I Hate My Teenage Daughter premieres November 30 on that network, and it promises to be chock-full of every tired, disproven, and discounted meme about teenage girls, and their mothers.  The realities – be they scientific or societal – have informed us repeatedly that girls do not have a stranglehold on “meanness”.  Boys are equally skilled at dispensing their own brands of adolescent humiliations on both genders, and their reckless behaviors can have damaging consequences.  But, I Hate My Teenage Son just doesn’t pack the same provocative punch.

Not that I’m advocating for hating sons or daughters as the basis for any media offering, let alone a sitcom.  I know of no parent who hates their child.  Try as I might to get behind the humor here, the title and the premise are nothing more than cheap shots directed at their target audiences:  Two mothers of teenage girls, both unpopular themselves as teens, have indulged their children so unselfconsciously that their offspring have become the girls they hated in high school. The mothers begin to witness the fallout of their lax parenting, and conspire to intervene and find crafty ways to reverse their daughters’ transgressions.

In theory, remediation would be on a parent to-do list. Maybe less indulgence, more involvement, a few well-placed deprivations might help, along with teaching by example.  But, hate?

I admit it’s the word that bothers me.  Stark, crass and so off-base that it startles on the face of it.  So wrong is it to ascribe this emotion to the mother-daughter relationship that I can’t bring myself to go so far as to watch.  I want to tell myself that it’s a stupid sitcom riding a tide of sexist stereotyping.  But the mother in me is protective and angry.  The network needs to watch its language, because words do damage.  And the war against females doesn’t need any more ammunition.

A recent study published by the Walter Annenberg Communications Institute at USC (researchers Stacy Smith, Marc Chouetti and Stephanie Gall) was recently released.  The study surveyed the top 100 grossing films for the year 2009. The results are revealing. The researchers examined 4,342 speaking roles. Of these roles,  32.8% were female and 67.2% were men (evidencing the ratios of genders in films – a topic for another article) or approximately a 2.5/1  male -female ratio.  There were few gender-balanced films.

In the study it was revealed that, despite what I had presumed were some strides towards the contrary based on anecdotal evidence (the author works as Executive Vice President at Continuum Pictures on the Paramount lot), films continue at a strong pace to marginalize and sexualize women. In fact, the most astounding and troubling statistic is the same prevalence of actions occurring to young women in the 13-20 year old category as with their older sisters.

The survey found that 33.8% of female characters were in sexy clothing, 28% showed exposed skin, cleavage or upper thigh regions.  This is compared to 5.3% of males in sexy clothing and 11.2% showing skin.  One can only assume that these images increase the objectification of women in society and a commensurate reduction in self worth, anxiety and other similar results.

Anything but weak: Athletes, Leaders, Soldiers, Mothers

Recently, Glen Beck had more than just a few words for Jimmy Fallon over his band’s use of a song called “Lyin’ Ass Bitch” as Michele Bachmann was walking onstage for an interview. Mr. Beck pulled no punches, calling Mr. Fallon “despicable” and “reprehensible”, saying Mr. Fallon should be ashamed of himself. Mr. Beck told his co-host, “If you ever did that, I’d fire your ass so fast your head would spin!” Jimmy Fallon and NBC have both apologized.

I was happy to see a high-profile man in the media be so vocal about a woman being treated disrespectfully. I would love to see more media personalities do the same. Unfortunately, Mr. Beck didn’t end his reprimand there. According to the article, he continued, saying Mr. Fallon probably wouldn’t fire his band because he was “a girl…playing little girl games.”

The word “girl” has long been used as a put down to indicate weakness. It is meant to be the ultimate emasculating phrase. In our society, racial, religious, and homophobic epithets have become completely unacceptable, and they absolutely should be. The use of such words gets actors fired and politicians apologizing. Using the word representing my gender as a vulgarity, however, seems perfectly fine.

In April, 2011 Sarah Palin said the GOP could learn something from the resolve of the women’s hockey team at the University of Wisconsin (national champions) and that they needed to, “learn how to fight like a girl.” She was holding up these young women to her party as examples of strength and determination. I love that she tried putting a positive spin on that expression. Dave Briggs of Fox & Friends saw it differently. Referring to that part of her speech, he said, “They (girls) gossip, they do it behind your back! Just kidding, ladies!”

