We're futzing around with the template a lot today, trying to figure out what's disabled Java in the main column of the main page, or figure out a workaround, so you may occasionally see the template looking different or comments temporarily disabled.
At the moment, clicking on the comments link below the post title takes you to Blogger commenting, which we don't use. So just ignore that link.
Disqus is still accessible via the individual post pages, so click on the post title to get to the post page, and then you'll be able to read and leave comments.
Again, my apologies for the inconvenience, and thanks for your patience.
Update on Blog Fuckery
Happy Birthday, SKM!
Happy Birthday to youuuuuuuuuuuuuu!
Happy Birthday to youuuuuuuuuuuuuu!
You look like a purveyor of the radical feminazi agendaaaaaaa!
And you smell like one, too!
(Mmm, saffron!)
I wasn't sure I was going to be able to top last year's Very Special Cake, but how can anyone resist Chuck Norris personally announcing that it's Cake Time! on her birthday...?! Secret Ingredient: Fist.
Open Thread
Hosted by Qwip.
This week's open threads have been hosted by white, puffy, anthropomorphic characters: aesthetically pleasing Paul the Spud since 1971.
The Virtual Pub Is Open
[For InfamousQBert. Explanations: lol your fat. pathetic anger bread. hey your gay.]
TFIF, Shakers!
Belly up to the bar,
and name your poison!
Just in Time for the Friday News Hole
Obama decides to get feisty with the GOP:
[Transcript here. Also viewable here.]
The background: "Republicans invited Obama to appear at their annual conference; the president accepted — and then surprised them by asking that cameras and reporters be allowed into the room. Republicans immediately agreed to the request, but they may be regretting it now. Again and again, Obama turned the Republicans questions against them — accusing them of obstructing legislation for political purposes and offering solutions that won't work."
Amanda, Steve, and Marc have more.
BTD notes: "If politics actually worked this way, Dems would win every time. And Obama would be our FDR. But it doesn't. Do not expect the GOP to ever make this mistake again."
Indeed.
Daily Kitteh
Dear Roland,
If you did not attack and nom my hand every time I went to pet you, you would get more scratches, you silly glaik.
love,
Auntie SKM.
P.S. Your blissed-out expression when I am able to scratch under your "armpits" is motivation enough for me to keep trying. As well you know.
Today's Edition of "Conniving and Sinister"
Strips One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven, Eight, Nine, Ten, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105. 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.
I Get Letters
I see hoe the Feminist mind works. It was bad to stop George Tiller from killing innocent babies, but Scott Roeder's life gets ruined and you say "Good." even though you deameaned celebrating Tiller's death, now your celebrating.Welcome to the psyche of the anti-choicer, folks. Can't see a difference between celebrating murder and expressing relief at the conviction of a murderer. Calls himself "pro-life," justifies murder, and accuses me of a double-standard. Still hasn't figured out how to use spellcheck. Forever and ever, amen.
Not-So-Random YouTubery: Matthew Fox on Sesame Street
Jan. 19, 2010:
Matthew Fox: Hi, I'm Matthew.
Elmo: And Elmo's Elmo.
Matthew: And we're here to tell you all about the word "bones."
Elmo: Yes! Bones!
Matthew: Now, bones are what are under your skin.
Elmo: Oh, oh, but does that, Mr. Matthew, mean Elmo has bones under his fur?
Matthew: Sure, yeah, we all have bones. Bones help support your whole body.
Elmo: Oh. But does that mean Elmo has bones, um, in his arms?
Matthew: Yeah, an arm bone.
Elmo: How 'bout, how 'bout his leg?
Matthew: Uh, yes, we have leg bones.
Elmo: Oh, well, how 'bout Elmo's—Elmo's neck?
Matthew: Oh yeah. Yeah, we have neck bones, too. You see, bones are all over your body, and they look like this. [lifts bone]
Bone: Hey! Whaddaya call two scoops of chocolate on a fibula…? An ice cream bone! [They all laugh.] Get it?! A fibula's a bone! Ice cream bone! See what I did there?!
Elmo [to Matthew]: What kinda bone is that?
Matthew: A funny bone. [They all laugh.]
All three, looking directly into camera: BONES!!!
