I think maybe a link is missing, but it sounds interesting.

Shouldn't there be a link somewhere? Sorry, just asking.

I wonder whether this is confusing what an artist could paint with what an artist wanted to paint. Before the 19th century, the only people who had enough free time to pose for an artist -- and who had enough money to fund artistic enterprises -- were wealthy people. Consequently, what we see may have more to do with the economics of art than with artists' perceptions of beauty.

As a woman who is somewhat zaftig, I had a guy tell me in high school that if I had lived "in the Renaissance period," I would be very beautiful. Um. Thanks. I think.

As a woman who is somewhat zaftig, I had a guy tell me in high school that if I had lived "in the Renaissance period," I would be very beautiful. Um. Thanks. I think.

I remember one of my friends being complimented, by an eightysomething (female) classics professor, on her "pre-Raphaelite beauty." To this day, I don't know if la profesora was being sweet or being catty.

Cheers,

TH

I don't think it was industrialization or advertising. It's mostly that plumpness is no longer associated with prosperity, since everyone in the US can eat. Beauty standards are very much about which people are powerful enough that people want to imitate their looks.

It has to do with the visual that is achievable due to wealth. The era of that painting, not doing manual labor and being well fed were the domain of the wealthy. Everyone else had to do manual labor to survive. Being in the sun was part of work. As workers were more and more put in side, being tan was seen as a feature of the rich. You had to have free time to go be outside, beyond the grasp of the person working 40+ hours inside. Now tan and anorexic skinny are pushed as the desired look. Tans take time in a booth or a beach. That means money and free time. Being skinny means you have money and time for a gym, personal trainer, quality low calorie food. The average schmoe is stuck in a cube farm eating Mcdonalds or Budget gourmet with little time to attend to working out or making healthy food. Healthy food is also expensive.

in todays news and relevent here

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6247625.stm

I like the fact that really they only concentrated on a few hundred years of work, and only some of the literature was not western.

Innnnteresting. You know whats sad? I am not particularly thin, I probably resemble more those women then whats considered attractive now, I know that the standards of beauty are unrealistic, but I still find those women in that picture unnattractively lumpy. (that being said, I dont want to be as thin as what beauty standards today say is attractive).

Healthy food IS more expensive, and in general the food supply in america is horrible. however, you dont HAVE to eat mcdonalds or other extremely bad food for you everyday, I don't like that cop-out either.

Another interesting twist on this issue has to do with power and legal rights. As health and body weight were symbols of class larger and stronger was considered the ideal. It was safe for women to be strong and healthy in body since there were so many laws and customs to restrict any power they might gain. As women progress and gain more rights this becomes threatening and as legal restrictions declined further cultural restrictions were imposed to keep women weak in body and mind. This leads us to the here and now, a time in which so many of us are too preoccupied and starving to think straight, let alone organize and gain real power. Apparently, we are even passing out on subway trains and making all those men late for work.

I don't think it was industrialization or advertising. It's mostly that plumpness is no longer associated with prosperity, since everyone in the US can eat. Beauty standards are very much about which people are powerful enough that people want to imitate their looks

I think explanations along these lines are a) radical oversimplifications and b) little more than post hoc just so stories. If pale blondes were the current trend, people adhering to this belief would just be saying "oh, it's because wealthier people are more likely to have managerial positions and are more likely to afford bleaching. Therefore, people are just trying to imitate those higher on the social ladder."

Could you post the link?

Lnik please :)

I also think it’s fascinating to look at all the nudes of supposedly non-white women done by painters during a time when a contemporary white woman could not be depicted nude without being pornographic, but anything 'eastern' mythological or historical was fair game:
http://www.artrenewal.org/asp/database/museum_template.asp?aid=9&page=1
or even..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/df/Ingre,_Grande_Odalisque.jpg/300px-Ingre,_Grande_Odalisque.jpg

Sorry folks, I'm trying to get the link...Samhita is in CA so it's still before 9am her time so she prolly hasn't seen that the link is missing yet.

diddakoi writes:
I also think it’s fascinating to look at all the nudes of supposedly non-white women done by painters during a time when a contemporary white woman could not be depicted nude without being pornographic, but anything 'eastern' mythological or historical was fair game ...

Oh, good point. Re "foreign" bodies as safe nudes: This arguably continued through the late 1970s. Roots and Gauguin included topless scenes; heck, Gauguin was almost entirely made up of topless scenes. Both made it past the FCC 25 years ago, but wouldn't today. I'm not 100% sure if that's progress, but I'm leaning towards a mild yes.

