<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><feed
	xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0"
	xml:lang="en-US"
	>
	<title type="text">Leigh Anderson | Vox</title>
	<subtitle type="text">Our world has too much noise and too little context. Vox helps you understand what matters.</subtitle>

	<updated>2019-03-04T22:14:22+00:00</updated>

	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/author/leigh-anderson" />
	<id>https://www.vox.com/authors/leigh-anderson/rss</id>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://www.vox.com/authors/leigh-anderson/rss" />

	<icon>https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2024/08/vox_logo_rss_light_mode.png?w=150&amp;h=100&amp;crop=1</icon>
		<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Leigh Anderson</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[I never noticed how racist so many children’s books are until I started reading to my kids]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/2015/7/10/8901109/childrens-books-racist-sexist" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/2015/7/10/8901109/childrens-books-racist-sexist</id>
			<updated>2017-12-14T11:40:00-05:00</updated>
			<published>2015-11-03T08:00:00-05:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Books" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Culture" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Features" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[What happened to Little Black Sambo? As a white girl growing up in West Virginia in the 1970s, I remember it on my childhood bookshelf. It was on my friends&#8217; shelves too. It may also have been in the dentist&#8217;s office, along with Highlights for Children and Joseph and His Coat of Many Colors. It [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/9869659/readingv3.0.0.0.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
		</figcaption>
</figure>
<div class="chorus-snippet center"> <p>What happened to <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Little-Black-Sambo-Helen-Bannerman/dp/1479309796" target="_blank" rel="noopener"><em>Little Black Sambo</em></a>? As a white girl growing up in West Virginia in the 1970s, I remember it on my childhood bookshelf. It was on my friends&#8217; shelves too. It may also have been in the dentist&#8217;s office, along with <em>Highlights for Children</em> and <em>Joseph and His Coat of Many Colors</em>.</p> <p>It was not on the shelves of the local day care, a center run by an entrepreneurial black woman who saw a business opportunity in the droves of young white mothers who were socialized in the 1950s and &#8217;60s to be housewives and then dumped into the workforce by the 1970s economy.</p> <p>I remember the story primarily for its description of the tigers chasing one another round and round a tree until they melt into butter, butter that Sambo&#8217;s mother uses for a stack of crispy pancakes. In the 35 intervening years, I knew the book had been relegated to the dustbin of racist cultural artifacts, but I didn&#8217;t remember it well enough to know why.</p> <q>&#8220;You walk into a bookstore and it&#8217;s a sea of white. It makes you feel very strange about yourself.&#8221;</q><p>The young woman at the bookstore register flinched when I asked for the book and said she couldn&#8217;t order it for me; <a href="http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/06/amazon-stops-selling-confederate-flag" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Amazon</a>, until recently agnostic on race relations, dropped a copy in a plain brown wrapper on my doorstep. A quick skim revealed illustrations with the minstrel-show aesthetic &mdash; bright, white, round eyes, bulging red lips &mdash; of &#8220;darky&#8221; iconography.</p> <p>Before the package arrived, I had vaguely entertained the notion of reading it to my sons&mdash; I hate to waste a book &mdash; but a single glance drove the thought from my mind. One thing I hope to teach them, via reading, is sensitivity to other cultures, and this book is an ugly caricature of black history. I set it in a drawer, stuffed under some papers and hidden from my children forever.</p> <h3>It&#8217;s not just <em>Little Black Sambo</em>: Lots of kids&#8217; books are racist, sexist, or culturally insensitive</h3> <div class="float-right s-sidebar"> <h4>More from First Person</h4> <a target="new" href="http://www.vox.com/2015/6/29/8847385/what-i-learned-from-leading-tours-about-slavery-at-a-plantation" rel="noopener"> <img data-chorus-asset-id="3852048" alt="TheOldPlantationBanjoDrum.0.jpg" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3852048/TheOldPlantationBanjoDrum.0.jpg"> </a><p><a target="new" href="http://www.vox.com/2015/6/29/8847385/what-i-learned-from-leading-tours-about-slavery-at-a-plantation" rel="noopener">I used to lead tours at a plantation. You won&rsquo;t believe the questions I got about slavery.</a></p> <p><a target="new" href="http://www.vox.com/2015/3/5/8149077/homeschool-teaching" rel="noopener">I thought homeschooling my kids would be simple. I was wrong.</a></p> <p><a target="new" href="http://www.vox.com/2015/2/12/8006733/stay-at-home-mom" rel="noopener">9 things I wish I&#8217;d known before I became a stay-at-home mom</a></p> </div> <p>Here&#8217;s what happens when you try to recreate your 1979 childhood library: You buy <em>Bread and Jam for Frances</em>, <em>Frog and Toad</em>, <em>Blueberries for Sal</em>, <em>One Morning in Maine</em>, <em>Heidi</em>, <em>The Cricket in Times Square</em>, <em>Lyle Lyle Crocodile</em>, <em>Stuart Little</em>, <em>Babar</em>, <em>Sylvester and the Magic Pebble</em>, <em>The Secret Garden</em>, <em>The Little Princess</em>, and the whole Ramona Quimby series. All were treasured books of my childhood, read and reread to me, and then read again as soon as I could read to myself.