Girls Are So Weird, Right?

Having just recently been to see New Moon, and having chided myself for shallowness over it, I was interested in this piece from The American Prospect (you must also admire the punny title, Girls Just Wanna Have Fangs).

The article talks about the way that our culture sort of broadly derides the Twilight books/movies/overall phenomenon, perhaps not so much because they're poorly written/problematic in their presentation of relationships (which is not disputed) as because girls like them.

And anything meant for girls, and that girls like a lot but guys don't get, is bound to be pretty silly, isn't it?

This is an interesting (though not novel) point.

After all, it's not as if a lot of the stuff intended for guy consumption is high art. Nor, to be fair, is it as if it's presented that way--there was plenty of well-deserved projectile vomiting over the second Transformers movie too--but somehow it's not universally considered to be just plain frivolous the way Twilight is, although giant robots shambling through a half-assed plot that I suspect was pieced together from bits of 15 randomly selected other bad movies is in fact pretty frivolous.

I guess it all comes back to the way that we do tend to imagine the 'default person' as a male person. Ridiculously over-the-top movies aimed at guys are just ridiculously over-the-top movies. And I enjoy some of these as much as the next person. They're fun to watch, applaud dramatic explosions in, snicker at, and talk about later.

Ridiculously over-the-top movies aimed at girls are chick flicks. And I enjoy some of these as much as the next person too, but there sure aren't as many 'next persons' to enjoy them with. Because the 'default person' doesn't care about them. Only girls.

It almost makes me want to root for New Moon to become the biggest movie of the year, the one everybody has to see or be hopelessly out of the loop, just for some balance (darn it, I want to be able to dissect every hilarious slow motion sparkle with everyone I know!), but...enh. Maybe not quite.

.

Paths to Popularity

Another nice example from Sociological Images of how beauty standards change, with an ad advising that "if you want to be popular...you can't afford to be skinny!"

One way or another, it's all about changing something, isn't it? I guess there are a lot of things it would be tough to sell stuff to people by telling them things are OK the way they are.

One thing that we see doesn't change is goofy names/spellings for products: the one in the ad referenced is cleverly called "Wate-On."

Of course, phonetic spellings of words related to the product's intended purpose seem kind of retro at the moment--right now, we like to leave the initial letters off anything with an X in it ('Xtreme' is very hot) or attach any sort of masculinity-related term to pretty much anything marketed to men ("Dude-Wear Clothing!" "Bro-othpaste!" "Man-larm clocks!" "He-lium Balloons!").

This will seem very old-fashioned one day. Tomorrow, with any luck, because I'm already tired of it.

.

Guiding Lines

Everyone is surely riveted to the kerfuffle around the recent change in the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations on mammograms.

I must say that my own immediate response was one of pure delight. I can wait until age 50 to be squashed and x-rayed?! That's much farther in the future than 40! Win!

But apparently I was missing some of the details, since there are plenty of people who are pretty perturbed about it.

I was filled in by some fine posts on the subject, to which I here give full credit:

Orac at Respectful Insolence has a well-reasoned post explaining the new guidelines, and another addressing some of the objections to them. (It's actually partly due to reading Orac's previous posts on the often-fuzzy issues around preventive screening that I reacted so casually.)

Christine C. at Our Bodies Our Blog also covers the new guidelines in a clear, straightforward way.

And finally, if you need any more, Naomi Freundlich at Health Beat has excellent details.

Something all of these posts explain is that  no one is telling women they can't get a mammogram before 50 if there's a reason to think they may need one. The new guidelines are just saying that in general, if there are no risk factors calling for increased watchfulness, you don't need to feel you're neglecting your health unduly if you wait.

After doing this reading up, I can say that I personally remain comfortable with the idea of forgoing the mammogram until age 50, unless something about my circumstances between then and now suggests I'm at increased risk of breast cancer and should do it sooner.

I'll be totally cool with it if that doesn't happen.

