“Plus” what, exactly?

ImageThe woman to the far right is Jennie Runk, pictured here in a Glamour spread circa 2009. The intarwebs have been a-buzz because she’s H&M’s new “plus size” swimwear model.

Let’s take another look. Here she is in H&M’s new swimwear shots:

ImageYes, apparently this size 12 woman is “plus-sized.” Excuse me? She looks HEALTHY. AND NORMAL. And pardon me, but I believe one finds size 12 in the “misses” (that is, the NOT plus-sized) section. Since when is this plus-sized? Certainly it’s not the size 0 we normally see, but should we really be calling this “plus”? Plus what? A normal amount of body fat and muscle?

As two women who are not size zeroes, we object. We object first because calling this woman anything other than normal is a gross misstatement. To imply that this woman is somehow heavier than she should be is nonsense. She looks beautiful as-is. I don’t just say this because when I look at most retailers’ models, I want to feed them giant Katz deli sandwiches by the fistful, but because this is the same kind of nonsensical distortion we get with the size zero model. Girls who are Ms. Runk’s size and one higher (14) are shopping in the section that advertises with size zeroes. Women who are size 16 and over are shopping for the clothes Ms. Runk is modeling. Isn’t it time we have just a bit of truth in advertising? If you’re going to sell “plus size” clothing, you need to use a plus size model. A model, that is, who wears size 16 or higher.

Additionally, there needs to be some parity across sizing. I give you the following anecdote: In December, I went looking for a New Year’s Eve dress. I headed to the predictable spots: Forever 21, H&M, etc. H&M was my first stop. My dress size, 95% of the time, is a 6 or 8. I do have a bit of trouble finding dresses that fit because I’ve got a lot of booty and not a lot of booby. But, I digress. I went looking for a black sequin number I saw on the website, and found they only had a size 4 left. I thought to myself, I might as well try this on. It’s realistically only one–maybe two–sizes below me. Maybe it will fit.

And what do you think happened?

Not only did this “dress” not fit over my ass, it hardly fit over my boobs! My tiny boobs! Most women who are my size or a bit smaller have bigger boobs than me! And, on top of that, the notion that this thing was a dress was a joke. Even if I had gotten it to begin fitting over my hips, it wouldn’t have made it much farther because there just wasn’t any more fabric! The damn thing was shirt for a 10 year old being passed off as a dress.

My call, therefore, is for parity in sizing as well as in advertising. I should be looking at models smack dab in the middle of the spectrum of “misses” (that’s a size six, by the way) and smack dab in the middle of “women’s.” And I should be able to reasonably enter a store and try on one or two sizes of clothing and find items that are at least close to fitting. I shouldn’t have to shop at store A as an 8 and then go over to store B and have to buy a 13/14. If we could actually get some real sense of what size we were and stick to it, and saw real humans modeling the clothes we’re buying, we’d significantly reduce the amount of body-hating that goes on.

Stop Calling Mindy Kaling an “Up and Coming Comedienne.” She Has a Show. She’s Up. She’s Come.

If I see one more fucking article or blog post about how Mindy Kaling is “up and coming,” I’m going to lose my fucking mind.

SHE HAS HER OWN SHOW.  IT’S CALLED “THE MINDY [F’ING] PROJECT.”  SHE’S MADE IT.  SHUT UP.  SHUT UP.  SHE IS AS SUCCESSFUL AS ANY MAN COULD HOPE TO BE.

I mean, she has her own show…  Right?

the mindy project

Also, she’s been a head writer and a cast member for The Office for almost 10 years.  They hired her at 24.  She’s established.

young mindy kaling writing for the office

Oh, and she wrote a bestseller.  BEST SELLER.

kaling_211

When dudes get their own shows, do we call them “new” or “up and coming?”  NO.  Now, they’re just famous, rich, and successful.  Mindy Kaling is famous, rich, and successful.  We need to accept that women can be successful, not just nearly successful, not just almost successful.  Women don’t get the same credit.  They have to prove themselves over and over again.  Men, however, only have to prove themselves once – maybe twice.

I mean, really, are we waiting for her to get rid of her boobs and become John Hamm?  By the way, John Hamm is not an up-and-comer, and he doesn’t even have his own show, and his show is on cable.  (I think it’s very good, but you get my point here.)

