Friday, March 6, 2009

Malcom X Park

Today made me remember why I was so happy to move to the city. A coworker, her partner and myself went to Malcom X Park and enjoyed the nice weather with a really good lunch. We had a conversation about my relationships, monogomy and the oppression of women in patriarical societies. I really enjoy talking about human sexuality from a sociological persepective, it's so dynamic and it's so much deeper than people like to believe.

Do you ever just know that you are thinking outside of the box? Well some times you really aren't. You may think that you believe in women's reproductive rights, but perhaps you are actually just the different side of the same coin. Maybe we need a completely different coin.

I have a question for you. If the main reason to have sex is for reproduction, then why is the clitoris, the only body part designed purely for pleasure, located outside of the vagina?


This probably should have been at the top, however, we also discussed me going to grad school. I'm 24 and I'm seemingly very restless. I want it all and I want it all now, the hunger for more is insatiable. OK, I'm being a little dramatic, but here is the point. I want to go to American University and do a joint JD/MBA (Law/Businuess Admin) program. It's accelerated and would allow me to graduate with both degrees at the same time in only four years as opposed to 5-6 if I did them seperately. My concern is that I really want to do the joint program, and in order to increase my chances of getting in the law school I was thinking of doing early selection into AU's school of law. However if I get accepted into the law school and not the business school I'll still be obligated to go to attend AU. I don't know if I should not do early selection and compete with everyone else just so that if I don't get accepted to both I can go to another school that did accept to me both, or risk it and try to get into the law school of my first choice early so that I don't have to compete with as many candidates.

AHHHHH decisions! They are so tough. I used to not worry about things like this, back in the day I would have just assumed that I would have gotten into both programs because I'm such a hot shot haha. Oh well, humility does and did come with age in my case. Hopefully I'll figure this out before I get myself into a time crunch.

Wednesday, March 4, 2009

Alicia Keys is Michelle Obama

This is a photo from Glamour Magazine:

This photo dipicts Alicia Keys as Michelle Obama. To give a brief rundown on why Glamour published this photo, the publication has been around for 70 years and to celebrate they are printing photos of modern celebrities representing other celebrities from the past seven decades.

This photo jumped out to me because I love both Michelle Obama and Alicia Keys.

However, it made me think ... think about race, complexion and standards of beauty. Not within American society as a whole but the black community.

Here are my initial thoughts in a nut shell (keep in mind my thoughts can and will change as I take more time to think about the photo):

At first I was happy that they would depict a classy beautiful woman, with another classy beautiful woman. As I thought about it more I felt that it would have been even better if they had used a woman of a darker complexion. The beauty of the rise of the Obamas isn't just that they are black, it's that they look black. You cannot deny that Obama is of African decent. Alicia Keys as being biracial blurs that line a lot more and is relatively "safe" as far as apperances.

With that said, when I take the photo shot for what it is I'm delighted that Glamour would want to use Alicia Keys to represent Obama. Her inner and outer beauty and talent isn't anything that I can deny. Glamour wasn't trying to make any commentary about race, it's a commentary on bold edgy fashions over 70 years.

When all is said and done, I have one thing to say: That photo is fierce!

Whant to view the entire spread? Then click.