[Explanations: lol your fat. pathetic anger bread. hey your gay.]
TFIF, Shakers!
Belly up to the bar,
and name your poison!
The Virtual Pub Is Open
[Explanations: lol your fat. pathetic anger bread. hey your gay.]
TFIF, Shakers!
Belly up to the bar,
and name your poison!
Quote of the Day
[Trigger warning for violence.]
"I was treated like a criminal, like a complaining woman."—Katie Tagle, whose son Wyatt was killed by his father, Stephen Garcia, after San Bernardino County Superior Judge Robert Lemkau ignored "three motions for an order of protection against Garcia" filed by Tagle and "chose to believe her former boyfriend's denials rather than the evidence she supplied of Garcia's threats―including e-mails, text messages and voice messages. Although no extenuating circumstances were raised in court transcripts of the case, the judge simply accused Tagle of lying, and ordered that she turn Wyatt over to his father—with fatal results."
I encourage you to read the whole article, which also addresses how family courts across the country have "been affected by the rise of the Fathers Rights movement" and notes the conundrum "that efforts to give fathers more rights in custody cases have increased the odds against victimized mothers and children."
[Via Sadie.]
Daily Dose o' Cute
"What? I totally fit in here!"
So, after a week with Dudley now, I cannot begin to convey how much I love this guy. If I'd had the chance to custom-order a dog out of a catalog of awesome dogitude, I don't know that I could have come up with a specimen as tremendous as he is.
Dudz is slowly coming out of his shell, getting more playful with us, and he's starting to trust me more very quickly. (We're already on Day 3 of no submissive piddling—touch wood!) He's still showing no interest, besides a general curiosity, in the cats, with whom he's happy to share food and water and treats; he's great with other dogs and with kids; we're currently having a massive thunderstorm, and he hasn't so much as flinched during the crashing and booming thunder.
So, basically, he's a GOOD BOY! But more than that, he's just such a gentle, empathic, sweet soul. I know every dog owner in the world says this (so welcome me to the ginormous club), but there's something really special about this pup.
Today's Edition of "Conniving and Sinister"
See Deeky's archive of all previous Conniving & Sinister strips here.
[In which Liss reimagines the long-running comic "Frank & Ernest," about two old straight white guys "telling it like it is," as a fat feminist white woman and a biracial queerbait telling it like it actually is from their perspectives. Hilarity ensues.]
Save My School, Privileged Messiah Billionaire!
by Shaker TC
I loved Melissa's "Skinny Jesus Chef" series (see here and here on Jaime Oliver's inane TV show and was reminded of them when I heard a This American Life segment on California gubernatorial candidate Steve Poizner and his semester teaching high school at an "inner city" school. (A pdf of the transcript is here.) It reeks of the same messianic dynamic where a clueless, privileged man who doesn't know anything about a community makes douchebag assumptions and gets everything completely wrong.
Poizner wrote a book about how SCAAARY the neighborhood and high school is:
Steve Poizner: [reading] I passed nearby my neighborhood French bakery and the local Ferrari dealership.Turns out that Privileged Messiah Billionaire has a skewed worldview that he can't admit is skewed.
Ira Glass: This is Steve Poizner, reading from the book he wrote about this.
Steve Poizner: [reading] Several miles and a couple of highways later I took the Capital Expressway exit and drove into what felt like another planet. Signs advertising janitorial supply stores and taquerÃas. Exhaust hung over 10 lanes of inner city traffic; yellowing, weedy gardens fronted many of the homes, as did driveways marred by large oil spots or broken down cars.
Ira Glass: Driving around the neighborhood, it is hard to disagree with the teachers who say it's a perfectly nice middle class and working class area. Occasionally you'll see a house in bad shape, but overwhelmingly it's neatly tended yards, garages, decent cars and SUVs in the driveways. It's suburban. I was surprised to learn that when Poizner taught here in 2003 there was a golf course just a few blocks from the school - there's still a lake and the Raging Waters water park. He doesn't mention those in the book. We called a half dozen local real estate agents who confirmed what teachers told us - that the neighborhood looks the same today as it did back in 2003. If anything, they said, with the recession it's gotten a little worse – the average house price in 2003 near the school was $457,000. Today it's $317,000.It's not just the neighborhood; it's the students as well. Poizner characterizes the students he teaches for a semester as sullen and unresponsive but This American Life astutely points out that the lack of responsiveness could be the result of Poizner being a bad speaker.
But here was the strange thing: the conclusion Poizner comes to - again and again during these scenes - isn't that he's doing anything wrong or has anything to learn as a teacher. Instead, he blames the kids. They're tough, they're unmotivated, they lack ambition, they're wired differently. The students, meanwhile, in every scene in the book (I read the whole book), seem utterly lovely. Polite, they don't interrupt, they don't talk back, they just seem a little bored. His very worst student is a graduating senior who's hoping to go into the Marines.Like any good Privileged Messiah Billionaire, Poizner is completely adamantly that HIS perception and HIS reality is clearly everyone's reality, facts be damned.
Ira Glass: Are you overplaying the desperate poverty of this neighborhood?It's really fascinating how similar these narratives are in terms of how wrong both Jamie Oliver and Steve Poizner got it working with their respective communities. Neither can see beyond the blinders of their privilege to actually get a complete picture of the communities they are trying to "save."
Steve Poizner: No, I don't think so. I mean, it's definitely not like some inner city areas. And I don't know, what you described doesn't strike me as the neighborhood I was at. I mean, at least in 2002 and 2003, the neighborhood is rough-and-tumble. In that there's definitely a lot of crime, and no question lower income. And there's a lot of, you know, signs that people were struggling economically. That's why the crime statistics for surrounding the school – you know you can get those from the San Jose Police Department, like I did – and we definitely documented that not only did it appear to be a rough up and coming area, but the police will tell you that too.
Ira Glass: So we went to the police, and they informed us that no, the neighborhood around Mt. Pleasant high school is NOT especially dangerous or crime ridden. It's average for San Jose. And while San Jose might have a reputation in the richer suburbs around it for being sketchy, and definitely was more dangerous in the ‘70s and ‘80s, a police spokesman told us that view is out of date, an urban myth. According to FBI statistics, San Jose is one of the safest cities in the country. There were 371 violent crimes per 100,000 people in San Jose in 2003, the year Poizner was there. You'd be more likely to be a victim of violent crime in Austin, Texas, or Seattle or Phoenix or Columbus, Ohio or San Francisco. When it came to property crime that year, you were more than twice as likely to have something stolen from you in Honolulu, Denver, Seattle, San Francisco or nearly any big city you can name.
The scary thing is that Jaime Oliver and Steve Poizner are on TV shows and writing books on how to "fix" things – obesity and education. Based on how wrong both of them get in terms of assessing their environments, they shouldn't be given the authority to fix a cuckoo clock.
And yet they're being touted as experts.
Friday Blogaround
This blogaround brought to you by Shaxco, makers of Deeky-n-Liss Brand Tweezers, for all your explosive eyebrow needs.
Recommended Reading:
Susie: The Senate Hearts Big Banking! They Voted To Protect Behemoth Banks, 61-33. We Won't Forget.
