This just in! Lesbians prettier on TV than in real life!

Source: instablogs.com

The minimal increase in TV programs showcasing lesbian characters over the last few years has actually caused debate within the lesbian community according to the August 13,2012 issue of Maclean’s magazine. Though I doubt most women in this underrepresented minority would, in theory, oppose the entertainment industry’s portrayal of their lifestyle for the masses, likely expecting understanding and acceptance as a result, it is ultimately the validity of the depiction that falls into question. As Emma Teitel, author of the Maclean’s article puts it “The lesbian media has a history of being elated with news its community will be represented on the small screen, then grossly disappointed with how its represented.”

 

Pretty Little Liars
Source:flickriver.com

Lesbian characters on television shows are not exactly novel territory. Ellen Degeneres came out as a lesbian on her hit sitcom “Ellen” in 1997. Sandra Bernhardt played a lesbian character on Roseanne for years. More recent examples are Callie and Arizona on Grey’s Anatomy, Angela Darmody on Boardwalk Empire, Santana Lopez on Glee and Emily Fields on Pretty Little Liars. Breaking new ground is programming showcasing lesbian characters almost exclusively such as BBC’s Lip Service and the now defunct The L-Word, and reality shows scrutinizing the lives of lesbian women such as Showtime’s The Real L-Word.

The Real L-Word
Source:wikipedia.org

If the mainstream media is finally embracing the lesbian community, what’s all the fuss about? Well here’s a shocker. Turns out some of these women feel they are being misrepresented. According to Teitel in her Maclean’s article: “Common criticisms of these shows from lesbian pundits and TV writers often have less to do with acting and character development than with how the characters look”. She quotes Julie Blindel from The Guardian as saying about Lip Service as saying that “every single lesbian is skinny, achingly trendy and lashed with lipstick.” She goes on to say that in ‘real life’ lesbians “tend not to dress for male approval, often rejecting makeup, high heels and other trappings of femininity.” So it appears that some in the community feel that TV lesbians are being characterized as ‘prettier’ or ‘sexier’ than what is realistic.

 

Lip Service
Source: bbc.co.uk

Wow, what a surprise. Sorry, I have been trying very hard to suppress my innate cynicism in an attempt to be a more optimistic and happier person, but I feel incapable of holding my tongue here. I find it almost shocking and quite frankly insulting that lesbians would think they would be accorded an honest portrayal in the media when no other member of the female population is granted the same. I can’t say for certain, but I would hazard a guess that television networks, like the rest of the western world general, are run by rich white men. And rich white men tend to cater to rich white men. They are also business savvy, wanting to make as much money as possible by bringing in the most viewers. However, they don’t give people much credit, assuming that most purveyors of fine television aren’t seeking much more than visual titillation. So what do they do? Put pretty women on TV. It doesn’t matter what the program content or character development is. Men will be drawn to watch and women won’t question this because it is what they are used to seeing, no matter how misogynistic and self-hatred provoking. Just because the main character is a lesbian and thus by definition (according to some) shouldn’t be beautiful doesn’t exempt her from being glamourized for TV. Most straight women aren’t a size 0 with flowing locks and designer clothing, but the majority of the ones you see on TV are. Oh, and they’re rich too. So sorry for the homosexual women out there but it seems that the television networks don’t think society is ready to see ‘butch’ lesbians or women without makeup on TV, especially in HD. The masses want to see Katy Perry kissing a girl wearing Cherry Chapstick. She likes it, and so do we, it seems.

 

I mentioned a debate before. Well, while some lesbians are upset about their attractiveness in today’s television shows, many applaud this depiction, citing it as relevant. There are some lesbians who accentuate their femininity, going out of their way to appear “girly”. Maclean’s cites to Megan Evans who calls herself a “femme” lesbian and says “television shows featuring highly feminine lesbians have made her feel more comfortable with her sexuality.” She says that often “If you’re girly and into beauty, then you definitely are viewed as not legitimately gay”.

