chicago!

I just got back from a quick trip to Chicago for the Law & Society Association conference. It breaks my heart just a little bit- I pay a $90 registration fee (and that's the student discount), and all I get is a program the size of a phonebook and a tote bag. Next year, it should give out t-shirts that say "I paid $90 to attend the LSA conference and all I got was this lousy t-shirt."

But I digress. It was great to be in Chicago again, and I really enjoyed the break. Drew and I ate deep dish pizza and Chicago style hot dogs. We walked around a lot, just enjoying the city and seeing what we see. We headed up to Lakeview and the Lincoln Park neighborhoods, and basked in the sun in Oz Park.

We went to the Chicago Diner, a veggie restaurant near Wrigley Field. It was the best food I've eaten in a long time. We ate the Radical Reuben:

And the Dagwood:
Somehow, we found room for a slice of lemon coconut cake:

Vegan or not, you should check out the Chicago Diner if you're ever in the area. After eating ourselves into a food coma, we walked up to Wrigley Field. Unfortunately we did not snag tickets for any Cubs' games, but maybe next time.

Other non-picture highlights: We went to a show called Cirque Shanghai at the Navy Pier. I've never seen Cirque du Soleil, but I imagine this show was similar (but way cheaper). The Chinese acrobatics was very impressive, and the performers make it look so easy. After the show, we walked around the Navy Pier, where we discovered Garrett Popcorn. This was my third trip to Chicago, and I can't believe it took me so long to try out the popcorn. I know what you're thinking- it's just popcorn, right? But this stuff is phenomenal. They serve up buttery popcorn, caramel, and cheese, and they also have fancy stuff like pecan caramel crisp and macademia caramel crisp. We got the Chicago mix- a combination of cheese and the caramel crisp. It sounds a little peculiar, but it was awesome- the perfect mix of savory and sweet. Obviously, you can't eat each flavor separately, you have to eat one cheese and one caramel kernel together. Or I guess you could just shove a handful in your mouth, but why would you do that? This stuff should be savored. Anyway, I loved the popcorn so much that I bought more in the airport. Surprisingly, it did survive the trip home.

On our last day, we trekked out to Soul Vegetarian, and to Chinatown.

Not a lot to say about Chinatown. There are shops and restaurants, but we weren't in the mood for eating or shopping. We browsed in a bookstore (well Drew did, I couldn't read anything except these books geared toward children learning English). After roaming around, we relaxed in this park next to the river.

All in all, the trip was a lot of fun. We are back and ready for Week 10.

athletes and violence against women

I hear that Boston is playing LA in the Men's NBA finals. It is the third year in a row that the Lakers have made it to the finals, and they won last year after defeating the Denver Nuggets. There are a lot of Lakers haters out there, but I'm not simply hopping on the bandwagon. You see, I don't exactly hate the Lakers per se. I really despise Kobe Bryant. So I'm not so much cheering against the Lakers (and no, I don't care that they used to be the Minneapolis Lakers) as I am cheering against Bryant.

I'm getting ahead of myself. I've blogged about this stuff before: celebrities and violence against women. It is so fucked up, the way that celebrities get away with assault, sexual harassment, rape, and even the murder of women. Sure, these accusations are simply allegations. Innocent until proven guilty, right? I'm not so sure. We as a society let them off easy. And maybe you think that this is the way that it should be- after all, they're innocent, right? Let me tell you why I'm such a skeptic and why I dislike Bryant and what he represents.

In 2003, Kobe Bryant flirted with a female employee at a Vail resort. She went to his room, they kissed, then he allegedly raped her. She claims the kiss was consensual; the sex was not. In the end, the charges were dropped because the victim refused to testify.

Rape is severely underreported, and well, it's not difficult to see why. At rape trials, it is not the defendant's behavior that is on trial. It is the victim's. Rape accusations are so suspect that it is up to the victim to prove that the sex was not consensual. The cross examination is so grueling that trial's have been called "the second rape." When it comes to rape, it is actually the victim who must defend her behavior- did she fight back?, did she really say no?, what was she wearing?, what was she doing in his room so late at night? And so on. The question should not be "well, what did she expect to happen?" but "why did Bryant think he was entitled to sex?" A kiss is not a contract, and neither is a late night visit to a hotel room. If she says no, it's rape. Women are allowed to say no, even after consenting to a kiss.