On a recent (11/22) episode of ABC’s “Man Up” one character was teased by a junior high bully with “You have girl hips, that’s why you can’t run!” Years later he’s still traumatized, and when faced with the same taunt by the same bully, a public brawl erupts. It isn’t limited to TV personalities or sitcoms, either. I’m sure we’ve all heard, “You run/fight/throw/act/cry like a girl!” or “Are you going to let a girl outrun/outsmart you?”

This kind of sexist language teaches us all that women have been disadvantaged since birth, that being born female automatically relegates us to a life of mediocrity and “almost, but not quite”. No matter how hard we work to instill a sense of empowerment and pride in girls and young women, it will be diminished as long as being called  ”girl” is an insult. When casually hurled at men as a way to expose supposed weaknesses, we are hearing that women are also weak. Women like Hillary Clinton, Sarah Palin, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Michele Bachmann are viewed as exceptions, rather than the norm.

Being female does not equal being weak. “Girl” must no longer be tolerated as another “four-letter word.”

A portrait of a young Amy Beach.

The host was Madeleine Albright.

The program included
Aaron Copland’s “Fanfare for the common man”
Joan Tower’s “Fanfare for the uncommon women”
Saint-Saëns “Introduction and Rondo capriccioso”
Amy Beach’s “Grand Mass in e flat major”

Violinist Chee-Yun performed the solo part of Saint-Saëns “Introduction and Rondo capriccioso,” originally composed for Pablo de Sarrasate, the Spanish virtuoso from the 19th century and she played brilliantly.

The grand mass from Amy Beach, performed by the 130-member symphony choir and about 70 instrumentalists including a harp and four vocal soloists, was Amy Beach’s first major composition. Amy Beach had no formal training in composition and undertook this work at age 19 and finished it in three years. It is in late romantic style with lush harmonies. It established Beach as a major American composer and as they said “one of the boys.”

Julia Ward Howe, a suffragist, wrote that this mass made evident the capacity of a woman’s brain to plan and execute a work combining great seriousness with unquestionable beauty. Amy Beach’s grand mass is magnificent, and it would be desirable to have the work recorded from the outstanding performers of the National Symphony. The mass is in Latin, and according to the program notes there are some flaws in the accentuation of Latin. For most of us, this would be of less concern. The Gloria and the Agnus Dei were my favorite parts. The interplay between soloists, instrument groups and choir is very interesting: at the beginning of the Agnus dei the celli and the harp communicate, then a soprano solo, followed by a duet, and a quartet and then the majestic choir building up and returning to the entrance movements of the Kyrie.

A loud thank you to the National Symphony for a great performance and particularly for reviving this great mass. Amy Beach had many successes during her life time, had support of her Harvard professor husband for her compositions and was very well received in 1892. This period ended -as I read in the program notes – when Antonin Dvorak became director of the National Conservatory for Music in New York and declared that there was ample musical talent in America, but that all that talent was male.

For a whole century the mass was not performed.

Amy Beach was a very gifted child, learned piano from her mother and gave public recitals at age 7, improvised duets before age 2, knew 40 songs by age one. At 18 she had her piano debut with the Boston Symphony, and soon married the surgeon and Harvard professor HHA Beach. At his request her concert appearances were restricted, but he supported her composing. She composed over 300 works, with a Gaelic Symphony and a Piano Concerto as larger works. She is the only female composer whose name is engraved in the granit wall at Boston’s “The Shell” where she joins 86 other composers.For further reading and resources read here: .

On Friday, September 23rd, Bill Maher said this during his HBO show:
“Sarah Palin Would ‘F–k’ Rick Perry If He Was Black.”

This statement is yet another example of Bill Maher’s misogyny. Maher has employed terms such as: ‘dumb twat’, ‘bimbos’, and ‘cunt’ in reference to women leaders including Sec. Hillary Clinton, Rep. Michele Bachmann and Gov. Sarah Palin (read here)….