 

It seems to me that the problem here is that there is a disassociation between groups of women where there should be a unification of forces. Straight women and gay women are essentially angry over the same issue, but arguing separately. Even lesbians who believe that there is no issue with lesbians being represented as feminine should be concerned with the idealistic images of women presented on television. Lesbians should not be adversaries against each other, nor towards straight women, we should all support each other to encourage a realistic and healthy portrayal of women of all sexual orientations in the media.

Fifty Shades of Assault and Battery: There’s Heat in the Beat

I became curious about the book “Fifty Shades of Grey” by E.L. James while in London where it was the subject of billboard advertisements everywhere. Londoners seem to place more importance on reading than us here in North America, although as it turns out they are no less seduced by smut as this work of “literature” proves. On return to Canada I spotted women everywhere with this book in hand, and started to hear snippets about it in eavesdropped conversations and even in the news, where it has been dubbed “mommy porn” due to it’s graphic sex scenes and popularity among middle aged women.

I enjoy reading. While I have varied taste in books, I like to think that a common thread between my favorites is that they are all at least somewhat thought-provoking, serve to conjur up emotion in the reader, and are well written. But I will admit I have read and even enjoyed my fair share of  fluff. Sometimes you just have to rest your mind, and get out of your head a little bit. A cheesy, tasteless or tawdry novel is like the literary version of reality TV but better. The characters look however you imagine them to, they don’t all speak at once, and you don’t need to wait until next week to tune in. Also like reality TV, you are often embarrassed to admit you are a fan. I borrowed the Twilight trilogy from a friend, thus avoiding that embarrassing purchase. Unfortunately I was not so lucky with The Hunger Games. Although I muttered something about the books (the last 2 of which I bought at the same time to avoid humiliation three times) “being for my niece”, I’m sure it was pretty clear by my “Team Peeta” button this was not the case. “The Devil Wears Prada” and “Confessions of a Shopaholic” were ebook purchases, the greatest invention ever for concealing kitschy novels. And the “Gossip Girl” novel? Stolen from my fiancee. He purchased it from an airport bookstore to read on a plane. Sorry honey, the cat’s out of the bag. But I digress. The point is, my curiosity as well as my desire for a mindless and entertaining book to read on the plane back to Vancouver after my sister’s wedding trumped the potential mortification that would ensue had anyone I knew seen me buy the book in question, and I finally purchased and read “Fifty Shades of Grey.”

Now, I have never read a romance novel before, and I wouldn’t call this a romance novel in the same sense that I imagine the books I see older blue-haired women reading, with Fabio on the cover kissing beautiful women in flowing dresses surrounded by gardens of roses. The books with names like “Stolen Kisses” or A Midnight Adventure”. I wouldn’t exactly call it “porn” either, but there is a lot of sex in the book. I don’t want to rehash the whole plot, but basically girl (Anastasia) meets boy (Christian). She’s a virgin, he’s into S&M. He wants her to be his little pet, or submissive as they call it in the book. He even wants her to sign some contract to the same effect. She isn’t so sure. They have sex. About a million times. She’s uncomfortable with his sadistic sexual tendencies. She tries to get to know him but he won’t let her because he’s had a bad childhood. Because of his dominant tendancies he tries to control her. She resists. Eventually it doesn’t work, they break up and in the end they are both heartbroken. Cliffhanger which makes reader want to read second book of trilogy. Which I of course do. And then the third.