When Louis C.K. got his own show, people weren’t sitting around saying: “Wow.  He’s almost comparable to other successful comedians.  We should watch him to see if he gets more successful.  What a nice young man.”

Tina Fey, Amy Poehler, and Martha Stewart aren’t the only successful women in the world.  Many, many women have “made it.”  They didn’t “make it” with an asterisk, or any ifs, ands, or buts – they just fucking MADE IT.

When Hilary Clinton wins the 2016 election, are we going to sit around and talk about her like she’s ALMOST there, almost made it.  Having a vagina doesn’t make your success any more or any less temporary.  What else do people think will happen?  Having boobies shouldn’t mean you have to wait to get credit from all the dudes who like touching boobies – who, by the way, are probably way too intimidated by the success of those boobies to feel good about touching them.

It is harder for women to make it in Hollywood as writers.  It is harder for women to make it in politics, business, engineering, and many other fields.  That does not, however, take away the power, the position, or the accomplishments of these women.  It does not make their successes more vulnerable or their power less permanent.  We should be, and perhaps are, even more impressed with their triumphant success over rooms filled with dicks and dick jokes.  Ladies have to work a little harder.  Ladies have to prove themselves continuously.  Ladies have to show that they can be strong without being bitches, and that they can be sexy without being stupid or desperate.  Men can be gross or fat or assholes or hardasses or softies or whatever with so much more ease.  I know that some men will take offense to this – they should.  It’s awful that this is still true in so many offices and writers’ rooms, etc.  Change it.  If you are a man and you don’t like this point of view, challenge it.  Think about the women in your field, the women in your TV.  How many are there?  What are their positions?  What are your opinions of them?  How do the men around you talk about them?  If it’s sexist or unfair, speak up about it.  If it’s not, then YAY!  I’m wrong and happy to be.

mindy kaling sag white dress sexy

My point is that women’s success seems to be compartmentalized into “women’s success” instead of just success.  Mindy Kaling isn’t “one to watch out for.”  She is literally someone you can currently watch on TV– on her show — which she created — which she writes — in which she stars.  

She deserves a little more faith from the media.  She’s a pretty big deal.  Deal with it.

I don’t care, but now I know. Pop Culture Edition!

Here are a list of things I don’t care about, but I know now.  Now, you get to know too.

  1. Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez broke up.  She dumped him.  He is not coping well.
  2. Justin Bieber’s pants are absurd.  See AMA performance.  (Google it yourself.)
  3. David Petraeus is a man whore.  Info.
  4. Snooki has a baby.
  5. Mitt Romney’s family is huge.  See photo below.
  6. Jessica Simpson looks great.  She lost all the baby weight.  Here.  Also, photo below.
  7. That reminds me, Jessica Simpson had a baby girl and named her Maxwell.  Maxwell.
  8. Apparently, Nicki Minaj might have butt implants.  I’m pretty neutral on this.  I will not research it.  Feel free.
  9. Taylor Swift cut her hair, or wore a wig.  Here.
  10. James Bond is a sexist and probably a rapist.  “What a shock!,” said no one.  This is just so disappointing.

Romney Clan:

 

Jessica Simpson:

The Many Faces of Willard (Mitt Romney)

I think we’ve all seen Mitt Romney’s face.  It’s creepy.  It’s not always creepy, but it’s usually creepy.  He just seems like he’s plotting something sinister.  You know, besides forced transvaginal ultrasounds, banning civil rights, making millionaires more millionaire-y, and being generally unaware of actual-incomed people’s lives.  (Some of us make less than $50K… like a lot of us.)

FACE TIME

Here’s Mitt Romney freaking out.

 

Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. 00011101010100101111010101011101001010101001011101010101001111

 

Romney likes to get adventurous with his fashion choices from time to time.  After all, he did get pretty darn adventurous with his dog’s travel plans during a family vacation.

 

In case you were wondering, this is what a sad and ponderous Mitt Romney looks like.

 

This is what Mitt Romney looks like when he’s just plain sad.

 

Young Romney looks pretty good.

 

Mitt Romney ate a lemon.

 

Sometimes Mitt Romney farts.  Everyone farts.  It’s okay.

Brown faced and white faced.

He loves binders, and he’s excited.

 

Sometimes Mitt gets mad, gosh darnit.

 

Sometimes, the Romster feels scared and vulnerable and worried and maybe a little angry too.

