Politics Daily

Far From Lightweight: Michelle Obama's Childhood Obesity Fight

Judy Howard Ellis — 2010-03-04T08:50:00 00:00

Filed under: Health Care, Woman Up, Michelle Obama

I love the idea of First Lady Michelle Obama pushing her anti-childhood obesity campaign. Childhood obesity may seem like one step above planning the White House Easter Egg hunt to critics who like their superheroines throwing punches in the health care debate. But I admire bloodless coups. And to let you in on a theory: I think the first lady is launching one.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Vanity Fair's March Cover: What Would Richard Pryor Say?

Judy Howard Ellis — 2010-02-02T12:30:00 00:00

Filed under: Race, Woman Up, Culture

Did Vanity Fair editors think about Richard Pryor when they planned their March cover? The late comedian once observed that the sci-fi film, "Logan's Run," was loaded with cultural subtext because blacks weren't in it. The futuristic world of the 23rd century was depicted as for whites-only, and Pryor, wielding the n-word like a knife, said:

They had a movie of the future called "Logan's Run." There ain't no n-- in it.

I said, "Well, white folks ain't planning for us to be here . . ."

If Pryor were still alive, what would trigger his mockery? Vanity Fair's February cover featuring former golden boy Tiger Woods defrocked into a shirtless hoodlum? Or maybe the mag's March cover where darker-skinned women apparently aren't up-and-coming stars in the "new Hollywood." Vanity Fair lauds "Twilight's" Kristen Stewart, "The Wrestler's" Evan Rachel Wood, "Bright Star's" Abbie Cornish, "Dear John's" Amanda Seyfried, "Alice in Wonderland's" Mia Wasikowska, "Zombieland's" Emma Stone, "An Education's" Carey Mulligan, "Frost/Nixon's" Rebecca Hall, and "Up in the Air's" Anna Kendrick as the "dolls" to watch.

Does the Vanity Fair cover reflect a fresh Hollywood or an old one, air-brushed for 21st century tastes? Or is it fair to single out this cover?

A multi-dimensional conversation is on the "Entertainment Weekly" site. A sampling of the comments:

CeCe

Mon 02/01/10 5:22 PM

They could have include some women of color.

Celia

Mon 02/01/10 5:48 PM

Zoe was in the 2008 Hollywood issue, but it would've been nice to see her on the cover since she's been so big this year. Star Trek AND Avatar and she's not even mentioned.

Charlie

Mon 02/01/10 6:52 PM

Saldana would be nice (or, for that matter, Gabourey Sidibe.)

whatevs

Mon 02/01/10 5:50 PM

Women of color? What is this, 1920?

llevinso
Mon 02/01/10 5:56 PM

Actually whatevs, WOC is the correct term. Maybe you should go dig around on some social activism blogs and you'll see it everywhere, trust me.

Sara

Mon 02/01/10 6:24 PM

Really! I love that this comes out in February, too. We just took a step back Hollywood!

Jeez
Mon 02/01/10 7:12 PM

I knew someone was gonna make it political. Get a life.

Yiu28

Mon 02/01/10 6:45 PM

You guys are great. I was so sad when I saw this article. I'm glad that I'm not the only one who had similar thoughts. I just couldn't get pass the sameness of the spread. I like all these actresses but couldn't they find at least one other woman with a darker shade or a size 6?

.Angie

Mon 02/01/10 6:54 PM

America Ferrera had a great film career prior to Ugly Betty and now that the show has been canceled I'd definitely look out for her in a big way! She's gorgeous and sosososo talented that, unmistakably, she will be the face of new Hollywood.
Also, this isn't about new people and giving them props, it's about who will still be stars in 10 years. For example, 10 years ago I bet we would have seen Katie Holmes, Kirsten Dunst, Julia Stiles, etc...for this same cover with the expectation that one of them would be actively making quality, well-attended films currently. In actuality, none of them are...

Madd
Mon 02/01/10 7:15 PM

While I agree that there are plenty of talented women of color who belong on that cover, as an extremely pale girl I'm glad to see the make-up artists didn't drown them in spray tan.

How does America (and that includes Hollywood) see itself? It's complicated . . .

Follow Judy Howard Ellis on Twitter.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Jeff and Susan Bridges: A Swooning Moment at the SAG Awards

Judy Howard Ellis — 2010-01-26T05:00:00 00:00

Filed under: Woman Up

I'm almost scared to acknowledge it, as if -- poof! -- two tender moments from the recent Screen Actors Guild Awards will vanish. Weeks of revelations about bad-boy husbands can make a blogger skittish, but here goes, my eyes closed, but still hoping.

Jeff Bridges won best actor for his performance as country singer "Bad Blake" in "Crazy Heart," but when he honored his wife, Susan, he became more of the delectable, middle-aged heartthrob. During his acceptance speech, he called out to his wife from the audience and she responded with a wave (scroll to 4:30 mark for Susan's wave):

My personal swooning moment was when I read about what happened backstage. Christie D'Zurilla in the Ministry of Gossip in the Los Angeles Times recorded what happened when Bridges was asked about his family, and how he brought his wife to the podium to answer the question:

"My wife did such a wonderful job, but like my dad, I was gone for a lot of the time. I love my girls very much, and my wife has raised them beautifully. Sue, why don't you come out here for a second?

"Ladies and gentleman," he said, "Sue!"

And he didn't leave her out on a limb: "The question is about raising daughters -- what did you do?," he asked, his arm around her under the spotlights. "I said most of the time you were there. I did my bit... "

"He was fun," said Sue, "and I was constant."