I have read several reviews of this trilogy. Most focus on the sex. Apparently sex in books is very controversial. You can turn on HBO and basically watch two people having intercourse, but god forbid we read about it in a book. I have gathered that one of the main issues is that some libraries are carrying the book and the concern is that children could get a hold of it. First of all, wouldn’t the libraries have some type of policy that adult materials be checked out by adults only? Secondly, shouldn’t parents have at least some involvement in their children’s lives here? When I was a young child, I wasn’t fleeting off to the library on my own. Furthermore, my parents were aware of what I was reading, watching on TV, listening to on my ghetto blaster (ah, the old days), and who I was talking to on the phone. When I was old enough to go to the library by myself, I was a teenager. And believe me, teenagers today have seen a lot more shocking things than they could read about in this book, no matter what Sarah Palin tells you. Other critics claim the book is “unrealistic” in terms of the amount and, ahem, ‘quality’ of her sexual encounters. While unlike some, I have not counted the number of orgasms in the trilogy (in fact by the end I was skipping the repetitive sex scenes altogether) I agree the numbers are outstanding. But it is a work of fiction. Furthermore, how interesting would a book be that read: (Spoiler alert! Excerpt from book:)”How he’s making me feel that familiar pull deep in my belly, tightening, quickening. NO…and my traitorous body explodes in an intense, body shattering…” (my alternate ending) “Shit!!! Baby, are you done already?” Many women love the book. They claim it is erotic, and that it is empowering to women because it was written by a woman. Uh huh. Never mind the fact that the protagonist is a young virgin who is being controlled by a dominating man who likes to spank her and “punish her” when she doesn’t “obey” him. She talks a lot to her “inner goddess” and refuses to quit her job so clearly she’s a strong woman. While it would seem men would enjoy the book, apparently not so. While Christian Grey is clearly dominant within the relationship, he is still extremely attentive and aims to please in the bedroom, and this doesn’t sit well with the men out there. It places undue pressure on them from the scores of female readers who want their own Christian Grey, sexual god and orgasm wizard.

These are all valid criticisms. But I can’t help but but be puzzled that people seem to be missing the biggest elephant in the room when appraising this book. Sure it is often noted (as it is in the book) that Christian Grey is ‘a little obsessive’ or ‘stalkerish’. But as I read the book, all I could think was “Get out! Get out now!!” This is an abusive relationship if I have ever seen one. All the red flags are there, and this girl, while being portrayed as intelligent and strong, just isn’t seeing them. Or worse, she is, but she is choosing to ignore them. Is there a worse message that a female writer could send to a predominantly female target audience? Anastasia continually forgives and excuses Christian’s bad behavior because of his troubled past. She allows him to avoid facing his past, his temper and his control issues by using sex to pacify and distract her. She makes excuses for him to others and herself, explaining his abusive behavior away as a need to protect her. If you disagree with me, look at the criteria.

You may be in an abusive relationship if he or she:

1) Is jealous or possessive toward you.  Check.
2)Tries to control you by being very bossy or demanding.  Double check.
3)Tries to isolate you by demanding you cut off social contacts and friendships.  Yup. Got angry when she didn’t tell him she was going to visit mom. Doesn’t like her going out with friends.
4)Is violent and / or loses his or her temper quickly.  Yes
5)Pressures you sexually, demands sexual activities you are not comfortable with.  I believe this is premise of book.
6)Abuses drugs or alcohol.  This may be a stretch, but seems to glurp wine/champagne entire book.
7)Claims you are responsible for his or her emotional state. (This is a core diagnostic criteria for Codependency.)  A favorite phrase is “Oh Anastasia, what are you doing to me?”
8)Blames you when he or she mistreats you.  See above
9)Has a history of bad relationships.  Yes
10)Your family and friends have warned you about the person or told you that they are concerned for your safety or emotional well being.  Best friend Kate warns her.
11)You frequently worry about how he or she will react to things you say or do.  She constantly worries about how mad he will be.
12)Makes “jokes” that shame, humiliate, demean or embarrass you, weather privately or around family and friends.  Not applicable. He never makes jokes.
13)Your partner grew up witnessing an abusive parental relationship, and/or was abused as a child.  Yes.
14)Your partner “rages” when they feel hurt, shame, fear or loss of control.  Yes.
15)Both parties in abusive relationships may develop or progress in drug or alcohol dependence in a (dysfunctional) attempt to cope with the pain.  4th book??
16)You leave and then return to your partner repeatedly, against the advice of your friends, family and loved ones.  Once so far.
17)You have trouble ending the relationship, even though you know inside it’s the right thing to do.  She’s too dumb to know it’s the right thing to do. She’s 21. And she thinks they’re soul mates.
(Courtesy of http://www.recovery-man.com)