One thing I find interesting in your first example, i.e. Monsieur Gerome, is the fact that although his "Arab" women look caucasian, his Arab men actually look like Arabs. Women, no matter the context, have to be adapted a little bit more than the men so as to better fit the artist's idea of feminine beauty. This is true whether you're talking about Gerome's alleged Middle Easterners, female robots with augmented breast plates, or Smurfette. Maleness is simple humanity, but to be female is to be gender-plus-one and has to be specially designated. I find that very telling. Nobody would think of giving Smurfs penises, would they? But Smurfette needs big blond hair and a skirt.

Cheers,

TH

The entire premise of "foreign' bodies as safe nudes really fits quite well into the entire post colonial view (and of simone de beauviors view to a certain extent) of everyone who isnt white as "other". Just like TH said, maleness is humanity, being female is "other" (that is definitly simone de beauvoir). if you are a non-white female, your degree of otherness increases even more. hence uses of the word "exotic" to describe non white women.

Well, Smurfette got high heels and gobs of long blonde hair after Papa Smurf waved his magic wand and made her good. Back when she was first made by Gargamel, as a spy and a trap for the smurfs, and she was evil, she had short brown hair.

Not that I was deeply upset by this when I was in 3rd grade or anything. It's not like I immediately stopped watching the smurfs after I saw that episode and then threw out all my smurf stickers.

Anyway, back on topic, I don't think the nudity is just a matter of other-ness. Especially in this period, it's a matter of high culture vs. low culture, very similar to the way it is now. Goddesses from Greek myth were not considered to be racially other; rather, it was one of the legitimate ways you get away with doing female nudes, in a "it's not obscene, it's art" sort of way, because classical myth was high culture, and Greek goddesses were not considered to be the same as, well, actual Greeks, in the same way that Mary and Joseph weren't considered to be like actual contemporary Jews.

"Consequently, what we see may have more to do with the economics of art than with artists' perceptions of beauty."

No, I don't agree with this. Part what these artists were expected to do is to make their subjects look as beautiful as possible, so what we're seeing is probably a heightened representation of beauty ideals rather than a strictly accurate representation of what portrait-sitters looked like. And it was almost never the rich ladies who were posing nude.

Since Samhita forgot the link I sent her here it is.

1639? That's the beginning of the modern period (almost), innit? ;)

Nope, you're off by about 200 years. The modern period didn't phase in until the late 19th century (1880-1890). For reference -- Rembrandt was still around in 1639.

Tonuge in cheek comment. I was thinking that 1639 is a late start for a piece on the changing shape of "ideal women" in art. Why not some Greek statues, or Venus of Willendorf?

"Tongue" - my bad.

Modern era is generally considered late 18th century, not 19th century. 1639 would be early modern, FWIW.

Oh, and Tom: I really hope your friend took the "pre-Raphaelite" comment as a compliment. From an octogenerian, I suspect it was. In any case, I know I'd be flattered.

I'm pretty sure it was intended as a compliment, but this was a delightfully blunt octogenarian.

We belonged to the same poetry society. I still remember one exchange: A visitor spent 15 minutes slowly reading an excruciatingly bad poem aloud (as I recall, it included a seven-minute hummingbird/explicit sex parallel and the phrase "mother load" with the asterisked line "this is a pun / on the death of my son"--oh, and did I mention it all RHYMED?).

After we'd suffered through it, yonder classics professor told her: "That was very nice." After our hummingbird-eroticizing friend left, la profesora turned to me and added: "I don't know why I said that. It was a dreadful poem."

But I think "pre-Raphaelite" was definitely a compliment. :o)

Cheers,

TH

I have to say, that link isn't very good. For one thing, it is only showing one picture for most of the decades, and certainly not all of history. It could be a fascinating thing to look at, but the author only put up about 10 pictures and therefore wants us to make assumptions about 400 years of history? I think not.

There are many, many more art pieces from that time period that would show different body types, as well as the way that clothes restricted women into certain shapes. The shapes of the clothes throughout history are fascinating as well- you can generally tell what men and women were wearing (within the last, oh, 700 years or so) because both genders keep the same basic shape.

I think the author comes down too hard on white people. If I was a white person living in Africa where they have their own standards of what is beautiful for a woman I might be ostracized. Also, what with the advent of better medical knowledge-it's NOT healthy to be huge. I don't see where the white correlation fits in.

