CNN Blogs on sex: "Should women be more like men?

Sex: Should women be more like men? – The Chart – CNN.com Blogs

First, a disclaimer: I have always found "Sex and the City" – both the novel and the TV show – to be vapid, idiotic, unrealistic fluff that is insulting to women. Now on to a response to the question posed in the article.

Now, not all men are assholes and whores. Neither are women. So why women fixate on the less flattering qualities of men to emulate in their quest for balanced gender roles is baffling. I tend to think it's because they're not really searching for equality; rather, they're seeking to rebel from the more sensationally prominent of their existing gender role constraints.

Men are not respected by women when they are players/whores. Why would women think they'd command respect as sluts who objectify themselves, valuing their bodies as nothing more than currency in the same way some men do? Is it an "if you can't beat them, join them" mentality?

Then there are the biological variables as described in the article, and of course the fact that "Sex and the City," the TV show, was helmed and directed by men.
That said, the themes and scenarios and characters in the show did spur greater awareness and serious discourse alongside all the vapid frivolity.

People in general need to stop trying to be like someone else and start being like themselves. We can admire qualities in others, and decide to adopt and shape it as our own, but to attempt taking identities wholesale requires a level of misdirected insecurity and regard for the superficial over the nuances of human and individual identity.

Public Produce Markets as an Economic Catalyst and Job Generator?

The Project for Public Spaces published an article this month calling for a national study on the economic impact of public markets, with one of the goals being to find out just how many jobs are and might be created by the development and presence of a public market in a community. This would be a valuable reference for both market advocates and political types with job-creation on their minds to have.

Personally, I have always loved the cry of vendors hawking their wares. It varies by location and in intensity and pitch, but inevitably exudes such a natural, yet practiced and practical, enthusiasm.

History also supports my romanticized vision, having shown that markets have been gathering places throughout the world for people of all walks of life. It has only been in industrialized, technology-centered societies that the natural appeal and applicability of public markets waned (or was suppressed). Now, in an era where jobs are scarce, trendy trappings are more a luxury than a given, and "fresh" + "sustainable" + "community" is to food as "vintage" is to clothes, it makes sense that public markets are making a comeback.

My personal bias aside, such a study would certainly provide welcome data about the economic potential of public markets in communities of varying sizes, from an urban metropolis to a small town. Our nation is in need of any project that has economic viability, on top of the social and environmental benefits offered – perhaps a study on social potential should be called for? – so this type of collaboration would be ideal.

Some of the other topics and goals of the study are as follows:

• The number of jobs created by a public market - directly and indirectly. These could include farmers, seasonal farm workers, market stall employees, market managers, and even seed salespeople.

• The economic impact on the businesses around the market.

• The economic benefit of participation in a public market for the farmer/producer’s business, including an understanding of their cost of production and the cost of their market operation.

• The economic impact on the participating farmers’ rural communities.

• What else needs be evaluated? And how can this study take shape?

Browse the PPS's article for more about the background of public markets and the logistics and collaboration that such an impact study would entail. The nonprofit is also soliciting reader feedback and ideas on their "Markets Economic Impact Study" at info@pps.org.

ENTERTAINMENT OP-ED: Tyra Banks puts on a show and show's off her ignorance

So Tyra Banks and her "America's Next Top Model" crew decided to plaster colored skin creams all over their contestant's faces in an effort to make them look, as one contestant put it, "so exotic." Some are calling it a return of the hated blackface. Others argue it's just acting. All wonder if it's going to even be a controversy.

I've detested this show since it was first a twinkle in the WB/CW's eye so nothing they do that's offensive or controversial really surprises me since I find the whole concept and industry behind high-end fashion modeling offensive and degrading, but this is just astounding because for all my hate on Tyra Banks and the fact that young women actually eat her superficial crap up, I kind of figured that she and her peers were just working with what they've got and are savvy enough to use society's obsession to their advantage, but this just makes them flat out stupid, in my opinion.

I mean, really? How does this not ruffle anyone on set's glittered feathers? Is such acceptance of such ignorance and consumerism over humanity really so pervasive? Heck, as noted in EW, they even mixed up racial identity with national and cultural identity, telling the aspiring models that Hawaii's a melting pot of races so they're each going to portray a jumble of Greek/Mexican, Moroccan/Russian, Botswana/Polynesian, Tibetan/whatever individuals.

Shows like Ugly Betty try to show the intelligence and thought process behind fashion shoots, the covering of all bases and being smart about it. These showrunners didn't even bother, reducing Native Americans to an eagle-staring people and Tibet to a stereotype of tranquility and oppression.