I know that I'm not being fair to Bryant (I say this as if he really gives a shit). After all, these things happen all the time. Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger faced sexual assault allegations (he was suspended and ordered to undergo behavioral evaluations). Jets quarterback Mark Sanchez was accused of sexually assaulting a woman while he was at the University of Southern California. And former New York Giants linebacker and Hall of Famer Lawrence Taylor was recently arrested for the rape of a 16 year old girl. Just do you don't think I'm just picking on football and basketball, here are some others: Boxers have been convicted of rape (Mike Tyson), baseball players have been acquitted of sexual assault charges (former Minnesota Twins legend Kirby Puckett- yes, it stings a little to write about that), and lacrosse players have been accused of rape (see Duke men's lacrosse players). Most recently, a University of Virginia men's lacrosse player has been charged with the first-degree murder of a UVA women's lacrosse player.

Any of these cases- rape, sexual assault, sexual harassment- rarely go to trial. (oh, and I would bet you that rape charges get reduced to sexual assault charges) Keep in mind that just because these cases don't go to trial doesn't mean that these athletes are innocent. It doesn't mean that what these women say happened didn't really happen. There is a difference between dropped charges and innocence. Yet, this is what we forget as we cheer on and continue to revere our favorite athletes. But I repeat, just because charges get dropped does not mean that they are innocent. Perhaps it means that women, like the one that accused Bryant of rape, don't want to testify and be victimized again and slandered by the press and society at large. Perhaps it means that these women fear that they don't stand a chance against these metaphorical Goliaths. I'm sure that there are many more reasons. I don't know why charges get dropped and these cases never go to trial. However, dropped charges should never be conflated with innocence.

There is a link between sports, particularly team sports, and violence against women. It has to do with masculinity, power, violence, control, and conquering an opponent. Women are something to be used, something to be conquered. Women are the opponent, and men must prove their masculinity (just like they should on the playing field) and do so. Otherwise, they are not "real" men. This link should come as no surprise. After all, violence against women is about male dominance, power, and control. Athletes aren't the only ones who commit violent acts against women, but they may be more likely to do so given the violent nature of their sport (some sports more than others, of course).

These athletes get to go about their lives as if nothing has happened. Yet, these women are scarred, maybe for life. You may think that these men should be able to go on with their lives. After all, you may argue that we should judge them solely by their athletic ability, not their personal character. We should care about their ability to shoot a basketball in the hoop or hit a homerun. I disagree. These athletes are role models. They are household names. Kids- boys- look up to them. What kind of message does it send when we revere athletes despite the charges against them? Despite the convictions or acquittals? What does it say about a society that continues to admire athletes that have faced accusations of hurting, disrespecting, even hating women?

totally random thought

I lost my student ID today. (well, technically I temporarily misplaced it) I am a little embarrassed to admit that my first thought was not "how am I going to check out books from the library?" Instead, I thought "how am I going to get the student discount at the movie theatre?" Seems that my priorities are mixed up. I don't even go to the movies that often.

I am blogging to you from Chicago! I am here for the next few days for the Law & Society conference. It is so nice to be out of Orange County and in a real city!

Stay tuned for lots of fun pictures!

eating LA

It was a busy, but relaxing, weekend. Drew and I went to the beach, we went hiking, and we went up to LA to apply for visas to visit China. Did I mention the China trip? We will be in Beijing during the month of July. Drew's research interest is something to do with China, and he is learning the language. So we will be in China so he can hone his skills, and I'm going along for the ride. I guess that this is an advantage to being a grad student, I can work anywhere as long as I have my computer. And an internet connection.

Anyway, we went to LA to apply for visas, and we spent the rest of the day eating and hanging out. We went to Pure Luck, this cozy vegan restaurant. We started off with fried pickle chips:

Here is the story about how I love fried pickle chips: I have eaten these only a few times, and the only place I've been able to find them is...wait for it...Hooters. I have raved about fried pickles to Drew, but my efforts to get him to go to Hooters have been futile. Maybe he genuinely has no interest in going to Hooters, or maybe he's smart enough to refuse. I dunno. So anyway, I was very excited to find fried pickle chips on Pure Luck's menu so that I could share the goodness with Drew. They were good, a nice contrast between the crispy breading and the tangy pickles. But, I still think the fried pickle chips at Hooters are better.

I ate Jack's Super Burrito Wrap, which was jackfruit "carnitas" rolled up with sweet potato fries, cilantro, pinto beans, and barbeque sauce. Mmmmmm, it was so good.