Bridges is one of my longtime favorite actors. He plays it straight. He plays it real. Without a beard, and especially with a graying one. While I know no more about his marriage than what I read -- the couple married in 1977 -- the glimpses, if indicators of the real thing, are endearing. As he said in a 2006 Reader's Digest article, he and his wife have experienced highs and lows. He also told Hello! in 2001:

"We've been married over 20 years and your marriage is bound to be tested, and every time it is and you're able to grow from that, then your love becomes bigger. You say, 'Gee, I thought that was the boundary; I thought my love was only that big.' But your love can grow and hold the thing that you thought was going to tear it apart and just make it like another piece of fruit in the bowl."

Bad-boy husbands (or wives) need not dominate the headlines 24/7. The excruciatingly public sagas of John Edwards, Tiger Woods, Charlie Sheen, and Gov. Mark Sanford linger. But Bridges' gesture to the mother of his three daughters is one example that seems to reflect the sweeter side of marriage. Call me idealistic, but why should selfishness and poor choices push love and loyalty from center stage? Besides, Susan Bridges' comment at the SAG Awards is a delightfully "uppity woman" moment that should not go unnoticed. She said so much by saying so little: "He was fun and I was constant."

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Racism: We're Talking About It Now

Judy Howard Ellis — 2010-01-11T10:05:00 00:00

Filed under: Woman Up

Mary C. Curtis' excellent post about Sen. Harry Reid and matters of race asks the question about whether Americans can have an honest conversation about race. I offer this thought: Maybe the nation is already engrossed in one.

First of all, the Obama administration is the epicenter of that conversation. The administration has exposed racism as one of the creepy things that crawl in the basement of politics, along with an array of bigotries. This is the same damp place where white and minority politicians get schooled on how to get minority votes on Sunday morning without really giving anything back to the community. It's the place where minority politicians learn to diminish themselves because being themselves alienates whites. This basement is a scary place where people may not wear white hoods, but you feel like they do.

Obama has sought to transcend race, to be race-neutral, but the racism from that basement dogs his steps. It was unrealistic to think his presidential campaign would spread enough pixie dust to transport our country into a post-racial universe at warp-speed. Too many people -- of all races -- aren't there yet. Wonderfully, a lot of people are. But while Obama's election ushered in hope that we were moving forward, our conversation isn't over. Every day we get to choose how we play it.

Right now, the conversation is mean and dirty. It's not only Reid sounding like a throwback to the white view of the 1940s when dark-skinned Hattie McDaniel was the beloved Mammy and the light-skinned Lena Horne was the beauty. It's Glenn Beck ruminating about what to call black people or Rep. Joe Wilson feeling patriotic calling Obama a liar during a joint session of Congress. It's some African Americans who cheered Obama's presidency, but who doubt he has the black muscle to tend to their issues. It's the affront of Obama being exposed to an appalling security breach and marketing firms feeling comfortable stealing his and First Lady Michelle Obama's images without permission. It's Michael Steele, a black man who challenged Reid about his race-based comments, but who himself was served up as GOP chair to show some love to African Americans, and who recently insulted Native Americans by using a pejorative term. It's the media treating Hawaii, Obama's home, as exotic territory because the president vacations there.

Obama experiences the bulk of our collective racial angst because he is a light-skinned Jackie Robinson. He has to weather the trashy attacks while he breaks barriers for the entire country at home plate. Certainly Obama must be held accountable for his leadership missteps, just as he is celebrated for his hopeful ambitions. Loudly criticize him about his handling of the economy, challenge him about keeping his campaign promise to have a public discussion about health care, but refuse to let those issues swim in the inky waters of race. Those issues are about his leadership, not his ancestry. His failures and successes aren't color-coded.

We would be a lot healthier as a nation if we acknowledge how we dump our lingering racial issues on Obama's shoulders. If we are humble enough to do that, both he and the rest of the country may get a lot further along in our ongoing conversation about race.

Follow Judy on Twitter.

.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

The Salahis Follies: Coming Soon to Vegas!

Judy Howard Ellis — 2010-01-08T07:00:00 00:00

Filed under: Woman Up

Someone help me out here. True or false: If you have the reputation of being the couple whose major claim to fame is gate-crashing the White House, wouldn't you want to sit down and be quiet? Wouldn't you limit your social exposure until your infamy faded away? Wouldn't the last thing you would want to do is to show up on anybody's red carpet?

You wouldn't. Not if you're Tareq and Michaele Salahi.

The infamous social climbers of the Beltway have accepted an invitation to be the official party hosts on Jan. 16 at the Pure Nightclub in Las Vegas. According to the Washington Post, the couple will receive an undisclosed sum for hosting. So once again, the Salahis are the benefactors of fame, and they will get some fortune, too.

Only in America -- and definitely in Las Vegas -- are tacky acts openly rewarded or overlooked, unless someone confronts them.

Sneaking a photo with the president and mingling with international dignitaries isn't like slipping into a friend's dinner party uninvited. The couple embarrassed the White House and breached national security. Bending the rules at the White House is not an adventure that justifies the eternal limelight of TMZ and Entertainment Tonight. Hair shirts may not be among the gowns and tuxes in the Salahis' closet, but wouldn't a bit of social repentance be nice?

