upworthy
More

Janet Mock's powerful directorial debut shows why representation matters.

Her episode of 'Pose' sidestepped the tired trans tropes we've come to expect.

If you're not watching FX's "Pose," you're missing out.

The show, an '80s-era drama centered on New York City's ballroom culture and the HIV/AIDs crisis, made a lot of news when it was first announced. To tell a story about transgender people, creator Ryan Murphy did something novel: He hired trans actors, writers, and directors. Trans actresses MJ Rodriguez, Indya Moore, Dominique Jackson, Hailie Sahar, and Angelica Ross landed starring roles. Our Lady J and Janet Mock, who are also trans, serve as writers and producers on the series.

Ryan Murphy poses with Janet Mock, Dominique Jackson, and MJ Rodriguez during VH1 Trailblazer Honors 2018. Photo by Theo Wargo/Getty Images for VH1 Trailblazer Honors.

You might be asking yourself what's so remarkable about a collection of trans people telling trans stories. The answer is sadly simple: It's a rare thing to see, even as storylines about trans people seem to be on the rise.

With this week's episode, Janet Mock made history as the first trans woman of color to write and direct an episode of TV.

That's a pretty big accomplishment! Her episode, "Love is the Message," included a scene in which [very mild spoiler] one of the characters comes out as trans to another. It's a scene that's been done many, many times before, but never with as much nuance as Mock's direction and Moore's acting showed here. There's a fine line between sincerity and exploitation involved in this scene, but the combined lived experience involved in its creation steered the narrative back toward the sweet.

"Everything I can’t have in this world is because of what I have down there," says Moore's character, referring to her genitals. "If you really want to know who I am, that is the last place you should look."

The episode's gotten largely positive reviews, as has the show itself.

Janet Mock attends the 2017 Forbes Women's Summit. Photo by Dia Dipasupil/Getty Images.

Representation matters, especially for trans people.

Most Americans don't personally know a trans person — at least that they know of. When people don't know a member of a marginalized community, they're less likely to be supportive of that community. Part of what led to so many breakthroughs in gay rights over the past 25 years has to do with the fact that 65% of Americans currently have a close friend or family member who identifies as gay or lesbian. This is precisely what makes the fight for trans rights such a tough battle.

A 2017 Public Religion Research Institute survey found that just 21% of Americans had a close friend or family member who was transgender. To put that in context, that's roughly the same percentage of the population that knew a gay, lesbian, or bisexual person in 1993. The relative unfamiliarity with trans people makes it that much more important that people's exposure to trans people and issues — coming largely from news and entertainment media — is accurate.

Poor representation can reinforce inaccurate stereotypes.

There's a real aversion to letting trans people tell their own stories, such as the recent casting of Scarlett Johansson in the role of Dante "Tex" Gill, a trans man. While Johansson's gotten a lot of backlash for taking the role and for her flippant statement in defense of it ("Tell them that they can be directed to Jeffrey Tambor, Jared Leto, and Felicity Huffman’s reps for comment," read a message from her representative, citing other cisgender [non-trans] actors who've played trans roles), there's one aspect that's not often addressed. When cis men are cast as trans women (as Tambor, Leto, Eddie Redmayne, and Matt Bomer have all done in recent years) or cis women are cast as trans men (as Johansson is doing here or Hilary Swank did in 1999's "Boys Don't Cry"), it buttresses the inaccurate image people have of trans people as simply men pretending to be women and women pretending to be men.

How do we know this is the case? For one, because multiple trans actors have gone on record to say they were passed up for trans roles for not "looking trans enough." If a trans man doesn't "look trans enough" and the answer is to hire a woman to play him, it's because society falsely believes that trans men are women; the same goes for society's belief that trans women are men. When someone says a trans woman doesn't "look trans enough," they're saying that they expect her to be more masculine. When someone says a trans man doesn't "look trans enough," it's because they expect him to look more feminine. To be sure, there absolutely are trans women who err on the masculine side of things and trans men who embrace femininity, but this stereotype is inaccurate, narrow, and holds back progress.

