just call me spooky

from the website gurlpages.  Don't laugh.  This is my quiz result for "what temperament are you", although I already knew all this.  However, I think their list of famous melancholics is quite funny. 

According to Galen's ancient theory of temperaments, people with melancholic temperaments are often perfectionists, and are analytically oriented. They are said to be sensitive and loving, but may also be hard to please because of their high standards. Because of their sensitivity, they often prefer a smaller group of friends, and don't feel as comfortable in large groups.

Do you find yourself paying more attention to the details than the big picture? Pursuit of perfection in a world where not everything is perfect may lead to disappointment...but armed with an unfailing sense of curiosity and purpose, those with melancholic temperaments are bound to find solutions to even the most frustrating of problems.

famous idealists: mother teresa, queen elizabeth ii, barbara walters, special agent mulder ("the x-files")

or maybe chick flicks just suck.

The New York Times' Movie Dispatch has this article called "Hollywood's Shortage of Female Power".  It links the decline of movies "geared toward women and girls" - both at production sets and at the box office - with a declining number of women working in decisionmaking positions in Hollywood.  Some producers are apparently concerned over this:

Still, some long-time Hollywood producers feel that something has shifted. “For every Lionsgate, you’d hope there would be another company saying, ‘We’re going to make ‘My Big Fat Greek Wedding,’ ” said Lindsay Doran, an independent producer (“Nanny McPhee,” “Sense and Sensibility”) who once ran United Artists. “You don’t see that. You don’t see companies saying, ‘More than half of this population is women, we should design a slate to come up with movies like ‘The Break-Up,’ and ‘The Devil Wears Prada.’ ”

Or how about not.  The article does make the point (good job, New York Times, here's a star!) that women go to the "male", adrenaline and testosterone-laden gunfights, monster movies, and special effects extravaganzas.  But this point is very downplayed - in general, the tone remains concerned that with a reduction of female presidents and chairwomen at blockbuster studios (Paramount, Disney, and Universal are mentioned) comes a reduction of what I can only call chick flicks, and thus that women like fashion and romance... and that's about all they like.  A movie is not geared toward women if it is not inundated with over-the-top, happy-ending, heterosexual love between attractive stars, complete with a cast of lovable supportive goofs, some ridiculous rivals, and a very nice wardrobe that may just end up the movie's only Oscar nomination. 

I was once told that it was possible I "have a serious problem with women".  Sometimes I think this is true.  I have no doubts that I'm straight, and I always identify myself as female.  See my entire livejournal.  But I don't usually identify myself with the female character, especially in chick flicks.  This doesn't mean I identify with the male character, either.  It means I identify with no one.  And when I find female characters in movies that I can actually applaud, I am ecstatic.  That's why I still love "Independence Day" - Jasmine (although I have just realized that I tend to be more sympathetic to female characters who are minorities - of all the characters that are a challenge for me to like, I think the White Woman that is most difficult).  Same with Sarah Harding and Ellie in the "Jurassic Park" franchise. 

These are all, however, extremely "masculine" movies.  Of course, I think they're more like "people" movies, in my opinion - saving Earth from aliens, in this world, is macho.  One wonders what a women's alien invasion movie would look like (because surely the softer "Signs" is not a women's movie either, since all the main characters are male).  I suppose it wouldn't exist, because women don't think about aliens, and in fact, they don't seem to think about anything larger than themselves and their own friends and families at all.  Movies about Earth are not women's movies.  Lionsgate, that macho movie house that makes "Hostel" and "Bug" movies, also made "Lord of War".  Omigod, it's about guns, it must be macho.  It's about arms proliferation and how it's one of the worst things happening in the world and no one seems to care.  Then there's "Requiem for a Dream", also by Lionsgate.  Drugs!  Macho!  Even though the protagonist is female!  Same with "The Descent", which features a cast of entirely combative, athletic women and monsters, but is still a masculine movie, I suppose, because it is set in a cave, there is blood, there is gore, and there are no men to flirt with.  And if that attitude isn't sexist, I don't know what is.  I mean, all this hoopla is just bullshit, and I almost feel like writing to the New York Times on this. 