The buzz of celebrity apparently holds too much allure for the Salahis and those who preen best in the spotlight. They couldn't resist a paid stint at a night club that has featured Brittany Spears' ex, Kevin Federline, former skater Tonya Hardy, Paris Hilton and rapper 50 cent. But despite what the Salhis may think, they are not rapper/actor LL Cool J, who will be featured Jan. 26 at Pure, or reality TV stars Heidi Montag and Spencer Pratt, who will appear on Feb. 13.

Celebrity status of the nightclub variety never lasts, and the Salahis aren't rappers, skaters or spring chickens. They had better enjoy the red carpet and the opportunity to be the hottest couple in Vegas for one neon-lit night. Their celebrity status may not get much better than that.

Follow Judy on Twitter.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Before Michelle Obama, There was Eunice W. Johnson

Judy Howard Ellis — 2010-01-07T05:00:00 00:00

Filed under: Woman Up, Culture

Long before Michelle Obama strolled down Pennsylvania Avenue on Inauguration Day in Isobel Toledo's shimmering day dress and coat or graced the cover of Vogue, another Chicago woman demonstrated how formidably fashionable black women can be.

Eunice W. Johnson was the business-minded fashion wizard who married haute couture and blackness when Bobby Kennedy was only musing about America one day electing a black president. Johnson, who with her late husband, John H. Johnson, started a publishing empire in 1942 with a $500 loan, became a fashion icon who oversaw the traveling Ebony Fashion Fair shows, known for their avant-garde looks from the top fashion houses.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Seven Questions for 2010 (and Beyond)

Judy Howard Ellis — 2009-12-28T05:00:00 00:00

Filed under: Woman Up

I intend to toast the end of this decade with gratitude and a kiss, but a gleam is in my eye for 2010 and beyond. Will we learn from our heroines, heroes, villains and failures? At the start of a new decade, and at the end of a tragic, chaotic and glorious one, life has repositioned us for change. Will we make the most of it?

My "wishes" for the years to come are framed as questions laced with hope:

1. Will we demand a solid education for every American child? I've talked to kids who attend private and public, suburban and urban schools and have been grieved by gaps in their training. The good news is that several of them excel at math and are learning languages such as Spanish and Mandarin. But one student told me she was fearful she would learn nothing in geography. Her teacher discusses geopolitics, but she's still not learning about where Kazakhstan is on a map. Many of the kids I have talked to also seem to know little about western civilization, not to mention studies about the great civilizations of Africa, Asia and the Americas. Goodness, if they read the news story about anonymous "undersea archaeologists" who claim they may have found the lost city of Atlantis, would some kids think it was once inhabited by wizards? Or vampires?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Will George Stephanopoulos Go Better With My Omelet?

Judy Howard Ellis — 2009-12-09T17:30:00 00:00

Filed under: Woman Up

I was prepared to drop my evening news habit this month with the departure of Charlie Gibson on "World News." Gibson was part of my dinner-preparation time, a favorite domestic ritual when I'm home -- folksy and cozy, like a warm oven, glistening plates and long dinner conversations. The capable Diane Sawyer just doesn't inspire me as that kind of a dinner accompaniment. But that's me. Certainly the wise news execs at ABC know better. It's Sawyer's long-overdue reward for her hard, distinguished work. So what if it's my TV loss?

I had accepted the fact that my evening news viewing would become incidental. Basically, if I caught one of the evening broadcasts, cool. If not, I could always listen to National Public Radio in the kitchen. The voices on NPR wouldn't rattle the mixing spoon in my hand like some of the radio and cable yell-it-loud variety. I wouldn't forget to add the rosemary or the oregano because someone cut off a guest mid-sentence.

But that settled state of mind was interrupted when stories emerged that George Stephanopoulos would join "Good Morning America." And now Politico reports that Stephanopoulos' new GMA role may be announced on Thursday. Just as Sawyer strikes the wrong chord when I'm broiling salmon for dinner, Stephanopoulos doesn't seem to fit my weekday breakfast routine like Sawyer, Robin Roberts and Chris Cuomo have done wonderfully for years. Yeah, it's all about the news experience for me. News delivery is everywhere, but nuances either engage me or drive me to escape. (And it doesn't hurt when the news delivery goes well with food -- the Sunday New York Times with brunch, a meaty mag with hot chai . . . You get the culinary picture.)

Stephanopoulos is a well-known political fixture, the former senior adviser in the Clinton administration who understands the sharks in the Beltway shark tank. He aims and fires questions and conveys Washington insider news with ease on "This Week with George Stephanopoulos." He's a familiar face at ABC, and could the sage network execs have a GMA remake in mind by replacing Sawyer with him? Perhaps they were thinking along the lines of Politico's observation, that Stephanopoulos has "executed a remarkable series of seamless reinventions." Will Stephanopoulos morph GMA, or how will the broadcast transform him?

As I mourn Gibson's retirement, ABC has added a wrinkle to my television viewing: Will Stephanopoulos go better with my omelet?

Follow Judy Howard Ellis on Twitter.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Tiger Woods: Is He Really a Fallen 'Hero'?

Judy Howard Ellis — 2009-12-04T05:00:00 00:00

Filed under: Woman Up

Of course the Tiger Woods scandal is disappointing. Adultery always is. When marital betrayal occurs, it isn't just the spouse who tastes the bitterness. Think of the children, the close family friends, the business partners, the neighbors. Adultery is like that. Its foulness isn't confined. Prostitution may be viewed as the oldest profession, but adultery is the oldest form of betrayal. Choose an era and select any civilization and adultery is there. Somewhere.