[rebelmouse-image 19345891 dam="1" original_size="750x293" caption="GLAAD's Nick Adams is joined by Alexandra Billings, Laverne Cox, Shadi Petosky, Jill Soloway, and Rhys Ernst at the organization's "Transgender Trends on TV" panel in 2017. Photo by Frederick M. Brown/Getty Images." expand=1]GLAAD's Nick Adams is joined by Alexandra Billings, Laverne Cox, Shadi Petosky, Jill Soloway, and Rhys Ernst at the organization's "Transgender Trends on TV" panel in 2017. Photo by Frederick M. Brown/Getty Images.

Throughout history, a lot of movies and shows have been made about groups without their involvement. They haven't aged especially well.

Go back and watch 1961's "Breakfast at Tiffany's" and you'll see what I'm talking about. Mickey Rooney's Mr. Yunioshi was little more than an offensive Asian caricature. Harrison Ford's Indiana Jones eating monkey brains is another moment that'll make you cringe. Even Greg Serano's portrayal of Enrique (actually, more the way Reese Witherspoon's Elle Woods interacts with him) in 2001's "Legally Blonde" isn't aging especially well less than two decades later. Adam Sandler and Kevin James's 2007 dud "I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry" came off as homophobic at the time — and has only gotten worse since.

[rebelmouse-image 19345892 dam="1" original_size="750x500" caption="Daniela Vega starred in "A Fantastic Woman," and was the first trans actress to present an award at the Oscars. Photo by Vittorio Zunino Celotto/Getty Images." expand=1]Daniela Vega starred in "A Fantastic Woman," and was the first trans actress to present an award at the Oscars. Photo by Vittorio Zunino Celotto/Getty Images.

We already know that movies like "Ace Ventura," "Glen or Glenda," and "The Crying Game" don't stand the test of time. The question is whether creators want to make work they can be proud of 20 years from now. Trans people are everywhere, and there's really no reason not to include them in the creative process. If not for the sake of accuracy, creators should consider the lasting power of their art.

Daniela Vega played the lead in "A Fantastic Woman," the winner of the 2018 Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film. Laverne Cox was twice nominated for Outstanding Guest Actress in a Drama Series at the Emmys for her role on "Orange is the New Black." Shadi Petosky created the Emmy-winning Amazon series "Danger & Eggs." There's a lot of trans talent out there both in front of and behind the camera.

Janet Mock's powerful directorial debut is only the latest example of trans people kicking ass in the entertainment world.

Janet Mock attends the Brooklyn Artists Ball 2017. Photo by Theo Wargo/Getty Images.

Culture

Dad’s 5-year-old daughter's hilarious answers to his questions have the internet screaming

“Do I have to change my name if I get married? Call me Shredder.”

via James Breakwell / Twitter

Raising kids is tough, but there's a lot of laughs along the way. Comedy writer James Breakwell has four daughters under the age of eight and shares their hilarious conversations on Twitter. And, from Breakwell's tweets, it looks like his five year old has a future in comedy. Here's a sampling of some Breakwell's funniest kid-inspired tweets.


1.

2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.


8.


9.


10.


11.



12.


13.


14.


15.


16.



17.


18.


19.


20.


21.


22.


23.


24.


25.




His 5-year-old isn't the only (often unintentionally) hilarious child in the house; the 7-year-old and 3-year-old turn up from time to time. There's also a 2-year-old, but she hasn't been the subject of many tweets yet.


26.


27.


28.


29.


30.


31.


32.


33.



34.


35.


36.



37.


38.


This article originally appeared four years ago.

From Your Site Articles
comedy
Joy

Proud owners of this dog breed quickly call out a trainer who dubbed it a 'terrible choice'

The trainer thought these dogs were "frenzied lunatics." Others heartily disagreed.

Photo credit: Canva

Are Springer Spaniels really "frenzied lunatics?"

Will Atherton, an England based Clinical Canine Behaviourist (MSc), recently dubbed the Springer Spaniel a “terrible choice” of dog breed for most people. In a video posted to his TikTok, Atherton explained that while many people get them because they “look awesome” and “match a barber jacket which makes it cool for Instagram pictures,” they aren’t taking into account what Springer Spaniel were bred for—hunting.