 

He’s like, “Ermahgerd!” You know, he loves taxes.

 

But, wait.  What would his face look like if it was even tinier?

 

Romney likes to change his mind… a lot.  He’s pretty darn flippity floppity.

 

However, we must mention that there is no Romney face creepier, more disturbing, more intense, more deafeningly intense, and incredibly fierce than the Josh Romney face.

 

 

 

Yes, this is a real commercial.

After seeing this on TV for the second time, I felt compelled to share it with all of you. At least, I figure, I won’t be alone in my rage against this company and whatever marketing “genius” came up with it.

The first time I saw this, I thought, “Oh awesome! This guy built a mousetrap-style machine that refills his drink! This should be cool.” Alas, I was disappointed, aghast, angered, etc. to find that instead, the solution to the empty drink glass is the girlfriend (wife?). What the fuck. How is this on television? Why isn’t the whole world pissed about this? I mean, the Miller Lite commercials they used to have on TV promoting the “manliness” of drinking Miller Lite (e.g. don’t be a sissy, girls’-pants-wearing light beer drinker!) seem tame and almost endearing compared to the outright misogyny of this gem. I mean, really? We haven’t moved beyond “women belong in the kitchen and/or serving my every need including thirst”? It’s 2012 for godsakes.

I mean, the idea of businesses like SportsClips thrive on the idea that women are meant to serve men both in deed and as eye candy (see also America’s favorite place to get buffalo wings and glimpses of boobies, Hooters). The problem isn’t only the proliferation of antiquated notions of what it means to be a Woman–that is, buxom, always sexy, kitchen- or service-centered, adorably dumb… the list goes on–but antiquated notions of what it means to be a Man. Commercials like this imply that part of being a man means treating all women like glorified servants and exclusively doing “manly” things like watching sports–and being unable to drag oneself away from such manly activities in order to groom oneself, because that’s for pussies. It’s not only women that should be outraged at commercials like this that appeal to undeniably sexist notions of male/female relations, likely located somewhere in the irrational amygdala.

I don’t want to suggest that we should be better than this. We are better than this and it’s about time we show it.

Christina Aguilera as a Hot, Scary, Brightly-Colored Serial Killer in “Your Body” (and she’s still not fat)

I know, I know… I write too many blog posts about Christina Aguilera.  I’m sorry, but I absolutely idolized her when I was a little girl.  I would sit in my room and stare at my stereo while I tried to figure out if I could ever get that good at singing.  Answer: nope.  I just want other people to realize that she’s pretty much the most talented singer to ever exist, and that she’s really gorgeous and not at all fat.  Once again, NOT FAT.  I also really want to like her.  I want her to be more likable.  I want to fall back in love with my idol.

Ugh.  Okay, now that I’ve done that part, let’s get on with the post.

“Your Body” is Christina Aguilera’s latest release.  It’ fun and cool.  It’s crazy and vulgar.  It’s probably just what her career needed.  Our popular culture machine is all about vulgar these days.  I mean, have you heard that damn song about “whistling” (goes something like: “Can you blow my whistle?  …  Just put your lips together and come real close…”)?  It’s terrible and it’s obviously about blow jobs.  We get it, Flo Rida, you like blow jobs.

Pop music these days is all about sex and drinking and drunk sex…  It’s not a new trend, but the crazy bright colors, upsetting patterns, and overly intense cartoon themes are all new to me.  I hate them.  That said, this video is kind of awesome.  I’m surprised I think that, but I do.  It’s like a candy-porn snuff film.

Even though I find the whole video questionable, I feel like it’s a not-sad comeback for her.  She looks sexy in a scary, trashy, dirty (maybe dirrrrty), scented-marker kind of way.  I should hate this video, but I don’t.

She’s a Crayola serial killer out to get men who’ve done her no wrong.  She’s just randomly killing.  I think it actually might be a satire of current culture’s acceptance, encouragement, and of sleeping around.  It might actually be an intellectual argument.  This could be a real, live satire.

The song itself is about screwing random people.  As she says, “So, don’t even tell me your name.  All I need to know is: who’s place?  And let’s get walking…”  She doesn’t even want to know your name, she just wants to love your body.  The song is about random sex and how great/wonderful it is.  Basically, “All [she] want[s] to do is love your body.”