The more difficult observation about the circumstances surrounding Woods is that American culture has rewarded outward competence in just about everything. In Woods' case, we publicly serenaded his mastery of golf and cheered him as he reached a pinnacle where his competition was virtually just himself. We've done the same thing with political, business and entertainment leaders. They need only mouth a specific political ideology, resurrect a company from financial ashes or direct a great movie to be showered with book deals, outrageous bonuses and film awards. We often treat these leaders as if they were heroes.

If Woods is a hero who fell from grace, from where did he fall? While I'm saddened by his choice of adultery, horrified by the news of a revised prenup so that his wife will stay with him, I have to ask: Did Woods not fulfill what we slavishly awarded him? We awarded his skill at golf. We did not award his skill as a faithful husband. Personal character is not foremost in our thoughts in the capitalistic process of endorsements and media accolades. Everybody just wants to get paid. Maybe we should examine why we carelessly anoint leaders as heroes when all they have shown is physical strength or mental acumen. A hero is a person of convictions. Honorable men and women stand out in a lifetime and reveal their love, forgiveness, loyalty, self-sacrifice, and trustworthiness in the daylight and in the shadows. They are not perfect, but they seek forgiveness openly and labor to do good even if no human being acknowledges their progress. These are the ones we should seek to imitate, study and introduce to our children.

One of Woods' friends, Charles Barkley, famously said he was not a role model. He was right. But was Barkley a great power forward in the NBA? Absolutely. Did Woods and his other friend, Michael Jordan, transcend their respective games? You can bet your Masters' jacket and NBA Championship ring. Would any of these men be viewed as role models of marriage? No way. They could no more nab that title now than South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) or former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards.

But we all know real role models, real heroes. They are beloved and are birthed in the rock-strewn places of life, not in the glitter of praise that fawns over human skills and competition. With unforgettable personal character, they illuminate the places where there may never be hype or applause.

Follow Judy Howard Ellis on Twitter.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

The Salahis: Getting Paid for Not Being 'Tardy for the Party'

Judy Howard Ellis — 2009-11-30T06:53:00 00:00

Filed under: Woman Up

The party-crashing scandal involving Tareq and Michaele Salahi is a total misunderstanding. Really. Social secretaries of a certain delicate age may have shuddered uncontrollably as they prepared their Thanksgiving soirees thinking about the Virgina socialites invading President Obama's first "state" dinner. But those "fossils of etiquette" got it all wrong.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

NASA Declares It's Not the End of the World (Whew!)

Judy Howard Ellis — 2009-11-13T16:01:00 00:00

Filed under: Woman Up

Americans may not agree on troop numbers in Afghanistan, a resolution in Iraq, universal health care, or how to pull the jobless rate from the cliff at 10 percent, but will they find agreement in the possible threat of an apocalypse?

Maybe . . . if only to escape the harsh, complex reality of the world as it is now.

Chatter about end-time events -- whether generated by the hand of God, otherworldly creatures, galactic collapse, human corruption or some combination of all four -- have become common conversation in many circles. Google "2012," and you can read tons of entries about the ancient Mayan "Long Count" calendar concerning what some believe is an end-of-the-age event scheduled for Dec. 21, 2012.

Some contemporary Mayans have said the hoopla about this ancient calendar is misinterpreted, but that doesn't stop the History Channel from airing shows such as the "Nostradamus Effect" (complete with discussions about Web Bot predictions, Timewave Theory, and I Ching) . Later this year, "The Road," and in January 2010, "The Book of Eli," will offer even more doomsday shock.

Web sites offering 2012 advice abound. People who believe in the merit of ones such as www.2012supplies.com won't forget to pick up extra water and plant seed while they're shopping at Wal-Mart.

NASA jumped into the doomsday furor in anticipation of Friday's release of the film, "2012." NASA reassured that we will all be fine on Dec. 21, 2012. And to make us really feel all better, NASA launched a web page to debunk our 2012 worries. You gotta give them credit; NASA even offers a Q & A. Here's a sample:

Q: Are there any threats to the Earth in 2012? Many Internet websites say the world will end in December 2012.

A: Nothing bad will happen to the Earth in 2012. Our planet has been getting along just fine for more than 4 billion years, and credible scientists worldwide know of no threat associated with 2012.

Q: What is the origin of the prediction that the world will end in 2012?

A: The story started with claims that Nibiru, a supposed planet discovered by the Sumerians, is headed toward Earth. This catastrophe was initially predicted for May 2003, but when nothing happened the doomsday date was moved forward to December 2012. Then these two fables were linked to the end of one of the cycles in the ancient Mayan calendar at the winter solstice in 2012 -- hence the predicted doomsday date of December 21, 2012.

Q: Does the Mayan calendar end in December 2012?

A: Just as the calendar you have on your kitchen wall does not cease to exist after December 31, the Mayan calendar does not cease to exist on December 21, 2012. This date is the end of the Mayan long-count period but then -- just as your calendar begins again on January 1 -- another long-count period begins for the Mayan calendar.

NASA's bureaucratic reassurances -- the FAQ also says that NASA does not foresee any giant solar storms or meteors in our 2012 future, either -- may make the idea of a conspiracy look even more plausible. Nothing agitates skepticism more than to hear the government, that shadowy manipulator of evil, indulgently cooing how safe we are.

Nothing happened with Y2K, that other global worry preceding the Year 2000, so perhaps we really are OK. But is safety as creepy fun as musing about runaway asteroids, an impending ice age, Atlantis and supernatural creatures? Call it fringe nonsense, but even the Vatican, for the second time since 2005, convened a conference this week on the possibility of alien life. And since NASA has confirmed "significant" water on the moon, watch the speculations about extraterrestrials and Cydonia increase dramatically.