These dogs, Atherton notes, are bred to “work non-stop like frenzied lunatics,” rather than sit on the “sofa and chill.” Since the latter is so “rarely achievable” with Springer Spaniels (since they “don’t have an off-switch”) Atherton sees so many of them being sent to his center for “problem behaviors.”

However, an overwhelming amount of Springer Spaniel owners were quick to disagree.


@iamwillatherton Let’s talk about the honest truth behind Spaniels shall we... p.s. before you comment I know there are some that are chill but they’re the outliers and congratulations you got lucky! And remember, I’m honest about these things because I want people to be happy with their dogs and I see SO many that aren’t with their Spaniel because their Spaniel was a terrible choice for them because they can’t train it well. #springerspaniel #springer #spaniel #englishspringerspaniel #cockerspaniel #dogtraining #dogtrainer #dogtrainingtips #dogtrainingadvice #dogbreeds ♬ original sound - Will Atherton (MSc)


“My springer is probably the laziest dog I’ve ever seen.”

“My springer just sleeps most of the time.”

“Mine is either running around like a lunatic or sleeping and chilling, just two extremes it’s great.”

“My springer must be a bit dodgy because you’ll never meet a dog who wants nothing more than [to] cuddle. Yes when he’s out he’s a lunatic but as soon as he’s home all he wants is sleep and hugs, love them.”

“I must be lucky my Springer [is] both brilliant outside and chilled outside.”

“We had a Springer Spaniel when I was growing up. Yes he was very active but he was also very friendly and good around kids. I loved that dog.”

Photo credit: Canva

While the American Kennel Club does echo Atherton’s sentiment that Springer Spaniels are built for “long days in the field,” the site notes that they are also “highly trainable people-pleasers,” in addition to being highly affectionate, good with both children and other dogs. The AKC also recommends adding enrichment activities that require not only physical exercise, but mental exercise as well. Otherwise they’ll find their own projects, “and they probably won't be the kind of projects you'd like.”

And while everyone might not agree with Atherton’s point of view, it does provide a great reminder of the importance of researching dog breeds before you buy one. Studies have shown that certain behaviors are indeed passed down through lineages (this goes double for purebreds). And those natural behaviors might not align with a person’s lifestyle, making a satisfying situation for both dog and human.

Still, other research indicates that environment plays a much bigger role in a dog’s personality. So providing things like training and/or socialization from an early age can help things mesh better.

Bottom line: Dogs are individuals, with their own personalities. Not carbon copies. However, in order to give them the best possible life (which is what every dog owner wants to do, right?), one should probably know about a dog’s breed before purchasing.

media0.giphy.com

From Your Site Articles
animals
Pop Culture

Cool video shows why everyone used to wear hats and then suddenly stopped

The change started around 1960.

via Warmbru Curiosity/YouTube

When did everyone stop wearing hats?

If you see old newsreel footage of men in the office or on commuter trains from the advent of the motion picture camera to the early ‘60s, nearly everyone is wearing a hat. Hats were just as common for women in that era. For a woman to go out without a hat in the first half of the 20th century was akin to going out without clothes.

The funny thing is that everyone’s headgear is so similar in the old-timey footage that it makes previous generations look like big-time conformists. Then, in the early ‘60s, everything changed, and men and women started to go out in public with their hair exposed. Why did such a big aspect of fashion seem to change overnight?

Warmbru Curiosity investigated the question recently in a popular YouTube video. Warmbru’s channel is a lighthearted look at some of the more unusual people and events from our history and how they have influenced the world in which we live.

Why did people stop wearing hats?

Warmbru says fashion changed dramatically after World War II, when people in developed countries began to care less about expressing their social status. “This was especially true among the younger generation the rise of youth culture in the 1950s and 1960s emphasized rebellion against traditional norms, including formal dress codes,” the YouTuber says.

- YouTubeyoutu.be

Another big reason for the change in fashion was technology. Cars became the preferred mode of transportation for many after World War II and indoor environments became more hospitable. “People spent far less time exposed to the elements as people increasingly moved to urban areas and started using cars,” Warmbru says. “The practicality of wearing hats diminishes. Hats can be cumbersome in cars and on public transport, improvements in heating and air conditioning reduce the need for hats to provide warmth.”