But, maybe…  Just maybe…  This video is kind of making fun of that.  Christina Aguilera has always made pretty average pop music with a way-above-average voice; maybe she knows that.  Maybe she knows that she’s better than all of this.  She should be singing amazing ballads and jazz and more stuff that sounds like, “Beautiful,” instead of “Dirrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrty.”  I think that this video might know that.

Why?  Well, because instead of loving all these bodies of men, she’s killing them.  Then, there exploding with glitter and blue goo.  Maybe singing that you want to love someone’s body, and then visually showing that you actually want to kill them randomly and viciously, maybe that is a joke.  Maybe it’s an acknowledgement of the absurdity of today’s pop music.

Perhaps more interestingly, Ms. Aguilera sings, “Fuck your body…” in the explicit version of the song.  Maybe she really means that she wants to “fuck up” their bodies rather than “love them sweetly.”

Okay, it’s probably just a crazy video for a crazy song.  I just really want to believe in my idol, a former “Genie in a Bottle,” and a forever bottle-blond.  She’s probably just a dirrrrrty girl.

Oh, and here’s some bonus goo:

You can stop whining about how hard it is to be young now.

More and more often, I’ve been seeing articles bemoaning being in your twenties (in particular, Thought Catalog and the HuffPost Blog love making lists on this topic). I wrote a goofy version (at least I like to think so) myself–far less, well, serious and doom-y. But I’m really, really, REALLY getting tired of people bitching and moaning about being twenty-whatever in combination with one of the following:

A. Not having a job. I get that this is frustrating. I do. Having a degree that you worked hard for and that you can seemingly wipe your ass with sucks. However, there is not some sort of cosmic significance to your lack of employment. We have a shitty economy. We are, realistically, in a rec(depr)ession, and you’re pretty much at the bottom of the ladder. It is, yes, adversity that you have to work through, but plenty of other people have worked through it before you. It is not something special for our generation, it does not make you better/unique/more self-aware. You’re also the one who refuses to do menial labor because you’ve been fore fed some bullshit about it being below you for the last two decades. You annoy me. Shut the hell up already.

B. Being single. And drunk. And single. Okay, I get it. You’re lonely. And you’re verging on being a full-blown alcoholic. This has nothing to do with being in your twenties. Being drunk and lonely is not a profound experience, nor is it the special property of the young.

C. Feeling directionless and using your blog to whine about it. Blogging always straddles that strange line between making your point and getting whiny in order to elicit sympathy from total strangers. One thing that is true about many people in their twenties (but also true of many teens and even a boatload of baby boomers) is a need for constant reassurance/confirmation from their social circle. Why else would social media be so addictive and so conducive to the humblebrag?

D. Being too far or too little self-aware. It depends on who you ask on this one, but for all the time you, author of blogpost/article, are spending reflecting on being in your twenties (instead of oh, I don’t know, living them) I sure hope you’re erring on the “too much” side of this equation. Honestly, quit taking yourself so seriously. Chances are, by the time you hit your mid twenties, you’ll experience something that will change the way you see the world or yourself. That’s healthy and appropriate. Whether that’s losing a beloved grandparent, having to break off a long-term relationship, or even getting a first phone call from a collections department, all of these things can force you to crawl out of your (supposed) vodka-induced coma from part B of this list and re-evaluate your shit. It’s called life, and it is not special or particular to being a young adult.

E. Whining about being broke. Your parents are paying (or stopped paying) your rent/grocery bill/phone bill/bar bill/healthcare bills (think Lena Dunham à la Girls). You live in New York/L.A./Miami/Chicago. Um. What did you think was going to happen if you moved to a HUGE metropolis and had, if we refer to part A, NO JOB? Shit is expensive! I hope your parents have already paid off the house they have in Happytown, USA because even a shitty studio apartment in some of those places is probably going to have them forking over twice as much as they did for their mortgage. Give me a break. Stop acting like they’re obliged to be paying for your dumb ass to live the high life while remaining totally oblivious to all of the benefits you do have, like parents who are not only willing but able to help you with your rent.