</p> <p>Even before I had kids, my primary vision of mothering involved squeezing into an easy chair and sharing these classics with my children. With my own kids, I&#8217;ve patiently endured the <em>Thomas the Tank</em> <em>Engine</em> stage and the <em>My First Farm Book</em> stage (with its implicit threat that there might be more farm books to come). We&#8217;ve finally arrived at the moment in which my 5-year-old son is willing to sit and hear books about something other than machinery. Now, at last, all the pleasures of reading, from mere escapism to language and illustration to a window into other cultures, are at our fingertips.</p> <p>But a lot of these books, 35 years on, are startlingly racist, sexist, or culturally insensitive. I was enjoying our chapter-a-day of <em>A Cricket in Times Square</em>, for example, until I got to the stereotypical Asian dialect of the cricket-cage seller. I finesse this by simply refusing to read the dialogue in the spirit it&#8217;s intended &mdash; in our house, Sai Fong sounds like a middle-aged woman with a West Virginia accent and pretty good grammar.</p> <p><em>The Five Chinese Brothers</em>, a tale of five identical brothers with slits for eyes, illustrated with broad watercolor strokes of yellow, joined <em>Little Black Sambo</em> in the drawer. In <em>The Secret Garden</em>, Mary&#8217;s maid says to her, &#8220;I thought you was a black too,&#8221; and Mary stamps her foot and says, &#8220;You thought I was a native! You dared! You don&#8217;t know anything about natives! They are not people. &#8230;&#8221; I skipped that whole book, setting it on a shelf for later, noting that it would have to be accompanied by an appropriate conversation about colonialism and ugly views of native peoples. Of the very few titles on my childhood bookshelf that featured minority characters, only <em>Corduroy</em> and <em>A Snowy Day</em> have stayed in our rotation.</p> <p>Even the stories about families &mdash; wholesome, all-American families &mdash; I now see through a different prism. A large number of the books I read in the &#8217;70s and &#8217;80s were written in the &#8217;50s and &#8217;60s. A surprising number equip the mother of the story with an apron and a broom, and confine her activities to the kitchen: In <em>Bread and Jam for Frances</em>, Frances&#8217;s mother is clad in a ruffled apron, tirelessly preparing all the meals Frances won&#8217;t eat. Lyle the Crocodile cooks with Mrs. Primm, also in an apron, while Mr. Primm looks on.</p> <p>Harry the Dirty Dog is tended to by a mistress with a broom, in an apron. Sylvester&#8217;s mother, also armed with an apron and a broom, stands by the dad in the wing chair. Ramona Quimby&#8217;s mother begins the series as a housewife in 1955; in the mid-&#8217;70s she goes back to work; by the mid-&#8217;80s she&#8217;s pregnant again and quits. (Evidently Mrs. Quimby starts with the problem with no name, transitions to <em>The Second Shift</em>, and finishes with <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/26/magazine/26WOMEN.html">the opt-out revolution</a>.)</p> <h3>Why the lack of diversity in children&#8217;s literature is damaging</h3> <p>All the mothers in the kitchen and dads in wing chairs present a fantasy world of white, four-person families, so far removed from my own only-child, single-working-mother childhood that I internalized the books (and the era&#8217;s TV shows) as normal and us as the aberration. This seems to be how many children who don&#8217;t see themselves represented in the dominant culture respond: Young adult novelist I. W. Gregorio is a founding member and VP of development for <a href="http://weneeddiversebooks.org/">We Need Diverse Books</a>. She told me that the lack of Asian characters in her childhood books, coupled with growing up in a predominantly white town, meant that she accepted that erasure as normal.</p> <p>&#8220;I turned to books to figure out how to navigate life and relationships,&#8221; Gregorio said. &#8220;And as a result of reading so many books with white characters, I internalized that role. I became a &lsquo;banana&#8217;: yellow on the outside, white on the inside. Self-hating.&#8221;</p> <p><a href="http://www.varianjohnson.com/">Varian Johnson</a>, who wrote <em>The Great Greene Heist </em>and is black, says, &#8220;You walk into a bookstore and it&#8217;s a sea of white. It&#8217;s tough when you&#8217;re not represented out there in the world&mdash;it makes you feel very strange about yourself, like you don&#8217;t matter.&#8221;</p> <q>A surprising number of books equip the mother of the story with an apron and a broom</q><p>Johnson reports that seeing a photo of Walter Dean Myers, author of young adult classics like <em>Monster</em>, was a revelation: &lsquo;It was the first time I saw that, oh, black people can care about and write books too.&#8221;</p> <p>Children&#8217;s books are indeed relentlessly white. The Cooperative Children&#8217;s Book Center at the School of Education, University of Wisconsin, <a href="https://ccbc.education.wisc.edu/books/pcstats.asp">reports</a> that roughly 3 percent of children&#8217;s books published in 2014 were about Africans or African Americans; about 8 percent were about any kind of minorities. Lest you think this is due to so many kids&#8217; books featuring trains and badgers and crocodiles, the director, Kathleen Horning, addresses those concerns <a href="http://ccblogc.blogspot.com/2013/07/i-see-white-people.html">here</a>: In 2013, about 10 percent of books about human beings (as opposed to trains or badgers) featured people of color.</p> <p>Those numbers don&#8217;t reflect any improvement over the past couple of decades, either. Horning told me, &#8220;The numbers have been fairly stagnant over 20 years. They go up one year and down the next. We haven&#8217;t seen a steady increase.&#8221;</p> <p>Getting my boys to read books that feature minority protagonists can be challenging, simply because there aren&#8217;t that many: In a search through our local bookstore&#8217;s children&#8217;s section, I found several books that explicitly addressed race as a theme, but very few that depicted black children, for example, just doing ordinary things.