Warmbru adds that President John F. Kennedy, elected in 1960, rarely wore a hat and his decision to go bareheaded became associated with modernity. Further, in 1963, the mop-topped Beatles proudly flaunted their hatless heads as they shook them while singing, “Wooooo.” Hat-wearing among women began to decline around the same time as the restrictive and complex headgear clashed with the burgeoning women’s liberation movement.



The decline in hat purchases meant that manufacturers closed and the headgear became harder to come by. This reduced availability further contributed to the decline in hat-wearing. As fewer people wore hats, there became a greater demand for high-quality hair products and services. “Why spend a fortune at the hairdressers or the barbers just to cover the end result with a hat?” Warmbru asks.

Ultimately, there were many reasons why people stopped wearing hats. It appears that it was a combination of technology, influential people such as Kennedy and The Beatles, and the overwhelming mood of change that swept most of the Western world in the 1960s. But if one thing is true about fashion, it goes in cycles. So, it seems that hats may be ready for their big comeback.

This article originally appeared last year.

From Your Site Articles
history
Parenting

How often should you bathe your kids? Experts say when they're visibly dirty.

This parenting debate probably goes back generations but we have the answer.

Photo credit: Canva

Bathing kids only when they're visibly dirty is expert advice

When it comes to bathing children there doesn't seem to be a universal consensus among parents, who are generally the ones doing the bathing. Some people feel strongly that children starting from infancy should be bathed daily while others are fine with a couple of baths a month. There are even some parents that skip baths for their kids for the entire summer because they rely on swimming pools and other water play to do the job.

Some grandmother somewhere just audibly gasped at the thought of swimming in a pool counting as bathing. But in reality, people really just try to do what they think is best for their kids or what makes the most sense to them, though some parents may need to put down the soap. Specifically the parents who are bathing little ones daily or multiple times a day, because experts say that's entirely too much for young humans.

A couple of years ago a few famous celebrity couples made headlines for openly admitting that they don't bathe their children often. In fact, Mila Kunis and Ashton Kutcher extended that revelation to include that they don't bathe themselves often either. The couple waits until they visibly see dirt, while their pals Dax Shepard and Kristen Bell admit to only washing their kids if the catch a whiff of something funky.

How Did I Get Here Baby GIF by TLC EuropeGiphy

In an episode of the "Him & Her Show," Veronica Max, a holistic Nurse Practitioner shares that she does not dictate her kids' bath schedule. She explains to the hosts that her four children might bathe once a week, admitting that in the summer it's even less.

"If it's once a week? You know, like now they sw...so they swim. We have a pool and they swim in the summer so I guess we call that bathing so it's probably even less than that," Max admits.


@thehimandhershow Is it crazy to only bathe your child once a WEEK?! 🛁 🤔 (Ep with Veronica Max 🤍) #childcare #momlife #motherhoodunfiltered #parenting #delayedbathing ♬ original sound - HIM & HER Show - thehimandhershow

Another mom shares that once her children starts going out side of the home to be around other children like at daycare or school, that's when they need to bathe every day. Bathing daily is one of her house rules and her explanation may make sense to others that have similar concerns.

"I just can't imaging them running around recess, sitting on the floor at school, rubbing each other with their classmates, sitting on the bus...the school bus, with their jeans and they just come right home and just lounge on their bed and go to bed overnight, wake up the next morning and come down and eat breakfast with me. I just cannot imagine that would happen, ever.


@fine_lvoe #stitch with @halliemkc #momlife #parentlife #parenting #parentingtips ♬ original sound - fine_lvoe

Every parent is different but according to Harvard Health kids only need to bathe once to three times a week. Any more than that and it can cause skin issues, "Lots of bathing can lead to dry, irritated skin. But also, the skin has natural protective oils, and natural bacteria, that help to keep us healthy and safe — and that can get washed away with daily bathing."

There are exceptions such as visible dirt, the use of bug sprays, sun screen or being in a pool with chlorine. Otherwise, they say it's perfectly fine to only bathe children infrequently during the week, though they point out that this doesn't go for teens and the gnarly smells they can emit.