F. Jerking off to your own perceived intellectual, social, and cultural superiority. We get it. You have clever Tweets. Who knew so much wit could be packed into a mere 140 characters? Your Instagram photos each have the perfectly selected filter for the five hundredth picture of your cat, or the one where you’re holding up a half-drunken PBR at some skeevy neighborhood bar you like because it’s “pure” (that is, you’re the only person under forty inside of it). Your Tumblr is both thought provoking and delightfully cheeky in the 21st century intarwebs sort of way. You’ve read (and get) Derrida and Naked Lunch. You need to remind your Facebook friends how brilliant and unique and clever and unique and underground and unique and unique and unique you are. Did I mention you’re unique? And your blog, OH! Your BLOG. It is so deep and meaningful and there’s just so many feelings you need to discuss.

The biggest problem is that there’s a good chunk of “twenty-somethings” who aren’t anywhere near this obnoxious, self-righteous, self-absorbed, and arrogant.

We live on our own. We have jobs. We pay our own bills. We might have put ourselves through college. We aren’t stressing that we don’t have the newest version of the iPhone. We still don’t really “get” Twitter. We’ve (self-consciously) learned how to resist the humblebrag. We take care of our parents, financially, physically, or emotionally. We appreciate cheeky internet humor as much as the next guy, but don’t feel compelled to base our entire self-worth on it. We, too, sometimes drink to much, have a crisis of conscience and confidence, and really–really–enjoy watching Girls. We just don’t take to the virtual streets and feel it’s necessary to tell the world each passing detail of our lives, or record them in photographs, preferring to experience them without a camera lens in our face or our fingers racing across the touch screen of our phone to check-in on Facebook 24/7. And quite frankly, we’re sick and tired of getting lumped in with people who do act those ways and do those things. I’m looking at you, New York Times.

So, let’s be real. Being in your twenties, like being in any other conveniently-named age range, has its ups and downs. Sitting around pampering your bruised ego on the internet or looking for affirmation of your feelings and your self-worth from your peers, known or unknown, is a (bad) choice, not a feature of an age group. It’s okay to feel pissed off because you’re unemployed or because you can’t find a boyfriend; it really is. But it has nothing to do with your age.

K-Stew Blows (Up)

I’m taking this opportunity to join the bandwagon and hate on K-Stew, who, upon my attempt to watch the 2009 movie Adventureland (I had to turn it off midway through because it sucked so hard and she was so bad), I immediately disliked because of her total lack of acting skills. Now everyone’s gone hateface on her because she did some indiscreet public humping with her director. I’m just along for the ride.

Brief Disclaimer: If you can make it through the following clips, you’re probably a saint.

Five Reasons K-Stew’s “Acting” is Awful:

1. Could she breathe anymore flippantly? Is it possible? Every thirty seconds is a huffy sigh of indignation or angst. Give me a break. Use your words, K-Stew. It’s okay, you’re an adult now.

2. Add to her angsty sighs her angsty eye rolls and you’re pretty much at the pinnacle of K-Stew’s acting abilities.

3. AWFUL line delivery. AWFUL. Between stuttering and a total lack of emotion/utterly flat delivery, she makes watching any and all of her scenes unbearable.

4. Any scenes that do require emotion, like happiness, are way overdone and feel false.

5. She doesn’t act. That’s just how she is. So instead of becoming characters, characters became the awkward and annoying K-Stew. Hair playing and flatline sighs abound! Wee!

And just because I’m feeling generous, here’s a bonus #6: I wonder how many flies Kristen Stewart has swallowed in the course of her life considering the fact that she never closes her mouth. BLARRR!!!!

Perpetual state of “Whaaa?”

Some time ago, KStew mentioned wanting to be a writer. God help us if she writes as poorly as she acts.

Quit Droppin’ Yer G’s

Dropping the “g” in words that end in “-ing” is often associated with being “folksy,” “common,” a “regular joe,” so to speak. Often you’ll hear politicians drop the “g” when speaking to crowds in what has been dubbed “real America” (which is really just a bastardization of “rural America” and no more or less “real” than any other part of the nation). Sarah Palin, perhaps, is one of the most notorious G-droppers, but Obama does this, too. I get the political benefits of G-dropping, but that doesn’t make it any better in principle. Let’s face it: people on TV dropping the “g” are all pretty well educated–some excellently so–and you’re not fooling anybody with half a cerebellum. You aren’t folksy. Drop the act. Quit your pandering.