Well there we have it. I once watched a movie called Boxing Helena. It was about a surgeon who was so obsessed with a woman that when he couldn’t have her he amputated her limbs and literally put her in a box in his gigantic house. I once dated a man who made me feel like I was living in a box. At first I found his attentiveness flattering. Then his constant questioning of where I was going and who I was going with, his checking up on me and jealous outbursts were smothering. When he followed me out for dinner with a good male friend it was over the top. When I finally broke up with him and he locked me in his car, drove 100 miles an hour to a deserted location and threatened to kill me it was downright terrifying. I’m lucky I’m here. Many women are not. So when I read a book like this that casually dismisses dangerous behavior I find it frightening. There is no shame in enjoying the book for what it is. Overlook all the other flaws. But keep this one in the back of your mind. This book is a work of fiction. In the book, the characters live happily ever after. In reality, they would not. So if you or anyone you know is in a relationship like this, please help them get out. Even if the man is gorgeous and rich and gives her an orgasm every time he touches her.

The Wonderfully Spun Wizardry of Dr. Oz

Source:getthebigpicture.com

As a pharmacist, I die a little bit inside every time I hear the question “Do you have (insert Product X here)? I saw it on Dr. Oz…” As I work and have a social life, and also a fair amount of love and respect for myself, I don’t watch Dr. Oz, and therefore have usually not heard of said wonder product. The herbal, nutraceutical, aruvedic and homeopathic market is growing quickly and it is virtually impossible to keep up with every product being marketed. Not to mention that most of these alternative health care products are not well studied, and have unknown actions, side effects and drug interactions. Products that claim to have “science” and “clinical studies” proving their effectiveness may have small scale experiments or very small, often biased studies paid for by the marketing company in their favor. That being said, if a product is considered a “nutraceutical” it does not need to go through the rigorous clinical trial process that drugs do in order to be marketed. A lot of people don’t consider the possible harm these products can cause, assuming that because a product is “natural” it must be “safe”. Has nobody told you not to eat wild berries in the woods because they are poisonous and can kill you? Some wild mushrooms can also be fatal if ingested, while some are used as illicit drugs for their hallucinogenic properties. The list goes on. In fact, many of the western medicines we have today are derived from “natural” or plant medicines. Asprin or ASA is derived from Willow Bark, and in large amounts can cause gastric ulceration, metabolic acidosis and death. A commonly used class of chemotherapy agents, the taxanes, are also derived from plant structures. These agents are extremely toxic. Digoxin, a powerful medication for heart failure, from the digitalis leaf. This is not to say that it is never appropriate to recommend herbal products to patients. Many are well studied and useful in certain situations. However it is important to consider each individual’s medical conditions, medications, and what they are treating, weighing the benefits and risks for each person based on their particular situation. Health care professionals have an ethical responsibility to put patients first above all else. This is why it angers me that the good Dr. Oz is touting the benefits of these “safe” natural products to millions of impressionable and trusting people watching his show every day. And it really pisses me off that I have to clean up his mess.

First of all, who the hell is Dr. Oz? Even the name sounds fake. In fact, he is a real doctor. The problem is, he is a cardiothoracic surgeon. Meaning, his expertise lies in the operating room. He is not an expert in nutrition, herbal remedies, exercise, microbiology, dermatology, homeopathy, diabetes, obesity etc. However, if you watch his show you would believe he knows everything there is to know about health. He gives tips on everything from vaccinations to weight loss and nutrition to diabetes.Of course, he always has a panel of experts on board to back him up. These “experts” often have something to gain from advocating the point of the day. For example, a recent show discussing the fad HCG diet featured the doctor responsible for the recent resurgence of the diet’s popularity and who has published numerous recent studies supporting the diet. Advocating this diet which consists of starving by eating a mere 600 calories a day (the average is about 2000) and receiving expensive daily shots of the hormone HCG (the pregnancy hormone) will of course gain her patients, notoriety, and money. This does not change the fact that the data supporting the diet is very weak and the diet is dangerous.