The petition received close to 1,000 signatures and 1,000 likes on Facebook.

We forwarded the petition to the board of directors of Time Warner, owner of HBO.

TNA’s Amy Siskind also had telephone dialogue with Jeff Cusson, SVP of Corporate Affairs at HBO, to express our continued displeasure with Bill Maher’s misogyny, and our desire, as stated in the petition, that he be fired.

We received the following response in the mail.  We welcome your thoughts and input.

And know that we do have further action planned – stay tuned!

I remember the first time I visited prison. I was nervous that night and my mind was racing with scenes from movies movies of barbed wire and hardened criminals. As the guard slammed and locked the gate behind me, I really had to wonder if I had made the right decision. I was going to begin volunteering for the group Convicted Women Against Abuse (CWAA) – a group of women serving life sentences for killing the men they once loved.

As I slowly entered the visiting room, florescent lights above seemed almost blinding. Yet, maybe it wasn’t really the lights, and more by utter shock at what I was seeing. My preconceived notions seemed to go flying out the barbed wire covered windows as I was introduced to women who looked like they could be my grandmother, mother or even….myself. Were these women really murderers?

Glenda Crosley shared that the first time her husband was physically abusive was when she was eight months pregnant with their second child. He shoved her into a wall. Eventually, she came to realize that the violence wouldn’t end until one of them was dead. During a fight one evening, in a public parking lot, Glenda ran over her husband with her car. He died at the scene. A cut and dry murder case. Yet, why would a 45-year-old woman with no prior criminal history brutally kill her husband?

Brenda Clubine endured broken bones. Skull fractures. Her face bruised and battered. By the time Brenda was put behind bars for killing her husband in 1983, she felt worthless. She received a sentence of 15 years to life. She had to give up her son for adoption. She thought she was the only one in her situation. But, Brenda soon discovered that she shared common experiences of love turning violent with many of her fellow inmates.

After years of meeting on the yard and telling each other their whispered stories, an inmate-initiated and -led group was born inside the prison in 1989, called Convicted Women Against Abuse (CWAA). Brenda’s revelation inspired this support group, the first group of its kind in the entire US prison system. The goal of the group is to help women inside prison break the silence about abuse and learn more about how they can help others stop the cycle of violence. And there I was sitting with the same women, nearly 20 years after the group had started, as they each continued to introduce themselves to me and describe the path that led to incarceration. I knew that these women were not murderers, but actually the victims.

Since that first meeting, I have been unable to turn my back on the women of CWAA. They opened my eyes to a part of the world that I never knew existed. Once that silence had been broken, I found that I could never pretend that life was the way it was before. Through attending CWAA meetings, I began to realize that these women were the experts on domestic violence and were willing to share stories of how they found themselves on such dark and desperate path. Yet, as months of meetings went on and relationships were built, the women soon learned of my background as a filmmaker, and approached me to help tell their stories. I knew with this request came a long journey, yet I knew if women’s stories could be heard beyond prison walls, countless lives would be saved…..and Sin by Silence was born.

Month after month, year after year, I drove the 70 miles to be at every CWAA meeting. I listened to experiences that were living nightmares. I began trying to raise funds. The women of CWAA believed that they could be a part of impacting the “outside” world and gave the first $1000 – a donation made up from average wages of only 10 cents an hour.

The women of CWAA became stronger as a result of the filming process. A surprisingly large amount of the women stated that this was their first opportunity to openly reveal their lives, their abuse, their experiences, and their perceptions. Many members who used to remain in the background started to find their voice and members started inviting other inmates they met on the yard. An entirely new sense of purpose was given to the women of CWAA, and a sense of empowerment came from finally being able to have their voices be heard. Empowerment that could lead to other women learning how to not follow in their footsteps. Empowerment that could inspire others to finally do something about the countless women being brutalized behind closed doors.

It has been 10 heart-wrenching years since my first visit to prison and now Sin by Silence will be having its world television debut on Investigation Discovery on Monday, October 17 at 8pm. Nearly 78 million homes will now have the opportunity to get to know the incredible survivors of Convicted Women Against Abuse. These women completely changed my life for the better, and their message of hope will be heard loud and clear beyond prison walls on television screens across the country. Through their stories of terror and hope, we can all better understand the cycle of violence, the signs of an abuser, and how each and every one of us is responsible for changing the tragedy of domestic violence that kills nearly 4 women every single day. Make sure to tune in!

ABOUT THE FILM: SinBySilence.com

ABOUT THE BROADCAST: InvestigationDiscovery.com/Silence

Montana Mann on set of "Dangerously Close"

Whenever I would visit my father throughout my childhood, I would also visit his sets. It was definitely the type of environment that gets your heart beating, but it was not just the enthralling behind the scenes but the love for the final product that convinced me I wanted to be a director. Storytelling, whether with words or visually was always a passion of mine. Currently I attend The Art Center College of Design where I intend to achieve my BA in film. Dangerously Close is my first short film that will premiere at its first festival, LA Femme Film Festival, this October. It is based on a story that since high school I knew I wanted to tell.

It was sticking out between Betty Friedan’s The Feminine Mystique and J.D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye. It was covered with old pictures and magazine clippings. The glue had partly eroded and warped away at the cardboard underneath. The title was: Composition 2006 – 2008. It held inside the stories a teenager had written down in high school. Stories that started out with words like freedom, invigoration, love, power exhilaration, and ended with words like bittersweet, tragedy, heartbroken, reality and consequence.

It was during my junior year of high school, somewhere between taking SAT practice tests and staying at home on a Saturday night to make sure my paper due that Monday was perfect – that I realized I was missing out on the best years of my life. Three years of high school had gone by and I felt like I had not really lived any of it. I was tired of sacrificing life experiences to study for my math tests. I was tired of the pressure to get into a top-rated university and the fear of being unsuccessful.

It was during one of these meltdowns that I started hanging out with a group of kids. They came from broken homes. Some of their parents were abusers, and some drug addicts. They lived on the dumpy fringe of Beverly Hills. They did not fit into the 90210 stereotypes by all means; they had nothing and usually resorted to stealing because they had no income to buy anything. They went to school with some of the wealthiest children in Los Angeles – sons and daughters of actors, producers, music moguls, and surgeons. They were not drug addicts or gang members.

They were just a group of kids struggling with the same growing pains as anyone else, but they lived in a world where everyone around them had everything they did not. They were angry at their situations, and their only release was to let it out on the society around them. And after their consequences caught up to them, they were asked to abandon the only family they had: each other.

What was so enthralling about these kids to me was their ability to live in the present. They were never thinking about the past or the future – they just lived moment to moment. Some may argue this was their downfall, but to my sixteen-year-old self I loved that they never worried about the future and did not get anxiety about where they would be at twenty-five years old.

It was after I moved to Ohio to attend my first college that I lost touch with them. Two years later I re-opened my composition journal and realized that there was one theme that stood out to me: growing up is extremely painful – especially when that decision means you must let go of people that you care about. I picked this story for my first short film because I felt that I had just made those same tough decisions in my own life.

The poster for "Dangerously Close"

I wanted to express that “rehabilitation” can only be done within an individual and that no outside force, not even a parole board, can persuade a person to make new life decisions. Only a person’s own reflections about what they had done might possibly influence them to change their ways. The road to growing up is at first a lonely one – and nobody really knows where that road goes, but it can ultimately only be walked alone and the outcome is purely up to the person walking it. In Dangerously Close I wanted to express the sweet and tragic aspect of making that final decision, and exemplify hope for anyone thinking of setting out on that same road.

Having grown up around the industry with her father, director Farhad Mann, Montana Mann says she had plenty of real life mentors and inspiration when she decided to turn to filmmaking as a career. She cites directors Martin Scorsese, Quentin Tarantino and Elia Kazan as major influences on her style and love of film. She is presently earning her degree in film from Art College Center of Design in Pasadena.

Dangerously Close, the compelling story of a young parolee facing down his demons, once more will screen at the Renberg Theater, 1125 N. McCadden Place in Hollywood on Friday, October 14 at 7 pm.

LOS ANGELES, September 21, 2011 – “Dangerously Close,” directed by Los Angeles-based filmmaker Montana Mann, will make its debut at the LA Femme Film Festival, to be held inHollywood, October 13-16, 2011.
 
The compelling story of a young parolee facing down his demons once more will screen at the Renberg Theater,  1125 N. McCadden Place in Hollywood on Friday, October 14 at 7 pm.

Produced, written, directed and edited by the 20-year old Mann, the film is blessed with a diverse cast of veterans, among them Kristanna Loken and Lochlyn Munro, and led by exciting newcomers Spencer Daniels and Alesandra Assante (daughter of actor Armand Assante), along with a strong storyline about the choices one makes that can change your life in an instant.
 
The film is based in part on Mann’s own experiences with friends she had during her high school after she moved from Virginia to live with her father in Los Angeles, Farhad Mann (of “Max Headroom” fame), who is a director-producer in television and film. While the situation specifics are not her own, the feelings and issues raised in the script have a universal resonance says the young filmmaker.
 
“In high school I fell in with a group of kids that lived on the dumpy fringe of Beverly Hills,” recalls Mann. “They were the ‘outliers’ of their city, even though their address was technically still in the city of Beverly Hills. Their parents were drug addicts, abusers, neglecters, and the only true family they had were each other. They were not gang members or junkies, but more the charming and boy-next-door types. When I decided to make my first film, I immediately was taken back to the those kids I had spent so much time with who had gone through the universal struggle that so many of us can identify with.”
 
Having grown up around the industry with her father, Mann says she had plenty of real-life mentors and inspiration when she decided to turn to filmmaking as a career. She cites directors Martin Scorsese, Quentin Tarantino and Elia Kazan as major influences on her style and love of film. She is presently earning her degree in film from Art College Center of Design in Pasadena.
 

It was a joy to see the magnificent Margo Martindale receive an Emmy for her work as the villainous backwoods matriarch Mags Bennett on FX’s “Justified” this season. But as heartening as it was to see a 60 year old character actress being recognized for her portrayal of a complex, distinctly non-cookie cutter character — and one originally written for a man — she is something of an anomaly in a world where actresses are still surgically enhanced more often than not. It’s not that men aren’t doing it, too, because they are. But some very beautiful, talented woman who would otherwise be aging gracefully feel a pressure to extend their careers in a certain category with a pull and a tuck, or several.

While we have made progress by virtue of so many female series leads being in their forties, fifties, even sixties, the other day I watched the new show of a very successful actress who had a face lift so severe as to render her all but unrecognizable. Why is she not allowed to have a single line on her face? Why does she not allow herself to have one?

Actresses on television have far more opportunity than on film and yet, on film, there are two actresses who refuse to succumb to the knife – Meryl Streep and Helen Mirren. These two ladies are both considered acting goddesses and seem to have a monopoly on any roles for interesting, complex women of a certain age. Is their great stature a built in protection against such pressure to get cosmetized?

Surely the external pressure to undergo cosmetic surgery is great. But since we have so many options to render ourselves younger looking, is the temptation too much to resist? In a culture that celebrates youth, and where women tend to become invisible as they age, I am surrounded by those who give in to that pressure. And I would be lying if I didn’t say that I’d like to take an eraser to a couple of the lines on my forehead. But I don’t.

The good news here is we are starting to see more women on television who are not (only) a size two, and more important, not twenty two. Glenn Close, Kathy Bates, Kathy Baker, Dana Delany, Sela Ward, Mary McCormack, Julianna Margulies, Ally Walker, Patricia Heaton, Melissa McCarthy, Marg Helgenberger, Jane Lynch, Lauren Graham, Bonnie Bedelia, Mariska Hargitay, Amy Brenneman, Maria Bello, to name a few, are women in charge with lives of their own – not window dressing…

But how many of them have succumbed to “airbrush” pressure coming from the other end of the spectrum via the young ladies on this fall’s tv line-up of “Pan Am,” “The Playboy Club,” and “Charlie’s Angels.” The young size twos send us all a very different message as our networks continue to sell sex and youth in order to titillate and lure the viewing public away from reality tv.

Even Diane Keaton – currently doing very high end make up commercials, has had the skin on her face digitally airbrushed – this dishonesty does nothing to honor her own natural beauty. Her 2003 Oscar nominated performance in “Something’s Gotta Give,” had Keaton portraying a middle-aged, very accomplished playwright and divorcee who embarks on an unlikely romance with an over-aged womanizer played by Jack Nicholson. The pleasure of their obvious chemistry was only outdone by the fact that they looked and acted their respective ages.

Here’s a hot flash – reality is refreshing. It also typically finds a bigger audience than the airbrushed, glamorized, pulled, tucked, cosmetic version of life we are so often force fed. If only we could convince studio and tv execs — and screenwriters — of the same. An actress I worked with several years ago said she was given a script to read that described the lead woman character as “35, but still attractive.” If that’s the attitude, no wonder women want to scrape their faces off! Another actress buddy of mine said, “We’re all in the same category – 35 to death.”

The message is the same across the board: the way the real world looks is not good enough, not glamorous enough – we need enhancing. And heaven forefend an actress, model or singer has a little meat on her arms. Editors will scrape that off their magazine covers, too.

Working in this business for many years I have seen actresses airbrush away (either in a headshot or under a surgeon’s knife) precisely what makes them unique. And sometimes those adjustments do help a career. I would wager there are just as many cases where they hurt. Attempting to clone oneself into a look that works for someone else has had decidedly mixed results. It is fascinating that women who tend to be most successful often refuse to take away the expression, the quirks and the character that have grown them into who they are – and who we love to watch.

Here’s to allowing us to celebrate our bodies, our faces, our own unique beauty and the aging process; a process to be honored. Not shamed.

Vogue interviewed Christine Lagarde, the recently appointed managing director of the International Monetary Fund. Although the profile centered on her “oatmeal-hued suit,” “bandbox-neat” appearance, and overall “elegance,” it also discussed her “classically liberal” leanings towards Adam Smith’s economic thought, meaning her preferences for “free trade and minimal government intervention, positions usually associated with conservatism.” Further, it quoted her saying, “Joseph Stiglitz endorsed me. [Paul] Krugman did not.” Smith, Stiglitz, and Krugman – names that I never thought I’d see in Vogue.

Glamour went to Africa to interview Secretary of State Hillary Clinton who was talking up her entrepreneur program for women, which helps “small-business owners take their brands international.” While still focusing on her “wheat-blond hair” and “kitten heels,” the profile hones in on Clinton’s life-long dedication to promoting the advancement of women and girls. It mentions her 1995 “game-changing speech” in Beijing, her “18 million cracks in the glass ceiling” presidential campaign, and the professional risks she hopes young women will take as they put together their careers (“Try it! Put your foot in the pond and see if you want to swim.”).

Women's Right (ELLE): (From left) Firearms advocate and hunter Regis Giles; conservative commentator S.E. Cupp; pollster Kellyanne Conway poses for the Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute’s 2009 calendar, “Pretty in Mink”; attendees of the Conservative Political Action Conference pick up Sarah Palin posters; presidential hopeful Michele Bachmann and South Dakota Congresswoman Kristi Noem address the CPAC crowd.

Perhaps, soon Bazaar will catch on to this trend and decide that having Lady Gaga interview Debbie Harry about being blond is not cutting-edge journalism – talking to a woman who helps manage the world’s economy, a woman who raises the issue of “gendercide” in China and rape in Africa, and a woman who says that she wants to “see more headlines stating ‘Girl kills attacker with gun’ than ‘Girl found dead after being raped and choked to death” are all much more “edgy.”

Although none of these fashion profiles challenge the women they interview, they do highlight varied points of view and show women in positions of power, making a difference in politics. Hopefully, they will also encourage more women to take note of both female political leaders and politics more generally. Just last week, Lagarde offered her economic prescriptions for a global recovery in Jackson Hole, Wyoming; Clinton dressed down Syria; and the young conservative women profiled by Elle became incensed that the magazine referred to them as “Baby Palins.”

It’s a brave new world, and women are changing it.