Echidne: WaPo Puts Its Left Shoe Forwards!
Shark-fu: A Terminator Situation
Andy: Lesbian Cannot Be Dean, Says Marquette University
Resistance: The Non-Apology Apology
Seraph: Proud to Be a New Yorker
Leave your links in comments...
More
[It has been about a year since this was originally posted, and there's been a lot of concern trolling in threads lately, so I suspect it may be time to post it again, and recommit ourselves to expecting more.]
This, you may have noticed, is a blog about teaspoons.
It is a blog about increments of measurement so infinitesimally tiny they haven't been given names, about glitches in the Matrix so swift and subtle that they are more easily missed than noticed, about tangible particles of a thing called progress not visible to the naked eye.
It is a blog about hope—not the kind that's packaged and sold in anti-aging creams, soda pop cans, or even political campaigns—but the real thing: A hopefulness that radiates like whoa from the pores of indefatigably optimistic dreamers, who close their eyes and tilt their faces up toward the sun and imagine a future where equality and freedom are not aspirational concepts, but defining features of every human life.
It is a blog about connection, and the realization that we are all in this thing together, and the resolve to be all in, because we make a difference in this world, for good or ill, because we know there is no neutral; there is no moral ambiguity in staying silent; there is only standing up and saying no to the indignities one human visits upon another, or saying yes.
It is a blog of wildly unreasonable expectations, because unreasonable expectations are the seeds of progress.
One of the greatest American advocates for progress, a gentleman you may have heard of named Dr. King, is not remembered for giving a speech about his resignation to the status quo. He is remembered because he admonished us not to wallow in the valley of despair and exhorted us to envision big things and told us to never be satisfied with less. He said to the world, "I have a dream," and that dream was what many people might have called in its time an unreasonable expectation.
Eradicating any kind of bigotry is, by definition, an unreasonable expectation—because institutional bigotry is deeply entrenched. Prejudice is ancient. Only a fool would imagine it can be overcome.
Except, of course, that it can be. Bit by bit. Particle by particle. Teaspoon by teaspoon. Person by person. Prejudice is ancient, but it dies with its every carrier and must be taught again. And it can be unlearned. Bit by bit. Particle by particle. Teaspoon by teaspoon. Person by person.
Patience, it takes, and determined sanguinity, to create people filled with expansive love and intractable respect for one another in a culture that casts us as enemies.
And it takes unreasonable expectations, the seeds of progress.
Thus, every time someone asks me, greets my bellicose display of unreasonable expectations with, the exceedingly un-progressive question, "What do you expect?" I will answer the same as I always do: I expect more.
Of course the Republican Party is racist. What do you expect?
I expect more.
Of course lots of male bloggers are misogynists. What do you expect?
I expect more.
Of course some television show is homophobic. What do you expect?
I expect more.
Of course some feminists are transphobic. What do you expect?
I expect more.
Of course there are ablest jokes in sitcoms. What do you expect?
I expect more.
Of course there are fat-hating jokes in advertisements. What do you expect?
I expect more.
You can't expect people to mess with iconic cultural images just to give a nod to diversity. It will upset people.
The fuck I can't. I expect more.
I'm not ironically detached, I'm not apathetic, I'm not resigned, and I'm not contemptuous of bleeding hearts. I am a greedy bitch with voracious expectations, and I dream long and lustfully of a better world that is both my muse and objective. I want it like the cracked earth of the desert wants rain, and I will neither apologize for nor amend my desire because of its remove from the here and now; its distance encourages my reach.
Don't bother asking me what I expect.
You already know the answer.
PSA FAIL
(Trigger warning for dehumanization)
The Illinois Department of Public Health has begun running new PSA ads in the Chicago area (and perhaps elsewhere) in a new anti-HIV, or should I say, anti-people-with-HIV campaign. Their clever little tagline is "He's the 1." (I suppose using a number instead of the word makes it more "hip.") The image is below the fold, but for those of you who are unable to see the image, it basically consists of four cutout sections of male faces of differing races and skin tones, connected together to form a monstrous single "face." The text states "He's the 1 that could infect you."*
So, where to begin?
1. The combined facial expressions of each person making up this combined image are certainly threatening. Add to that the "he's the one that could infect you" text, and the IDPH more or less casts men with HIV in the role of predators. As if the majority of men with HIV are out there, intentionally spreading the virus, and you're next.
2. Note the use of "that" instead of "who." Add that to this threatening, monstrous face (the fact that one eye is placed significantly lower than the other is not, I believe, unintentional, invoking historical depictions of Igor, Quasimodo, and other "deformed" characters whose appearance is meant to be menacing), and the dehumanization of people with HIV is complete.
3. As Melissa pointed out when I sent her the link to the ad, this campaign completely ignores HIV reinfection, concentrating solely on first-time infections. Reinfection is incredibly fucking serious, and this ad completely erases the threat for those already infected with HIV.
4. Way to erase women, IDPH! Have we forgotten so quickly that women, and women of color in particular, are the group with the highest number of new infections?
5. ADAP (AIDS drug assistance program) funds are in serious jeopardy in Illinois; recipients are now being re-evaluated every six months rather than every year, and we may have to go to a waiting list. So... cut money for life-saving medications, but I wonder how much of this money must have gone into this campaign; if they paid for the design, and if they paid to buy full-page ads in every gay paper in the city, as well as street poster advertisements.
6. This is exactly the kind of stigmatizing bullshit that keeps people from going to get tested for HIV in the first place.
7. Fearmongering campaigns don't work.
8. By running this ad in all of the gay publications, as well as posters in gay neighborhoods, this was certainly an excellent way to make HIV a "gay disease" again! Bravo.
I'm sure I could come up with eight more things that are wrong with this, but I'm too pissed off right now. Wait, one more... I can't believe they raffled off a fucking iPad in conjunction with this steaming pile of FAIL. I'm hearing that many HIV agencies and LGBTQI organizations in the Chicago area are already voicing their outrage over these ads. Good. If you'd like to contact the IDPH and let them know you don't appreciate this ad campaign, their contact information is here.
* The text at the very bottom of the poster proudly announces "Paid for by the Illinois Department of Public Health." I hope they're ready to own this huge lapse in judgement, compassion and taste.
I Am Not a Bunsen Burner
In March, I wrote about an Emory University study that found "intestinal bacteria may contribute to obesity and metabolic syndrome." Now, another study at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center has similarly found "that people with gut bacteria that causes a high amount of methane gas tend to have higher body mass index."
It's well known that there is great individual variation in bacteria in the gut. Genetics, foods, antibiotics and other factors can cause change in that bacteria. Bacteria help to break down food and produce various types of gas, such as hydrogen, carbon dioxide and methane. Different people will produce different types of gas.This is, quite obviously, terrible news for sanctimonious fat-shaming thin people, as it potentially deals a terrible blow to their precarious conviction of moral superiority which is carefully maintained almost exclusively via a reliance on shouting "CALORIES IN! CALORIES OUT!" at fatties.
Dr. Mark Pimentel and his colleagues at Cedars gave 58 people a breath test to measure methane gas. About 20% of the participants tested positive for methane. Those people also had a body mass index up to 7 points higher than patients who did not show the presence of methane. It's possible that methane from methane-producing gut bacteria can slow down digestion and increase the uptake of calories, the authors said. The study was presented Wednesday at the Digestive Disease Week annual meeting in New Orleans.
Other studies are hinting at this connection too. An interesting story in Thursday's issue of MIT Technology Review, "You are your bacteria," discusses the role of gut bacteria variation among individuals and how that bacteria can be altered and play a role in disease.
It is, however, good news for everyone with a passing interest in a fact-based reality.
Buh-Bye, Facebook
Facebook Glitch Brings New Privacy Worries: "On Wednesday, users discovered a glitch that gave them access to supposedly private information in the accounts of their Facebook friends, like chat conversations. ... Although Facebook quickly moved to close the security hole on Wednesday, the breach heightened a feeling among many users that it was becoming hard to trust the service to protect their personal information."
Ugh. I just...every time I read something like that, I get a horrible feeling in the pit of my stomach because I can't help thinking of all the people who exploit security breaches like that to get access to people they want to hurt. I readily admit the stalking in my personal history colors my perspective, and I'm certainly not suggesting everyone (or anyone) else should share my perspective, but it's impossible for me to trust social networking media that encourages users to treat its databases as a reservoir for extremely intimate information.
I just deactivated my Facebook account (which I never look at, anyway, and which I should have done a long time ago, since its founder's a misogynist asshat). And it felt like a relief.
Hmm
[Trigger warning for domestic violence.]
So there's this asshole named Danny Dyer, a 10¢ celebrity who writes (wrote) an advice column for the British men's magazine Zoo, and he's been sacked from the gig after he advised a heartbroken ex-boyfriend who wrote seeking counsel: "I'd suggest going out on a rampage with the boys, getting on the booze and smashing anything that moves. Then, when some bird falls for you, you can turn the tables and break her heart. Of course, the other option is to cut your ex's face, and then no one will want her."
Somehow, this swell advice made it into print, via what Zoo is claiming was "an extremely regrettable production error," which I believe translates roughly into: "We had no idea that everyone would get so upset about a little disfigurement joke! Sheesh!"
Which, in some twisted way, is understandable, given that Danny Dyer's hot advice has previously included the suggestion to a correspondent who complained about his girlfriend's abundance of pubic hair: "Maybe set light to the muff hair. That stuff goes up quick, like a thatched roof."
Why, one wonders, was advising setting a woman on fire met with yawning indifference, but advising slashing her face resulted in massive blowback, Dyer's immediate dismissal, an apology and a donation to Women's Aid from the magazine, and their promise to dedicate the space where his next column would have run to awareness-raising about domestic violence…?
Don't misunderstand me: I believe the reaction to his slashing advice was spot-on. I'm just wondering why his ignition advice did not elicit the same reaction.
Maybe it was just a matter of this recent affront catching the attention of the right information maven, from whose network spread an infectious indignity. Maybe.
Or maybe not. Because it hasn't escaped my notice that the advocated cruelty which was ignored admonished a man to violently take care of a woman's unruly public hair (enforcing the Beauty Standard), whereas the advocated cruelty that sparked outrage admonished a man to violently ruin a woman's face (subverting the Beauty Standard).
It's certainly interesting, that.
Of course, it's entirely possible, ahem, that's just a coincidence.
UK Election (Not Quite) Final Results
Running off the BBC reportage, with 16 seats left to declare, the totals are:
Conservatives: 299
Labour: 254
Liberal Democrats: 54
Others: 27 (Scots and Welsh nationalists, Sinn Fein and other NI parties, and the Greens' leader)
With a total of 642 seats in play (there are 650 total, but four are taken by the traditionally neutral Speaker and deputies, and another four are held by Sinn Fein, which doesn't take up its seats in the Westminster Parliament, leaving 642), the majority number is 322.
For those who don't know, the Westminster Parliamentary system provides that the party with the most seats is invited to form a government, ideally with more than half the voting seats. No party has done this, meaning a few possible outcomes:
1) The Conservatives could try to hold a minority government, as in fact is currently the case here in Canada. This would mean they'd be the government, but they'd be a government which had to cope with the fact that they'd need to put compromises in their legislation to win support from other parties.
2) Either the Conservatives or Labour could form a partnership with the Liberal Democrats. If the Lib Dems partner with the Conservatives, their coalition would be sufficient to hold a majority, but the Lib Dems would hopefully soften the right-wing agenda of the Tories. This might also include a shift toward a more proportional system of voting, something long favoured by the smaller parties, as the First Past the Post system tends to favour the bigger, established parties. For example, Labour and the Lib Dems had roughly similar proportions of the popular vote, but the distribution of that vote means that Labour have five times the number of seats, compared to the Lib Dems.
At the moment, and possibly for the coming several days, the government will be in some chaos, as the various parties jockey and negotiate to try and come to a conclusion about what kind of government will be formed.
Traditionally and constitutionally, the incumbent party is given the first chance to form a government which will hold the confidence of Parliament, which would mean Labour (under current PM Gordon Brown) would have the first go. If they can't, then other parties will be invited to try.
The Tories, unsurprisingly, have been making a lot of self-serving noise about the "moral right" to try and form a government, but given they only received 37% of the popular vote, it's hard to see this as a mandate of any sort - nearly two-thirds of Britons voted for someone else!
It's still very tight, very tense, and will be for some time.
(Note: I won't be around to monitor this thread much; I'm off to Buffalo this morning, as my partner is visiting for the weekend and I need to pick her up from the Flugplatz.)
UK Election, Widespread Disenfranchisement
Among the many, many stories this morning in the aftermath of the UK's General Election, are a number of stories of disenfranchisement: people not allowed to vote because of poor organization at the polling stations, chaos and protests and poor decision-making all around in what will be a close and contentious election (thus magnifying the effect of disenfranchisement).
One such is here on Livejournal, from jady_lady, a woman who is blind* recounting her difficulties with poorly-trained staff making it so that her ballot was very likely spoiled.
If you have links to other stories of disenfranchisement in the UK General Election of 2010, please give links below, so that progressivists in the UK can lend their teaspoons to the cause.
* Her self-identification.
Question of the Day
Following up on yesterday's QotD: What's the last book you tried reading more than once, and just couldn't finish it?
Normally, if I try a book and can't get into it after a serious attempt, I don't pick it back up again. I think I may have read the first bit of James Joyce's Ulysses on two different occasions, and both times chucked it aside with a heaving sigh of exasperation. Just no.
UK Election Open Thread Part 2
Starting a new thread to watch this fascinatingly close election, with what are now looking to be some truly appallingly poor choices being made by staff at the polls: stations where there weren't enough ballots, stations where people were turned away because the clock had gone 10, protests, and likely legal challenges.
Today's Edition of "Conniving and Sinister"
See Deeky's archive of all previous Conniving & Sinister strips here.
[In which Liss reimagines the long-running comic "Frank & Ernest," about two old straight white guys "telling it like it is," as a fat feminist white woman and a biracial queerbait telling it like it actually is from their perspectives. Hilarity ensues.]
Afternoon WHUT
Here's a superweird article about Fred "God Hates Fags" Phelps, and his history as a successful civil rights attorney back in the day.
All righty then.
Radical Feminist Agenda
You know all those man-hating commercials that MRAs (and other highly privileged characters who blame man-hating on feminism or "the feminization of society" or some variation thereof) are always complaining about...? Like basically every single slice-of-kyriarchal-heaven Superbowl advert, for example...?
Yeah. I'm sure you'll be SHOCKED to hear that they're created almost exclusively by white men.
Pass me the smelling salts, Bertha.
First, Do No Harm
[Trigger warning for female genital cutting.]
PZ reports that the American Academy of Pediatrics has proposed a "compromise" on female genital cutting, suggesting a "ritual nick," a minor incision of the clitoris to satisfy the urge to ritualistically disfigure a female child's genitals in order to control her sexuality.
See, this way, people can honor that awesome tradition without actually removing part or all of the genitalia. Everyone gets a little something: Girls get only a little heinous physical and psychological trauma, and their guardians get to practice their violent misogyny, just in a slightly less violent way. Yay for compromise!
*takes deep breaths; resists the urge to smash everything in sight*
FGC is a human rights violation. It has no medical purpose, and its cultural rationale is steeped in gender inequality. There is no reason to tolerate even this proposed alternative version of the procedure in a culture with an ostensible belief in gender equality.
Insert the 10,000 posts I've written about consent and autonomy here.
And, despite the AAP's claim that endorsing nicking will be a deterrent, Equality Now rightly notes that advocating a more minor version of the procedure will almost certainly mean that "mothers who have until now resisted community pressure and not subjected their daughters to FGM in the U.S., in part because of the anti-FGM law, could be forced under the AAP guidelines to ask pediatricians to 'nick' their daughters' clitorises if it is legally permitted."
They are actually robbing mothers, adult women who are under enormous pressure to visit upon their American daughters a trauma they could not avoid, of the best argument they've got in their arsenal if they want to shield and protect their daughters.
Go here to take action.
[H/T to Shaker Ann. Please Note: PZ frames the use of the term "female genital cutting," instead of the more common "female genital mutilation," as a bit of pandering to the ritual's practitioners. This is not accurate. The change in language respects the experiences and self-images of women who have survived the procedure and do not view themselves as "mutilated." It is not accommodating the perpetrators, but respecting their victims. "Cutting" is an accurate description, and it is the preferred nomenclature for this thread.]
My Prayer for Today
Since the President has called on me to pray today, even though a federal judge has declared the National Day of Prayer unconstitutional, I feel it is my civic duty to offer the following spiritual appeal in accordance with my own faith and conscience:
Dear DUC:
Please restore my national government to a state of integrity wherein it respects its own founding documents.
Also, please assure that monkeys fly out of my ass.
Have a shpadoinkle day!
Portly
Quote of the Day
"Karl has always said: People call us a vast right-wing conspiracy, but we're really a half-assed right-wing conspiracy. Now, he wants to get more serious."—An anonymous organizer of "a massive fundraising, organizing and advertising machine" built by Republican architects (such as Karl Rove) to connect powerful conservative operatives and donors with the explicit goal of recapturing Congress and the White House.
Shiver.
Things are about to get even uglier.
Two-Minute Nostalgia Sublime
Martin Denny: "Quiet Village"
Yma Sumac: "Ataypura"
Esquivel: "Jalousie/Sentimental Journey"
Speak Softly and Carry a Big Teaspoon
[Trigger warning for attempted violence.]
These ladies are All In:
Five female students, including one who had recently completed a self-defense class, jumped to the aid of a fellow student, grabbing her knife-wielding attacker and holding him until police officers arrived at Husson University [in Bangor, Maine], officials said yesterday.The assailant has been charged with attempted murder and violating a protection order, among other charges.
The student with newly acquired skills lunged for the hand holding a knife, while fellow students grabbed the man's other limbs and wrestled him to the ground, police said.
Officers responding to the report of a domestic fight at 7:40 a.m. arrived to find 45-year-old Horst Wolk of Bangor subdued on the pavement. A campus officer cuffed him, and city police hauled him away.
John Michaud, professor of legal studies, heard the commotion and saw a pile of people on the pavement, while more women stood by, ready to jump in.
"I was very impressed by the students," Michaud said. "How many times do you hear about people walking by incidents like this? These young ladies weren't going to walk past this incident." He said the young women disarmed the suspect and "had the situation well in hand."
How many times do you hear about people walking by incidents like this? Lots. Lots and lots and lots and lots.
And I also hear about
So the fact that these women jumped in, and the fact that they weren't assaulted for their efforts at the scene and aren't being punished after the fact, but being recognized as the heroes that they are, makes me very happy indeed.
[H/T to Shaker theZissilent. Related Reading: All In, Heroes, "No matter what the consequences were, we were going to do what was right.", Not My Problem, Five Good Samaritans Rescue Woman from Assault, Five Reasons Why "Teach Women Self-Defense" Isn't a Comprehensive Solution to Rape, "You Think That Was Assault?", Bullied to Death by Misogynists, LIRR Train Crew "All In" Against Rape, Richmond Rape Case: 911 Caller Was Another Teenage Girl, Victim Blaming-a-Go-Go, Today in Rape Culture.]
The Subtleties of Privilege
I was reading through my LJ list this morning, and came across a post by a friend of mine, a man whose name reflects his South Asian heritage, and not one which is often encountered here in Canada.
I don't normally think about having to deal with telling strangers my name as being a big hassle, but I was just thinking about the fact that I'm apt to give out another name of someone in the party to avoid it or just make up a name. Still, it was surprising to me how much of a difference it made calling up an Indian restaurant to make reservations today and realizing that I could just give them my name and then having them just accept it without asking me to repeat myself or spell it or anything. It was downright soothing, like letting out a tensely-held breath.And it occurred to me that this, here, is a teeny, tiny little piece of the unearned privilege many, many white people - me definitely included - receive on a daily basis.
As you might all guess (see? that's it at work again!), my name (Caitie, or Cait) is short for the Gaelic version of Kathleen: Caitlin. It's a good name for me, though few people ever call me the full version, and none of us pronounce it properly if it were being used among Gaelic-speakers (where it'd be closer to "Kathleen" in pronunciation). But it suits me. It's a name people tend to assume belongs to a white woman, which is good, cause that's who I am.
What's the privilege? Well, having a name that comes from a background which is shared with that of Whiteness on this continent, I never have to spell it for people. Oh, I might have to let them know that I spell it with a "C" and two "I", rather than with a "K" and/or some "Y" in place of the I. But no one looks at me oddly, or makes me repeat it a few times, or requires me to spell it all out.
How is it a privilege? Well, I refer you back to my friend's comment, above, which started me off. It's never occurred to me how many times that difference plays to my advantage, until I read his last line:
It was downright soothing, like letting out a tensely-held breath.I've never had to feel that way, that tensely-held breath, about my name.
Now, yes, I'm aware, many people with white skin have names which require spelling out to strangers, and many with brown skin bear names that don't require it. But that doesn't take away that those white folk could, if they wanted, take a name which wouldn't seem the least bit odd for their ethnicity/background, and take advantage of that tiny privilege.