The ABC television series, "V," whether the writers intended it, reflects our unabated fascination with beings who know more than we do. Observers have eagerly compared it to the criticisms of the Obama administration. Politics give "V" a narrative, but for a nation enthralled by "Paranormal Activity," "Monsters vs. Aliens," "District 9" and "Aliens in the Attic," not to mention vampires, kid wizards and mutant machines, something bigger than political satire may be afoot.

If the conspiracy talk bears one iota of truth, should it change our lives? If we want to be alive to talk about the day after Dec. 21, 2012, should that make us more introspective? Should the notion of doomsday alter the debate about war, the national deficit and whether the White House is occupied by a Republican or a Democrat? Maybe the doomsday clock, which is expected to stoke senseless fear, could nudge us to seek common ground instead of constant crisis.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

In Fatal Texas Beating, Silence Was Not Golden

Judy Howard Ellis — 2009-11-09T16:00:00 00:00

Filed under: Woman Up

Jonathan Bird of Wylie, Texas, had just returned from a fishing trip with his fiancee's eldest son late Saturday night when a truck came barreling through his neighborhood. Bird apparently yelled at the teen drivers to slow down. The teens should have taken his advice and driven on. And Sunday, the 28-year-old Bird should have spent the day sharing fishing stories. End of story.

Instead, he was fatally beaten. Five male suspects are in custody. The oldest is 17.

According to reports, witnesses in the small town northeast of Dallas saw Bird being beaten, and the Wylie News Web site has comments like the ones below, asking why no one stepped in to help.

-- "What i can't understand is why everyone just stood by and witnessed this happening and did nothing.......did no one call 911.......the witnesses are just as guilty as the ones that did it!!!" -- Carroll

-- "I dont understand why none of the witnesses helped this pour man while he was getting beat to death. How can u just watch this happen?I live on second st and when i drive down third there is always a bunch of punk kids hanging out in the street is that the kids that did it?My heart goes out to his family this has really upset me i couldnt sleep last night cause all i could think about was this." -- Nycole

-- "Why did the witnesses not stop the beating?" -- Sheila

This commenter had a different view:

"This act was no fault of the WPD or the witnesses. It was the fault of five men who will have to pay the price for their actions. Several have asked why didnt the witnesses help? I believe they did not assist out of fear that their lives would be taken too. Criminals do not discriminate, it can happen anywhere and to anyone. I have the utmost respect for the men and women that put their lives on the line for our community every day! I encourage those that have doubt in law enforcement to become an officer and make a difference!" -- Diana

All crime is disturbing. When it spews into our lives at random, we can experience fear and vulnerability because of crime's trespassing presence -- especially if people who could have helped didn't.

A similar outcry about the role of witnesses occurred when a 15-year-old girl was gang-raped Oct. 24 in Richmond, Calif. after a high school homecoming dance. Police said some witnesses just watched and others took pictures with their cell phones. It took Margarita Vargas, 18, who wasn't even at the homecoming, to report the rape to police once she heard of the crime. She told CNN witnesses to the rape may not have reported it because they feared being labeled a snitch. The word in Richmond, she said, is that "snitches get stitches."

Both the fatal beating in Wylie and the gang rape in Richmond converge for me because of the troubling questions they pose. These questions aren't new: Have we desensitized our children to the power of rage to destroy without recovery? What are we teaching ourselves and our children about fear? How should parents be held more accountable for their children? If a horrible event like the beating or the rape do not happen in our neighborhood, how much do we really care about the long-term implications for the nation as a whole?

Silence is golden in a movie theater, but when is passive silence as treacherous as the crime itself?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Exposing the Boys Club of Late-Night TV

Judy Howard Ellis — 2009-10-29T10:25:00 00:00

Filed under: Media, Woman Up

The reported sexual harassment at "The Late Show With David Letterman" was slimy enough, but Nell Scovell's piece in Vanity Fair plumbs a new depth of workplace foulness in late-night TV. Wonder how many women actually write some of the stuff Letterman, Jay Leno or Conan O'Brien say? Scovell says there are none.

Sexual harassment is a universally understood offense, but so is unequal opportunity. Competent women should have the same chance to nab the job in any industry, just like capable men. But Scovell alleges that women rarely get that equal shot to compete and win jobs on Letterman's show:

"I was the second female writer ever hired at Late Night. When I applied for the job in 1988, I had no way of knowing how much the odds were stacked against me. In 27 years, Late Night and Late Show have hired only seven female writers. These seven women have spent a total of 17 years on staff combined. By extrapolation, male writers have racked up a collective 378 years writing jokes for Dave (based on an average writing room of 14 men, the size of the current Late Show staff)."

In late-night TV, white men often get the writing gigs and recommend other white males as job candidates, Scovell says:

"One frequent excuse you hear from late-night-TV executives is that 'women just don't apply for these jobs.' And they certainly don't in the same numbers as men. But that's partly because the shows often rely on current (white male) writers to recommend their funny (white male) friends to be future (white male) writers. Targeted outreach to talented bloggers, improv performers, and stand-ups would help widen the field of applicants. I'm also aware of several worthy females who have submitted material and never heard back."

