Once again I am proud to be from Alabama. The state I love comes up with new and more insane ways to aggressively defend the national and international perception of it being the most bigoted backwards-ass place on the planet. Thank you, representative gerald allen (tuscaloosa, 50 miles from my parents' home) for making sure that bigotry remains the number one association that people have when they hear the word "alabama".
a little on how he has done us so proud (from the Guardian)
Guardian Unlimited | Arts features | 'We have to protect people'
>What should we do with US classics like Cat on a Hot Tin Roof or The Color Purple? "Dig a hole," Gerald Allen recommends, "and dump them in it." Don't laugh. Gerald Allen's book-burying opinions are not a joke.
Earlier this week, Allen got a call from Washington. He will be meeting with President Bush on Monday. I asked him if this was his first invitation to the White House. "Oh no," he laughs. "It's my fifth meeting with Mr Bush."
Bush is interested in Allen's opinions because Allen is an elected Republican representative in the Alabama state legislature. He is Bush's base. Last week, Bush's base introduced a bill that would ban the use of state funds to purchase any books or other materials that "promote homosexuality". Allen does not want taxpayers' money to support "positive depictions of homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle". That's why Tennessee Williams and Alice Walker have got to go.
I ask Allen what prompted this bill. Was one of his children exposed to something in school that he considered inappropriate? Did he see some flamingly gay book displayed prominently at the public library?
No, nothing like that. "It was election day," he explains. Last month, "14 states passed referendums defining marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman". Exit polls asked people what they considered the most important issue, and "moral values in this country" were "the top of the list".<
By 'moral values' did you mean anything about caring for the poor, or helping the sick, or caring for the depressed and hurt among you? When you invoke moral values, are you invoking caring for your fellow man as you do for yourself? Does this mean calling for honesty and openness from our public officials and holding them accountable for how their policies affect our fellow man, at home and abroad?
No, when you say 'moral values' you mean 'bigotry'. Plain and simple, the 'moral values' vote was the bigot vote. You meant ostracizing and punishing the 'different' people. It is harder these days to get away with flat out, overt racism (although you already know how I feel about folks who like to say it isn't still a problem), so cultural bigotry is the new, acceptible racism (find Mason's rant in the archives on Abu Ghraib for more on this). Domestically, homos are the big easy target.
And when the representatives put us in their bullseye, so do others. Other alabamians decided to skip the book burnings and go straight on to burning the faggots:
Scotty Joe Weaver and Billy Jack Gaither
Billy Jack was killed around the time of Matthew Shepard, but he was older and less pretty, so the national media didn't really care when he was beaten to death and burned on a pile of kerosene soaked tires. Only the gay media really covered it at all and alabama turned a largely blind eye to what happened.
So it happened again. Scotty Joe was attacked and killed and burned as well. And yes these deaths happened before you got it in your fool mind that there should be no positive representations of homosexuals available to kids in alabama, and no you didn't commit these crimes, representative allen, but when you say there should be no positive representation of us available, you are painting a big bullseye on the head of every poor gay kid who stays stuck in what you are determined to keep a violent, bigoted backwater of a state. The blood of these men is on your hands and so will be the blood of the next. You are loading bullets in the guns that troubled homosexual adolescents will be blowing their own brains out with; you are pouring the kerosene on the pile of tires that will be used to burn the next victim.
Lynching niggers is out, so lets burn the faggots.
You can cry all you want that that isn't what you meant, but you be very sure of this: it is what you are doing.
And you better be very thankful of your relationship with Jesus, because he is the only one who might forgive you.
And yes, I do take this very personally. I got out in one piece, but it wasn't a given that I would and there were more than a few that I know that didn't. I am well educated and mobile and able to chose where I live and who I surround myself with, but that is not the option available to every (or even most) gay kid(s). The average gay person isn't like the representations on Will and Grace. Most gay people aren't wealthy and happy and educated. Plenty of us are, because we aren't given much of a choice (find a way out or die), but so many more are still hacking it out in hostile environments. Being able to get married isn't their biggest issue and whether or not the hot guy at the gym noticed them or which party they should go to are not their biggest dilemmas. Their lives just became a little more dangerous.
Monday, December 13, 2004
I am sad tonight...
I haven't really used this whole blog thing much for personal emoting; generally not my thing. I am much better at bitching about politics and such. But everyone else in the house is asleep and I am sad.
The things I want to say and can't won't let me sleep.
A child at camp who claimed to be able to see others' auras, once told me my aura was black and looked creeped out like if he looked at me too long his soul would be sucked away. He had been telling everyone else that their auras were happy pretty colors and meant fun nice things like they were very understanding or good empathizers or were more interesting than they first appeared. And he told everyone about their 'psychic' abilities. "You sometime can feel things before they happen" or "Your orange inner aura reveals that you have strong psychic powers" or whatever. All the kids were eating the shit up, whch was amusing and all and we were having to wait while folks did some individual stuff in the diving class we were teaching, so anything that keeps the idle kids from trying to entertain themselves was a welcome diversion even if half a dozen teenage girls trying to practice their psychic abilities can quickly become annoying.
Point being, after looking at me in horror and declaring my aura (inner/outer/all of it) black, one of the other kids asked if I had any psychic ability, to which he responded, "No, he has absolutely no psychic ability whatsoever. None, not a bit." which struck me as a bit rude and the kids started making fun until he followed up with, "He doesn't need any; he just knows things." That struck me as kind of nice.
but as our title declares, sometimes awareness is painful.
sometimes i wish i didn't just know things.
tonight i wish i didn't.
but i do and sleep won't come.
The things I want to say and can't won't let me sleep.
A child at camp who claimed to be able to see others' auras, once told me my aura was black and looked creeped out like if he looked at me too long his soul would be sucked away. He had been telling everyone else that their auras were happy pretty colors and meant fun nice things like they were very understanding or good empathizers or were more interesting than they first appeared. And he told everyone about their 'psychic' abilities. "You sometime can feel things before they happen" or "Your orange inner aura reveals that you have strong psychic powers" or whatever. All the kids were eating the shit up, whch was amusing and all and we were having to wait while folks did some individual stuff in the diving class we were teaching, so anything that keeps the idle kids from trying to entertain themselves was a welcome diversion even if half a dozen teenage girls trying to practice their psychic abilities can quickly become annoying.
Point being, after looking at me in horror and declaring my aura (inner/outer/all of it) black, one of the other kids asked if I had any psychic ability, to which he responded, "No, he has absolutely no psychic ability whatsoever. None, not a bit." which struck me as a bit rude and the kids started making fun until he followed up with, "He doesn't need any; he just knows things." That struck me as kind of nice.
but as our title declares, sometimes awareness is painful.
sometimes i wish i didn't just know things.
tonight i wish i didn't.
but i do and sleep won't come.
Friday, December 10, 2004
He's too insensitive to notice discrimination, let's make him head of the civil rights panel.
Here is your reason to throw up for the day:
"I just assume somewhere in my life some knucklehead has looked at me and my brown self and said that they have given me less or denied me an opportunity," said the chairman, Gerald A. Reynolds, 41, an African-American lawyer. "But the bottom line is, and my wife will attest to this, I am so insensitive that I probably didn't notice."
The New York Times > National > Shift Toward Skepticism for Civil Rights Panel
A conservative black lawyer who says he has never noticed any discrimination in his life? Were he and dr. rice hatched out of the same damn pod?
A man who called affermative action "a big lie" is now in charge of the government watchdog panel for civil rights. Yes, we can expect much from him.