Drew ate the bbq sandwich with rosemary fries and a roasted garlic aioli. Damn, I am getting hungry just blogging about this good food. So here's the thing about jackfruit: If you cook it up, it sort of takes on the consistency of shredded pork and it takes on the flavors of anything you add to it. Amazing. It's like tofu. Now, it doesn't totally simulate pork, but it satisfies any pulled pork and carnitas cravings.

After we ate ourselves into a food coma, we headed over to the Los Angeles County Museum of Art. We had never been to an art museum together before, and it was a fun and funny experience. Turns out that we have different tastes in art, so I took him to the exhibits that he would have normally passed up and vice versa. I love modern art, and he likes the more conventional stuff like European paintings.

I can't pass up a sculpture garden! Below, a piece by Alexander Calder, one of my favorites:

Whenever I'm in an art museum, I always wonder what my life would be like right now had I stayed in art school. I had a brief stint at the School of Visual Arts (photography), and sometimes I wonder what I'd be doing right now had I graduated. Oh well, I'll never know.

Below, here's a cool sculpture. I don't know what it is or what it means, but that's the fun part of it.

After the art museum, we headed to Cinnamon Vegetarian for dinner. This restaurant served up a variety of vegetarian food. We went for the Mexican selections- chicken mole and carnitas. The food was good, but since I have no pictures, it might mean that I didn't like it as much as Pure Luck.

weddings and video games

Drew and I agree on most things, but we don't agree on video games. I don't like them, and I don't see the point. (when I was in college, a guy down the hall was parked in front of his TV with some controller in his hand every single night. I heard that later he became a video game tester) I harbor negative stereotypes about those who play video games (hello? go out and interact with real live people!). I am what you might call a "gamist."

Drew is not the kind of guy who's glued to his computer or TV playing video games day in an day out (seeing as how I'm a gamist, I guess I wouldn't be with him if he were), but he does like to play here and there. I'm sure that my video game aversion is unfair. It's unfortunate that I'm such a gamist, but I'm never going to come around to them. I know video games are a hobby, similar to reading a book or playing tennis. But I still don't see the point of sitting in front of your computer or TV, playing a game in which the purpose is to shoot people up.

The other day, Drew texted me a picture of two things I detest wrapped into one: a wedding video game. See below:

The caption to his text says this: "To get you into video games, I thought I'd start with this." My reply? "Only if I get to shoot the bridezillas!"

I can't believe that there is such a thing as a wedding video game. I don't have enough time to articulate everything that is wrong with this.

release the kagan!

In case you haven't heard, Justice John Paul Stevens is retiring from the Supreme Court. at the end of this term. Nominated by Ford, a Republican, in 1975, Stevens became one of the leading liberals on the Court. Earlier this week, Obama announced his pick to replace Stevens: Elena Kagan. Kagan is currently the Solicitor General (first female to hold that post) and is the former dean of the Harvard Law School (first female to do that too). If confirmed, Kagan would be the 3rd woman on the Supreme Court, and the 4th woman ever to be to a Supreme Court justice.

Some commentators have pointed out that when Stevens leaves, there will be no Protestants or veterans on the Court. Now, I'm all for diversity, but let's not forget that there were no women on the Supreme Court until 1981. And women are about half the U.S. population. Currently, there are 2 women on the Supreme Court, which is about 22%. Women are better represented on the highest court in the land than in Congress, where there are 17 female Senators and 76 female Representatives (out of 100 senators and 435 house reps).

The commentary on diversity is especially interesting. It appears that a diverse Supreme Court (or any other branch) is important because it suggests that it will be a representative body. People are concerned with not only the gender diversity of the Court but also the religious diversity as well. We're not concerned with only gender and religion; a collection of op eds in the New York Times made a case for other kinds of diversity: age, sexual orientation, race, atheism, military background, etc. This concern with diversity and representation seems counterintuitive; after all, aren't judges supposed to be neutral? Shouldn't they check their backgrounds, experiences, and ideologies at the door? It's an interesting notion. If they are supposed to be neutral and impartial, is diversity then relatively unimportant?

sage, blackberries, pb & j brownies

It's been a busy brownie baking weekend. I've been testing brownie batter recipes and flavor combinations. I made coconut brownies last week, and this past weekend, I tried out a sage and blackberry combo, blackberry, and two versions of PB & J.

First up, sage and blackberry brownies. Oh, and just plain blackberry brownies. I simmered blackberries and tossed in some sugar to make a sauce. I poured it over the brownie batter, and it sizzled as it baked. The blackberry brownies were pretty good, but the sage and blackberry were not. Apparently, savory and sweet don't go together.