Women writers seem to fare better in prime time. Among the bright spots: the popular "Mad Men" series is written by a team comprised mostly of women. And, according to a report by the Center for the Study of Women in Television and Film, San Diego State University, the percentage of women writers actually increased from 23 percent in the 2007-2008 season to 29 percent in 2008-2009, Dr. Martha M. Lauzen, the center's executive director, writes in her report. But even that percentage falls short of the 35 percent high during the 2006-2007 season.

If Scovell's assertions are true, will standing on the moral high ground of equal opportunity persuade late-night TV shows to push for a greater number of female writers within their organizations? Will somebody have a revelation and realize that a writing team armed with a variety of perspectives could lead to new audiences (read: more profits for the show)?

Of course, all this chatter about uppity females joining the ranks of the boys' club of late-night TV could be ignored as hot air from the Estrogen Set. Fine. Let the men scrap about who will be the Ratings King. Every woman knows that the added value of smart female writers on the team would help the best show become the undisputed champ.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

A 'Star Trek' for the Recession

Judy Howard Ellis — 2009-10-27T05:00:00 00:00

Filed under: Woman Up, Culture

Gene Roddenberry's "Star Trek" television series foresaw much of today's technology. Before you held your cellphone, underwent non-invasive surgery, or used a GPS in your car, technologies like these were used on the series. But can the franchise have meaning during the Great Recession?

One can only hope. I wrote in May about what newspapers can learn from "Star Trek" because insight often wades in the waters of creative drama. Well, I couldn't resist talking about the franchise again because CBS and Mad Science Group recently announced that in 2010 they will present "Star Trek Live" shows in theme parks and performance venues nationwide. TrekMovie.com reports that an official brochure says the shows will offer "cutting-edge special effects, unmatched audience interaction and cool science."

Cool science? Again, one can only hope. TrekMovie.com says the 60-minute shows will feature Capt. James T. Kirk and Spock interacting with the audience as Starfleet cadets during an incident where the USS Enterprise is attacked. Will this format be real-time problem solving? If joblessness in the U.S. hits 10 percent at the end of this year and hovers at 9.5 percent at the end of 2010, as some economists predict, some Americans may be quoting Spock to get them through the economic night. Really. The strategic, albeit make-believe, conversations between Kirk and Spock sorting out a galaxy-wide conundrum may inspire more change than the sluggish, bureaucratic debates in Congress.

The arts in general stir inspiration despite horrific times. During the Great Depression, for example, movie theaters became a place for entertainment and a mirror of what Americans were enduring. From the unforgettable funny scenes with Katharine Hepburn and Cary Grant to Henry Fonda's hollowed-out expression in "The Grapes of Wrath," movies told much-needed stories for the Depression era.

I'm not saying "Star Trek Live" will carry the lasting cachet of the 1930s movies. But could the shows appeal to our tech-laden generation, which faces widespread economic trouble -- despite technological advancements? If written and cast well, could the "Star Trek" shows become an unexpected alternative to much of American entertainment that is a slave to duplicate hospital dramas, celebrity gossip and endless reality TV?

Futuristic entertainment with a brain? Here's to hoping.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Will the Culture Wars Return Under Obama?

Judy Howard Ellis — 2009-10-12T07:59:00 00:00

Filed under: Barack Obama, Abortion, Gay Rights, Woman Up, Culture

After winning the Nobel Peace Prize for his commitment to global concord, President Obama may face his fiercest battles for tranquility at home. Under his administration, could the culture wars be reignited with renewed intensity?

Obama was ushered into the White House by a diverse coalition of voters; some of those voters had, at one time, taken opposing sides in the cultural wars. Some of those constituents who entered the Obama tent to elect him now worry whether the president will satisfy their interests.

For example, many gays view Obama's pledge to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" military policy as just that, only a pledge. They say that by not establishing a timeline to repeal the policy, Obama is not responding to their needs fast enough. As Matthew Yglesias noted in the Daily Beast:

On the campaign trail, Obama was clearly committed to ending discrimination in the military. "We're spending large sums of money to kick highly qualified gays or lesbians out of our military," he observed, "some of whom possess specialties like Arab-language capabilities that we desperately need." Ever since the New Year, however, Obama and his team have been slow-walking the implementation of their promise.

Meanwhile, shifts have taken place nationally. According to the God and Country Blog in U.S. News & World Report, a recent survey by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life found that 49 percent of the public believes that homosexuality is morally wrong. That same Pew survey shows more Americans comfortable with gay civil unions, while another Pew finding indicates that support for abortion rights has "slipped," another fixture-issue in the culture wars. Obama supports abortion rights.

A Gallup poll also recently reported that "Americans now show a clear preference for the government's promoting of 'traditional values,' a change from recent years, when the public's views were more divided, but a return to the prevailing view from 1993 through 2004."

The shift, Gallup says, "comes primarily from the political middle. Independents' views show a dramatic turnaround, from a 55%-37% split against government-promoted morality last year to a 54%-40% division in favor of it today. By contrast, Republicans' and Democrats' views have been relatively stable, with the former solidly in favor of the government promoting traditional morality, and a majority of the latter opposed."

Although much of the political narrative so far has focused on critics from the far right who wish for Obama's presidential failure (and worse), could the real story be the alienation that might increasingly occur between the president and the assortment of voters who put him in office?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Was Oslo Loony to Award Obama? Maybe Not

Judy Howard Ellis — 2009-10-09T18:00:00 00:00

Filed under: Woman Up

Maybe honoring President Obama with the Nobel Peace Prize wasn't as loony as people on the left and the right may think. Or even as I thought when I heard a Dallas-area radio talk show host compare the news to a spoof by the Onion.