I imagine the difficulties members of the Black communities face, when they bear names which don't come from the European heritage we associate with whiteness: of applying for a white-collar job with a name that speaks proudly of its owner's Black culture.*
I consider the difficulties East or South Asian, or African, or Latin@ people face, with their names from a thousand places, by far the majority of them outside the little privileged world of "white-appropriate" names.
I think about politicians who introduce bills requiring people to take "American" names.
I ponder the pressure on people with names outside that core group to take names from within the core group.
Privilege. You may not want it, but you're almost certainly soaking in it, over someone, somewhere. Someone's holding their breath tensely, over something you breeze through like a dancing zephyr.
* This section, and the three after it, have been edited, and I wanted to acknowledge that here. The way I wrote it originally spoke from an assumption that my readership shares the privilege I have, which is an othering practice I'm trying to shake: the four paras all started "Think of the...", which of course makes a clear suggestion that my readers can't come up with those possibilities for themselves, quite possibly because they're their lived experience.
As is my wont, I will edit to remove the offensive assumption, but I don't want to hide my mistake, nor the privilege from which I was speaking; if I'm going to hold myself up as someone whose opinion on this deserves being heard, I think it's important to recognize that I'm a long way from perfect on these issues myself. My thanks to Liss for pointing out the error, and my apologies for it.
Impossibly Beautiful
The June 2010 issue of Marie Claire features on its cover the lovely Sarah Jessica Parker:
What's most notable about the changes to this image of SJP is the Photoshopping of her hands, which are rather famously wrinkly.
Articles, usually quite nasty ones, are written about the appearance of her hands, which, perhaps because I am the proud bearer of excessively lined hands myself, I happen to find quite beautiful and remarkable.
If I had to wager a guess, I would imagine that SJP is rather fond of her own hands, as well. Anyone who's watched Sex & the City (which she executive produces) has seen endless close-ups of her hands at her face, brushing aside her hair, or holding a drink. She clutches her hands to her chest excitedly and nervously, a habit that is hers, not just her character's, on display in interviews and in the recent episode of Who Do You Think You Are? in which she traced her ancestry back through American history.
I daresay it was not SJP who wanted her hands Photoshopped to the point of total unrecognizability. I suspect she did not request her hands to be made to look like babydoll hands stuck on the ends of the arms of a confident 45-year-old woman.
My estimation is that Sarah Jessica Parker—smart, talented, personally and professionally successful, legendarily stylish, and uniquely beautiful—still wasn't beautiful enough to grace the cover of Marie Claire with her own body intact.
The editors of Marie Claire may be telling me I should be ashamed of my hands, but I will not be.
------------------------
By way of reminder: Comments that try to suss out what changes, exactly, were made, and even comments noting that, for example, the removal of laugh lines because they are ZOMG wrinkles actually robs a face of its character or humanity, are welcome. Discussions of how "he looks handsomer/hotter/better in the candid picture" and associated commentary (which would certainly make me feel like shit if I were the person being discussed) are not. So please comment in keeping with the series' intent, implicit in which is the question: If no one can ever be beautiful enough, then to what end is the pursuit of an elusive perfection?
[Impossibly Beautiful: Parts One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven, Eight, Nine, Ten, Eleven, Twelve, Thirteen, Fourteen, Fifteen, Sixteen, Seventeen, Eighteen, Nineteen, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39.]
NQDTR Discussion Thread - R100506
Hiya, Shakers, time for another Discussion Thread for the Not Quite Daily Teaspoon Report!
This is the thread in which you may offer congratulations or admiration for a teaspoon or teaspooner. If you're posting with just congrats or admiration, though, do take a moment and check the thread to see whether other people have said so a number of times already. Remember that no one is required to read here just because they posted over there, so there's no guarantee you'll get a response to a given comment.
The Not Quite Daily Teaspoon Report - R100506
Time for another Teaspoon Report, brought to you by TOTTENHAM HOTSPUR FOOTBALL CLUB AND THEIR SEASON OF RENOWN!*
Leave comments here that describe an act of teaspooning you encountered or committed. They don't have to be big, world-shaking acts; by definition, a teaspoon is a small thing, but enough of them together can empty the ocean.
If you would like to discuss the teaspoons here reported, or even offer congratulations or your admiration to a fellow Shaker, we ask that you do so over here in the Discussion Thread for today's NQDTR.
Shaker bgk has been kind enough to get a Twitter-pated version out there for you young twittersnappers (and by the way, get off my lawn, you meddling kids! *shakes cane*). You can find the details about the Tweetspoons project right here. That runs all the time, as far as I'm aware (*grumblenewtechnologygrumble*), and we encourage you to let other people know that there's at least one tweetstream talking about just going out and doing good things for the human species.
Teaspoons up, let's hear 'em, Shakers!
ô,ôP
* Sorry, big night last night, the football (soccer) team I support won a really crucial game, and will be practicing their McGuffin-in-the-score-hole routine across Europe next year, so Caitie's all excited. :)
UK Election Open Thread
by Shaker Cim
Voters have been going to the polls today for the United Kingdom general election. The polls close at 10pm local time, and it looks certain that whatever the result is, the political direction of the UK will be significantly altered. Which way it gets altered, though, is still up in the air. Here's a quick(ish) introduction to the election for people outside the UK.
The parties
Labour are the current majority party, and are approximately centre-left. They have been in power for 13 years, and the accumulated unpopularity of their decisions - and they've made some really bad decisions in that time - means that they are doing very badly in the polls and are likely to lose at least 100 seats and probably significantly more in this election. Most of their support comes from the inner cities and northern industrial towns.
Their main challengers are the Conservative party (aka the Tories), a right-wing party that has been either the majority party or the major opposition party for the last few hundred years. They look to be the best placed to capitalise on Labour's unpopularity, but are struggling somewhat in the polls themselves, probably because a lot of people remember the last time they were in power, which was great for well-off white heteronormative families, and very bad for everyone else. Their support mainly comes from rural constituencies and wealthy suburban areas in the south of England.
The next biggest party is the Liberal Democrats (often abbreviated Lib Dems). They are also centre-left, but in a very different way to Labour, reflecting their liberal roots rather than Labour's socialist roots. Their support is scattered across the country, though they do have a few regional strongholds in the South West and in Scotland, and also do well in some university towns where the mix of vaguely left middle class students and locals benefits them. They look very likely to get significantly bigger this election, though still a definite third.
In Scotland and Wales, the Scottish National Party (SNP) and Plaid Cymru (PC) respectively are local parties for those countries. They have a lot of power within the regional government but not much outside it. There are several regional parties in Northern Ireland, most of which are loosely allied with one of the big three British parties (which do not stand candidates in Northern Ireland). The influence of these parties in the UK government is generally very limited.
There are several other smaller parties and hundreds of independent candidates, but except in a few rare cases mentioned below, they don't stand a chance in most constituencies.
The major issues
The UK is slowly coming out of a recession brought on by the global financial crisis. Labour have taken a lot of blame for getting us into that mess, but also get some credit for getting us out again. The Conservatives want to make huge cuts to public services to balance the government books, whereas Labour and the Lib Dems are both looking more towards tax rises. (Though whoever is in charge, public services will be cut, and taxes will rise).
A lot of MPs were caught cheating on their expenses, and a lot more putting in claims that were technically within the rules but not really within the spirit of them. Many MPs are standing down at this election as a result of this, and a few are being investigated for fraud. As a result there's a general anti-politics sentiment in the country that's a lot stronger than normal, and all parties are proposing ways to restore trust and improve democracy.
None of the main parties have a great record on helping people who fall outside the social default of white heterosexual non-disabled upper-middle-class cis men (or indeed, on selecting candidates who aren't - the Centre for Women and Democracy have an analyis of the numbers of women standing this time). Labour and the Lib Dems generally at least pretend to care but get things very wrong at times and both have a problem with thinking about people generally, rather than in compartmentalised "women's rights" or "disability" issues. The Conservatives are even worse. Here's a quick summary of the votes on LGB rights by the big three parties, here's one on the last big vote on abortion rights (aye is the anti-choice side) - I can't find convenient summaries for voting related to other forms of oppression, but here's some research by the Fawcett Society on "What about Women", and Operation Black Vote have lots of material on the parties and (anti-)racism, for hints about what might happen next.
Immigration has come up as a big issue during the election campaign. All three major parties (and indeed most of the minor parties) promise to take extra steps against undocumented immigrants, and increase the level of control over documented immigrants. The Lib Dems policies are marginally less bad, in that they promise to stop detaining asylum seekers in abusive situations (search for "Yarl's Wood abuse", but *trigger warning* for most of the links you'll find) and propose a one-off amnesty for undocumented immigrants - policies for which they've been heavily criticised by Labour, the Conservatives and the media. Really, though, if you want a party that might actually consider immigrants (documented or not) to be as equally human as citizens, and makes policy accordingly, you're looking for one of the minor left parties. Everyone else is too busy trying to "look tough" to avoid losing votes to the BNP to actually stand up and say "wait, immigrants aren't actually destroying the country".
The BBC have a pretty good list of the parties major policies, and there are a few quizzes to suggest the best parties for you given your opinion on various policies, which might help you get a better impression of where they stand. Here's one.
The election system
The UK is divided by an impartial Boundaries Commission into 650 constituencies or seats, each of which has around 70,000 voters. The results of the latest redrawing are being used for the first time in this election, which means that for a majority of constituencies, "notional results" are being used, where the "last time" vote is estimated from local Council elections.
In each constituency, each of the three main parties puts up a candidate (except for Northern Ireland, which has different parties, and the constitutional oddity of the Speaker's seat). In most constituencies, some of the other parties will also put up a candidate.
Voters then vote for one candidate, and the one with the most votes wins. This is a terrible system for everyone but Labour and the Conservatives, who mostly benefit from it and aren't doing anything to change it. The Lib Dems, naturally, would really prefer it if it was fixed, and polling suggests that most voters would like that too.
Usually after all the votes are counted, one of the big two parties will have a majority of the MPs, become the government, and spend the next few years doing things varying degrees of wrong.
Election night
At 10pm, all the polling stations close (an advantage of having a country small enough to fit in a single time zone) and the votes are taken to be counted. From this point on, exit polls can be released, and TV channels will compete to see who can put together the silliest animation about the election.
The first constituency (usually an urban safe seat where the votes can be collected quickly and where being off by ten or twenty on the final count won't matter) will usually announce the results an hour or so later, with results coming in through the night and into the next morning. Generally the urban constituencies will declare first, with the geographically large rural constituencies declaring later. (A quick description of the counting process).
Constituencies that will be interesting to watch for more than their contribution to the final result (or if you happen to live there) are:
Once all the results are in, things get really tricky. Assuming the current polls are accurate, there are basically two likely results. As you can guess from the headings, I'm not optimistic about this election.
Simple but bad
The Conservatives might get a majority of the MPs. It's looking unlikely on the current polling, unless they do very well in the crucial constituencies, but if it happens then they get to be the government and we can look forwards to at least four or five years of right-wing policies. David Cameron is relatively moderate for a Conservative personally, though that's not saying a lot, but his party and core supporters are quite a bit less so, and if they win convincingly there'll be a lot of pressure from them to push through an agenda that generally benefits the rich at everyone else's expense.
More complicated, and still probably bad
Looking more likely at the moment is that the Conservatives will be the largest party, but without enough MPs for a majority (in theory they need half - 325 - in practice they could get away, barely, with around 320, because the Speaker doesn't vote, and the Sinn Fein MPs refuse to take an oath of allegiance to the Queen, and so don't take up their seats. This could go several ways:
Firstly, the Conservatives could try to rule as a minority government, as in Canada, and hope the other parties aren't willing to vote them down, especially if they're only a few MPs away from a majority. Secondly, they could go into a coalition government with some of the other parties. Thirdly, if Labour don't lose too many seats, Labour and the Lib Dems could form a coalition to outvote the Conservatives. Finally, the parties might be entirely unable to agree on anything, and we might have a new election very soon (please, no...).
There are a lot of complicated political calculations here, and none of the three main parties is willing to say what it would do in public, so whatever happens, this will get messy - but probably not as bad as a Conservative majority, and a Labour-Lib Dem coalition could in principle be very progressive (or not, depending on which bits of each party's policies get agreed on).
How To Put A Smile On Your Face
Read this.
Go ahead, I'll wait.
See? You're smiling, aren't you? Toldja.
(Shaker SamanthaExplosion provides a link to a Facebook page with all kinds of related material)
Tip of the CaitieCap to Emily W.
Net Neutrality Update
In a move that will stoke a battle over the future of the Internet, the federal government plans to propose regulating broadband lines under decades-old rules designed for traditional phone networks.Yay! ...But wait, what's this?
The decision, by Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski, is likely to trigger a vigorous lobbying battle, arraying big phone and cable companies and their allies on Capitol Hill against Silicon Valley giants and consumer advocates.
Breaking a deadlock within his agency, Mr. Genachowski is expected Thursday to outline his plan for regulating broadband lines. He wants to adopt "net neutrality" rules that require Internet providers like Comcast Corp. and AT&T Inc. to treat all traffic equally, and not to slow or block access to websites.
The decision has been eagerly awaited since a federal appeals court ruling last month cast doubt on the FCC's authority over broadband lines, throwing into question Mr. Genachowski's proposal to set new rules for how Internet traffic is managed. The court ruled the FCC had overstepped when it cited Comcast in 2008 for slowing some customers' Internet traffic.Hold the
In a nod to such concerns, the FCC said in a statement that Mr. Genachowski wouldn't apply the full brunt of existing phone regulations to Internet lines and that he would set "meaningful boundaries to guard against regulatory overreach."
"On the surface it looks like a win for Internet companies," said Rebecca Arbogast, an analyst with Stifel Nicolaus. "A lot will depend on the details of how this gets implemented."Well. That clears it up. Obviously the FCC will pander to corporations as much as it feels it can get away with and still assert to be championing "net neutrality." Awesome.
..."The question is how heavy a hand will the regulatory touch be," [Mike McCurry, former press secretary for President Bill Clinton and co-chair of the Arts + Labs Coalition, an industry group representing technology companies, telecom companies and content providers] said. "We don't know yet, so the devil is in the details."
And the firesale of America to soulless, for-profit corporations continues unabated.
Bad news-ish, then. Sigh.
Bread and Teaspoons Thirty
Good morning (unless it isn't where you are, in which case I wish you Good $TIME_PERIOD), and welcome to this week's installment of Shakesville's networking post, Bread and Teaspoons*.
This is a (theoretically**) weekly post providing a spot for Shakers to network a little with one another, see if we can help each other out some.
NB: I have added a bit to the guidelines for what’s on-topic here, to allow the posting of useful job resources for progressives.
Also remember, if you’re running or part of a small business, you’re encouraged to drop links here for that. I’m happy to see Shakers makin’ their own way in whatever manner that is.
Here's how it works: There should be four sorts of comments here.
1) You comment here with any details of work you're seeking: where, what, that sort of thing. You give an e-mail address at which you can be reached - feel free to set up a special e-mail for it, if you don't want to post your regular one for the world to spam - and if another Shaker has a lead, they can contact you directly to pass it along.
A work-seeking comment should include:
Please do NOT include information such as your full name or telephone number, as this is and will remain a public post, and once posted, there's no taking it back (because it'll be spidered by a search engine, not because we don't want you to).
It is explicitly alright to comment to this each week with similar info.
For example, if I were to comment - rather than taking advantage of my position by posting it up here in the OP! - I'd leave one saying:
I'm a professional translator of French, German and Russian, with 17 years of experience. I'm looking for basically any translation job, academic, commercial, personal, genealogical, you name it, with one exception: I do not currently have certification, so if you need a certified translator (usually for legal docs: birth certificates, divorce decrees, wills), you need someone else.
I am also available as a writer or editor, for academic, journalistic, creative, marketing-oriented or any other type of written communication. Basically, if you'll pay me, I'll write or edit it. My company website is found here.
You can contact me for business purposes through my business address, cait@cogitantes.net.
2) The second type of comment would be task offering: if you've got a job you think might suit someone here, consider posting it as a comment. Use the same guidelines as above: give general information here, and specific information when you exchange e-mails. An offered task might look something like this:
I have a doctoral thesis which needs proofing and editing by Thursday, is anyone available? You can reach me at ABDShaker@shakesville.miskatonic.edu.
We also welcome appropriate job resource sites for progressives, e.g. Canada’s Charity Village, which specializes in jobs with non-profits and NGOs.
3) The third kind of comment I'd love to see is success stories! We’d love to know when this works out, and people actually find some employment through our efforts. If you feel like sharing, tell us how it worked out for you. :)
4) If you’re a progressive working for or running a small business and would like to include a pointer to your business, you may do so. If you’ve never otherwise posted before here (i.e., you’re a lurker), I may check in with you to be certain you’re a Shaker and not a spammer. If it turns into a spamfest, or we start getting businesses that are of dubious progressive credentials, we may need to revisit this one, but let’s give it a try.
So, that's what we'd like to see.
What we do NOT want to see:
So there. Have at it, Shakers, for Bread and Teaspoons!
Important disclaimers: Shakesville makes no endorsement or claim as to the capabilities of anyone commenting to this post, and anyone considering hiring someone should be prepared to treat it like any other business situation: DO YOUR DUE DILIGENCE. We're not doing any screening of this, so you'll want to make sure you check references, use safe-payment procedures (e.g., ask for a deposit), all the things you'd do when working with any stranger on the Internet. While this is intended for Shakers in general, remember that there is no real obstacle to being able to comment here, and do the things you need to do to keep yourself safe.
* As might be evident, this is an intentional reference to Bread and Roses, a longtime slogan of the left. In this case, though, my hope is that if we achieve steady bread, we will use it to power our teaspoon use.
** "Theoretically", because sometimes my life or my depression interfere. :)
The last several Bread and Teaspoons: Twenty-Four. Twenty-Five.
Twenty-Six. Twenty-Seven. Twenty-Eight.
Twenty-Nine.
Happy Birthday, Spudsy!!!
Happy Birthday to you!
Happy Birthday to you!
You like to sit in the dark eating braunschweiger
while watching bad mooooooovieeeeees…
And OMG Shoez I do, too!
I loves ya, Spudsy.
Thank you for being a friend.
xoxox
Question of the Day
What book have you (re)read with the most frequency?
(If you haven't ever given any book multiple readings, feel free to name the book you're most likely to read again. Parents and other carers of small children, please feel free to exclude favorite books you've read a zillion times at bedtime. This is more a question about books you've read singularly for your own pleasure.)
I have an acquaintance who re-reads The Lord of the Rings trilogy once every year. That's dedication!
I don't read anything that often, but I have re-read many books, despite my endless list of books I still want to read, which I will never conquer unless I live to be a hundred million years old. (Super senior discount!)
I'm pretty sure the book I've read the greatest number of times is Beautiful Joe, a children's novel narrated by an abused dog who finds a home with a caring family. It's no exaggeration to say that Beautiful Joe was a significant influence on my life; I owe a great deal of my capacity for empathy and my ability to survive to Joe's tale.
It was based on a true story and written by Marshall Saunders—actually Margaret Marshall Saunders, who entered (and won) a literary contest sponsored by the American Humane and Educational Society under her middle name because female authors weren't getting published—and was first published in 1893. My tattered copy of the book was passed down to me through three generations.
My first memory of really loving a book is loving Beautiful Joe.
You can read it here, if you are so inclined.
Big Brother Is Weight Watchering You
So, Congress has decided to "tackle obesity." (Obesity's all: "Ow! Get off me!") I'm sure nothing bad will happen:
On May 5, U.S. Rep. Ron Kind (D-Wis.) and several Congressional co-sponsors introduced the "Healthy Choices Act," a bill proposing a comprehensive national approach to addressing the country's obesity crisis.Well, that all sounds pretty good. Sounds like the ingredients to a national healthfulness* initiative, which would be better framing than an anti-obesity crusade. Especially if Congress isn't on an anti-obesity crusade, with a specific intent of targeting fat people for elimination.
The bill's many provisions include ones that would align federal food programs with existing governmental nutritional guidelines; make healthy foods affordable and accessible to children and adults most at risk, including rural and low-income urban areas; coordinate the federal response to addressing the obesity crisis (including realigning transportation policy to encourage healthier lifestyles); and provide children and adults with opportunities for physical activity, nutritional information and assessment tools.
Doctors would be provided with tools to diagnose and treat obesity, and funding would be provided to help researchers develop more effective prevention andOh. Well. So it sort of is about eliminating fat people, not just making sure people are healthy. Um—
treatment methods.
One provision falling under the assessment area could raise some privacy concerns: It would require pediatricians to measure the body mass index, or BMI, of school-age children and note this in children's vaccination records.Aaaaaaaand you've lost me.
Now comes the part where I laugh with bitter contempt, yes?
Rick Wolford, chairman of the Grocery Manufacturers Association's board of directors and chairman, president and CEO of Del Monte Foods, issued a follow-up statement praising the bill's sponsors for creating "sensible, science-based legislation" with a framework that is "both simple and attainable."Yes.
The American Beverage Association (ABA) also issued a statement confirming its support of the bill.
Obesity Crisis!!!eleventy! legislation ghost-authored by lobbyists for the food and beverage industry. Perfect.
----------------
* Here, I use "healthfulness" not in juxtaposition to disability, but to the "fat axiomatically equals unhealthy" narrative. I recognize there is a potential, if unintended, marginalization of people with disabilities whenever health-related terminology is used and/or when health is centered as an ideal.
As someone who is both fat and disabled, I am keenly aware of this complicated intersection. I do think it's extremely important to counteract the "fat=unhealthy" narrative; I also think it's extremely important not to imply that healthfulness is superior to disability.
It's not easy to reconcile the two, but what I want to try to do in this space is recognize that the "health at every size" paradigm as it relates to weight isn't seeking to marginalize people with disabilities, but is seeking to counter a very dangerous narrative that reflexively equates fat with an inherent lack of health. At the same time, I want to recognize that it nonetheless has the potential to marginalize, and, to that end, will continue to address that issue, so that "health" (posited in juxtaposition to "fat/unhealthy") is never discussed here without an awareness of the implications for people with disabilities.
Today's Edition of "Conniving and Sinister"
See Deeky's archive of all previous Conniving & Sinister strips here.
[In which Liss reimagines the long-running comic "Frank & Ernest," about two old straight white guys "telling it like it is," as a fat feminist white woman and a biracial queerbait telling it like it actually is from their perspectives. Hilarity ensues.]
Huh.
Chief Targets of Student Incivility Are Female and Young Professors:
When it comes to being rude, disrespectful, or abusive to their professors, students appear most likely to take aim at women, the young, and the inexperienced, a new study has found.Huh.
Naturally, it was only a matter of time before "Well, women are known to be oversensitive hysterics!" raised its ugly head.
Given the universal nature of some of the student behaviors examined, such as dozing off in class, it may be fair to ask whether some faculty members were just more inclined than others to have let student incivility roll off of them and not recall it or see it as worth reporting.Sigh.
I'm curious about what role race played in these findings, or if that wasn't examined (and if not, why not).
[H/T to Shaker Phyllis.]
How Low Can Leno Go?
Pretty goddamn low: Last night, during his typically abysmal monologue (start at about 3:15), Jay Leno included a segment that purported to examine attempted Times Square car bomber Faisal Shahzad's Facebook page, because terrorism is hilarious comedy fodder.
Different parts of the page were zoomed in as he "joked" about them, and, although it was left unremarked-upon, clearly visible on Shahzad's imaginary profile under group memberships was "Team Coco," a reference to supporters of Conon O'Brien.
What a petty, spiteful shit.
Yeah, you just haven't won enough, Jay Leno. It wasn't enough that you got The Tonight Show back after fucking with the serial drama lead-in formula that kept you on top for all those years. What you really needed to do to prove how AWESOME you are was take a swipe at a guy who's clearly had the wind knocked out of him (and has signed a non-disparagement agreement, so he couldn't retaliate in kind even if he wanted to).
Class act, all the way.
And, you know, I don't even really care about Conan O'Brien. I thought his shtick—which I once enjoyed, for its giddy absurdity—got mean and small and unfunny when he took over The Tonight Show. And I can't muster too much sympathy for a super-privileged dude who landed with a $30 million parachute after losing a job, when people all over this country get laid off all the time with jack shit.
But some things are just wrong on principle—and this is one of them. You are the worst, Jay Leno.
The WORST.
Contact NBC Universal.[H/T to Paul the Spud, who got it from The Daily What.]
Quote of the Day
"I think [Arizona's new immigration law] is very misguided. I think it's, unfortunately, to the detriment of our society and our civil liberties. I think it's very important for us to stand up for things we believe in. As a team and as an organization, we have a lot of love and support for all of our fans. The league is very multicultural. We have players from all over the world, and our Latino community here is very strong and important to us."—Phoenix Suns guard Steve Nash, who, along with his teammates, will wear "Los Suns" jerseys for tonight's game against the San Antonio Spurs "to honor [the] Latino community and the diversity of our league, the state of Arizona, and our nation."
(The Spurs reported tried to arrange for "Los Spurs" jerseys, but had too little time.)
Suns General Manager Steve Kerr explains that the team wants to "make sure that people understand that we know what's going on and we don't agree with the law itself."
As noted in the linked post, it's quite unusual for a professional team to take such a bold political position.
[H/T to Shaker Euterpe813. Commenting Note: Though I haven't addressed the connotations of a show of solidarity that consists of tacking on "Los" to an English team name, please consider that on-topic for the thread.]
Wednesday Blogaround
This blogaround brought to you by Shaxco, makers of Deeky Brand Robotic Megagloves.
Recommended Reading:
Marcella: Carnival Against Sexual Violence 93
Frankie PhD: The 24th Edition of the Down Under Feminists Carnival
Ouyang Dan: The One Damned Sock…
Lori; 10 Myths About Sex and Virginity—Debunked
Renee: "Shoot The Illegal Immigrants"
Andy: Lutheran Pastor Brad Schmeling and His Partner to Be Reinstated
shweta_narayan: As we're looking through our prison bars do I see mud when you see stars?
Leave your links in comments...
Ernie Harwell - 1918-2010
The gentle man who brought baseball -- and summer -- to millions of people over generations has died.
I cannot count the times I listened to a baseball game called by Ernie; the summer nights on the back porch, the days at the pool, riding in the car going somewhere, be it to work or driving up to northern Michigan, the signal from Detroit's WJR fading in and out the farther away we got. At night he was a gentle presence lulling me to sleep as I hoped the Tigers would pull it out in the ninth at an away game in Seattle or California.Harwell succumbed to cancer of the bile duct, and passed away at his home in Novi, Mich. Doctors diagnosed the condition as an aggressive form in August, and Harwell and his family decided against surgery at his age. He explained his situation with an extraordinary sense of peace, both to his friends in the community and to fans at Comerica Park when he made one last visit in September.
"I've got a great attitude. I just look forward to a new adventure," Harwell told the Detroit Free Press when he disclosed his illness. "God gives us so many adventures, and I've had some great ones. It's been a terrific life."
Unlike a lot of baseball broadcasters, he didn't feel as if he had to fill each moment on the air with talk; there were times when all you could hear was the background noise of the park as the batter got ready or the pitcher leaned in to get the signal. Finally: "Here's the windup.... and [thud] he struck him out." You could see the game through his voice better than any TV coverage, and to this day for millions of baseball fans, the only way to watch baseball is over the radio.
Ernie was there from spring training -- when he opened each first broadcast with the words of the Song of Solomon -- to the last pitch in October; when the Tigers won the Series in 1968, and when they were at the bottom of the standings. He taught us about baseball and winning and losing and disappointment and joy, and for a man I never met but whose voice is as immediately recognizable to me as my own father's, I will always think of good times, quiet nights, celebrations and the joy of a game that isn't won on brute strength alone.
"For lo, the winter is past, the rain is over and gone; the flowers appear on the earth; the time of the singing of birds is come, and the voice of the turtle is heard in our land."
[Note: If there are less flattering things to be said about Harwell, they have been excluded because I am unaware of them, not as the result of any deliberate intent to whitewash his life. Please feel welcome to comment on the entirety of his work and life in this thread.]