Can we talk about affirmative action for a minute? This back to my earlier post on WASPs in this country who are the biggest fucking babies about so much. Any time the scale isn't tipped in the white, christian's blatant favor on any issue, there is a call to arms. If one more comfortable upper middle-class butthole start crying over affirmative action to me, I am going to kick them in their shins. You don't get an advantage? It should all be merit based? Like hell you don't get an advantage and their are other things besides GPA's. The stinking nekkid emperor got everything in his life on affirmative action instead of merit. He got into an ivy league school because his father went there, not because of his grades. He got business deals, and hauled out of them when he was a miserable failure, because of who is father was. He got political backing and the 'extra' help he needed to take the presidency because of his family. He did not accomplish on thing on his own or by merit his whole life, but he will bitch about Affirmative Action. Affirmative action in my book is anything which gives you an advantage to help you get ahead which is not based on your personal accomplishments. He (and every middle-class white person in America) has recieved it in spades.
And for Mr. Reynolds, you take a good look around and you will see the bigotry. This last election hinged on it. But really, man, just because every instance hasn't crippled you doesn't mean it isn't there. You are from New York? Do you ever take cabs? No, they aren't that tough to hail. If you are in the city, watch a black person, well dressed or not, try to hail a cab. I have on more than one occassion seen cabs with their lights on drive past a black man in a suit just to pick up a white kid in ratty jeans down the block. Trouble with cabs may be an annoying thing, more than threatening, but it is symptomatic.
Racism is not what it was in 1950, but if you think it doesn't play a role in your daily life today, you are an idiot. You can refuse to let it stop you or weigh on your mind and choose to just do with what you have. Fine, all admirable options, but don't try to tell everyone that they are crazy and life is fair and race isn't an issue any more in America.
"I just assume somewhere in my life some knucklehead has looked at me and my brown self and said that they have given me less or denied me an opportunity," said the chairman, Gerald A. Reynolds, 41, an African-American lawyer. "But the bottom line is, and my wife will attest to this, I am so insensitive that I probably didn't notice."
The New York Times > National > Shift Toward Skepticism for Civil Rights Panel
A conservative black lawyer who says he has never noticed any discrimination in his life? Were he and dr. rice hatched out of the same damn pod?
A man who called affermative action "a big lie" is now in charge of the government watchdog panel for civil rights. Yes, we can expect much from him.
Can we talk about affirmative action for a minute? This back to my earlier post on WASPs in this country who are the biggest fucking babies about so much. Any time the scale isn't tipped in the white, christian's blatant favor on any issue, there is a call to arms. If one more comfortable upper middle-class butthole start crying over affirmative action to me, I am going to kick them in their shins. You don't get an advantage? It should all be merit based? Like hell you don't get an advantage and their are other things besides GPA's. The stinking nekkid emperor got everything in his life on affirmative action instead of merit. He got into an ivy league school because his father went there, not because of his grades. He got business deals, and hauled out of them when he was a miserable failure, because of who is father was. He got political backing and the 'extra' help he needed to take the presidency because of his family. He did not accomplish on thing on his own or by merit his whole life, but he will bitch about Affirmative Action. Affirmative action in my book is anything which gives you an advantage to help you get ahead which is not based on your personal accomplishments. He (and every middle-class white person in America) has recieved it in spades.
And for Mr. Reynolds, you take a good look around and you will see the bigotry. This last election hinged on it. But really, man, just because every instance hasn't crippled you doesn't mean it isn't there. You are from New York? Do you ever take cabs? No, they aren't that tough to hail. If you are in the city, watch a black person, well dressed or not, try to hail a cab. I have on more than one occassion seen cabs with their lights on drive past a black man in a suit just to pick up a white kid in ratty jeans down the block. Trouble with cabs may be an annoying thing, more than threatening, but it is symptomatic.
Racism is not what it was in 1950, but if you think it doesn't play a role in your daily life today, you are an idiot. You can refuse to let it stop you or weigh on your mind and choose to just do with what you have. Fine, all admirable options, but don't try to tell everyone that they are crazy and life is fair and race isn't an issue any more in America.
Monday, December 06, 2004
sick and tired christian 'victims'
My cousin sends from time to time what are often the most obnoxious stupid forwards I have ever read. The silly forward-this-and-microsoft-will-give-you-money letters are annoying, but easily enough deleted without ruffling my feathers. It is the white-people-who-call-themselves-christians-and-worship-a-fictional-version-of-the-past-but-now-cast-themselves-as-victims letters that make me want to puke.
For two main reasons:
1) If you are a christian, white person in America, any oppression you may feel has nothing to do with either being christian or white. If anything, you are given advatages that other people can only dream of. If you are truly being oppressed or marginalized, it is because of your lack of wealth or education or both. Otherwise, you are probably just whining and you need to stop bitching about the way things used to be and be happy about what you have and help those who have less.
If you find that people have a negative reaction to you because you are a christian, you might take a good hard look at what kind of christian you are. Saying you are a christian and running around swinging your religion like a weapon won't make you any friends except among the other greedy, warring types. Most people I know who wear their christian mantle like a banner wouldn't think twice about passing a homeless person who is begging in the streets without so much as looking their way. Everyone seems to have lost their 'WWJD?' bracelets these days, which leads to my second complaint...
2) If you claim Christianity as your faith and Christ as your spiritual leader, but do not give to the poor, you are a hollow excuse for a Christian. When I say give to the poor, I mean truly give when someone needs without all the stupid judgemental excuses and contorted reasons for not helping. What do YOU do? If you are wealthy and comfortable, you have no (nada, none, zero) place lecturing anyone else about Christian values. You can share your abundance, you can share your peace and your joy, you can offer to help them, but shut the hell up about how you deserve what you have and how others should work harder and how the lord blesses you.
In the letter that my cousin sent today that got me all twisted and pissed off, it included this line:
"Christians are just sick and tired of turning the other cheek while our courts strip us of all our rights."
WTF?!?! "Christians are just sick and tired of turning the other cheek..." is damn near the stupidest rant I have ever heard. Turning the other cheek wasn't supposed to be fun or easy. It was supposed to be the right thing to do. It was supposed to be a testament to your selflessness and your faith in God. It was supposed to be symbolic of your faith in God's plan, an unflinching personal response to worldly conflict. These sad misguided invocations of bastardized christian values are pathetic and craven at best. 'Blasphemous' is probably the better description.
Too many people do not want to believe in free will or personal responsibility. They want their 'christianity' handed to them, inherited from their superior parents and as a testament to having been chosen. Christianity is not a birthright or a weapon. Those who treat it as either belittle and slander what is beautiful in its message.
For two main reasons:
1) If you are a christian, white person in America, any oppression you may feel has nothing to do with either being christian or white. If anything, you are given advatages that other people can only dream of. If you are truly being oppressed or marginalized, it is because of your lack of wealth or education or both. Otherwise, you are probably just whining and you need to stop bitching about the way things used to be and be happy about what you have and help those who have less.
If you find that people have a negative reaction to you because you are a christian, you might take a good hard look at what kind of christian you are. Saying you are a christian and running around swinging your religion like a weapon won't make you any friends except among the other greedy, warring types. Most people I know who wear their christian mantle like a banner wouldn't think twice about passing a homeless person who is begging in the streets without so much as looking their way. Everyone seems to have lost their 'WWJD?' bracelets these days, which leads to my second complaint...
2) If you claim Christianity as your faith and Christ as your spiritual leader, but do not give to the poor, you are a hollow excuse for a Christian. When I say give to the poor, I mean truly give when someone needs without all the stupid judgemental excuses and contorted reasons for not helping. What do YOU do? If you are wealthy and comfortable, you have no (nada, none, zero) place lecturing anyone else about Christian values. You can share your abundance, you can share your peace and your joy, you can offer to help them, but shut the hell up about how you deserve what you have and how others should work harder and how the lord blesses you.
In the letter that my cousin sent today that got me all twisted and pissed off, it included this line:
"Christians are just sick and tired of turning the other cheek while our courts strip us of all our rights."