As one of my dearest mentors told me, perhaps the esteemed Norwegian Nobel Committee in Oslo was awarding a leadership trait that stands apart from epithets, threats and generally self-centered, Wild-Wild-West diplomacy. While many of us strain to hear the chords of peace, perhaps Oslo has picked up on its faint sounds. Peace, as my mentor reminded me, starts with the person who attempts to diffuse the tension and backs away from the inflammatory rhetoric. Peace-making amid rage is a peculiar strength and does not mean the process of peace is done. But because we often link might with war, our perceptions of strength and peace are skewed. Verbal muscle is determined by skirmishes of raw words. Peace, like the 100-pound weakling we love to taunt, is shoved into the corner with fists.

Although not its first controversial selection, as Newsweek.com points out, the Nobel Committee risked its prestige to acknowledge the leadership of a sitting president shifting the tone of a global dialog, even when his administration has hardly begun. The award may embarrass Obama, who accepted it humbly, but my guess is that the Nobel Committee understands that prophets of any generation can be without honor among their own, especially when their voices are first emerging.

Musing even further, I wonder if by awarding Obama, was the Nobel Committee inviting the world to celebrate a leadership style that tries to resist the rant factor? Dr. Ellen Weber, president of the MITA International Brain Based Center, tapped into this on Twitter when she shared her blog post, "Obama Leads Peace with Brain in Mind." She cited Obama's leadership approach as "valuing differences," "emulating teachability," "taking risks," and "caring for people more than cold programs or rigid policies." And President Shimon Peres of Israel said in a letter to Obama on Friday: "Very few leaders if at all were able to change the mood of the entire world in such a short while with such a profound impact. You provided the entire humanity with fresh hope, with intellectual determination, and a feeling that there is a lord in heaven and believers on earth."

Apparently, Obama's eligibility for the prize did not hinge on launching a movement to ensure workers' rights to organize, as did Lech Walsea; or challenging the racial barriers of the South, as did Martin Luther King, Jr.; or ministering to the poor in Calcutta, as did Mother Teresa. Maybe Obama was given the prize simply because so far he has sought the words of peace, not because he has single-handedly implemented a full manifestation of its presence.

How we do achieve peace on earth is up to all of us.

Follow Judy Howard Ellis on Twitter.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Thou Shalt Not Tweet Sincerely

Judy Howard Ellis — 2009-09-28T15:31:00 00:00

Filed under: Woman Up

Washington Post Ombudsman Andrew Alexander recently wrote about the tweets of one Post editor, Raju Narisetti, and how the editor's decision to close a Twitter account coincided with the release of newsroom guidelines for using online social networks. But were Narisetti's tweets really a runaway train or a teachable moment?

Narisetti had quipped on Twitter:

"We can incur all sorts of federal deficits for wars and what not. But we have to promise not to increase it by $1 for healthcare reform? Sad."
"Sen Byrd (91) in hospital after he falls from 'standing up too quickly.' How about term limits. Or retirement age. Or commonsense to prevail.

Alexander acknowledged that Narisetti's tweets were "pretty innocuous" for Twitter, but the problem was that they were posted by one of the paper's managing editors. Alexander wrote: "In today's hyper-sensitive political environment, Narisetti's tweets could be seen as one of The Post's top editors taking sides on the question of whether a health-care reform plan must be budget neutral. On Byrd, his comments could be construed as favoring term limits or mandatory retirement for aging lawmakers. Many readers already view The Post with suspicion and believe that the personal views of its reporters and editors influence the coverage. The tweets could provide ammunition."

All true. But who hasn't posted words they wish they could recall or recast? To assume social media requires journalistic sainthood before reporters and editors participate is like saying newspapers should close if they ever retract a story. Mistakes in social media happen and are as embarrassing as a politician saying something reckless when she thought the mic was off. But do verbal (or written) gaffes end by mandating silence? Will social media sterility actually attract people? News flash: Robotic tweets soaked in what newsroom managers decree as objectivity will not woo the audiences newspapers crave.

Readers, followers, friends and contacts on social media sites have little reason to effectively engage with journalists without some degree of transparency. News consumers pass over mundane stories served like indiscernible casseroles at a cafeteria. They want connections within their dynamic world and interactions with shrewd journalists who can harvest meaty stories from those networks. News consumers want to groan at their iPhone when they're scanning a compelling story while waiting in the grocery checkout line or burst out laughing at a Facebook post while at lunch in their work cubicle. They want to rush to city hall, fully informed, after learning from a socially linked reporter that a new initiative will negatively affect their neighborhood.

Newsrooms may feel uncomfortable with this interactive intensity, but engagement on the Internet is a requirement, not a suggestion. Unless newspapers grasp that, their internal resistance to change will block the innovation they desperately need. Let journalists pioneer unknown territory. Quickly and publicly correct mistakes and wrong approaches that violate core values. But at all times recognize that in this current information economy, people expect journalists to be fair, not objective, authentic, not devoid of human feeling. Besides, most trained journalists know the boundaries and, as their presence matures in social media, credible journalists will walk the line of wisdom -- just as most of them did long before former Vice President Al Gore "invented" the Internet.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Coach Tony Dungy -- Now THERE'S a Leader

Judy Howard Ellis — 2009-09-24T17:40:00 00:00

Filed under: Woman Up, Culture

Tony Dungy's interview with the Wall Street Journal's Matthew Kaminski makes me long for more people like the Super Bowl-winning coach in politics. Dungy has a reputation for speaking quietly while his leadership shouts clearly. Would that our national imagination be captivated by this: How would the Dungy style of leadership influence health care reform or the debate over sending more troops to Afghanistan?

