upworthy
Add Upworthy to your Google News feed.
Google News Button
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.

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.

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.

Harvard researcher Arthur C. Brooks studies what leads to human happiness.

We live in a society that prizes ambition, celebrating goal-setting, and hustle culture as praiseworthy vehicles on the road to success. We also live in a society that associates successfully getting whatever our hearts desire with happiness. The formula we internalize from an early age is that desire + ambition + goal-setting + doing what it takes = a successful, happy life.

But as Harvard University happiness researcher Arthur C. Brooks has found, in his studies as well as his own experience, that happiness doesn't follow that formula. "It took me too long to figure this one out," Brooks told podcast host Tim Ferris, explaining why he uses a "reverse bucket list" to live a happier life.


bucket list, wants, desires, goals, detachment Many people make bucket lists of things they want in life. Giphy

Brooks shared that on his birthday, he would always make a list of his desires, ambitions, and things he wanted to accomplish—a bucket list. But when he was 50, he found his bucket list from when he was 40 and had an epiphany: "I looked at that list from when I was 40, and I'd checked everything off that list. And I was less happy at 50 than I was at 40."

As a social scientist, he recognized that he was doing something wrong and analyzed it.

"This is a neurophysiological problem and a psychological problem all rolled into one handy package," he said. "I was making the mistake of thinking that my satisfaction would come from having more. And the truth of the matter is that lasting and stable satisfaction, which doesn't wear off in a minute, comes when you understand that your satisfaction is your haves divided by your wants…You can increase your satisfaction temporarily and inefficiently by having more, or permanently and securely by wanting less."

Brooks concluded that he needed a "reverse bucket list" that would help him "consciously detach" from his worldly wants and desires by simply writing them down and crossing them off.

"I know that these things are going to occur to me as natural goals," Brooks said, citing human evolutionary psychology. "But I do not want to be owned by them. I want to manage them." He discussed moving those desires from the instinctual limbic system to the conscious pre-frontal cortex by examining each one and saying, "Maybe I get it, maybe I don't," but crossing them off as attachments. "And I'm free…it works," he said.

- YouTube www.youtube.com

"When I write them down, I acknowledge that I have the desire," he explained on X. "When I cross them out, I acknowledge that I will not be attached to this goal."

The idea that attachment itself causes unhappiness is a concept found in many spiritual traditions, but it is most closely associated with Buddhism. Mike Brooks, PhD, explains that humans need healthy attachments, such as an attachment to staying alive and attachments to loved ones, to avoid suffering. But many things to which we are attached are not necessarily healthy, either by degree (over-attachment) or by nature (being attached to things that are impermanent).

"We should strive for flexibility in our attachments because the objects of our attachment are inherently in flux," Brooks writes in Psychology Today. "In this way, we suffer unnecessarily when we don't accept their impermanent nature."

What Arthur C. Brooks suggests that we strive to detach ourselves from our wants and desires because the simplest way to solve the 'haves/wants = happiness' formula is to reduce the denominator. The reverse bucket list, in which you cross off desires before you fulfill them, can help free you from attachment and lead to a happier overall existence.

Education

Stop struggling with small talk by using the easy 'COST method'

This simple acronym will make your next social gathering a lot more enjoyable.

A man and woman chatting at a dinner party.

There are several reasons why people are hesitant to engage in small talk at a party or around the water cooler at work. Some people simply avoid it because they don’t find chatting about the weather, sports, or what they saw on television the night before very interesting.

Others are afraid that they may run out of things to say or that there will be an awkward pause that makes them want to hide their head in the sand, like an ostrich. Mary, a friendship educator with a degree in interpersonal communication, has a solution for those of us who want to be friendly and meet people but abhor small talk; she calls it the COST method.


What is the COST method for making small talk?

According to Mary, who goes by @better.social.skills on TikTok, COST stands for Compliment, Observation, Story, and Tip. These are four options you can turn to when you're in need of a conversation topic.

@better.social.skills

Remember the acronym C.O.S.T. and you’ll always have something to talk about at parties or events. C stands for compliment. Tell somebody you like their shirt or shoes, for example, and see where the conversation leads. O stands for observation. Remark on something happening around you, like if you enjoy the music or feel a certain way about the weather. A stands for story, in which you share a little anecdote about yourself. For example, maybe you were late to the party for some reason, or you’re excited to get home and watch a show you’re loving. T stands for tip, in which you give a small recommendation to someone. For example, where the shortest bathroom lines are, which food is particular particularly delicious, or point out an interesting person they might want to talk to. What do you think? Would you use these? #creatorsearchinsights #conversationstarters

1. Compliment

“Tell somebody you like their shirt or shoes, for example, and see where the conversation leads,” Mary says.