WTF?!?! "Christians are just sick and tired of turning the other cheek..." is damn near the stupidest rant I have ever heard. Turning the other cheek wasn't supposed to be fun or easy. It was supposed to be the right thing to do. It was supposed to be a testament to your selflessness and your faith in God. It was supposed to be symbolic of your faith in God's plan, an unflinching personal response to worldly conflict. These sad misguided invocations of bastardized christian values are pathetic and craven at best. 'Blasphemous' is probably the better description.
Too many people do not want to believe in free will or personal responsibility. They want their 'christianity' handed to them, inherited from their superior parents and as a testament to having been chosen. Christianity is not a birthright or a weapon. Those who treat it as either belittle and slander what is beautiful in its message.
Tuesday, November 30, 2004
the cake that is baking...
Josh Marshall over at talkingpointsmemo has been talking about the need for the democrats to position themselves as a true opposition party. I really couldn't agree with him more (although he might put it a little differently than I do).
The dems in congress really have to learn (as Charlie Pierce has been imploring them for sometime now) to just say 'no'. Wouldn't Nancy be proud? But seriously, let them (the republicans and such) have their cake and eat it too. The one they are baking now is not going to taste very good.
For God's sake just refuse to do a damn thing if they aren't going to listen and scream bloody hell about how they are screwing everything up! Really, just say no. They can pass what they want without you, so why the hell not take the moral high ground and keep your names off some of their crap legislation? Support the good stuff and tell them to take a hike when they present shit. I know there will be hemming and hawing and plenty of arm twisting; fine. Just make sure that at the end of the day, when it goes on the record, when the majority party is trying to flex their muscle that you say "I object."
It's their cake. Let them have it. Don't help them ice it, don't help them cut it, don't help them serve it. They chose the ingredients and how to cook it, let them eat it. You aren't the head cooks anymore but you better make it loud and clear that you know and accept that or they will be blaming their burnt shit on you.
The dems in congress really have to learn (as Charlie Pierce has been imploring them for sometime now) to just say 'no'. Wouldn't Nancy be proud? But seriously, let them (the republicans and such) have their cake and eat it too. The one they are baking now is not going to taste very good.
For God's sake just refuse to do a damn thing if they aren't going to listen and scream bloody hell about how they are screwing everything up! Really, just say no. They can pass what they want without you, so why the hell not take the moral high ground and keep your names off some of their crap legislation? Support the good stuff and tell them to take a hike when they present shit. I know there will be hemming and hawing and plenty of arm twisting; fine. Just make sure that at the end of the day, when it goes on the record, when the majority party is trying to flex their muscle that you say "I object."
It's their cake. Let them have it. Don't help them ice it, don't help them cut it, don't help them serve it. They chose the ingredients and how to cook it, let them eat it. You aren't the head cooks anymore but you better make it loud and clear that you know and accept that or they will be blaming their burnt shit on you.
Monday, November 29, 2004
burned food items as religious icons...(or 'for-sale-piety might as well be edible')
Thank God (who may or may not chose to reveal him/herself to you in your food) there is no end to coverage of the Mary on the sandwich being sold on ebay, since otherwise there would be nothing worth reporting. I guess the sarcasm falls flat when this is the subject on which I chose to comment after barely writing anything for a couple of weeks, but there are several things I find interesting and annoying about this.
I really don't mind some lady sincerely believing that Mary has come to her in her grilled cheese. Despite a protestant upbringing which frowns upon... well, damn near everything (mostly southern baptist, but thankfully also a little Methodist), but particularly on stuff such as superstitious beliefs, I totally find little signs comforting in everyday life. I have a Hello Kitty! toaster which burns her face into my bread each morning and I completely take how clearly the face burns into the bread as a direct omen towards how my day is going to go. No, I don't stay at home if my toasts burns or the face is indistiguishable, but it is one of those silly little things that makes my life a little easier. Frankly, compared to many of our institutions, superstition isn't looking so bad these days. (note: by superstition I do not mean to be derisive, but rather using it as a catch-all for finding spiritual significance or control in the way everyday, not explicitly religious or spiritual activities, and not in a holistic, 'everything is spiritual' kind of way but rather a event specific omen/talisman kind of way)
I kind of do find annoying (ok, I find it insanely annoying)the idea that someone believes God appeared to them in their snack and then subsequently believes it a good idea to sale said direct divine communique to the highest bidder. But I guess if folks auctioning off their piety for personal gain has to be on the news, I'll take the grilled cheese lady over james dobson or jerry faldwell or pat robertson or the nekkid emperor. She at least seems more sincere and I imagine her 13 year old grilled cheese would be easier to stomach.
Really though, if we need people who find pictures in food on tv, can somebody find that great lady who used to come on the tonight show with her collection of potato chips that looked like celebrities?
I really don't mind some lady sincerely believing that Mary has come to her in her grilled cheese. Despite a protestant upbringing which frowns upon... well, damn near everything (mostly southern baptist, but thankfully also a little Methodist), but particularly on stuff such as superstitious beliefs, I totally find little signs comforting in everyday life. I have a Hello Kitty! toaster which burns her face into my bread each morning and I completely take how clearly the face burns into the bread as a direct omen towards how my day is going to go. No, I don't stay at home if my toasts burns or the face is indistiguishable, but it is one of those silly little things that makes my life a little easier. Frankly, compared to many of our institutions, superstition isn't looking so bad these days. (note: by superstition I do not mean to be derisive, but rather using it as a catch-all for finding spiritual significance or control in the way everyday, not explicitly religious or spiritual activities, and not in a holistic, 'everything is spiritual' kind of way but rather a event specific omen/talisman kind of way)
I kind of do find annoying (ok, I find it insanely annoying)the idea that someone believes God appeared to them in their snack and then subsequently believes it a good idea to sale said direct divine communique to the highest bidder. But I guess if folks auctioning off their piety for personal gain has to be on the news, I'll take the grilled cheese lady over james dobson or jerry faldwell or pat robertson or the nekkid emperor. She at least seems more sincere and I imagine her 13 year old grilled cheese would be easier to stomach.
Really though, if we need people who find pictures in food on tv, can somebody find that great lady who used to come on the tonight show with her collection of potato chips that looked like celebrities?
Sunday, November 21, 2004
Matters of importance...
I haven't been blogging much lately. Things have been busy and I haven't really had a whole lot of extra time near a computer. We all needed a little bit of a break after all the election crap and I am no exception. Having screamed my bloody head off for so many months (really, I think I have been screaming for as long as I can remember, and given how things are looking, I see no end in sight), I had to turn my attention to matters of great importance which I had been neglecting. So over the last couple of weeks, I have repotted plants and brought in those that were still outside and gave the aquarium in my bedroom a makeover (it had basically been a swamp full of duckweed, Salvinia, hairgrass, and snails).
I moved my Brugmansia (angel's trumpet) indoors and am anxious to see how it will fair indoors. It had been badly battered by the wind and only bloomed right at the end of the summer. I cut it back and put it in a big planter and it is already sending out new leaves and seems happy so far. Our living room is well lit with southern exposure, so hopefully it will thrive. If I can get it to bloom indoors over the winter, I'm throwing a party.
My geraniums aren't quite so happy, but if they will hang on through the winter they will be huge when I start them again in the spring.
In my old established fish tank, my polypterus is protesting no longer having a regular supply of guppies to eat by targetting the arulius barbs. He has managed to take one down and leave a hole in another one's tail. These guys are full grown and several inches long, so this is no small accomplishment. They have been holy terrors since I first introduced them almost a year ago and at times wished Jackson (the polypterus) would just eat them and be done with it, but recently they had calmed down and started showing their adult coloration and the males' dorsal fins have grown out and I was enjoying them. I am feeding more often now and calling my friend with too many guppies to try to prevent further ichthycide.