Dungy, the former head coach of the Indianapolis Colts, knows how to marshal a team of diverse personalities through setbacks and wins. And he continues to prove that he understands the power of second chances by mentoring three-time Pro Bowler Michael Vick.

Many sought to demonize the quarterback after being horrified by his participation in a dog-fighting scandal. But Dungy looked beyond that and saw the possibility of redemption. After serving in federal prison, Vick will be eligible on Sunday to play in the regular season for the first time since 2006. Whether Vick plays or not when the Philadelphia Eagles face the Kansas City Chiefs, Dungy's mentorship helped him reach this moment. Kaminski wrote:

Dungy's presence eased the way back for Vick. Sportswriter Michael Wilbon calls him "the quietest but most credible man in football." The NFL reinstated Vick and last month the Eagles signed Vick to a $1.6 million deal. Though the league and animal-rights groups wanted Vick to show remorse, Dungy says he was looking for something else when he saw him at Leavenworth prison before his release this spring. In visits with prisoners, he says, "What I look for, [is] 'What do you want to do from here?' That's something my dad used to tell me all the time. When you're in a situation you can complain about it, you can feel sorry for yourself, you can do a lot of things. But how are you gonna make the situation better?" To his surprise, they talked only a little about football. He says Vick told him he missed his three kids, who were growing up without a father. He "really felt" he had been given a chance to "be a role model and he had blown it." Dungy took him on, and stays in touch regularly.

Vick's performance -- as a gifted quarterback backing up a famed quarterback and as a leader off the field -- will be carefully observed. Will Vick display humility? Will he step up or blow it? Vick's defining moment mirrors the turbulent, come-from-behind season the country now faces. The odds seem against us, too, after an antagonistic summer and still tenuous economy. But visionary leadership can be a restorative salve, even for the wounds inflicted by politics.

Maybe, as Vick has chosen to do so far, the nation could benefit from the Dungy leadership motif. Dungy is the son of a World War II pilot with the Tuskegee Airmen, a husband and a dad, a former athlete who won a Super Bowl and a competitive head coach who helped the Colts win one, too. He has worked in prison ministry and with families. I don't intend to glorify him the way American pop culture maddeningly likes to do, but Dungy's view of football and life offer a counterintuitive style of leadership. As Sally Jenkins' insightful piece in the Washington Post noted when Dungy retired in January:

Tony Dungy made winning seem like a good deed. That's his real achievement as an NFL coach, the one he's proudest of, as opposed to any claim to being the first this or that. His bequest to the league includes his Super Bowl-victor's role in prodding a bunch of reluctant owners toward social justice, but mainly he'll be known for plain decency, the fact he paired the words "champion" and "good guy" in the same sentence.

It sounds like a small thing, but it's not. The qualities that make great coaches are often negative: They tend to be obsessive workaholics with controlling natures, whose dictatorial traits get stronger as pressure mounts, and the worst are snap-jawed tyrants.

Dungy has his imperfections, and he's as intense a gamesman as anyone, but he always fought that magnetized pull called loss of perspective. He coached from a place of basic kindness, treating every opponent as a friend, and the game as a game, even under duress.

We often compare sports with real life. Maybe Vick's comeback and Dungy's leadership invite us to remember that the game of life is not just a cliche. Even in the world of politics.

Five Gifts From the Recession

Judy Howard Ellis — 2009-09-18T21:03:00 00:00

Filed under: Economy, Woman Up, Culture

In the midst of the Great Recession, I have been showered with gifts. They caught me completely by surprise -- like finding a Christmas tree in a charred forest. Inspired by Delia Lloyd's piece about what she loves about America, I created a list about what the recession has offered:

1. Clarity. The time will come when I update my closet and add new home furnishings, but those purchases will be carefully planned. Intellectually, I knew that my personal abundance did not lie in my possessions, but it did not consistently translate into my spending habits. The economy and Dave Ramsey's Financial Peace University changed that. Now I "edit" my entire life more vigorously. Ask me to show you my Frugalista Badge. Clarity also illumines authentic relationships. When life is tough, the last thing anyone needs are fake friends.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Cracker Barrel Beating: Where Verbal Anarchy Has Taken Us?

Judy Howard Ellis — 2009-09-17T08:28:00 00:00

Filed under: Woman Up

A beat-down at the doors of a local Cracker Barrel. Isn't it disturbing to think that a simple act like taking your daughter to a restaurant can lead to being beaten in front of her?

Fox 5 in Atlanta initially reported Monday that a 35-year-old woman was beaten Sept. 9 by a 47-year-old man at a Cracker Barrel near Morrow, Ga. The woman, Tashawnea Hill, a U.S. Army Reservist, alleges that she asked the man to excuse himself after he nearly hit her 7-year-old daughter when they were entering the restaurant. In response, the man, Troy West, allegedly beat Hill with his closed fists, kicked her and called her racial slurs. According to an updated Fox 5 story on Wednesday, West alleges that Hill spit on him, prompting him to beat her up. Hill denies the spitting allegation. Hill, who is African American, told CNN Wednesday night she was called the N-word and the B-word by West, who is white.

West is charged with battery, disorderly conduct and cruelty to children. He was released on $5,000 bond. Meanwhile, the FBI is investigating the incident as a possible federal hate crime.

Could it be that the verbal anarchy happening in Washington infects what happens in America's streets -- or is it vice versa?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments