Between the recent reenergizing of the fighting in the Middle East, the mass genocide in Darfur, and the stories of slavery still going on in Sudan, the current state of the world is rather… well, depressing.

But today I came across just one more example of the injustices in the world that can’t afford to be ignored any longer… while reading my Glamour magazing of all places (which does actually have some interesting articles, believe it or not).

While considering a female for US President and fighting the ‘glass ceiling’ may be one step forward for women, the current attitude towards females in India is two steps back. Right now, in many parts of India, daughters are considered unwanted, insignificant, and disposable. Sons are coveted while giving birth to a daughter is grounds for being hated and ostracized by the community.

However, thanks to new technology… having a daughter is almost always ‘avoidable.’ Ultrasounds are used to learn the sex of the child early on, and if it is a girl, abortions are readily available and often utilized. Abortions are advertized with such sayings as “Spend 500 Rupees (a little over 10 dollars) now, save 50,000 Rupees later…” refering to the dowry a woman’s family traditionally gives to the husband’s family. According to an Indian OBGYN, “There’s no shame associated with abortion when you’re getting rid of a pain in the ass– a girl. It’s as normal as having a cup of coffee.” While this practice, commonly referred to as ‘sex selection’, is illegal, there is virtually no way to enforce it, and most doctors choose ways to get around the law because the sex selection is a lucrative business- approximately $100 million a year.

According to Puneet Bedi, M.D., a Delhi obstetrician-gynecologist, “What we are seeing is a genocide,” and the statistics show it. A British medical journal estimates that as many as 10 million fetuses have been aborted over the past two decades because their parents did not want to give birth to a girl. Because of this, the 2001 census in India showed that for every 1000 boys six and under, there were only 927 girls, down a substantial amount from 1991. However, in certain areas, the numbers are even worse. For example, in Punjab, the ratio is a measly 628 girls to 1000 boys.

Beyond the obvious tragedy in this mass-abortion tendencies and the degradation of the female sex, sex selection has numerous other malicious effects. Firstly, because most women abort their female fetuses, those baby girls who are carried to full term (whether by choice of the mother or because the mother wasn’t able to access the abortion) are forced to deal with the hardships and inequality of living in a male-favored society. For this reason, mothers sometimes view aborting their daughters as ‘saving them.’

Secondly, the long-term effects of sex selection are beginning to surface) especially in the areas where the ratios of girls to boys are the most drastic or where sex selection has been going on for the longest). Since women are the minority, they are also in high demand… and not in a good way either. Middle-aged men are not able to find wives or ‘share’ women (which is negative for both men and women). However, much more serious is the bride-trafficking business this has given way to. The reality is shocking. Young women are essentially kidnapped or bought from their families to be taken to a new place and sold to the highest bidder. From this point on, their ‘husband’ often treats them as nothing more than a sex slave- there only to breed and be a farmhand. Sometimes they are resold to another ‘husband’ after they produce children for their ‘first husband’. Demographer Ashish Bose, Ph.D. claims, “Women [are] increasingly viewed as property that men can collect. It’s the ‘brothelization of society’.”

Meanwhile, the rape statistics have jumped tremendously, and while there is no way to actually claim causation, it seems obvious that the shortage of women would be to blame. At Delhi University, females state they are often harassed, so they are forced to rush to and from classes; therefore, even amongst the women who are able to get an education, there is a sense of being unwanted and inferior, which only furthers the cycle of sex selection.

Overall, as kidnapping, trafficking, and sexual violence could very well rise, all of the rights women have gained will be lost and “women will be pushed back into the four walls of the home.” Furthermore, the sex-selection trend has travelled with the Indian dispora. For example, anecdotal evidence suggests that some Indians in North America are also selecting baby boys over girls. Son prefrence has become ‘cultural baggage.’ 

An Indian woman who is working to change social norms states, “The more I work with female feticide, the more i feel it’s not to do with son preference, but with daugther hatred,” and basically, the only way to solve this is a complete change in the anti-female mindset. If you are interested in this, be sure to check out the article in the August 2006 issue of Glamour entitled “A Generation of Women Wiped Out”. There’s many more facts, quotes, stories, and statistics that I’m sure you will find intriguing…

You see, it seems the new trend these days is that being famous for one thing just isn't enough. Just singing or just dancing, just being a fashion designer or an actor is no longer sufficient. Stars today want, and get, more.

I understand their argument that doing a little dabbling in different fields could be fun (I personally am interested in multiple areas as well). I also understand that some stars may have originally dreamed of being a singer and taking that job offer as an actor was their tool of achieving this dream. BUT, speaking broadly, the trend has exploded, and in my opinion, gone way too far in way too many cases.

Lindsey Lohan, Hilary Duff, Sean Puffy Combs, J Lo, Britney Spears, Nicky Hilton, Gwen Stefani, Jennifer Love Hewitt, David Hasselhoff, Jessica Simpson, Tyra Banks, The Olsen Twins, Kevin Spacey….. the lists of stars turned some other kind of star just goes on and on. Don't get me wrong: I'm not saying all of these transitions were completely foolish. However, I see two major problems with this trend.

1) Some (please note this word before you freak out on me) of them… just suck. As mentioned before, Paris's cd? Or what about J Lo in Gigli, the ever famous flop. Just because your good at one thing, unfortunately, does NOT mean you are good at everything. Sometimes you need to know when to stick to singing because your fashion line is just plain ugly. Or that you may be the best actress with the sexiest on-screen voice, but it doesn't mean that voice is soothing when carrying a tune. Just because you have the money to take on a new venture doesn't necessarily mean you should (and do you really need the extra income anyway? If you're going to experiment, you could at least consider giving the money to a good cause? Like hearing restoration for the people that had to suffer through listening to you sing? Ok, just kidding with that last part- it was a little too low.)

2) When a celebrity is famous for one thing (and no doubt they may have worked very hard to become famous) they automatically have free reign over other similar-celebrity-areas. For example, Lindsey Lohan worked her way to fame by way of things like The Parent Trap, which by the way, she was very cute in. However, when she decided to be a singer, she did not have to start back at square one in any way, shape, or form. She was instantly popular. Now the way I see it, this isn't exactly fair. It essentially makes the elitist group, more, well… elite and furthers the gap between the famous and the struggling talents. What I mean is that because celebrities are taking on many new different jobs, the commoners who have real, undiscovered talent that are striving to be noticed have less of a spot to fill and less of a shot at their dream. Agencies are turning to the already-famous and offering them deals instead of taking the time to sow out the not-yet famous. There are certainly many talented people out there that deserve a chance at their dream and could make a huge impact on their field, and there are certainly many people out there I'd like to hear on the radio in the morning more than Paris Hilton.

I'm not out to just rag on celebrities. Even though they are richer than me, vacation in Greece, can buy a new wardrobe every season, or have someone do their hair and make-up for them every day, doesn't mean they don't have their own challenges. Being attacked by the paparazzi and having every little thing they do documented would probably get old realllly fast. I'm just pointing out another little injustice in the world and possibly something for them to keep in mind when they are considering their next career move…

The basic gist of the article is that six years ago, a not-so-little girl, age six, decided to ride the log flume at Busch Gardens. How fun. Well, unfortunately, as she was getting off, the next log in line gently tapped her log, as often happens on log flume-type rides. The girl lost her balance and hit her knee on the padded inside of her log. As a result, the girl now, six years later, is suffering from hip problems and may even need a hip replacement. Sounds a little fishy, doesn't it?

As you might imagine, there is much more to this story than her mother would like you to know. The family did not even notify Busch Garden's that any accident had occurred until over a year after the incident, and they did not file the lawsuit until 2004, four years later. That alone makes one wonder if the incident was really the cause of the problem. Busch Gardens offered to settle the case for $165,000! But now, the reason it is in the news again is that the family is asking the judge to reject this offer because her future medical bills could be more than that. Secondly, at the time of the accident, the girl weighed 108 pounds- over DOUBLE the amount of an average six year old (anyone else think this could mean something….?) Medical representatives for both sides of the case admit that a contributing factor to her type of hip problem is obesity. Thirdly, when the girl finally saw a doctor, five days after the incident, she was diagnosed with a possible right knee sprain. Shortly after, she fell again, an incident that had absolutely no association with Busch Gardens, and this time she was diagnosed with a hip problem in her right hip, for which she had pins placed in the top of the hip socket. Two years later, she was diagnosed with a similar problem in her left hip. So basically, the fact that it was her knee, not her hip, diagnosed as the problem of her Busch Gardens fall is only further supported by the fact that she is having the same problem in BOTH of her hips. Finally, the article states, "The federal lawsuit listed [the] mother as a care coordinator for the Salvation Army. Court records show that she filed for bankruptcy in 2002. She filed a motion to reopen the case in 2005 for a student loan debt owed to Sallie Mae Servicing." Don't get me wrong, I feel bad for the girl. She will have to deal with hip problems and a possible limp her whole life. But it is clear that her mother is trying to connect two completely unrelated things in order to make Busch Gardens pay for her daughter's misfortune.

I believe cases like this show us some interesting things about the world today. One, America is "sue" happy. A family is able to sue Busch Gardens with a ridiculous case such as this. A woman is able to sue McDonalds because her coffee was 'too hot'. Or anyone hear about the guy who sued the tv show 'Jackass'? Apparently this guy legally changed his name to Jack Ass in 1997 and then proceeded to sue 'Jackass' for "infringing on the trademark of his name and defaming his good character." Case and point. America's a little too willing and able to sue big company for dumb reasons to try to make an easy buck. Two, today's society refuses to accept responsibility. Many would rather blame their problems on anyone and everyone else. People just look for an excuse and a scapegoat (for example, Busch Gardens), when they really need to step up and own up to their responsibilities–                                                                                                                    As we see, in this case, the mother either needs to suck it up and put up with the problem, or choose to do something about it and make her daughter…
Put Down the Big Mac!

Deal or No Deal: It really is the most simple, dumb concept ever for a show. You pick a box. It either has a lot of money in it or it doesn’t. Then, some man, up in a little studio, calls you on the telephone during the show to offer certain amounts of money for your box. You either take the “deal” or “no deal”. How ridiculously simple. But yet, this show has been getting astronomical ratings! I find even my father, an extremely educated man who reads quantum physics in his spare time, screaming at the TV, “Take the Deal! You have to TAKE THE DEAL!” When I made a joke about him watching it, he responded, “I only watch it because it’s so stupid.” (even though it doesn’t really seem this way when he’s complaining that his show got bumped because the president was addressing the nation)

24: I must confess; I’m pretty much addicted to this show. A few months ago, watching the first season on DVD encompassed about two weeks of my life. And now, I watch the fifth season every Monday at 9. But I’ll be the first to admit that this show is ridiculously unrealistic, and is also beginning to be very predictable in that, whatever seems impossible, out of the question, and far-fetched is what will and does happen- that is, as long as Jack never dies. I find that sometimes, during the same show, I’ll be scared and in suspense one minute, and, the next, I'm laughing my head off about how Jack just shot eighty people and now finds himself in a ridiculously dramatic pause, and oh wait, he just hijacked a plane…I just love to hate the impossibility.

American Inventor, American Idol, So You Think You Can Dance, etc. – I grouped these shows together because they share a lot of the same absurdly appealing characteristics. Many people tune-in at the beginning of each season of these shows because they find the outrageous things people will do to get on television rather humorous. But what happens to many seemingly normal people is that they get hooked– hooked on the drama of it all. The story of the boy whose parents died but is trying to over-come through singing/dancing/inventing/etc, or the girl who gave up everything because she really just wants to make it big. We know that these shows are dumb. We know most of it might very well be fake. We know there's probably some other more intelligent show on right now, perhaps a very deep documentary on right now about women during the Civil War. But… America, nonetheless, still tunes-in… even if they aren’t willing to admit it.