I also took out the watersprite that had taken over the top of the tank and everything is looking so much better now. The tiny water lettuce and the riccia at the top have been growing great and look much better on the surface. The cryptocornes are spreading through the sand slowly and the java moss is finally attaching to the driftwood and rocks. (for those of you that are not fish/plant people, sorry, politics needed a break)
In the new tank in my room, after weeding back some of the existing plants and getting the substrate (sand) and water ready, I went a little insane with fish and plants. I noticed I had a little money in the bank and all my bills paid, and there were cute little South American puffers at the LFS, so I snapped them up and started populating the tank. Well, I moved three banjo cats in from smaller living quarters, and got a few new plants, and suddenly two SA puffers turned into 6 corydora, 2 marbled talking catfish, 8 glassfish, and 3 spiketail gouramis. A little overboard, but it is a nice sized tank and the fish seem happy and I can't stop watching the tank. Now comes the trouble with trying to not add anything else.
anyway, I'll get back to rants and snark soon enough, but the fish and plants are currently keeping me sane, so expect to hear about them from time to time.
I moved my Brugmansia (angel's trumpet) indoors and am anxious to see how it will fair indoors. It had been badly battered by the wind and only bloomed right at the end of the summer. I cut it back and put it in a big planter and it is already sending out new leaves and seems happy so far. Our living room is well lit with southern exposure, so hopefully it will thrive. If I can get it to bloom indoors over the winter, I'm throwing a party.
My geraniums aren't quite so happy, but if they will hang on through the winter they will be huge when I start them again in the spring.
In my old established fish tank, my polypterus is protesting no longer having a regular supply of guppies to eat by targetting the arulius barbs. He has managed to take one down and leave a hole in another one's tail. These guys are full grown and several inches long, so this is no small accomplishment. They have been holy terrors since I first introduced them almost a year ago and at times wished Jackson (the polypterus) would just eat them and be done with it, but recently they had calmed down and started showing their adult coloration and the males' dorsal fins have grown out and I was enjoying them. I am feeding more often now and calling my friend with too many guppies to try to prevent further ichthycide.
I also took out the watersprite that had taken over the top of the tank and everything is looking so much better now. The tiny water lettuce and the riccia at the top have been growing great and look much better on the surface. The cryptocornes are spreading through the sand slowly and the java moss is finally attaching to the driftwood and rocks. (for those of you that are not fish/plant people, sorry, politics needed a break)
In the new tank in my room, after weeding back some of the existing plants and getting the substrate (sand) and water ready, I went a little insane with fish and plants. I noticed I had a little money in the bank and all my bills paid, and there were cute little South American puffers at the LFS, so I snapped them up and started populating the tank. Well, I moved three banjo cats in from smaller living quarters, and got a few new plants, and suddenly two SA puffers turned into 6 corydora, 2 marbled talking catfish, 8 glassfish, and 3 spiketail gouramis. A little overboard, but it is a nice sized tank and the fish seem happy and I can't stop watching the tank. Now comes the trouble with trying to not add anything else.
anyway, I'll get back to rants and snark soon enough, but the fish and plants are currently keeping me sane, so expect to hear about them from time to time.
Wednesday, November 10, 2004
ashcroft resigns!!! Ding dong, the witch is...being replaced.
Yes, one of the uglier witches is finally leaving Munchkinland, but unfortunately it isn't because a house landed on his head and it ain't Dorothy who got the slippers. Key player in bush's nation of retards, john ashcroft will be remembered fondly for such kind heart-warming things as indefinite detentions and the erosion of civil liberties. He truly has been a real, american douche-bag. I wish him all the best as he moves on to pursue a singing career.
But lest we be overjoyed and come crawling out of our flower and mushroom munchkin hiding places too quickly, he has been replaced by another dark overlord, alberto gonzales. Yes, that alberto gonzales. The man responsible for writing the legal opinion on how to toture folks and ditch the Geneva Convention and get away with it. Yes, this is obviously the person we want to be interpreting the constitution in an official capacity.
For all of you who want to scream, "but they are the bad guys; screw the Geneva Convention and they deserve to be tortured blah blah blah" remember this: when you see someone beheaded on tv, when you hear tales from our troops who get imprisoned who are tortured and treated like animals, when civilians are targeted in Iraq, our president had this man throw our grounds for moral objections to all this out the window. Oh yes, we the people can call these things monstrous (they absolutely are), but our president looked at them and said they don't matter. The Geneva Convention was the international aggreement that these things be considered war crimes and reprehensible. The man now interpretting the Constitution and our laws for the federal government disagrees.
More houses need to fall from the sky.
But lest we be overjoyed and come crawling out of our flower and mushroom munchkin hiding places too quickly, he has been replaced by another dark overlord, alberto gonzales. Yes, that alberto gonzales. The man responsible for writing the legal opinion on how to toture folks and ditch the Geneva Convention and get away with it. Yes, this is obviously the person we want to be interpreting the constitution in an official capacity.
For all of you who want to scream, "but they are the bad guys; screw the Geneva Convention and they deserve to be tortured blah blah blah" remember this: when you see someone beheaded on tv, when you hear tales from our troops who get imprisoned who are tortured and treated like animals, when civilians are targeted in Iraq, our president had this man throw our grounds for moral objections to all this out the window. Oh yes, we the people can call these things monstrous (they absolutely are), but our president looked at them and said they don't matter. The Geneva Convention was the international aggreement that these things be considered war crimes and reprehensible. The man now interpretting the Constitution and our laws for the federal government disagrees.
More houses need to fall from the sky.
Thursday, October 28, 2004
Aversion to reality: congenital disorder, signs of early onset dementia, or product of faulty upbringing
I with that it could be as simple as any of those.
I have been thinking over and over again about the quote from the Suskind article where he describes being told about the short comings of the reality based community (I don't feel like linking to the article right now or searching out the exact quote, that is why you have google). It makes a creepy sense to me, but in a depressing-craven-bastardization-of-something-familiar kind of way.
I am happily the friend of willful delusion and imagination and life following art. I have often felt that the truth can be a brutal and unwieldy thing if not approached with consideration, but I have no great aversion to it. But those moves and shakers out there like mr. rove and co. who consider themselves free from the constraints of reality are no artists or visionaries. They are fat, lying little pigs rewriting the rules on the side of the barn at night, adding their "...but some are more equal than others," while we sleep.
But it is not that leaders can be selfish and greedy which is so disturbing; that is not new or special. It is also how complicit our populous can be. The feeling currently turning my stomach is not just that people believe this crap because they want to support our president and don't want to believe he could be as horrible as a clear view and analysis makes clear, but that people would rather know that horrible things are happening elsewhere in their name than see uncomfortable things up close.
In particular I am going back the gay crap that I have kind of been harping about lately. Actually, not just homosexuality, but any uncomfortable social issues which are used as political rallying cries (which currently seems to be homos and abortions). I hear people who use these as their starting points for judging any candidate and rarely get any sensible statement on either subject out of them. I understand that not everyone will feel the same way about these issues and I certainly don't see either in black and white, but when someone who has a rigid take on either usually doesn't have much of an understanding of it beyond their solid prejudice. They begin and end with not liking that the issue exists at all and are insanely drawn to whoever will reinforce this bigotry.
How can a person cling so dearly to hatred and ignorance? Again, I don't mind well thoughtout disagreement, but when a person begins and finishes arguements on subjects with "it's just not right" and refuses to try for any deeper understanding, I am left speechless and horrified, whether they are talking about homosexual, black people, immigrants, Muslims, whatever. I am beginning to get this sinking feeling in my stomach that part of the reason my parents and sister have considered voting for bush is that they are more comfortable with our country being mislead into a war and then bungling along with criminaly faulty leader ship than with having a gay son. Dead bodies on tv are less disturbing than gay couples, and the leader who will hem and haw the most and act the most condescending and uncomfortable with the subject draws their attention. Their discomfort is more dire than others' pain and deaths. This is my greatest fear. This is monstrous and I pray that I am wrong.