.

O.M.G. [Swoon] Movie Review: New Moon

So this movie? New Moon?--everything I expected. Take that as you will.

We saw it with an entertainingly enthusiastic preview audience, so the showing was punctuated with applause, laughter, raucous hooting, and the occasional shout of "take it off!"

Seriously, I am not even going to run over the plot, because if you don't already know, you don't care. The story follows the book quite closely, as far as I recall (I read the book, but it was a year or more ago, so I can't swear to my memory of it).

But here are some general things you can expect if you choose to go see this film:

• Lots of longing glances
• Lots of hesitations before speaking (also long pauses!)
• Lots of well-muscled, shirtless guys
• Lots of attractively moody scenery (I did enjoy this)
• Lots of extremely pale, moody people
• Only moderately cheesy giant wolf effects (I do enjoy giant wolf action)
• Some fairly heavily cheesy gothic vampire characters
• Ever so much seething romantic tension! Seething, I tell you!

A few injuries and references to people getting sick, but no one spends any time in the library. Sigh.

I thought the character of Bella came across as less whiny than in the books, which was a plus. I also give the movie major props for the way they cover the movie that Bella goes to see, which was hilarious. (Face Punch! Best action movie title ever!)

It was two hours and felt slightly longer, but didn't make me actually check my watch.

Brief wrap-up: if you liked the first movie in this series, you'll probably enjoy this one.

If you don't know what the fuss is about but are curious, you probably want to see the first one first (and/or, just read the books a few times), on account of this one doesn't fill in the backstory for you.

But if you just want the giant wolves and seething romantic tension, dive right in.

.

My Essential Shallowness Revealed

There's a screening of Money-Driven Medicine tomorrow at Northeastern University, which is practically down the street from me. It's based on the book by Maggie Mahar of the awe-inspiringly informative Health Beat, and promises to be both interesting and educational.

I really want to see this movie!

But...I also have a pass to a preview screening of The Twilight Saga: New Moon tomorrow. And you know which one all the kids will be talking about in the halls on Thursday.

I gotta see New Moon. And why?

Because I love the books? Tee hee. No.

Because I love the idea of elbowing my way through crowds of swooning teenagers? Well, kind of. I do like to elbow.

Because I know teenagers who will be swooning and want to be able to relate to their experience? No, I don't currently spend much time with teenagers.

Because I love handsome, sparkling, angst-ridden vampires? Not particularly.

Because this movie is getting a lot of hype and I want in on it? Yeah, pretty much.

So there you have it. I want to see this movie, rather than a no doubt much more intellectually stimulating movie with more redeeming social value, because media buzz has told me I do.

I am shallow. Sorry, Money-Driven Medicine. If you show up on Netflix I'll rent you, I promise.

.

Bad News About Bats

I've heard a bit about the mysterious bat die-off before, but this story from the Boston Globe Magazine has distressing details.

Entire species of bat are on the verge of dying off, which is bad because they play a major role in the ecosystem, eating all those bugs, and it could have seriously unbalancing effects if they disappear: "Kunz [a bat expert] estimates that there are 694 tons of insects loose in the environment now that would have been consumed by the estimated 1 million bats that have already died."

That's a lot of tons of insects. And a lot of dead bats.

This is also bad because bats are super cool, with their flying and their sonar and their insect-eating, and I just like their adorable hideous faces.

Good luck with this mystery, bat scientists, and good luck with the fight against extinction, bats.

.

Ruling the Internet

Yowch. The Distant Librarian has news about the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, which I have to confess I was really not paying attention to, but which apparently could have a lot to say about copyright.

It's a treaty and is still in negotiations, so all information must be rumors at this point, but it doesn't sound great.

One of the leaks around ACTA suggests that there's a provision which will require ISPs around the globe to monitor and adhere to takedown notices upon mere accusation of copyright infringement, as well as a three-strikes and you're off the internet forever.

I should probably pay more attention.

.