Unfortunately, this G-dropping isn’t solely the domain of politicians anymore. I see this on the local news all the time. On the national news. On cable news. Everybody wants to sound like Joe Schmo because they think it will earn them viewers or support. And shame on us if it does; seriously, shame on us for facilitating the rapid spread of stupid or anti-education. You would think that defunding public schools and sitting our kids in front of crap TV and video games for ten hours a day would have been enough, but no. We need to make already intelligent people sound, look, and eventually act dumb, too. People are now publicly shamed as “elitists” if you choose to sound like a cognizant being aware of something other than the 24 hour bombardment of bullshit from all corners of the earth. Rationality has been denigrated in favor of violent, hyperemotional, non-sensical response, because that’s what we learn when we watch people arguing with each other on every channel. Whether it’s CNN or the Real Housewives of Bumblefuck, everybody is screaming at the top of their lungs at everyone else. We have never been good at listening; usually we just wait until the other person shuts up so we can seem polite when we begin to babble incessantly about our own concerns, but that feigned politeness has even dropped to the wayside. Now we’ve all just said “fuck it!” and are screaming over the top of everybody else. The loudest, most violent, most obnoxious people, and only they, are or can be heard.

I pose this as the bigger question in relation to the American political landscape: who actually wants to vote for somebody who sounds like the guy who lives next door and spends ten hours a week guzzling Budweiser while mowing his lawn with his tricked out John Deere? Do I trust that this person can manage economic, social, and international political concerns effectively? Can we, as a nation, agree that sounding and acting dumb/uninformed/folksy is not as valuable as sounding (and being) smart, confident, and educated? I’m so tired of stupid being cool. Stupid isn’t cool. Stupid is stupid.

Hoodies don’t kill people. People kill people.

This morning I caught wind of comments Geraldo Rivera made on the recent shooting death of Trayvon Martin in Florida. For those who aren’t familiar, the teen was walking in a Florida neighborhood toward his step-mother’s home with a box of candy in his hand when a neighborhood watch member called 911 to report a “suspicious” person in the neighborhood and proceded to follow Martin. He shot the teen (the 911 tapes present a case that appears as if he held Martin screaming for his life at gunpoint before shooting him) in the chest and claimed “self-defense.” Because of the gun laws currently in place in Florida, the shooter has not been charged or arrested for murdering this young man.

This has spurred some discussion nationally about gun laws, vigilantism, and race/racial relations (Martin was black. The shooter was, I believe, white or Latino). Geraldo Rivera weighed in on this event on Fox and Friends recently:

“I am urging the parents of black and Latino youngsters particularly not to let their children go out wearing hoodies. I think the hoodie is as much responsible for Trayvon Martin‘s death as much as George Zimmerman was […] Trayvon Martin, God bless him, an innocent kid, a wonderful kid, a box of Skittles in his hands. He didn’t deserve to die. But I bet you money, if he didn’t have that hoodie on, that nutty neighborhood watch guy wouldn’t have responded in that violent and aggressive way.”

In other words, in Rivera’s opinion, hoodies kill people. Yes, because some guy apparently decided to make the connection between an item of clothing that the majority of people across the nation have worn at some point–the hooded sweatshirt–and  crime, black and Latino kids shouldn’t wear them. What??!

Rivera’s logic is akin to saying women shouldn’t wear short skirts because they’re “asking” to be raped. Clothes don’t cause crimes. They don’t. People commit crimes. People act in violent ways. People make the decision to kill, to rape. Not clothing. Blaming the victim gets us nowhere when the conversation should be focused on whether or not Florida’s laws protect its citizens from harm, or whether the way the laws are written prevent guilty parties from being held responsible for their actions. In this case, they seem to be preventing a man who stalked an innocent young man down a public street because he felt that the young man looked “suspicious” fro being held responsible for what he has done. Suspicion should not warrant cause to shoot and kill someone–ESPECIALLY a child–in cold blood.

Furthermore, why just “black and Latino youngsters”? If Rivera hasn’t cued us all in that race played a huge role in the relative “suspicion” of Trayvon Martin walking around a relatively upscale Florida neighborhood, then I don’t know what will. But why is he blaming minority youth for a problem that obviously lies in the perception of black and Latino youth by white America? It’s NOT okay for people to jump to conclusions based on race! Haven’t we had this conversation over and over? Do we really need to have it again because Rivera is giving racism a free pass by blaming hoodie-wearing black kids for being shot in broad daylight carrying candy and nothing else? Why are we blaming Trayvon Martin for his clothes when we should be charging a racist murderer for a heinous, disgusting, and deplorable crime?