For the good of the public and the clarity of my conscience I would like to draw attention to a few of the good doctor’s most recent and most dangerous claims:

1) Raspberry Ketone:
Claim: Raspberry Ketone is great for weight loss and has no side effects

Fact: Raspberry ketone is structurally related to synephrine (a stimulant) and capsaicin. As a stimulant, it has been associated with heart palpitations and shakiness. Syneophrine and norepinephrine, as well as ephedrine, similar stimulants, have been associated with increased blood pressure, heart rate, heart palpitations, chest pain, and cardiac arrest. Ephedrine has been restricted in Canada to use as a nasal decongestant.
There is some evidence that it helps rats lose weight. There is not enough evidence in humans yet.
This medication can significantly decrease INR and require a larger dose of warfarin and require much more frequent monitoring of levels. However there is an unpredictable effect.

2)African Mango
Claim: It’s a wonder pill that will make you lose tons of weight without changing a thing in your life.
Fact:Yes, the African Mango group loss some weigh over the placebo group in a small study. However, they also consumed fewer calories Quite a lot fewer calories. Hmm. I wonder why they lost weight. Apparently the African Mango acts like a fiber making you feel full. Eat more fiber. This has been in every nutritional guideline for years. Take heed people!!

3)7-Keto
Claim:A natural byproduct of the DHEA hormone we naturally produce that helps keep us young and regulates our metabolic rate. After the age of 30 this drops, slowing metabolism and causing weight gain. 7-Keto stimulates the thyroid to increase your resting metabolic rate causing weight loss, less fat, more muscle and a smaller belly, especially with diet and exercise.
Fact: Some preliminary evidence of a decrease in body weight and fat in obese females but more evidence is needed. Decreased hemoglobin in some patients. Also has been associated with an increase in T3 hormone in some patients. Could be a concern for people with overactive thyroid, heart disease or uncontrolled blood pressure.

4)Forskolin
Claim: Helps promote breakdown of stored fats in fat cells. May also release fatty acids from fat tissue. Results in loss of body fat and theoretically increased lean body mass.
Fact: This is a potentially dangerous herb for many people. There is some evidence for its use in asthma and congestive cardiomyopathy, but no statistically significant clinical evidence of efficacy for weight loss. It can cause decreased blood pressure and flushing. There are many significant drug interactions. It can also interact with many other herbs such as anise, arnica, capsicum, chamomile, clove, fenugreek, garlic, ginger, ginkgo, ginseng, horseradish, licorice, red clover, tumeric, causing risk of bleeding or serious decrease in blood pressure. Any patients on anticoagulant or antiplatelet drugs, calcium channel blockers or nitrates should not take this herb. For patients on warfarin, INR may be increased if forskolin is used. Anyone with a bleeding disorder should not take this herb. Anyone with a heart condition should not use this herb. It should be stopped 2 weeks before any surgery to prevent serious bleeding.
This sounds really scary? Is it really worth it to lose a couple of pounds?

Source:www.bcrt.ca

We live in a society that has been taught that everything can be cured with a pill. This is the combined fault of doctors, drug companies through marketing and advertising, retailers, and probably even pharmacist. But it is also the fault of patients. It is each person’s own responsibility to take ownership of their own health. There has been a big push towards an empowerment model of health care, that is one where the patient is a partner in their own health, and is an active voice in the decision making process with respect to how they are going to prevent and treat their medical conditions. In order to make informed decisions, people need to have knowledge. Shows like Dr. Oz give the facade that people are making healthy lifestyle choices for themselves, but really they are being manipulated by someone who is often spewing misinformation under the guise of health promotion. What needs to happen is that people need to look into what is right for them, consult other sources, and not assume that everything they hear on TV is gospel. If something sounds too miraculous to be true, it likely is. Weight loss is still only possible with diet and/or exercise. You won’t get abs without sit-ups. This is why I will never have any. And Dr. Oz will only go away if everyone stops watching him.