“Oh, I like your shoes.”

“I like your shirt.”

“You have such a soothing voice.”

2. Observation

“Remark on something happening around you,” Mary says.

“This song is amazing.”

“I really love how Jeanie decorated this room.”

“There’s a lot more people here than last night.”

3. Story

“Share a little anecdote about yourself. For example, maybe you were late to the party for some reason, or you’re excited to get home and watch a show you’re loving,” she said.

4. Tip

“Give a small recommendation to someone. For example, where the shortest bathroom lines are, which food is particularly delicious, or point out an interesting person they might want to talk to,” Mary said.

“I don’t know if you’ve tried the new Mexican place on South Street yet…”

“I’d have one of Jeanie’s margaritas now, before they are all gone.”

“Be careful if you talk to Brian. He can get a bit long-winded.”

chatting before movie, popcorn, movie theater, snacks, small talk Three people chatitng before a movie.via Canva/Photos

The great thing, if you’re a little shy about making small talk, is that studies show that you definitely don’t need to do all the heavy lifting in the conversation. In fact, a Gong.io study found that the best way to make a connection with someone is to speak 43% of the time and let your new friend talk for the other 57% of the conversation.

Further proof that the best way to make a great first impression is a study published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. It found that when meeting someone for the first time, ask them a question and then be sure to ask two additional follow-ups before discussing yourself. This has been found to dramatically increase your likability.

“We identify a robust and consistent relationship between question-asking and liking,” the authors of the study write. “People who ask more questions, particularly follow-up questions, are better liked by their conversation partners.”

For those of you who have always felt that you're bad at making small talk. while others seemed to do it naturally, realize that people aren’t born great communicators; it’s a skill that can be learned just like anything else. With a few tips from the experts, you can go from dreading small talk to enjoying striking up a conversation with just about anyone.

A man and woman chatting over some wine.

A lot of people are uncomfortable making small talk, but it’s an essential skill that can make or break your love life, career, and social experiences. Many people believe that being good at chatting with others is something innate, but those who excel at it work at their craft and pick up small tips along the way to become better communicators.

One of the tricks that all great communicators know is that you will be more likable when you're more interested than interesting. Study after study shows that people love talking about themselves, and if you ask people more questions, they will like you a lot more than if you did all the talking. So, how do we do this without creating a one-sided conversation where your conversation partner learns nothing about you? The folks at the Science of People have shared the statement-plus question technique.


The statement-plus technique

“One of the smoothest ways to keep conversation flowing is to share a brief personal statement followed by a question,” the Science of People writes. “This technique accomplishes two things: it gives the other person information about you (making you seem more approachable and interesting) while also redirecting focus to them.”

small talk, conversation, office party, people talking, wine Coworkers having a nice conversation.via Canva/Photos

Here are some examples:

Instead of asking “What do you do for work?” say:

“I’m a writer for Upworthy, and I enjoy seeing my work read by millions of people. What excites you about your job?”

Instead of asking, “Where do you live?” try:

“I live in Long Beach, California, and it’s really nice living by the ocean. What do you love the most about where you live?”

Instead of asking, “How do you know the person who threw the party?” say:

“I met Sarah at a church meeting seven years ago. Do you remember the first time you met her?”

These questions enable you to discuss yourself while maintaining the focus on the other person. They are also open-ended, so you don’t just get a one-word answer. You learn their job and what excites them about it. You know where they live, and they get to brag about what they like about the city. The technique also broadens the conversation because, according to the psychological phenomenon known as reciprocal self-disclosure, people are more likely to disclose things about themselves after you share something about yourself.

- YouTube youtu.be

What is reciprocal self-disclosure?

“The most likely result of your self-disclosure is that other people will do the same. In the field of communication, we refer to this as 'reciprocity.' When you share information about yourself, the most likely result is that people will start to disclose a similar type of information from their own lives," communication coach Alexander Lyon says. "In our presentations, we talk about this as a magic wand. Disclosure is the closest thing we have to a magic wand in terms of a concept in communication. When you disclose, other people almost automatically reciprocate."