David Blaine: Drowned Alive- This publicity attempt, no matter what anyone says, was painfully idiotic. A man staying submerged in a big bowl of water, half-naked in the middle of a busy street for a week. Then, attempting to hold his breath underwater for nine minutes. Not exactly proof of advancing intelligence in America. But Blaine was all over television for a week. Every show you turned on had something to say about it, not to mention the footage constantly being played on TV and the endless stream of commercials leading up to it. The man was shriveled and clearly in pain by the end of the experiment. However, it seems his work paid off: Americans loved to hate this bizarre stunt. (check out sheil.wordpress.com for more on Blaine)

Laguna Beach- This one, I’m ashamed to say, used to be a little guilty pleasure for me. I would never tell anyone I watched it, but sometimes when I was bored at home alone, I would turn it on and lose myself in the unrealistic world of Laguna Beach. Don’t get me wrong, I thought the show was completely brainless and hated all of their petty drama. They were spoiled, going from party to party, new car to new car, and boyfriend to boyfriend- nothing like how the other 99.9% of us live. But something about their lavish, soap-operaish life styles was appealing; almost a retreat from the stresses of my own life. I knew it was probably fake, and that chances are all of the people on the show were really at least 25, but if I was flipping through the channels and found Laguna Beach, I was likely to cringe… and watch.

I could go on for quite some time, and no doubt many of you right now are probably thinking of your own “Love to Hate” show (don’t even try to pretend like you don’t have one!) So, go ahead and please comment with your own!

You might be thinking, as I was, how could this happen. Well, when you hear what her mother had to say about the issue, it might not be as hard to understand. "I'm not ashamed of my daughter at all – in fact, I'm proud of her," her mother has stated. And clearly, this mom doesn't believe in traditional parenting techniques because her daughter began drinking at ten and smoking at nine, a habit which she still partakes in despite the pregnancy. She doesn't believe that her 20 cigarettes a day are a detriment to her future baby. She states, "I can give up smoking at any time, but I don't find it affects my pregnancy."

Now, I know this post doesn't really have any intellectual value. I guess I just thought it was shocking. I wonder, can't anything really be done about this? This new baby is going to be the child of a child! Is this really fair to knowingly allow the eleven yr-old to sabotage the unborn child's life, not only by smoking 20 cigarettes a day but by the distinct fact that CLEARLY the eleven year old nor her mother are fit parents. The baby is innocent and deserves an equal chance at life, but I guess in today's world, this is all too often not the case. So I guess what I'm saying is this Sunday, give an extra special thanks to your mom for not smoking while she was pregnant, for not conceiving you during drunken sex with a fifteen year old boy, and most importantly, for not being eleven.

What exactly did they think they were accomplishing by honking at me? Was I supposed to run out in the street and yell my phone number at the beckon call of their honk? Or perhaps do a little dance? Or was this just their way of offering a compliment?

As a woman, I am constantly forced to think deep into the motives of others. Why could I not just accept the honk as a form of flattery and move on? (although this doesn't make sense to me, seeing as when I am running, I am wearing gym clothes, sweating, and have my hair tied back- not exactly what I would call my most attractive time of day. I suppose men just get kind of horny riding around in a truck all day…) Because in doing so, I would be in some way/shape/form 'lowering' myself. 

Let me explain myself further. I know I, as well as many other women I assume, would love for a man to show up unexpectedly at my door or to surprise me with a bouquet of flowers. On the other hand, I also want to be acknowledged as a smart, ambitious, independent young woman. However, these two things are difficult to combine.

To get ahead in the real world, women are encouraged to be "more like men." Women need to dress conservatively and act unemotionally to the extreme in order to gain respect in the business world.

Conflict being, I want the best of both worlds, and don't plan on settling on anything less. I won't choose being being determined, strong, confident, and capable and being a woman (feeling feminine, sexy, and all). Maybe this will prove impossible, but it sure is worth a try. 

Up until recently, Secert Deodorant's ad campaign was "Secret, Strong enough for a man but made for a woman"? Just a thought- why not try- "Secret, Strong enough for a real kick-ass woman."