I hope that this does not describe my parents, but this does seem to put those who don't live in the reality based community in perspective. They live instead in the bigotry based community, the land where comfort is found in not being one of 'Them' and their are easy answers because there faith in a fast and easy way-things-are-supposed-to-be. I for one will take my difficult reality; you can have your easy bigotry, but try and make it reality and you are going to get a fucking fight. People are being patient right now and praying for the best, but not damn many people take too kindly to being pushed around any more. If you think fags can't fight or stand up for themselves, in the words of the much missed Wesley Willis, "Fuck with me and find out."
I have been thinking over and over again about the quote from the Suskind article where he describes being told about the short comings of the reality based community (I don't feel like linking to the article right now or searching out the exact quote, that is why you have google). It makes a creepy sense to me, but in a depressing-craven-bastardization-of-something-familiar kind of way.
I am happily the friend of willful delusion and imagination and life following art. I have often felt that the truth can be a brutal and unwieldy thing if not approached with consideration, but I have no great aversion to it. But those moves and shakers out there like mr. rove and co. who consider themselves free from the constraints of reality are no artists or visionaries. They are fat, lying little pigs rewriting the rules on the side of the barn at night, adding their "...but some are more equal than others," while we sleep.
But it is not that leaders can be selfish and greedy which is so disturbing; that is not new or special. It is also how complicit our populous can be. The feeling currently turning my stomach is not just that people believe this crap because they want to support our president and don't want to believe he could be as horrible as a clear view and analysis makes clear, but that people would rather know that horrible things are happening elsewhere in their name than see uncomfortable things up close.
In particular I am going back the gay crap that I have kind of been harping about lately. Actually, not just homosexuality, but any uncomfortable social issues which are used as political rallying cries (which currently seems to be homos and abortions). I hear people who use these as their starting points for judging any candidate and rarely get any sensible statement on either subject out of them. I understand that not everyone will feel the same way about these issues and I certainly don't see either in black and white, but when someone who has a rigid take on either usually doesn't have much of an understanding of it beyond their solid prejudice. They begin and end with not liking that the issue exists at all and are insanely drawn to whoever will reinforce this bigotry.
How can a person cling so dearly to hatred and ignorance? Again, I don't mind well thoughtout disagreement, but when a person begins and finishes arguements on subjects with "it's just not right" and refuses to try for any deeper understanding, I am left speechless and horrified, whether they are talking about homosexual, black people, immigrants, Muslims, whatever. I am beginning to get this sinking feeling in my stomach that part of the reason my parents and sister have considered voting for bush is that they are more comfortable with our country being mislead into a war and then bungling along with criminaly faulty leader ship than with having a gay son. Dead bodies on tv are less disturbing than gay couples, and the leader who will hem and haw the most and act the most condescending and uncomfortable with the subject draws their attention. Their discomfort is more dire than others' pain and deaths. This is my greatest fear. This is monstrous and I pray that I am wrong.
I hope that this does not describe my parents, but this does seem to put those who don't live in the reality based community in perspective. They live instead in the bigotry based community, the land where comfort is found in not being one of 'Them' and their are easy answers because there faith in a fast and easy way-things-are-supposed-to-be. I for one will take my difficult reality; you can have your easy bigotry, but try and make it reality and you are going to get a fucking fight. People are being patient right now and praying for the best, but not damn many people take too kindly to being pushed around any more. If you think fags can't fight or stand up for themselves, in the words of the much missed Wesley Willis, "Fuck with me and find out."
America's biggest problem...
...is people with their heads this far up their bigoted asses:
Eschaton
I wish I could find this funny. Right now I am trying to convince myself that I am wrong in my nagging suspicion that there are masses of people out there who prefer seeing war and violence on tv than reminders that there are homosexuals living happy lives.
Eschaton
I wish I could find this funny. Right now I am trying to convince myself that I am wrong in my nagging suspicion that there are masses of people out there who prefer seeing war and violence on tv than reminders that there are homosexuals living happy lives.
Wednesday, October 27, 2004
Consequences: Bringing Them Home to Our Loved Ones
My brother and I were talking the other day about the conservative elements in our family (basically our older sister and at times our mother and father). He was commenting on trying to sort out memories of being raised in a democratic family and suddenly finding our parents leaning republican. This is not the normal southern flip into the republican party in an attempt to stay as bass-ackwards as possible, but my parents had thought Jimmy Carter was a great president and that reagan was completely untrustworthy and the big bush was a joke at best. They have always been pretty progressive and not terribly partisan. This is something that I have always deeply admired.
My sister has a good heart and feigns disinterest in politics, but she was always going to trend conservative. But I did expect her to make demands of those who claim to be conservative.
But lately they have all tended a little bit republican. We were speculating as to why, and our best guess is a combo of only wanting to really focus on the things closer than the tip of their noses and that they believe the republicans are made uncomfortable by issues that make them uncomfortable.
Namely: abortion and gay issues. My sister has long run with a crowd which gives audience to questionable characters with simpleminded takes on these and most other issues, so her having passionate and misinformed opions on the subjects is no suprise. My parents, though, have historically had a more nuanced take on most topics and kind of stayed away from these. But then their big gay son had to go and say "Hey, I'm not asexual and devoid of human emotion like I have pretended for so long, I'm gay." All things considered, they took it pretty well. They didn't really like it, but they have never stopped supporting and loving me.
But the dark side of their support is how they interact with this subject when not talking to me about it (which they fastidiously avoid). I haven't really pushed the issue much. I wasn't trying to get them to march on washington or to start waving rainbow flags; I just wanted to be able to act like a three-dimensional person and not get further distanced from my family. I knew it would take a while for them to be able to be casual about it and have been pretty respectful of this and tried to ease them into it. I didn't come out until I was completely comfortable with myself and my sexuality and had resolved a great many issues, but that took a long time for me and I know that it was never going to be a cakewalk for my parents.
That said, I didn't think it would drive them to being more conservative. In ways it hasn't, but in so many ways it has. They like whatever politician wants to try to just make the subject go away, or more accurately, who treats it like something to be ashamed of and which people SHOULD want to go away. The republicans bring it up over and over again, but they bring it up in such a way as to suggest they are really just trying to get all this out of the light once and for all. My sister has long been on this side of things, telling of friends for whom ex-gay programs have 'worked'. Yeah, they work all right, these are the ones that go on and get married and then have sex with strangers in public restrooms. Sorry, not the life I want and I have been propositioned by too many married christian family men to take any ex-gay ministry's claims seriously. You don't make anyone less gay, just more likely to kill themselves or they just end up shoved back into the closet.
Anyway, my point is that if my parents and sister and other conservative relatives are going to think that the republicans are the party that will make my sexuality go away as an public issue, then I am going to make damn sure that if they vote for that bastard and his asshole cronies and he wins, this is a subject that they will hear about in very proximate terms for the duration of his presidency. Allowed to live my life and treated with respect, I am happy to leave the whole gay thing as a no big deal kind of fact of life, but if it is going to drive my parents to making misguided political decisions which are out of character for them because the republicans like hiding gay people, then they need more exposure to the subject and I will make sure they get it.
My brother liked the idea of submitting threats like this; after all, isn't that really all the republican party does? Why should they get to lay down the terms of the 'gay threat'? I'm the homo in my parents' life and I'll do the gay threatening. I'll make certain that those slow simple gossipy members of my family who haven't caught on to the fact of my open gaity yet are very well informed around holiday get-togethers. We will discuss my boyfriend everytime I call home. I will force the hand on their agreement to go to a p-flag meeting after I went snarling and with stream shooting from my ears to that evil love-won-out convention (don't get me started). I figured they would find their way their in their own good time, but they haven't and now they want to vote republican, so it is becoming time to press the issue.