</p> <p>And while there&#8217;s no shortage of books featuring female protagonists, it might be a hurdle to convince my boys to read <em>Little Women</em> instead of <em>My Side of the Mountain</em>, a &#8220;boys'&#8221; book. The YA writer Shannon Hale notes that when she speaks at school assemblies, the administrations often will grant girls permission to attend her lectures, but not boys. For male authors writing books with male protagonists, the school will allow both boys and girls to attend.</p> <p>Hale <a href="http://oinks.squeetus.com/2015/02/no-boys-allowed-school-visits-as-a-woman-writer.html">writes</a>: &#8220;[T]he idea that girls should read about and understand boys but that boys don&#8217;t have to read about girls, that boys aren&#8217;t expected to understand and empathize with the female population of the world &#8230; this belief leads directly to rape culture.&#8221; It&#8217;s not a far leap to imagine that white children reading only about white children will stunt their empathy for people of other races.</p> <h3>Parents and grandparents are part of the problem</h3> <p>One factor driving the lack of diversity in children&#8217;s books, Gregorio tells me, is economics: Parents and grandparents buy the books for children, and they tend to gravitate to their old favorites, just as I did &mdash; which means that new children&#8217;s books have a hard time getting a foothold in the market.</p> <p>It&#8217;s time for parents like me to stop doing this. By putting white children at the center of the story, by imprisoning mothers in the kitchen and fathers in the wing chairs, we&#8217;re offering young readers a limited scope for imagination. As much as I&#8217;d like to think that my childhood favorites &#8220;broadened my horizons,&#8221; the characters pretty much ranged from white people in Portland to white people in England. I want better for my own sons. So long, <em>Little Black Sambo</em> and <em>The Five Chinese Brothers</em>. <em>The Secret Garden</em> and <em>Peter Pan</em> might join you in the drawer, too.</p> <q>Parents buy the books for children, and they tend to gravitate to their old favorites, just as I did</q><p>Gregorio tells me that Book People, a bookstore in Austin, has started a program called <a href="http://www.bookpeople.com/bookpeople-modern-first-library">Modern First Library</a> that curates gift bundles of books &mdash; books that are not only good but represent a more diverse culture than, say, <em>Blueberries for Sal</em> and <em>The Great Brain</em>. I called Book People and asked their kids&#8217; buyer for her best picks for a 2-year-old and a 5-year-old. She pointed me toward <em>Nino Wrestles the World</em>, <em>Ten Little Fingers and Ten Little Toes</em>, <em>Whistles for Willy</em>, <em>Hush! A Thai Lullaby</em>, and <em>Max and the Tag-Along Moon</em>. Varian Johnson recommended <em>Uh-Oh!</em> and <em>Peekaboo Morning</em>. I put in an order.</p> <p><em>Leigh Anderson is a staff writer at TheMid.com. She&rsquo;s written for Newsweek.com, Jane, Popular Science, and Salon. Follow her on Twitter <a target="new" href="https://twitter.com/LeighAnderson_" rel="noopener">@LeighAnderson_</a> or <a target="new" href="https://www.facebook.com/leigh.anderson.1217" rel="noopener">on Facebook</a>.</em></p> <hr> <p><a target="new" href="http://www.vox.com/first-person" rel="noopener">First Person</a> is Vox&#8217;s home for compelling, provocative narrative essays. Do you have a story to share? Read our <a target="new" href="http://www.vox.com/2015/6/12/8767221/vox-first-person-explained" rel="noopener">submission guidelines</a>, and pitch us at <a href="mailto:firstperson@vox.com">firstperson@vox.com</a>.</p> </div><p></p>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Leigh Anderson</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[Filming the police takes bravery. Releasing the video takes even more.]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/2015/4/10/8383453/filming-police-walter-scott" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/2015/4/10/8383453/filming-police-walter-scott</id>
			<updated>2019-03-04T17:14:22-05:00</updated>
			<published>2015-04-10T15:50:02-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Criminal Justice" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Culture" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Movies" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Policy" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Three days after police officer Michael Slager killed Walter Scott, an unarmed black man, during a traffic stop in North Charleston, South Carolina, video of the fatal shooting surfaced. That video, filmed by a bystander, told a very different story than the one Slager told investigators after the shooting. It did not show Scott trying [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="" data-caption="Cellphone footage of police has become ubiquitous. But what should amateur videographers do with the video? | &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-146433605/stock-photo-novi-sad-serbia-july-hand-with-a-smartphone-records-viva-vox-s-performance-at-exit.html?src=Rj1os0Qsdf18HTdDt5PbSQ-1-2&quot;&gt;Shutterstock&lt;/a&gt;" data-portal-copyright="&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-146433605/stock-photo-novi-sad-serbia-july-hand-with-a-smartphone-records-viva-vox-s-performance-at-exit.html?src=Rj1os0Qsdf18HTdDt5PbSQ-1-2&quot;&gt;Shutterstock&lt;/a&gt;" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/15328144/shutterstock_146433605.0.0.1428695046.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
	Cellphone footage of police has become ubiquitous. But what should amateur videographers do with the video? | <a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-146433605/stock-photo-novi-sad-serbia-july-hand-with-a-smartphone-records-viva-vox-s-performance-at-exit.html?src=Rj1os0Qsdf18HTdDt5PbSQ-1-2">Shutterstock</a>	</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Three days after police officer <a href="http://www.vox.com/2015/4/8/8368197/walter-scott-police-shooting">Michael Slager killed Walter Scott</a>, an unarmed black man, during a traffic stop in North Charleston, South Carolina, video of the fatal shooting surfaced.</p>

<p>That video, filmed by a bystander, told a very different story than the one Slager told investigators after the shooting. It did not show Scott trying to grab Slager&#8217;s Taser, as Slager alleged. Instead, the shocking footage showed Slager shooting a fleeing Scott in the back, then picking up something &mdash; possibly his Taser &mdash; and dropping it next to Scott&#8217;s body. On Tuesday, Slager was charged with murder.</p>

<p>Without the video, it would have been Slager&#8217;s word against, well, no one&#8217;s. From Eric Garner&#8217;s 2014 death in Staten Island to the 2009 shooting of Oscar Grant in Oakland to the infamous Rodney King beating in Los Angeles more than two decades ago, video &mdash; often shot by bystanders &mdash; has been an integral check on police in use-of-force cases. And even if the film does not lead to an indictment, as was the case with Daniel Pantaleo, the NYPD officer who killed Garner, the videos are an important way to level what is often a one-sided account from law enforcement.</p>

<p>The ubiquity of camera phones means more and more incidents like this will be filmed &mdash; an act that is <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/13/filming-police-officers_n_5676940.html">completely legal</a>, despite widespread reports of police ordering bystanders to stop filming them. This raises the question of how to best protect both the evidence and the well-being of the videographer.</p>

<p>So say you&#8217;re the person wielding the iPhone when the police shoot a man in the back. Then what? Once the smoke clears, what should you do? Here&#8217;s what Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst with the American Civil Liberties Union&#8217;s Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, has to say.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Saving the file is the first step</h2>
<p>&#8220;If I had something really hot, and I was worried it would be suppressed somehow, I would back it up as soon as possible. That might mean sending it somewhere in the cloud or to a trusted third party, or making a backup at home.&#8221;</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Remember that the name of the videographer will be in the news — and forever connected to the story</h2>
<p><strong> </strong></p>

<p>Amateur videographers should know that filming a video that puts police officers in a harsh light might also put the spotlight on them.</p>

<p>&#8220;Ramsey Orta [who filmed Eric&#8217;s Garner&#8217;s death in New York] is alleging that the police harassed his family, shone lights in his house at night, and targeted him for arrest, and now he&#8217;s afraid he&#8217;s being poisoned [in Rikers Island],&#8221; said Stanley. Orta was indicted on weapons charges a few weeks after shooting the video.</p>

<p>It&#8217;s important to take a moment to consider when and how to release the video. Feidin Santana, the man who filmed Walter Scott&#8217;s death in South Carolina, took three days before he gave the film to the family and considered keeping his identity a secret.</p>

<p>&#8220;At some point I thought about staying anonymous, and don&#8217;t show my face, don&#8217;t talk about it,&#8221; Santana told <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/09/us/south-carolina-witness-video/">CNN</a>. &#8220;But &#8230; if I wouldn&#8217;t show my face, everybody over there knows, including the police, who I am.&#8221;</p>

<p>While Santana seemed to imply that staying anonymous was not the safest bet for him, there are options for people who want to keep their names hidden. &#8220;The question is,&#8221; said Stanley, &#8220;do you want to remain anonymous? You can post the video to various anonymous forums, but in theory your IP address can be traced by law enforcement. If you really want to be paranoid, you can post to an anonymous secure drop site. You can also call a reporter. The reporter may or may not decide that your video is newsworthy, of course, but on the other hand, most reporters will go to prison rather than reveal the name of an anonymous informant.&#8221;</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Who gets the footage?</h2>
<p>Santana said he originally went to the station, was told to wait, and then left. He finally gave the film to Scott&#8217;s family. Posting the video online is an option, Stanley said, and so is giving it to the family, who are presumably represented by lawyers. The police? Not so much. &#8220;If the police are the people you have on tape doing wrongdoing, you should go to a reporter or post it online,&#8221; Stanley said.</p>

<p>&#8220;One advantage of YouTube is that even if a reporter for some reason &mdash; maybe just bad judgment &mdash; isn&#8217;t interested or doesn&#8217;t think your video is significant, it can still be judged by a larger community and have a chance of going viral there, or at least reaching particular communities. YouTube also gives you a quasi-official time stamp.&#8221;</p>

<p>And then the chips will fall where they may. &#8220;Ultimately,&#8221; said Stanley, &#8220;each person has to decide how brave they want to be.&#8221;</p>

<p>For good general information for citizen photographers, check out the ACLU&#8217;s <a href="https://www.aclu.org/kyr-photo">Guide to Photographers&#8217; Rights</a>.</p>
<h2 class="wp-block-heading">Watch: Why it&#039;s so important to film police</h2><!-- CHORUS_VIDEO_EMBED ChorusVideo:56758 --><h2 class="wp-block-heading">Further reading</h2><ul class="wp-block-list"><li><a href="http://www.vox.com/2015/4/8/8368197/walter-scott-police-shooting">What we know about the police shooting of Walter Scott in South Carolina</a></li><li><a href="http://www.vox.com/2014/9/17/6113045/police-worn-body-cameras-explained">Why the Walter Scott shooting led North Charleston, SC, police to adopt body cameras</a></li><li><a href="http://www.vox.com/2015/4/9/8370417/police-violence-black-on-black-crime">Why it&#039;s finally catching on that &quot;What about black-on-black crime?&quot; doesn’t make sense</a></li></ul>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
			<entry>
			
			<author>
				<name>Leigh Anderson</name>
			</author>
			
			<title type="html"><![CDATA[The Rules, 20 years later]]></title>
			<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.vox.com/2015/4/8/8353915/rules-dating-advice" />
			<id>https://www.vox.com/2015/4/8/8353915/rules-dating-advice</id>
			<updated>2018-09-14T15:26:01-04:00</updated>
			<published>2015-04-08T08:30:02-04:00</published>
			<category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Books" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Culture" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Dating" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Features" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Life" /><category scheme="https://www.vox.com" term="Relationships" />
							<summary type="html"><![CDATA[When I was 26, in the late 1990s, I met a very handsome man as he was unloading Danish credenzas from his pickup into a vintage-furniture shop he owned in Brooklyn. I&#8217;m from West Virginia: show me a sweaty man with a dangerously overloaded truck, and I&#8217;m immediately smitten. This was right after the 1995 [&#8230;]]]></summary>
			
							<content type="html">
											<![CDATA[

						
<figure>

<img alt="" data-caption="" data-portal-copyright="" data-has-syndication-rights="1" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/13074839/shutterstock_122591407.0.0.1491234565.jpg?quality=90&#038;strip=all&#038;crop=0,0,100,100" />
	<figcaption>
		</figcaption>
</figure>
<div class="chorus-snippet center"> <p>When I was 26, in the late 1990s, I met a very handsome man as he was unloading Danish credenzas from his pickup into a vintage-furniture shop he owned in Brooklyn. I&#8217;m from West Virginia: show me a sweaty man with a dangerously overloaded truck, and I&#8217;m immediately smitten.</p> <p>This was right after the 1995 publication of <a target="_blank" href="http://www.amazon.com/All-Rules-Time-tested-Secrets-Capturing/dp/0446618799" rel="noopener"><em>The Rules: Time-Tested Secrets for Capturing the Heart of Mr. Right</em></a>. <em>The Rules</em> was a dating guide, a set of instructions on what to do and not do to catch a man. Above all, women were to be passive (Rule No. 2: &#8220;Don&#8217;t Talk to a Man First&#8221;) undemanding (Rule No. 17: &#8220;Let Him Take the Lead&#8221;), and above all <em>happy</em> and <em>busy,</em> <em>breezy</em> and <em>lighthearted</em>.</p> <p>The paperback version hit the New York Times best-seller list the following year. <em>Rules</em> support groups for women sprang up around the country. The book prompted a <a href="https://vimeo.com/17301550">screaming match</a> on Oprah&#8217;s show; she devoted a whole episode to the topic of &#8220;do <em>The Rules</em> work or don&#8217;t they?&#8221; The authors, Ellen Fein and Sherrie Schneider, built a business offering phone consultations and in-person seminars, spreading the gospel of steely passivity to lovelorn women.</p> <q>I hoped <em>The Rules</em>, however flawed, would offer a scaffold upon which to build a romance</q><p><em>The Rules</em> was roundly denounced by feminists &mdash; &#8220;I asked my boyfriend out!&#8221; hollered a woman on <em>Oprah</em> &mdash; by my friends, and by, well, nearly everyone I respected. But the book struck a nerve. &#8220;Men do like a challenge!&#8221; people would say ruefully. I recently told a friend that it was the 20th anniversary of <em>The Rules,</em> and she whispered, &#8220;The crazy thing is, most of that book was <em>right</em>.&#8221;</p> <p><em>The Rules</em> is a rather incoherent mashup of good, practical advice (don&#8217;t waste your energy on someone who&#8217;s not interested), retro gender essentialisms (men don&#8217;t like funny women), and bizarre anecdotes (Bruce and Jill went bed shopping together for her apartment, and to prove she wasn&#8217;t angling for marriage, Jill bought a single bed instead of the queen-size bed, which worked, because then they got married, and <em>then</em> they had to buy a queen-size bed, <em>hah-hah-hah</em>. What adult buys a single bed?).</p> <div class="float-right"> <img data-chorus-asset-id="3578902" alt="The_rules.0.jpg" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3578902/The_rules.0.jpg"><p class="caption">The cover of <em>The Rules</em>. (Grand Central Publishing)</p> </div> <p>But the overall theme, presented to you as lovingly as your captor might tuck you in at night, is: adjust to men&#8217;s needs. Be someone different from who you are. Squash your own desires. To wit: In bed, &#8220;don&#8217;t be a drill sergeant, demanding that he do this or that. &#8230; Remember, those are <em>your</em> needs you&#8217;re concerned about filling, and <em>The Rules</em> are a selfless way of living and handling a relationship.&#8221; The reader is left wondering when she could finally let her &mdash; long! only long! &mdash; hair down and be her pushy, needy, authentic self. (Answer: Never. A subsequent book was <a target="_blank" href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Rules-Marriage-Time-Tested-Secrets/dp/0446526967" rel="noopener"><em>The Rules for Marriage</em></a>.)</p> <p>But what <em>The Rules</em> offered, more than anything, was a <em>strategy</em>. I was certain, at the age of 26, that my failure to secure a boyfriend meant I was doing something wrong. I was an only child, raised by an eccentric single mother who longed for a more conventional family. I fetishized traditional marriage, and I was sure other women knew something about men I didn&#8217;t know. Those of us baffled by the opposite sex eagerly reached for the map to happiness that <em>The Rules</em> promised. Four hundred years ago we might have paid a witch for a love potion; in the 1990s we paid Fein and Schneider $6 for what amounted to a personal marketing plan.</p> <p>So I decided to try <em>The Rules</em> on Brian, the vintage-store guy, in the hopes that my three-dates-then-crickets streak could be broken. I hoped <em>The Rules</em>, however flawed, would offer a scaffold upon which to build a romance.</p> <h3>My failed experiment with <em>The Rules</em> </h3> <p>Rule No. 7, &#8220;Never Accept a Date for a Saturday Night if He Asks After Wednesday,&#8221; was the first test. Brian called on Friday to ask me out for the next day, which I declined, and so I spent an irritable, lonely Saturday night eating Thai takeout and watching a Blockbuster movie. (It dimly occurred to me that I had deliberately deprived myself of a potentially fun evening in favor of solitary moping, but I pushed that thought aside.) <em>The Rules, </em>if followed correctly, sometimes meant you spent a Saturday night alone, losing the battle to win the war, so to speak. Your full social calendar &mdash; even if it was a pack of lies &mdash; inflated your value in a potential mate&#8217;s eyes.</p> <p>We made a date for the following weekend. I spent that week in a fever of anticipation. Per Rule No. 1 (&#8220;Be a Creature Unlike Any Other!&#8221;), I groomed myself to buffed, plucked perfection.</p> <p>He, when he picked me up (Rule No. 4: &#8220;Don&#8217;t Meet Him Halfway) was in work pants and a stained T-shirt. We went to an improv comedy show, the Upright Citizens Brigade.</p> <p>&#8220;I need a word from the audience,&#8221; said one of the comics.</p> <p>&#8220;Vagina!&#8221; someone called out.</p> <p>I started. It was Brian, right beside me. He laughed, a Beavis and Butthead <em>heh-heh-heh</em>. &#8220;Vagina!&#8221; he hollered again. &#8220;Va-gin-UH!&#8221; he screamed, as the comic lifted his eyebrows and I shrank in my seat.</p> <p>&#8220;Refrigerator,&#8221; said someone in the audience.</p> <p>&#8220;<em>Refrigerator</em> it is,&#8221; said the comic, and the show started.</p> <p>I put it out of my mind &mdash; he was probably nervous.</p> <p>The next week, I again waited for him to call (Rule No. 5: Don&#8217;t Call Him, and Rarely Return His Calls&#8221;), and when he did I offered no input about what I wanted to do on our date (&#8220;He picks most of the movies, the restaurants and concerts the two of you go to&#8221;). He chose a dank, deserted diner along the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway with 900 menu items and a clientele straight out of a William S. Burroughs novel. &#8220;Another glass of chardonnay, why not!&#8221; I said cheerfully to the waitress, per Rule No. 9: &#8220;Be Sweet and Light.&#8221;</p> <p>&#8220;I got to AA every day,&#8221; he said. &#8220;Every single day for 13 years.&#8221;</p> <p>&#8220;But &mdash; you&#8217;re only 30,&#8221; I said.</p> <p>&#8220;People can be serious alcoholics by 17, Leigh,&#8221; he said severely.</p> <p>Then he chuckled. &#8220;Plus that&#8217;s pretty much how I meet women.&#8221;</p> <q>I still hoped, after three terrible dates, that we were inching toward the kind of intimacy I longed for</q><p>I brushed this aside and pressed on with <em>The Rules</em>. I asked about his work, even though he didn&#8217;t ask about mine. &#8220;Where do you get the stuff for your shop?&#8221; I asked.</p> <p>He said he paid the Salvation Army drivers to swing by his store before they took their loads back to headquarters.</p> <p>&#8220;So &mdash;&#8221; I said, valiantly hanging on to <em>sweet</em> and <em>light</em>. &#8220;Basically, skimming from the Salvation Army?&#8221;</p> <p>He chuckled, <em>heh-heh-heh</em>.</p> <p>So, yes, technically, <em>The Rules</em> were working so far, even though I was batting down a niggling feeling that he might be a jerk. I resolved to give it one more chance.</p> <p>On our third date, a potentially important one (Rule No. 15: &#8220;Don&#8217;t Rush Into Sex&#8221; and &#8220;No More Than Casual Kissing on the First and Second Dates&#8221;), he took me to a house he was renovating in Red Hook, a waterfront neighborhood in Brooklyn. He wanted to tear out the concrete backyard, so he directed me to stay inside the abandoned house, alone, with his dog. I sat on a milk crate on the dusty floor as he spent the evening whacking a sledgehammer against solid pavement.</p> <p>I petted his dog in the dark house and listened to him smash and grunt. I debated going out to talk to him, but decided against it. (Per Rule No. 3: &#8220;Most men find chatty women annoying.&#8221;)</p> <p>After an hour, I pulled down the tiny arm of my first cellphone and called my mother. No slouch at fixing up houses herself, she said, &#8220;He&#8217;s banging at a concrete pad with a sledgehammer? There are tools you can rent to tear that out.&#8221; She paused. &#8220;This is a <em>date</em>?&#8221;</p> <p>&#8220;He&#8217;s crying now,&#8221; I whispered. &#8220;Just banging the concrete and crying.&#8221;</p> <p>&#8220;I think you should go home,&#8221; she said. &#8220;Can you call a taxi?&#8221;</p> <p>I hung up with my mom (Rule No. 6, &#8220;Always End Phone Calls First&#8221;) and listened to my beau weep in the backyard.</p> <p>This is incredible to me now, but I <em>didn&#8217;t</em> take a cab home. I went with him to his apartment. Despite his behavior, he felt familiar to me in a way that New York men didn&#8217;t. He fit into the context of my eccentric, artist, country upbringing &mdash; my grandmother brought her own Scotch to restaurants and yelled at waiters if they objected; my mother once accidentally painted an outhouse lavender; my stepfather shot our car. I knew from weird. I still hoped, after three terrible dates, that we were inching toward the kind of intimacy I longed for &mdash; not necessarily a sexual intimacy, but the sort where you help yourself from someone&#8217;s kitchen and go to Lowe&#8217;s for cabinet pulls and sometimes take the dog for a walk. I wanted to be a <em>girlfriend</em>.</p> <p>That lasted about one minute longer.</p> <p><img src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3578780/1443893.0.jpg" alt="1443893.0.jpg" data-chorus-asset-id="3578780"></p> <p class="caption">Why not? Sherrie Schneider and Ellen Fein, authors of <em>The Rules</em>, pose with a bunch of wedding dresses. (Evan Kafka/Getty Images)</p> <p> </p> <p>Just as we walked in the door, he said, &#8220;I don&#8217;t do latex.&#8221;</p> <p>We stood in silence for a moment. &#8220;You know,&#8221; I said in the lighthearted voice all women use when they&#8217;ve decided to flee but don&#8217;t want to tip their hand. &#8220;I&#8217;m really tired, so I think I&#8217;m going to head home now.&#8221;</p> <p>&#8220;Why?&#8221; he said, and raised his hands, still filthy from the sledgehammer. He frowned &mdash; his previously attractive face now rather ferret-like.</p> <p>&#8220;Oh, just, you know, beat,&#8221; I said, and dialed a taxi service.</p> <p>&#8220;One minute,&#8221; the dispatcher barked, and I grabbed my coat.</p> <p>&#8220;So,&#8221; I lied cheerily, &#8220;let&#8217;s talk next week &mdash;&#8221;</p> <p>He followed me down the hall and grabbed my arm as I pressed the button for the elevator.</p> <p>&#8220;Hey!&#8221; I said, startled, and pulled away.</p> <p>&#8220;Look, if you leave now,&#8221; he said, grabbing my arm again, &#8220;it&#8217;s over.&#8221; He pushed his face into mine as we stepped sideways into the elevator.</p> <p>&#8220;That&#8217;s fine,&#8221; I said, abandoning the lighthearted voice and shaking him off again.</p> <p>&#8220;Do you understand that if you leave now, it&#8217;s over?&#8221; he shouted, as he followed me out of the lobby and onto the sidewalk to the waiting car.</p> <p>&#8220;I totally and completely understand that,&#8221; I said, and slammed the car door behind me. (Rule No. 11, &#8220;Always End the Date First.&#8221;)</p> <p>The taxi took off down the street and he ran after it, screaming, &#8220;This is your last chance &mdash; do you get that? It&#8217;s over if you get in that car!&#8221;</p> <p>&#8220;I am <em>already in the fucking car</em>,&#8221; I screamed out the window as the driver turned onto Atlantic Avenue and sped up to catch the light.</p> <p>I wish I could say doing the Rules on Brian taught me an immediate and tidy feminist lesson. But personal change moves at a glacial pace. My experience with Brian was only the first tiny inkling that what I <em>really</em> needed to do was stop dating losers. In the intervening years between then and when I my met my (non-loser) husband, I unfortunately had to learn this lesson over and over again: You Are Better Than a Lot of the Men Who Ask You Out.</p> <h3>20 years later, dating norms haven&#8217;t changed much. Why?</h3> <p>Criticism of <em>The Rules</em> was primarily directed at women &mdash; that it encouraged women to play games, that it made women manipulative. But in a patriarchy, it&#8217;s rational to divine the needs of the powerful, to meet them, and to be chosen to share their position in the world. Historically, women haven&#8217;t had a lot of agency in selecting a mate, and that history, however muted now, still influences contemporary courtship. <em>The Rules</em> proposes to correct that lack of agency by taking away even more of your agency. It could be subtitled <em>Strategies for Chattel</em>.</p> <p>Women still don&#8217;t have a ton of agency in early courtship.</p> <p>In 2014, Ellen Lamont, a sociologist now at Appalachian State University, published <a href="http://gas.sagepub.com/content/28/2/189.abstract">two</a> <a href="http://jmm.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/11/04/1097184X14557495.full.pdf+html">studies</a> of heterosexual dating rituals among young men and women living in the Bay Area. She found that though most of this group identified as progressive and even feminist, those who cited marriage and children as a goal nonetheless stuck to traditional scripts while dating. &#8220;[T]he message from <em>The Rules</em> was definitely brought up frequently by the women I interviewed,&#8221; said Dr. Lamont in an email. &#8220;Women worry about appearing too desperate should they decide to pursue a man, and they worry this judgment will come from both men and other women.&#8221;</p> <p>She stresses that women were, however, &#8220;quite active&#8221; in securing dates &mdash; they would arrange to run into a man they were interested in at a party, for example. They just weren&#8217;t asking the men out or paying for the dates. The women believed men naturally want to be the pursuers &mdash; as <em>The Rules</em> says &mdash; and they were willing to accommodate that and even construct a narrative that hid their own behind-the-scenes orchestrations.</p> <p>But most of the men claimed that, actually, they <em>didn&#8217;t</em> like these gender norms in dating. They wanted women to ask them out; they wanted women to pick up the check. So why the disconnect? Well, because in practice, it didn&#8217;t work: Dr. Lamont&#8217;s female subjects said their experiments in being forward usually didn&#8217;t get them the outcome they wanted.</p> <q>I wish I could say doing <em>The Rules</em> taught me an immediate and tidy feminist lesson</q><p>Kathleen Bogle, a professor at La Salle University, found in researching her 2008 book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Hooking-Up-Dating-Relationships-Campus/dp/0814799698/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&amp;qid=1427328578&amp;sr=8-1&amp;keywords=hooking+up"><em>Hooking Up</em></a> that sexually aggressive college-age women were &#8220;sanctioned&#8221; for their behavior: they faced a certain amount of judgment from their peers in the form of a bad reputation. In her later interviews with post-college men and women, Dr. Bogle found, as Dr. Lamont did, that the fear of appearing &#8220;desperate&#8221; kept women from taking the overt lead in dating.</p> <p>I asked Dr. Bogle whether this is a case of men not actually <em>knowing</em> what they want and women deciding it for them? Not exactly, she said. &#8220;Sociologists think of gender as a performance. It&#8217;s something you act, something you demonstrate for other people.&#8221; We&#8217;ve &#8220;performed&#8221; our gender for so long, and the role is so ingrained, that it affects how we feel about ourselves and other people. Men can say, &#8220;I&#8217;d like women to do the asking and the paying,&#8221; but nonetheless the moment she reaches for the check feels awkward, for both the man and the woman.</p> <p>&#8220;An analogous situation,&#8221; says Bogle, &#8220;is that men <em>say</em> they&#8217;d love it if their wives made more money than them. But when that actually happens, it causes problems. The men feel emasculated; their friends tease them. The women, as Arlie Hochschild showed in<em> </em><a href="http://www.amazon.com/The-Second-Shift-Arlie-Hochschild/dp/B000CDG842"><em>The Second Shift</em></a><em>, </em>then do even more housework and child care to compensate for the men&#8217;s feelings.&#8221;</p> <p>Dr. Lamont found in her research that traditional gender roles in dating &mdash; which both men and women participated in and enforced &mdash; continue in marriage. And perhaps more important, these unspoken roles have a way of accruing privilege to the men in terms of housework and child care. Dr. Lamont found, as Dr. Bogle had, that the unequal division of household labor was also framed as personal preference: &#8220;Cooking is her hobby,&#8221; the men would say. &#8220;Or doing dishes is her <em>thing</em>. My thing is &#8230; sitting on the couch, not doing dishes.&#8221; Dr. Lamont said, &#8220;[Early on], a man might show care by paying for something, while a woman might show care by making a nice meal. As the relationship turns more serious, woman&#8217;s care work looks an awful lot like housework, while men usually continue to make isolated romantic gestures as signs of their care for the partner.&#8221;</p> <p><em>The Rules</em> emphasizes that men are naturally, biologically wired to be the pursuers, and women ignore that at their peril. So women adjust their behavior to conform to what they believe men want, even when it means &mdash; as in my case with Brian &mdash; that they squash their own needs and desires. &#8220;Men Do What They Want to Do,&#8221; intones <em>The Rules</em>, like that&#8217;s an immutable fact that must be accommodated.</p> <div class="float-right"> <img data-chorus-asset-id="3578920" alt="the-game.0.jpg" src="https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/chorus/uploads/chorus_asset/file/3578920/the-game.0.jpg"><p class="caption">The cover of <em>The Game</em>. (ReganBooks)</p> </div> <p>It&#8217;s possible that as women gain economic and political power, dating will change, too. But it hasn&#8217;t happened yet: <em>The Rules</em> is still in bookstores; the salesperson at Barnes &amp; Noble grabbed it for me before I even said the whole title. Several women in Lamont&#8217;s 2014 study explicitly mentioned it. A search for newer dating guides on Amazon shows titles with some variation on &#8220;make yourself irresistible&#8221; for the books marketed to women.</p> <p>The men&#8217;s contain active verbs, like <em>seduce</em>. In fact, the most visible &#8220;dating&#8221; guide since <em>The Rules</em> has been <a target="new" href="http://www.amazon.com/Game-Penetrating-Secret-Society-Artists/dp/0061240168/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&amp;sr=&amp;qid=" rel="noopener"><em>The Game</em></a>, a guide for the &#8220;pickup artist&#8221; community. It has been suggested that <em>The Rules</em> is directly responsible for <em>The Game </em>&mdash; if you&#8217;re playing games, we will, too<em> </em>&mdash; but I&#8217;d argue that the pickup artists are actually responding to women&#8217;s growing economic power. The precise moment marginalized groups manage to eke out a little clout is the same moment various dipshits redouble their efforts to wrest back control. The curious thing about <em>The Rules</em> and pickup artists is that they both focus on destabilizing <em>women</em>. If <em>The Rules</em> is a love potion, <em>The Game</em> is a roofie.</p> <p>But in the meantime, the courtship expectations of <em>The Rules</em> are still here. So is anything ever going to change? &#8220;Dating has been this way for a long, long, time, and it&#8217;s really hard to break out of these scripts,&#8221; said Dr. Bogle. &#8220;Regarding feminism, the gains in the workplace have been relatively fast, but women were leading the charge and there was a clear motive and benefit.&#8221;</p> <p>Changing the norms around romantic relationships isn&#8217;t going to be as simple, according to Bogle, in part because it&#8217;s not clear who would instigate the change.</p> <p>&#8220;Who&#8217;s going to lead the charge on dating? The men who don&#8217;t want to pay? The women who want to pay? I don&#8217;t see it happening anytime soon.&#8221;</p> <!-- ######## BEGIN SNIPPET ######## --><div class="chorus-snippet credits"> <hr> <div class="credits-content"> <div>Lead image: <a href="http://www.shutterstock.com/">Shutterstock</a> </div> <div>Follow Leigh on Twitter <a href="http://www.twitter.com/LeighAnderson_" target="new" rel="noopener">@LeighAnderson_</a> </div> <!-- ##### REPLACE TITLE LINK AND NAME ##### --> </div> </div> <!-- ######## END SNIPPET ######## --> </div>
						]]>
									</content>
			
					</entry>
	</feed>
