it was a good week for monsanto, the thuggish biotech company that is the leading producer of genetically modified seed as well as bovine growth hormone. they are also the illustrious company that brought us DDT and agent orange. this week, the supreme court overruled a lower court's ban on genetically modified alfalpha--even though cross contamination (even with organic seed) is inevitable.in the US, it is not required that companies disclose that foods are genetically modified organisms (GMOs.) this is CRAZY. companies like monsanto introduce animal or bacteria strains into seeds to make them resistant to herbicides or pesticide. we don't know the long term consequences of this practice, and monsanto doesn't exactly have a great track record on health, safety, land protection, or playing fair.
monsanto was also in the news for donating hybrid seed to haiti, but that donation carries a hefty price tag for local agriculture. 10,000 protesting haitian farmers don't want anything to do with monsanto seed (which cannot be saved from year to year and threatens indigenous varietals). worst.
(find more about monsanto in the book in defense of food or the movies the corporation
or food inc
.)-------
those of you who know me know i love all things u2. on facebook this week a friend linked to this vintage article from christianity today about the u2 frontman's faith, with excerpts from bono: in conversation with michka assayas
. it's a good read.-------
finally, reality tv star kim kardashian thinks public breastfeeding is gross. she tweeted:"EWW Im at lunch,the woman at the table next 2 me is breast feeding her baby w no coverup."you cannot open a magazine, walk down a street, or turn on the tv without being bombarded by hyper-sexualized images of women's bodies, but God forbid a woman use her breasts to nourish a child.
reducing debates about public breastfeeding to ‘Smart Feminists And Noble Mothers Against Scantily Dressed [...] Who Don’t Realize They’re Oppressed By Their Heaving Cleavage’ obscures what’s really at stake in this issue: our right and freedom to define the terms and practices of our own womanhood, and to not only resist but reject such false, culturally-imposed dichotomies as Madonna/Whore, Smarty-Pants Feminist/Unthinking Tart, Dutiful Asexual Mom/Lusty Young Woman. Because I don’t know about you, but I’m much more complicated than that. And I like my boobs in a whole variety of ways, that includes their life-sustaining baby-feeding superpower but also their pleasing appearance...And I worry that when these discussions get oversimplified...we promote a discourse that does exactly that. Sexy Boobs Bad; Nursing Boobs Good. Nursing Mom Good; Cleavage-Barer Bad. Babies On Boobs Good; Tight T-Shirt On Boobs, Bad. Why can’t all those things be good?"i appreciate the point she's making about honoring women's agency to inhabit their bodies in varied and nuance ways. what do you think?