I agree with JenLovesPonies-we in America are quite ignorant when it comes to European culture. To distill it down to white vs Everyone Else is distorting. There's alot more than just the superficial.

“Also, what with the advent of better medical knowledge-it's NOT healthy to be huge.”

Is that so? I suppose it is healthy to be underweight. In any case none of the women in those paintings (or any classic paintings I’ve ever seen) are “huge” enough to be “Not healthy”. As a matter of fact they look like a lot of women I see in the locker room.

Stupid question of the day:

In Renaissance Europe, there were mostly only white people around, right? Europe did not really become racially diverse (if it can even so be called that now) until the modern era.

If there are only white people around, most art will feature white people... kind of like why Revolutionary War-era art doesn't feature many Eskimos.

Often, our modern conception of "beauty" is radically different from what people consider to be beautiful. Many men would consider the women in the picture to be damn sexy and are truthfully turned off by the waif look. The subjects of the picture look like women, not boys.

get off your high horse oenophile.The whole world is not racially 'diverse,' and that goes for Africa, the middle east, and asia. Many other cultures have rascist attitudes, but because Europe is the only other one the west identifies with excessive pressure is put on them to fit the racially diverse ideal. It is backbreaking for a country to have that kind of idealistic pressure on them particularly when others aren't contributing.We must remember Europe is a native culture not the other, other America.

also, why base our concept of what looks good based on what men appreciate?
Like the Cistine Chapel many of the women depicted in the past were based on models of men rather than actual women-so if that is true for this picture then what exactly are you seeing? There is much evidence to point out that being overweight contributes to a variety of health problems.

F.Y.I. sojourner, yea they look like alot of the women you see in the locker romm, cuz were America, everyone's fat here.

Is nadskckr the same poster as freewmn? I'm noticing similarities.

EG, don't cry I know it hurts to be pointed out your wrong so often by an articulate, intelligent forward thinking women.
What are you gonna do bout it?

What on earth are you talking about?

And, since you're sinking to personal attack (for no real reason that I can see), I might as well point out that "articulate" women usually know the difference between "your" and "you're," as well as how to use punctuation properly. And spell.

nads, interesting that you opine that a white person in Africa would be ostracized. Of course, history has borne out that in fact the opposite is true.

As for the "poor Europeans" argument, I think the current trend is to criticize the entire "western world" -- which includes the USA, Canada (although their track record on these issues is far better than ours), Australia, and arguably Japan as well (although Japan is not "western" it embraces many western values) -- for racial strife. The reason for this is obvious: we're wealthier. That means we have a greater obligation to the rest of the world, period. Do unto others, to whom much is given, etc., etc. We're better able to do anything about racial tension, which makes it our responsibility. Also, much racial tension in "less developed" nations tends to be, if I'm not mistaken, more reactionary -- disdain for whites because white westerners are selfish and greedy. Frankly, as a white westerner, I can't say I blame them too much. (note also that the inclusion of Japan in my list jives well with the model minority myth).

The women in the pictures are not "fat." They're fat by modern standards, but modern standards prefer the skeletal look. In general obesity is a problem and it is unhealthy, yes, but it is no crime and it hurts no one simply not to match up with the prevailing beauty standard. That you find other women in the locker rooms unattractive has nothing to do with their health -- in fact, if they're in gym locker rooms chances are they're doing all right. Studies routinely show that people of any size who exercise regularly have fewer heart and cholesterol problems and better overall health, not to mention that they are less likely to suffer from that dreaded "mental health" problem of depression. I'm skinny and I have high cholesterol (it's a genetic thing) and have suffered from moderate clinical depression. I have a friend who's my height and who has about 60 pounds on me whose cholesterol, iron, etc., are all great, and who's never had to take medication just so she can face the world. She's "fatter" than me and also a lot healthier. So you can't go around judging books by their covers.

I'm talking about the fact that I'm smarter than you.

Whats your point about bringing the comparisons up for anyways?
You sound scared or something.

"EG, don't cry I know it hurts to be pointed out your wrong so often by an articulate, intelligent forward thinking women.
What are you gonna do bout it?"

hah! that and the "smarter" comment just came out of left field didnt it? people are weird on the internet.

That is painting a giant racist brush stroke to say all white westerners are selfish and greedy.
Second, have you ever visited Africa, the Middle East, Yemen, ect. You just get your opinions based on the days you sit on the couch channel surfing. There is only 12% of Europeans in the world, and only 66% are white in America. Also the fact that Asians make up the highest income level, as well as the educated level in America I think you just said Asians are selfish and greedy.

Doesn't it sound stupid to say in Africa there were mostly black people around-duh its africa. Saying that there were mostly white people around in Europe is like saying there's arabs in the middle east-DUH!

Wow,is this the fairy tale "The Three Billy Goats Gruff"?
'Cause there's an awful lot of Trolls around here!

yea, DUUUUHHH!

hahah

the word that always screams "intelligence"

ok im out of troll food

That is painting a giant racist brush stroke to say all white westerners are selfish and greedy.

That's an interesting and bizarre take on what I said. Being selfish and greedy has nothing to do with being racist. Everyone is selfish and greedy -- it just so happens that white westerners have the bulk of the wealth and are unwilling to share it with anyone. This happens to coincide with a lot of racism, but I never suggested the two are the same.

Like I said, *everyone* is selfish and greedy. If you're human, you're selfish and greedy on some level. Have any cites for your random statistics, and any actual cohesive analysis about what they're supposed to mean?

As for your couch potato remark -- why such animosity toward me? I never said anything rude to you. Or is it... how did you put it?... the pain of having it "pointed out your [sic] wrong so often by an articulate, intelligent forward thinking women [sic]"?

I think I like the paintings of whores(not performing their profession, but as models). Picasso has a really nice one, in his style, of a room full of whores. There is also another painting, the artist's name I cannot remember, is a picture of a whore, lying on a love seat, being given flowers by a dark skinned maid. I think it's one of my favorite realistic paintings in the world.

Weight seems to be a big issue in our country. We should all turn into vegetarians and learn to love tofu in all of its tasteless glory. I actually like tofu, and when my husband and I get our own place again, I told him we're going almost vegetarian. it seems more economical and healthier than eating meat. I love sushi and fish too much to give them up (hence the almost).

Beauty, no matter which gender, is in the eye of the beholder. We all have our likes and dislikes in the same and opposite sex (we are constantly judging one another). Some guys love us BBWs, others rather have stick figures that have to have surgeries to make them large in certain areas of their bodies.

What are we seeing in these paintings? I think it's the artist's perception of beauty. But painting isn't like photography. Photos can be altered, but there is an original somewhere. Paintings are created and the artists adds and subtracts what ever they see fit.

I would model either way.

In response to your not silly question, Oenophile,
while Europe is certainly more ethnicially diverse now than it was during the Renaissance, there was still alot of interaction throughout Europe with the top of Africa, (think of Othello), the Middle and Far East, and even within the ethnic variation of Europe itself. Certainly modern migration is more intensive than it would have been then, but it wasn't just Caucasians living in Renaissance Europe.

Completely unrelated, but it drives me CRAZY that people like freewmn and nads are walking around out there, sharing their thoughts with the world as feminism. It makes us look bad! And back up, nads. No one insults my girl EG. I'm small, but I'm scrappy.

I would comment on the actual topic, but I'm really not sure what to say. It's somehow easier when the topic is troll-free.

trnds are often instituted without much depth to them.Pointing out that its a trend is also pinpointing its flippancy.
Its a little ignorant to give more credence to a bunch of women-hating, uneducated, racist middle easterners, africans, and others who do not like our country and are going through certain flucuations in their own cultures-things we dont even understand?Very biased and uninformed.

You copied Jessicas words, I bet you can't even think for yourself. This is just a sorority to you.
You can't comment on the topic at hand because this isn't feministingwhitebashing, its feministing. I think your at the wrong site.

also law fairy, in case you forgot-Europeans hate us too. Because our media is so crappy its hard to gauge whats really going on. We also have to take into consideration our own limits as Americans. Even this site isnt that good, the exposure to other goings on in the world is limited for many Americans.

"also law fairy, in case you forgot-Europeans hate us too."

um, i just got back from visiting 7 diffrent places in europe and the delusion that europe hates americans just isnt true. people could TELL i was american and only one snooty waitress in paris didnt like me for my american-ness, but other than that no one gave a shit. mostly because they realize all americans dont = bush. sooo id at least GO there before spouting off ridiculous opinions

p.s. prairielily, I aint small, an' I aint scrappy.

Ah! freewmn is back! Seig Heil!

A friend recently told me that her little sister was having self esteem issues. I told her to get her an art history book. Art History brought my first eating disorder to an end the second I saw the Venus of Urbino and realized that I looked just like that.

wow, nads.

I think you might even steal today's rambling incomprehensible incoherence award straight out of Nancy Levant's nutty conspiratorial hands! Nicely done!

Whats incomprehensive law fairy?
Thats also what they say about Iran. I've read many books where the travelers who visited Iran thought the natives would be hostile, but turned out to be completely the opposite.
Like I said, just shows you how inhibiting our media can be.
Also electrodot just because you didn't experience any anti-americanism, doesn't mean others didn't as well. Very close-minded of you.

And I think if anyones going to win the Incomprehensive Award it should go to the Law Fairy what with her racist rantings, n'all, particularly when they are not re-enforced with stats, and actual facts.

I think lily, and fairy are just a little tissy cuz I'm not a religious zealot like they are.
Does prairielily even know what scrappy means? According to the American Heritage online dictionary it means fragmented-so your small and weak? I thought Muhammed prohibited such speech, particularly by a female.

Aiya! It's freewmn the racist anti-feminist. For what it's worth, there is a misconception Asians make the most money. There are simply more working members in Asian households than white. In other words, a white household has an average of two working members and in Asian families, three.

This timeline skips a lot of more thought-provoking images of the female nude. Why no Picasso's Desmoiselles d'Avignon? Why no Manet's Olympia? Why none of Michelangelo's sibyls from the Sistine Ceiling?

The comparison of a Rubens or a Renoir to the cover of Cosmopolitan is a gross oversimplification. These paintings were certainly not the Baroque and Late Impressionist equivalents of wide-distribution magazines. Certainly, we can all follow the argument of artists represented what was valued at the time, just like contemporary magazines. But, sadly, that's another easy statement that we learn in high school that isn't always true.

Art was created for a lot of reasons, and most of them weren't to sell the latest makeup, fashion hints, or celebrity.

“I thought Muhammed prohibited such speech, particularly by a female.”

Wow! Jut wow! I don’t think prarielily ever said anything about being religious. In any case you do really exhibit your illiteracy. Scrappy mean feisty. She is small but fiesty.

Thanks, Anorak. :-) (I was, not eloquently, trying to tease out the difference between
Western beauty = Caucasian and
Western beauty = the beautiful people in Europe, most/all of whom happen to be Caucasian.)

Agree with The Law Fairy about the low correlation between health and weight. Despite this, the general correlation may be strong enough so that we are programmed to find healthy (i.e. thinnish) people attractive. The strongest correlations are in skin tone, hair, and facial symmetry. The first two correlate with health and nutrition (people know I'm a vegetarian by my skin, incidentally); the second represents a good, diverse gene pool. (The genetic advantages to having a not-inbred gene pool have been well documented.)

So ends the nerdiest explanation of the ideals of beauty.

Nadskckr: As for my high horse - ahem, excuse me. Any population must be in the same climatic area for roughly 20,000 years for skin colour to change. Given that, we can assume that, for large parts of human history, populations have remained in one area with little interaction (in terms of intermarriage) with each other. Modern transportation and technology does not make the entire world racially diverse, but allows us to at least SEE people of other races - a basic requirement for painting them. The fact that you take this to mean that I'm on my "high horse" says a helluva lot more about you than it does about me. Claer, babycakes?

You know what, nads? Fuck you. I will detail why.

Its a little ignorant to give more credence to a bunch of women-hating, uneducated, racist middle easterners, africans, and others who do not like our country and are going through certain flucuations in their own cultures-things we dont even understand?Very biased and uninformed.

I lived in the Middle East for six years. I would say I understand it a lot better than you, and I wouldn't go labelling them all as "women-hating, uneducated, and racist." The country I was in was extremely proud of the accomplishments (educational, especially) of the local Arab women. There were even female paramilitaries in the army! The prevailing sense was often that the education of women was going to lead the country. Even in Iran, over 50% of college students are women.

You copied Jessicas words, I bet you can't even think for yourself. This is just a sorority to you.

You may be shocked to know that sororities were founded so that those ground-breaking women attending university could support each other. Things have evolved badly in a lot of places, but some sororities do, in fact, still support those feminist ideals. I went to a school where the women in one specific sorority were extremely involved in organizing Take Back the Night. And even detractors of traditional sororities often note the positive aspects of black and service sororities. Come up with a new cheap shot to take.

And so what if someone copied Jessica's words? She's bright. Anyone who copied her is smart enough to pick the right person to emulate.

also law fairy, in case you forgot-Europeans hate us too. Because our media is so crappy its hard to gauge whats really going on. We also have to take into consideration our own limits as Americans. Even this site isnt that good, the exposure to other goings on in the world is limited for many Americans.

Europeans don't hate Americans. Europeans hate obnoxious Americans who act like everyone unjustifiably hates them.

And we? I'm not American. A lot of the posters here aren't American.

The posts here often cover events in other countries. If you feel uninformed, that is your own fault. The media doesn't have to lay every piece of information at your feet for you to find it, although that would be nice. Independent research is a good thing.

p.s. prairielily, I aint small, an' I aint scrappy.

I never said you were small, nads. I said I was small.

And now, something pseudo-intelligent (so I'm not completely spamming):

Yes, all the pictures are of white women, but the white ideal of beauty has been exported all over the world. When I was on the Japanese exchange, I was struck by how obsessed all the girls were with the blonde, blue-eyed ideal of beauty. They told me that Japanese faces were "monkey faces."

What I'm wondering is whether we can even extricate modern ideals of beauty from "white" ideals of beauty. They're often so pervasive that they take over everything else, especially in a world where satellite images of Hollywood are shown in villages in India.

I also don't think that Marilyn Monroe was a healthy beauty ideal. She had a tiny waist and curvy breasts and ass. That's probably even more rare than being naturally skinny all over.

Lastly, the flapper girl... didn't flapper girls flatten down their breasts so they could wear those outfits?

PS. Esme, I love that story. I'm going to keep it in the back of my mind in case I meet a young lady with poor self-esteem.

Prairie Lily: yes, the blonde, blue-eyed model of beauty is pervasive everywhere. Just look at the Japanese girls who dye their hair (and often look the worse for it). Despite this, there are a LOT of people who have different ideals of beauty, such as interracial people.

Re: Marilyn. Actually, her waist-to-hip ratio is about 1:1.5, which is the "ideal," and correlates very strongly with fertility.

(I swear, I'll stop taking art and seeing science and we can return to an analysis of Renaissance Italy. ;) )

sojourner, I think (if we assume that it's NOT freewmn) it's because of that other thread where I defended religion because the crazies would find something else to use to oppress others?

But since it is, it dates back to that argument we had long ago where I called her racist for saying that Italians and other Europeans could learn not to be sexist and mysoginist, but that Muslim and Mexican folk could not.

I like you too, btw. I like a lot of the posters around here.

The "whitening" of beauty ideals is certainly a real phenomenon in many countries.

I don't know whether it pre- or post-dates the modern era, but it certainly quacks like neo-colonialism.

I'm reasonably new to this site, certainly to posting comments, so without fanning the flames of fury (ha!), can someone sensible tell me whether or not Nads is a joke? I mean, surely all the recent trolls (nads, modern man, knightwhoever) are just the same person? Surely? Please?!

anorak, there was this crazy poster a while back named freewmn, who got banned, and then came back repeatedly. She's showed up a few more times since then.

Since this poster can't spell or word sentences properly and the arguments tend to be racist, nonsensical, or both, it's generally quite easy to tell when she's back.

Trolls are just here to entertain us. Here, have some flavoured-with-butter, trans-fat free popcorn and enjoy the show.

Oh Thanks Renee! Those were the names of the paintings I was thinking about. I really need to get with it when I post on here. I keep forgetting the names of things I know.

Prairelily, I like your style!
Seeing as it's almost 5p.m. here in New Zealand, I might think about an organic pilsner to go with that popcorn!

You know prarielily, I have often found It is completely useless to try argue with people about what anything in the middle east is like. It is like something people heard on TV is more credible than our lived experiences. I have found that to be true even with people a lot more rational and less racist than freewmn/nads, even about things that are a lot more tangible than say whether or not Middle-easterners hate women. A very funny example is that when I tell people that I used to go skiing in Iran or that it snows in Tehran, or that I just talked to my mom and she said it is snowing there right now, people look at me with this incredulous look and say “But I heard it’s really hot in Eye-ran” or “But how come it doesn’t snow in Saudi Arabia?”

I like you too prarilily and I like a lot of the posters here too. There are lots more interesting people here than at my engineering department.