Next up, peanut butter and jelly. I used store bought strawberry jam, but it kind of burned. So I tried again.

Below is my interpretation of peanut butter and jelly brownies. How pretentious do I sound? In place of the jam, I used the blackberry sauce.

These were really quite good, but the sauce to peanut butter ratio was a little lopsided. Next time, I need to be more liberal with the sauce.

As I mentioned previously, I've also been testing batter recipes. The recipes I've used call for unsweetened chocolate, bittersweet chocolate, cocoa powder, or a combination of these. So far, my favorite is a recipe that calls for unsweetened chocolate and bittersweet chocolate. It seems to yield a richer and more densely flavored brownie. I think it gives the chocolate flavor more depth.

Next up? Chocolate chip cookie dough brownies.

gender roles and grey's anatomy

Some people say that they get great ideas when they work out. I am not one of those people. Me? I was mentally organizing all the hook ups on Grey's Anatomy while huffing and puffing on the elliptical. I know, I know, pathetic. I'm a grad student. Don't I have something more worthwhile and intelligent to think about? Apparently not. I mean, you're probably thinking that I should focus on my impending oral advancement exam, and here I am, trying to remember who had sex with whom on a television show. I'll tell you why it matters, but I'm getting ahead of myself.

I tuned in to Grey's Anatomy last Thursday. I've been watching it off and on, but I don't think I miss too much. Each episode is pretty much the same. Someone hooks up, someone breaks up, someone has sex in the medical supply room, there is some catastrophe and then there is an influx of patients in the ER. There. So anyway, Derek and Meredith have been a couple basically since the show started (7 years ago? I dunno). By the way, Derek is now the Chief of Surgery (he was an attending when Meredith was an intern). Meredith is now a resident. (Now, I think that the hierarchy goes chief-attending-resident-intern) Meredith and Derek have decided to be lifelong committed partners, but she kind of worries that some hot new intern is going to steal Derek away from her. After all, he was an attending and she was an intern when they first hooked up. At the end of the episode, she pretends to be an intern and seduces him.

So this is why I was mentally cataloguing the sex lives of Grey's Anatomy characters. Here goes: Grey's Anatomy probably prides itself on having some degree of gender, racial, and sexual diversity. (I said some.) However, there are these huge, glaring, blatant, disparities in power, status, and prestige. All of the relationships and hook ups are between a man who is in a position of higher power and higher status than the woman. Apparently, men are attracted only to the women below them in the hierarchy and vice versa. A relationship between a male chief of surgery and a female resident is natural and normal. It doesn't work to reverse the roles because then the woman would be emasculating the man. And apparently two equals cannot be in a relationship. And oh yes, notice how Meredith just assumes that the interns are straight women?

Lest you think I am cherry picking my cases, here are more examples. Christina (former intern turned resident) has a history of hooking up with her male mentors. There was that famous male doctor from when she was in medical school, and she had a relationship with this prestigious cardio surgeon in early episodes. Now she is doing the tango with Owen, but I don't think he is her equal- I believe that he is higher up on the hospital totem pole. Let's move on to Mark. Mark is an attending, who was in a relationship with Lexie, an intern. By the way, Mark has a history of sleeping with the nurses (women, of course) and hitting on anyone with boobs. Lexie moved on to sleeping with Alex, a resident, who also likes to sleep with the nurses. Alex was married to Izzie, who was his equal, but her character got cancer and he had to take care of her. Okay, moving on. Callie, a resident, was married to George, an intern, but then they got divorced. Oh, and George was played by T.R. Knight, who came out during this time. So I guess the only time that the female character in a relationship gets to be higher on the food chain is when the male character is played by a gay man. Oh, I haven't left out Miranda, who is something like the chief attending. Miranda has a young son and was married, but her long hours and commitment to her job broke up her marriage. See what happens when accomplished and powerful women try to have it all? Apparently, you can't.

Gender roles and gender disparities are pervasive in our society. We are so accustomed to them that most of the time we barely notice their existence. It's not good enough for Grey's Anatomy to just have more women or more minorities as doctors. As long as there are gender disparities in the relationships and hook ups, there are still vestiges of gender inequality. Women can be doctors, yet the show sends the message that their first and foremost role is to be sexually available for men in higher positions. Women might be smart enough and competent enough to be doctors like men, but they are and always will be subordinate to them.