Season 3 Smell GIF by Nanalan'Giphy

While dermatologist, Joan Tamburro, DO, tells the Cleveland Clinic children under the age of six should spend time in the bath tub two to three times per week max, but 2-3 times a week at a minimum for children 6-11 year old. But Dr. Tamburro advises against using pool days as bath days saying, "It’s important to bathe or shower after swimming in a pool, lake or ocean."

So there you have it, parents. Kids under the age of 13 don't need to bathe daily but they may need to wash more than once a week if they're sweaty, visibly dirty or covered with chemicals from chlorine, sunscreen or bug spray. Harvard also says using wet wipes between baths on the important bits and visibly soiled areas also work in between bath days.

Turns out the parents who were against daily bathing were closer to the opinion of experts than not.

From Your Site Articles
how often to bathe kids
Science

Scientists at Hebrew University may have found a way to predict earthquakes

Researchers discover the slow, silent process that ignites earthquakes

Photo credit: Canva

Scientists are getting a better understanding on how and when earthquakes occur.

One of the biggest challenges regarding earthquakes is preparation. Aside from recognizing where faultlines lay and determining which areas are the most prone to earthquakes and earthquake damage, there is very little we can do to prepare for the next “big one.” Earthquakes can occur at any time and happen with little to no warning, at least not enough warning for people to seek safety before they hit. Scientists at Hebrew University in Israel may have found a way for us to predict earthquakes in the future.

Through a study done in Israel, Prof. Jay Fineberg and his team of researchers at the Racah Institute of Physics at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem possibly found the causes that lead up to shaking tremors. Through experiments and theoretical models, they theorize that a fault’s geometry along with slow and steady displacement at certain stress points in the Earth’s crust typically precede a seismic rupture that leads to earthquakes.

Richter scaleThis new study could lead into better preparation for earthquakes.Photo credit: Canva

Tremors occur when cracks in the Earth’s crust suddenly give way, and previous studies have shown that slow movements do precede the formation of these cracks. Yet until now, the data of these processes has been relying on two-dimensional generalizations rather than practical or theoretical three-dimensional studies. Fineberg’s team looked into how slow, aseismic stress came into play within earthquake activity, how that stress evolves and nucleates into a budding and sudden tremor.

“Our findings challenge and refine conventional models of rupture dynamics," said Fineberg in a press release. "We show that slow, aseismic processes are a prerequisite for seismic rupture, driven by localized stress and geometric constraints. This has profound implications for understanding when and how earthquakes begin.”

A torn down house and rubble from an earthquakeBeing able to predict an earthquake could help prevent further injuries.Photo credit: Canva

Further testing needs to be made in order to further confirm Fineberg and his team’s conclusions, however this leads to a greater understanding into how earthquakes happen and identify new focal points. Should these solid theories become reality, it could lead to better warnings of earthquakes before they start, leading to better systems to inform the public so they can better prepare before the tremor fully hits.

Meanwhile, if you live near or in an area prone to earthquakes, it’s best to be prepared for the worst. According to experts at the U.S. Geological Survey, if you are caught in the middle of an earthquake, take cover under a heavy desk or table, away from any windows or top-heavy furniture. Stay in place, as most people injured inside a building during an earthquake are those trying to move to a different building or leave their current position. Ready.gov recommends packing an earthquake kit with clothes, water, medication, a first aid kit, a hand-crank flashlight, batteries, cell phone charger, and other such items at the ready in your home or car case you need to leave. There are also apps like MyShake that could give you alerts and other information about earthquakes around your area through your mobile phone, too.

A man and a woman taking shelter under a wooden tableIf you're experiencing an earthquake, hide under a table away from any windows.Photo credit: Canva

It takes time and study to learn how the world around us works, which can take years if not lifetimes before we fully understand it. Even when we get better understanding, it might only provide more prep time for emergencies. Regardless of how much more understanding we obtain about earthquakes, there will always be the need to prepare and to be ready, for ourselves and for our neighbors.

From Your Site Articles
earthquakes
Trending Stories