When I hear these attitudes, I feel like I'm a contradiction in terms.  Lionsgate is one of my favorite production houses.  So are Magnolia and Focus Features (and Rogue Pictures).  Further, I watch football and figure skating.  I played with Legos and Barbies.  "Jurassic Park" was my first favorite movie.  I love zombie movies, horror movies, and apocalyptic movies.  I love documentaries.  I watch Law & Order, Aqua Teen Hunger Force, Most Extreme Elimination Challenge, and America's Next Top Model.  I absolutely loved "Hot Fuzz", even though there are close to no female characters in it and it's unabashedly a testosterone flick.  Whatever.  I firmly believe I am not abnormal, and I do not have a problem.  As me and Kim decided when we saw it, we're cool because we were two girls who went and were not there because we were dragged by our boyfriends.  All it means is that we won't have fights over what movies to watch with our husbands.

And another issue - this feeling that women's movies just aren't being made anymore is not quite true.  Discounting the unsuccessful Hollywood romantic comedies, what about "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind"?  Are you really going to tell me "Little Miss Sunshine" is a masculine movie?  "Transamerica" wasn't masculine.  Then there's "Brokeback Mountain", which is like the opposite of traditional macho.  Maybe it says something that all these movies I'm listing off are indie movies, and that my favorite movie studios are all independent.  All these movies are also all good movies, not trash like "The Holiday".  But you know what?  Men go to see these movies as well as women!  No, men don't willingly see chick flicks, and yes, women do willingly see macho movies.  And while maybe this has something to do with men not being free to express their feminine side whereas women are allowed to be masculine, I think it's far more likely that macho movies, that don't have to pay their stars gargantuan amounts (see Julia Roberts' salary) and can actually devote this money to the movie itself, who recognize that adrenaline and excitement is not a high available only to men, and that are usually much funnier, with better scripts, and are much more willing to poke fun at themselves, are just better movies. 

Oh yes, and I should take this opportunity to say that I don't quite agree with the opinion in comparative politics that if more women are elected to office, women's issues will be brought to the agenda.  For one, what are "women's issues"?  My issues are security, democratization, militaries, norm change, nationalism, and colonial legacies.  None of these issues are particular to women.  Things like abortion, equal wages, equal legal rights, sexual violence, discrimination, and genital mutilation are not on my plate, not because they're not important, but because I'm just not into them.  If I were elected to public office, I would discuss the military budget and foreign policy.  Period.  And don't anybody dare say that because I believe war is an unnecessary evil, I'm showing my feminine side.  No.  I'm showing my human side. 

fraternities are for never

I discovered this via Facebook.  Isn't it funny how Facebook provides a public opinion gauge. 

Phi Kappa Tau, a national fraternity, has a chapter called Upsilon, at Nebraska Wesleyan (the second biggest university after the state schools).  This chapter has a Facebook group called "Phi Tau Upsilon Forever" (link only available if you're on Facebook), which says:

If you believe that Phi Kappa Tau Upsilon builds men of character this is your group. If you know doctors, lawyers, architects, accountants, or any other prominent alumni of this house join this group. We have to band together and support these men. We all love these men "and know they are amazing people and will be major idols in our society someday. Join if you believe in Phi Kappa Tau Upsilon, know these are men of character, and are confident they all will rise above situations they are faced with.

It later goes on to tell people to call the Phi Kappa Tau national CEO to "express your disgust with how nationals has proceeded with thier investigation and punishment!" in the hopes that with enough calls, "This should show them just how prominent these guys are!"

Curious as to what exactly happened at Phi Tau Upsilon, I of course turned to my good friend Google.  It turns out that there was a fire at the Phi Tau Upsilon house in November 2006, which killed one 19-year-old and injured several others.  Three (presumably fraternity brothers) have been arrested with charges of arson, hazing, illegal use of fireworks, etc.  The National HQ of Phi Kappa Tau subsequently suspended the Upsilon chapter for four years for violating their risk-management policy, and basically, to save face.  Hence the Facebook group. 

Needless to say, I don't buy the whole future doctors and architects spiel.  I'm actually of the opinion that while some former fraternity brothers may go on to become doctors and architects, they will probably be worse human beings for having been in a fraternity.  And anybody who thinks frats are basically good should realize that these incidents are not too far out of the norm.  I'm sure that hazing exists everywhere.  With new explicit rules, frats come up with new ways to haze - we can't beat them, fine, we'll make them stand in the cold.  I also find it very interesting that in order to reinstate the Upsilon chapter, this Facebook group hopes to prove that the Upsilon chapter's members are "prominent".  That word is thrown around a couple times, actually.  Prominent men.  What prominent really means to me is staggering, having influence over the community, coming from good families with fingers in a dozen pies, able to pull strings if need be.  It means powerful.  And that is not the same thing as character. 

The same goes for sororities, but as it's like in high school, of course the girls aren't as violent as the boys and get less flak.