I never really wanted to be a big gay rights freak. I think there are bigger issues than gay marriage and just generally have a problem with simplified us/them dicotomies across the board and never really cared to limit my outspokeness to one catagory. But it is beginning to shape up that this is the issue which is standing flat in the way of many of my parents more progressive tendencies and the one which I need to focus on at home.
Anyway, this is my threat: if my parents want to support republicans because they represent their best hope for supressing the visibility of gay issues (which just remind them of their own son's gayness), then I will work double time and tirelessly to make sure that they become comfortable with gay stuff through repeated exposure and prolonged discussion of the topic. I will no longer stear clear of the subject when I think it might be awkward and will no longer leave it to them to allow openings in the conversation for it. I will bring it home. People who refuse to see past the end of their nose SHOULD (and will) have things thrown in their face.
My sister has a good heart and feigns disinterest in politics, but she was always going to trend conservative. But I did expect her to make demands of those who claim to be conservative.
But lately they have all tended a little bit republican. We were speculating as to why, and our best guess is a combo of only wanting to really focus on the things closer than the tip of their noses and that they believe the republicans are made uncomfortable by issues that make them uncomfortable.
Namely: abortion and gay issues. My sister has long run with a crowd which gives audience to questionable characters with simpleminded takes on these and most other issues, so her having passionate and misinformed opions on the subjects is no suprise. My parents, though, have historically had a more nuanced take on most topics and kind of stayed away from these. But then their big gay son had to go and say "Hey, I'm not asexual and devoid of human emotion like I have pretended for so long, I'm gay." All things considered, they took it pretty well. They didn't really like it, but they have never stopped supporting and loving me.
But the dark side of their support is how they interact with this subject when not talking to me about it (which they fastidiously avoid). I haven't really pushed the issue much. I wasn't trying to get them to march on washington or to start waving rainbow flags; I just wanted to be able to act like a three-dimensional person and not get further distanced from my family. I knew it would take a while for them to be able to be casual about it and have been pretty respectful of this and tried to ease them into it. I didn't come out until I was completely comfortable with myself and my sexuality and had resolved a great many issues, but that took a long time for me and I know that it was never going to be a cakewalk for my parents.
That said, I didn't think it would drive them to being more conservative. In ways it hasn't, but in so many ways it has. They like whatever politician wants to try to just make the subject go away, or more accurately, who treats it like something to be ashamed of and which people SHOULD want to go away. The republicans bring it up over and over again, but they bring it up in such a way as to suggest they are really just trying to get all this out of the light once and for all. My sister has long been on this side of things, telling of friends for whom ex-gay programs have 'worked'. Yeah, they work all right, these are the ones that go on and get married and then have sex with strangers in public restrooms. Sorry, not the life I want and I have been propositioned by too many married christian family men to take any ex-gay ministry's claims seriously. You don't make anyone less gay, just more likely to kill themselves or they just end up shoved back into the closet.
Anyway, my point is that if my parents and sister and other conservative relatives are going to think that the republicans are the party that will make my sexuality go away as an public issue, then I am going to make damn sure that if they vote for that bastard and his asshole cronies and he wins, this is a subject that they will hear about in very proximate terms for the duration of his presidency. Allowed to live my life and treated with respect, I am happy to leave the whole gay thing as a no big deal kind of fact of life, but if it is going to drive my parents to making misguided political decisions which are out of character for them because the republicans like hiding gay people, then they need more exposure to the subject and I will make sure they get it.
My brother liked the idea of submitting threats like this; after all, isn't that really all the republican party does? Why should they get to lay down the terms of the 'gay threat'? I'm the homo in my parents' life and I'll do the gay threatening. I'll make certain that those slow simple gossipy members of my family who haven't caught on to the fact of my open gaity yet are very well informed around holiday get-togethers. We will discuss my boyfriend everytime I call home. I will force the hand on their agreement to go to a p-flag meeting after I went snarling and with stream shooting from my ears to that evil love-won-out convention (don't get me started). I figured they would find their way their in their own good time, but they haven't and now they want to vote republican, so it is becoming time to press the issue.
I never really wanted to be a big gay rights freak. I think there are bigger issues than gay marriage and just generally have a problem with simplified us/them dicotomies across the board and never really cared to limit my outspokeness to one catagory. But it is beginning to shape up that this is the issue which is standing flat in the way of many of my parents more progressive tendencies and the one which I need to focus on at home.
Anyway, this is my threat: if my parents want to support republicans because they represent their best hope for supressing the visibility of gay issues (which just remind them of their own son's gayness), then I will work double time and tirelessly to make sure that they become comfortable with gay stuff through repeated exposure and prolonged discussion of the topic. I will no longer stear clear of the subject when I think it might be awkward and will no longer leave it to them to allow openings in the conversation for it. I will bring it home. People who refuse to see past the end of their nose SHOULD (and will) have things thrown in their face.
Thursday, October 21, 2004
full of mineral water
I have just newly discovered William Gibson's blog, but damn it is the best thing I have found in a long time. Maybe I will finally pick up _Neuromancer_ and give it a read, but in the meantime, he has been added to my must read list. Here is just a little snippet from today which struck my fancy:
William Gibson: "In very much the sense that Bush is not actually a Christian, likewise is he nothing remotely conservative. Believing Bush is conservative in any traditional sense is like believing that a Formula One racer with the Perrier logo on its side is full of mineral water.
The RNC today is a party in the hands of dangerous political radicals. "
Amen. To be perfectly honest, I am not terribly devoted to either party outright. If I thought a sensible Republican were running, I would vote for him. In the last election, I would have voted for McCain over Gore in a heartbeat (I have more circumspect feelings about mccain these days considering the way he has been whoring himself out as bush's do-boy as of late, but that is another story). I am not completely opposed to conservative tendencies and when they are genuine and tempered with a sincere concern for others, I deeply respect them. In many ways I tend towards conservative. In others, of course, I tend towards radical, but point is it is not the label 'conservative' or 'liberal' that rallies me behind a politician or a cause.
But calling bush a conservative or a christian is at dramatic odds with his actions as president. He make get his backing from people who call themselves both, but he acts like neither.
William Gibson: "In very much the sense that Bush is not actually a Christian, likewise is he nothing remotely conservative. Believing Bush is conservative in any traditional sense is like believing that a Formula One racer with the Perrier logo on its side is full of mineral water.
The RNC today is a party in the hands of dangerous political radicals. "
Amen. To be perfectly honest, I am not terribly devoted to either party outright. If I thought a sensible Republican were running, I would vote for him. In the last election, I would have voted for McCain over Gore in a heartbeat (I have more circumspect feelings about mccain these days considering the way he has been whoring himself out as bush's do-boy as of late, but that is another story). I am not completely opposed to conservative tendencies and when they are genuine and tempered with a sincere concern for others, I deeply respect them. In many ways I tend towards conservative. In others, of course, I tend towards radical, but point is it is not the label 'conservative' or 'liberal' that rallies me behind a politician or a cause.
But calling bush a conservative or a christian is at dramatic odds with his actions as president. He make get his backing from people who call themselves both, but he acts like neither.
"How many bush administration officials does it take to change a light bulb?"
"None. There’s nothing wrong with that light bulb. There is no need to change anything. We made the right decision and nothing has happened to change our minds. People who criticize this light bulb now, just because it doesn’t work anymore, supported us when we first screwed it in, and when these flip-floppers insist on saying that it is burned out, they are merely giving aid and encouragement to the Forces of Darkness.
-- John Cleese"
There more goodies over at William Gibson's blog.
-- John Cleese"
There more goodies over at William Gibson's blog.
Wednesday, October 20, 2004
Jedi Mind Tricks
Being a fan of Boondocks and a child of the StarWars generation, this made me smile:
Yahoo! News - Boondocks
Yahoo! News - Boondocks
Monday, October 18, 2004
Pay no attention to the draft behind the curtain...