Ultimately, people love to talk about themselves, and if you give them the opportunity, they will like you more for it. However, that doesn’t mean you can’t reveal some aspects of yourself at the same time while keeping the focus on them. The statement-plus question technique allows you to reveal some things about yourself while making the other person feel seen and comfortable telling you more about themselves. It’s sure to elevate your small talk to something more substantial in a relaxed way that doesn’t feel like an interview.

Did Julius Caesar have his armpits plucked? Probably.

Modern life may have us shaving, waxing, microblading, laser treating, Botoxing, and altering our natural appearance in all manner of ways in the name of beauty, but the idea of grooming to specific societal standards is nothing new. In cultures all around the world and throughout history, humans have found countless creative ways to make ourselves (ostensibly) look better.

Of course, what looks better is subjective and always has been. Take, for example, the ancient Romans. If you wanted to be seen as a studly man 2,000 years ago in the Roman Empire, you'd remove as much of your body hair as possible. That meant tweezing—or being tweezed by someone else, most likely an enslaved person.


armpit hair, grooming, hair removal, hairless, beauty standard Armpit hair wasn't cook in ancient Rome. Giphy

The Romans, in general, weren't big on body hair for men or women.

"You had to have the look,” Cameron Moffett, English Heritage’s curator at the Wroxeter Roman City museum in Shropshire, U.K., told The Times. “And the look was hairlessness, particularly the underarms.” A collection of 50 tweezers on display at the museum, recovered from the archeological site that was once the Roman city of Viriconium, speaks to Roman tweezing habits, but that's not the only evidence we have.

Stoic philosopher Seneca once wrote in a letter lamenting how the noise from the Roman baths was disrupting his work: "Besides those who just have loud voices, imagine the skinny armpit-hair plucker whose cries are shrill to draw people's attention and never stop except when he's doing his job and making someone else shriek for him."

When we picture the ancient Romans, "skinny armpit-hair plucker" may not be the image that comes to mind, yet here we are.


teeth brushing, toothbrush, oral hygiene, toothpaste, dental hygiene They brushed with what now? Giphy

While we fret over fluoride, the Romans brushed their teeth with pee and mouse brains.

Toothpastes of the past were made with all kinds of things—herbs, spices, salts, crushed bone, and more. For the ancient Romans, that "more" included mouse brains and human urine, according to Decisions in Dentistry. Mouse brains were believed to enhance the effectiveness of toothpaste, and urine, imported in large quantities from Portugal, was utilized for its ammonia content and whitening properties. A standard Roman toothpaste would be a mixture of herbs, mouse brains, urine, and a binder such as honey. Oddly enough, it appeared to be somewhat effective, with archeological findings showing a relatively low number of cavities and tooth decay.

@charissekenion

Sailorr has everyone talking about her sound - and her teeth. Here’s my super short history lesson on the practice of ohaguro #ohaguro #geisha #japanese #japantok #aapi #history #japan #historytok #sailorr #japanesebeauty

Meanwhile, in ancient Japan, women tried to blacken their teeth

Teeth whitening is all the rage in modern times, but in the distant past in parts of Asia, making your teeth black was considered beautiful. The practice known as ohaguro was a traditional Japanese practice that, ironically, was intended to prevent tooth decay.

According to a letter in the British Dental Journal, women in ancient Japan would paint a solution of ferric acetate (from iron filings), vinegar, and tannin from tea or vegetables. It was called kanemizuonto and made the teeth appear black. The practice has made a comeback among some rural areas of Southeast Asia, and the Vietnamese-American singer Sailorr has made waves with her blackened teeth as well.

ear picker, history, artifact, grooming, beauty An ornate ear picker.The Swedish History Museum, Stockholm/Wikimedia Commons

Ear pickers were much prettier than Q-tips. In fact, they were an accessory.

The old saying, "Don't put anything in your ear except your elbow," may not be as old as it seems, as people have been inserting objects into their ears to remove wax for a long time.

In the 16th and 17th centuries, it was common to see beautiful, ornate "ear pickers"—small metal tools with a small scoop at the end for cleaning ears as well as teeth and fingernails. According to Jamestown Rediscovery, it was fashionable to wear gold and silver toiletry tools, such as ear pickers or toothpicks, as accessories. It's hard to imagine wearing Q-tips and toothpicks around. Also, ew. But if you look up "ear pickers," you'll find ornate examples from various parts of the world.

At the very least, it's nice to know that modern humans are not the first ones to go to great—and sometimes interesting—lengths to meet an arbitrary social standard of beauty. (And three cheers for modern toothpaste. Seriously.)