The head of the RNC sends a cease and desist letter to the head of Rock the Vote warning them to stop discussing the possiblility of a draft because the nekkid emperor, Mr. Burns, and Dumbsfeld say it won't happen. Didn't they also tell us that Saddam had stockpiles of chemical and nuclear weapons that he was planning on unleashing on our country with remote-controlled military drones? Yeah, their word still counts. Read the letter:
RNC shows its ass
and Rock The Vote fires back:
Rock The Vote tells them to grow up
Notice which sounds more coherent and well informed.
It is worth noting that when a particular party (in this case, the RNC) tells a non-partisan voter awareness group to stop discussing a topic (a creepy request any way you look at it) because it is a partisan subject, they are admitting that they are the side more likely to do what we are all afraid of: reinstate the draft. If they came out better on the issue, they wouldn't be crowing about it. Rock the Vote has also been tough on Kerry about assertions that the draft isn't coming back and isn't endorsing a candidate, rather has presented links to information about the issue, so if the RNC is asserting that RTV is being partisan it is an andmonition on their part that their policies lead us closer to that edge where the draft becomes a reality.
I guess this admin and their stooges have complained that the facts have been partisan all along.
RNC shows its ass
and Rock The Vote fires back:
Rock The Vote tells them to grow up
Notice which sounds more coherent and well informed.
It is worth noting that when a particular party (in this case, the RNC) tells a non-partisan voter awareness group to stop discussing a topic (a creepy request any way you look at it) because it is a partisan subject, they are admitting that they are the side more likely to do what we are all afraid of: reinstate the draft. If they came out better on the issue, they wouldn't be crowing about it. Rock the Vote has also been tough on Kerry about assertions that the draft isn't coming back and isn't endorsing a candidate, rather has presented links to information about the issue, so if the RNC is asserting that RTV is being partisan it is an andmonition on their part that their policies lead us closer to that edge where the draft becomes a reality.
I guess this admin and their stooges have complained that the facts have been partisan all along.
Friday, October 15, 2004
She's a what !?!? Part 2:
After looking at other folks talking about the stink about Kerry talking about Mary Cheney being a big ole' lezzie, it is interesting how sexualized all this chatter about it is. People who are only grudgingly beginning to handle the word 'gay' or can handle gay people only if they are neutered and serving society (like the Queer Eyes or your local hairdresser or priest) still have trouble desexualizing all language associated with the lifestyle.
Just a snippet from the underrated and excellent Digby:
Hullabaloo: "Apparently, the kewl kidz in the press tent all 'gasped' when Kerry used the word 'lesbian' the other night. And like their emotional role models, Beavis and Butthead, the mere mention of any word they associate with sex excited them a little bit. Because it did, and the Bush campaign sensed it, it's become one of those faux outrage dances that the media and the Republicans perform so well together."
Worth reading all of it, but I pulled this because it was addresses the root of this stupidity: 'lesbian' as an inherently sexualized word.
When I hear that someone is gay or lesbian or whatever, them having sex is usally not one of the first things I think of. Same when I hear that someone is straight.
Again, let's talk about my family for a minute. If my brother talks about his girlfriend or dating a girl, sex does not seem to flash straight into my parents head. They want to hear about her, what she does, how they met. If I talk about my boyfriend, there is this look of parental terror with the unspoken message of "We don't want to talk about your sex life!" Well, no shit; neither do I. This is the whole point in 'coming out': adding a social component to your associations with people to whom you are attracted. Having a boyfriend is not the same thing as having sex with the same person over and over. Just like being married isn't just about having sex with the same person over and over again.
Folks in our country really need to relax a little bit about sex. The funny thing is, that the people who rail against the moral decay of society and the dangers of the flesh are quite often the biggest perverts you will ever find. Not that they are running around getting laid left and right, but these are the people who immediately focus in on the sexual in anything. I have a boyfriend; their mind immediately goes to butt-sex. They use the word 'marriage' as code for 'sex'. Women are permanently objectified and sexualized in their mind and they perceive gay men as a threat for precisely the same reason: they imagine that they are being objectified and sexualized by us.
Just a snippet from the underrated and excellent Digby:
Hullabaloo: "Apparently, the kewl kidz in the press tent all 'gasped' when Kerry used the word 'lesbian' the other night. And like their emotional role models, Beavis and Butthead, the mere mention of any word they associate with sex excited them a little bit. Because it did, and the Bush campaign sensed it, it's become one of those faux outrage dances that the media and the Republicans perform so well together."
Worth reading all of it, but I pulled this because it was addresses the root of this stupidity: 'lesbian' as an inherently sexualized word.
When I hear that someone is gay or lesbian or whatever, them having sex is usally not one of the first things I think of. Same when I hear that someone is straight.
Again, let's talk about my family for a minute. If my brother talks about his girlfriend or dating a girl, sex does not seem to flash straight into my parents head. They want to hear about her, what she does, how they met. If I talk about my boyfriend, there is this look of parental terror with the unspoken message of "We don't want to talk about your sex life!" Well, no shit; neither do I. This is the whole point in 'coming out': adding a social component to your associations with people to whom you are attracted. Having a boyfriend is not the same thing as having sex with the same person over and over. Just like being married isn't just about having sex with the same person over and over again.
Folks in our country really need to relax a little bit about sex. The funny thing is, that the people who rail against the moral decay of society and the dangers of the flesh are quite often the biggest perverts you will ever find. Not that they are running around getting laid left and right, but these are the people who immediately focus in on the sexual in anything. I have a boyfriend; their mind immediately goes to butt-sex. They use the word 'marriage' as code for 'sex'. Women are permanently objectified and sexualized in their mind and they perceive gay men as a threat for precisely the same reason: they imagine that they are being objectified and sexualized by us.
Mason, read this: Reservists refuse convoy mission in Iraq
Mason, look at where they are from-
MSNBC - Reservists refuse convoy mission in Iraq: "WASHINGTON - The Army is investigating reports that several members of a reservist supply unit in Iraq refused to go on a convoy mission, the military said Friday. Relatives of the soldiers said the troops considered the mission too dangerous.
advertisement
The reservists are from the 343rd Quartermaster Company, which is based in Rock Hill, S.C. The unit delivers food and water in combat zones.
According to The Clarion-Ledger newspaper in Jackson, Miss., a platoon of 17 soldiers refused to go on a fuel supply mission Wednesday because their vehicles were in poor shape and they did not have a capable armed escort."
It also cites the paper my parents' local paper. Really, folks, if you are going to send our friends and family over there, give them the f'cking support they need or they SHOULD be sitting their happy asses down and refusing to move. (note: if you even think of commenting about Kerry being against that 87 billion pork package that the whitehouse demanded as being against our troops, you had better be well informed about the subject and have your facts straight because I am tired of hearing morons throw misinformed hissy-fits about it and won't take any half-assed idiots trying to pass the buck).
MSNBC - Reservists refuse convoy mission in Iraq: "WASHINGTON - The Army is investigating reports that several members of a reservist supply unit in Iraq refused to go on a convoy mission, the military said Friday. Relatives of the soldiers said the troops considered the mission too dangerous.
advertisement
The reservists are from the 343rd Quartermaster Company, which is based in Rock Hill, S.C. The unit delivers food and water in combat zones.
According to The Clarion-Ledger newspaper in Jackson, Miss., a platoon of 17 soldiers refused to go on a fuel supply mission Wednesday because their vehicles were in poor shape and they did not have a capable armed escort."
It also cites the paper my parents' local paper. Really, folks, if you are going to send our friends and family over there, give them the f'cking support they need or they SHOULD be sitting their happy asses down and refusing to move. (note: if you even think of commenting about Kerry being against that 87 billion pork package that the whitehouse demanded as being against our troops, you had better be well informed about the subject and have your facts straight because I am tired of hearing morons throw misinformed hissy-fits about it and won't take any half-assed idiots trying to pass the buck).
She's a what?!!?!!!
Juan Cole is a must read for anyone trying to keep honestly abreast of how things are going in Iraq, but his analysis of domestic issues is remarkably lucid. His take on the Cheneys' wig-out over their openly gay daughter being referred to as gay:
"Why are Lynne and Dick Cheney so angry that John Kerry mentioned their daughter Mary's lesbianism in the third presidential debate?
The difference of opinion on whether the mention was appropriate is rooted in two different worldviews, and on two different metaphors for gayness.
The behavior of the Cheneys demonstrates that they view being gay as like being disabled. Or rather it is like being disabled in the William F. Buckley conception of disabled people as not just different from ordinary persons but actually inferior in their enjoyment of life."
It is worth following the link and reading his full commentary.
I wonder at times if this is how my parents see my being gay: as a handicap. It is a difference, and it does require that I consider it in how I approach things, but not any more than being Southern or of limited wealth. There are limitations in life and I have accepted mine and have learned how to embrace them and use them to my advantage.
It is somewhat worth noting that actually becoming comfortable with being gay and not really treating it as anything to be ashamed of or to be troubled by has made my life much, much easier and made me much healthier and more able to deal with others. Growing up gay in rural AL is not the easiest thing on a kid, but strangely looking back, growing up in rural AL isn't really all that easy on anyone. And the more I go along, the more I am convinced that growing up isn't really easy anywhere. After you make peace with your own difficulties, you can begin to see that it is not the only kind of trouble. Sometimes the thorns in our sides are blessings.
So it makes me a little sad to see someone's parents treating their openly gay child as an embarassment or with pity. When I detect that in my parents it cuts pretty deep. But mostly I just get mad: like every child, I expect better from them.
Where we are from, I am sure everyone knows that I am gay, or damn near everyone, but gossip spreads in a funny quiet way that one doesn't often have to confront too directly and I am not back there very often so I wonder if they have been confronted with this publicly and if they were how would they react? I have seen them show amazing backbone when faced with ignorance and bigotry in times past, so I imagine them telling anyone who said something inappropriate to shove it, but I wonder if they are where they could hear about it being casually being mentioned like it were nothing remarkable and treat it as no big deal? It makes me sad to hear that other parents can't, but then again, I think my parents are much better people than the Cheneys.
Hey, don't ask, don't tell.
(but while we are talking about Mary Cheney, can't we take a minute to comment on her new hair do? Maybe she finally made friends with some of the log cabin boys and they took her to a hairdresser instead of a barbershop. It is still a bad republican haircut, but it doens't look like cornsilk taped to an orange anymore. But can someone tell Chris Matthews that her old haircut looks no better on him?)
"Why are Lynne and Dick Cheney so angry that John Kerry mentioned their daughter Mary's lesbianism in the third presidential debate?
The difference of opinion on whether the mention was appropriate is rooted in two different worldviews, and on two different metaphors for gayness.
The behavior of the Cheneys demonstrates that they view being gay as like being disabled. Or rather it is like being disabled in the William F. Buckley conception of disabled people as not just different from ordinary persons but actually inferior in their enjoyment of life."
It is worth following the link and reading his full commentary.
I wonder at times if this is how my parents see my being gay: as a handicap. It is a difference, and it does require that I consider it in how I approach things, but not any more than being Southern or of limited wealth. There are limitations in life and I have accepted mine and have learned how to embrace them and use them to my advantage.
It is somewhat worth noting that actually becoming comfortable with being gay and not really treating it as anything to be ashamed of or to be troubled by has made my life much, much easier and made me much healthier and more able to deal with others. Growing up gay in rural AL is not the easiest thing on a kid, but strangely looking back, growing up in rural AL isn't really all that easy on anyone. And the more I go along, the more I am convinced that growing up isn't really easy anywhere. After you make peace with your own difficulties, you can begin to see that it is not the only kind of trouble. Sometimes the thorns in our sides are blessings.
So it makes me a little sad to see someone's parents treating their openly gay child as an embarassment or with pity. When I detect that in my parents it cuts pretty deep. But mostly I just get mad: like every child, I expect better from them.
Where we are from, I am sure everyone knows that I am gay, or damn near everyone, but gossip spreads in a funny quiet way that one doesn't often have to confront too directly and I am not back there very often so I wonder if they have been confronted with this publicly and if they were how would they react? I have seen them show amazing backbone when faced with ignorance and bigotry in times past, so I imagine them telling anyone who said something inappropriate to shove it, but I wonder if they are where they could hear about it being casually being mentioned like it were nothing remarkable and treat it as no big deal? It makes me sad to hear that other parents can't, but then again, I think my parents are much better people than the Cheneys.
Hey, don't ask, don't tell.
(but while we are talking about Mary Cheney, can't we take a minute to comment on her new hair do? Maybe she finally made friends with some of the log cabin boys and they took her to a hairdresser instead of a barbershop. It is still a bad republican haircut, but it doens't look like cornsilk taped to an orange anymore. But can someone tell Chris Matthews that her old haircut looks no better on him?)
Again, I wish I were suprised...
The nekkid emperor has some values for you:
The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Block the Vote
Yes, George Soros is a drug dealer and georgie w. porgie is going to restore honor to the whitehouse and spread democracy abroad. WTF?
If Krugman's article is the first you have heard about this stuff, 2 things:
1) you should be angry with how the news is ignoring this and doesn't cover this like crazy.
2) you don't read enough and really should consider getting your news from more sources.
If Krugman's article doesn't piss you off and make you want to crack a few skulls for attacking what our nation is all about, you might want to re-examine your 'values'.
The New York Times > Opinion > Op-Ed Columnist: Block the Vote
Yes, George Soros is a drug dealer and georgie w. porgie is going to restore honor to the whitehouse and spread democracy abroad. WTF?
If Krugman's article is the first you have heard about this stuff, 2 things:
1) you should be angry with how the news is ignoring this and doesn't cover this like crazy.
2) you don't read enough and really should consider getting your news from more sources.
If Krugman's article doesn't piss you off and make you want to crack a few skulls for attacking what our nation is all about, you might want to re-examine your 'values'.
Thursday, October 14, 2004
Meeting the neighbors part 2:
So Stacy over at tatooed heathen (see last post) seems like the kind of neighbor you would invite to a pot luck or trust around your kids. But alas, sometimes "next blog" leads you to whack jobs like this: Refiner's Crucible
WTF? Really, is this fellow stupid or depraved? Just because you want bush to win is no reason to lie through your teeth (to yourself or others). regardless of who you like or for whatever warped reasons, bush looked like a confused little man tonight. He was not relaxed and lashing out really doesn't count as being 'on the offense.' And really, 'a command of the issues'? Are you special, dude?
Love bush if you are just gonna love him anyway he goes, but don't break with reality over it. This fellow is a true member of bush's nation of retards.
I am getting tired, but on another day perhaps I will grab Mason and go over for a visit and see if he is up for a chat since he challenges liberals to hold their own in discussing the Middle East. Probably not really worth talking judging from this initial perusal of his page, but hey, why not?
WTF? Really, is this fellow stupid or depraved? Just because you want bush to win is no reason to lie through your teeth (to yourself or others). regardless of who you like or for whatever warped reasons, bush looked like a confused little man tonight. He was not relaxed and lashing out really doesn't count as being 'on the offense.' And really, 'a command of the issues'? Are you special, dude?
Love bush if you are just gonna love him anyway he goes, but don't break with reality over it. This fellow is a true member of bush's nation of retards.
I am getting tired, but on another day perhaps I will grab Mason and go over for a visit and see if he is up for a chat since he challenges liberals to hold their own in discussing the Middle East. Probably not really worth talking judging from this initial perusal of his page, but hey, why not?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