Friday Blogaround
This blogaround brought to you by Shaxco, makers of Liss and Deeky's Lost Excitement Containers. Note: These containers have been recalled for poor performance.
Recommended Reading:
Shark-fu: Chris Matthews, Post-Racialism, and Acceptable Blackness
Andy: Gates Says 'Major Announcement on 'DADT' Set for Tuesday
Fannie: Story about Murdered Woman Focuses Entirely on Poor Accused Man Who Had to Deal with Bitchy Wife
Ouyang Dan: The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants: A Discussion That Always Happens from Outside
Mary: Broken Government
BeckySharper: The Most Ridonkulous Op-Ed of 2010: Audrey Irvine Rides Again!
Thea Lim: From Paris With Love…and Some Hilarious Racism!
Jorge: Wow!
Leave your links in comments...
Roeder: Guilty
After 37 minutes of deliberation, a jury of seven men and five women have found Scott Roeder guilty of first-degree murder for killing Dr. George Tiller. Roader now faces life in prison.
Good.
[H/T to Shaker sunflwrmoonbeam.]
Watch Your Mouth - Part 3: Use Your Big-Kid Thesaurus
Part 3 in an Ongoing Series (You may want to read Part 1 and Part 2 first)
In the course of discoursing on the web, I've witnessed and participated in many conversations about semantics and language.
I've seen discussions about whether the word "niggardly" is racist or not, whether or not the origin of the phrase "rule of thumb" refers to domestic violence, and whether the term "lame" has entered common usage to the extent that people who have difficulty walking should just stop being offended and shut up about it, already.
Now, I know that the word "niggardly" is not etymologically derived from a racial slur, but so what? If my listener/reader doesn't know this, do I really want to derail from whatever topic it is I'm addressing by pressing that debate, just so I can sound like a Dickens character?
I also know that the origin of the phrase "rule of thumb" is hotly debated -- maybe it really is tied to the maximum size of a stick with which a man is allowed to beat his wife, and maybe it isn't -- but do I want to spend the next two hours arguing that? Isn't it just as effective for me to say: "General rule"?
This leads me to the most complex question in this entire series (for me, at least): Why am I choosing the words that I'm choosing?
Am I choosing certain words and phrases because I think they will help me establish my own identity?
The choice of the handle PortlyDyke, for example, is rich with reclamation for me on two fronts, but it also serves as a handy auto-filter -- if people are offended or put off by my screen name at first read, I can guess that they're probably going to be offended by a lot of things I say, and if they chuckle upon reading or hearing it (which happens a lot) I figure they're probably going to appreciate my sense of humor.
Am I choosing language that helps me bridge a gap?
As a 53-year-old who interacts with online communities which are often composed of much younger people, I find that I often refrain from using idioms that "date" me. When I find myself communicating with someone who is relatively new to feminist thought, I may not use phrases that are commonly used in Feminism 301 conversations. If I'm talking to my 83-year-old mother about my spiritual views (which is rare, I grant you, but it happens from time to time), I tend to use phrases that are somewhere between her notion of the Big White Guy in the sky and my ideas about a Vast Organizing Consciousness.
Am I choosing idioms because I think they are going to "buy" me some kind of acceptance?
This is a slippery edge for me, really -- because at the same time that I'm dropping some terms that would peg me for an old fogie, I might also slip in some words and phrases so that I can sound "hep", even if I don't use these in my day-to-day speech (and see, that right there is an example of an old-fogie word -- "hep" -- which is a dead giveaway). This behavior, by the way, can go horridly, horridly wrong (as when your Dad tries to sound cool in front of your friends).
Also, in the same moment that I'm searching for words that Mom can relate to, I might be filing off the edges of my own belief system, in the hope that my world-view would be more accepted by my family. Which sucks.
Sadly, these attempts to purchase acceptance inauthentically rarely really work in the long run. An example I'd point to is Rachel Maddow.
There are many things about her show that I absolutely adore -- the way she opens interviews with potentially combative people by asking them if she's gotten all the facts right in her intro, the general fastidiousness of her civility toward them when debating even the most difficult issues, etc., -- but there is one thing I deeply dislike -- her continuing use of the words "lame" and "lame-itude" as an idiom for "bad". I even wrote to her about it (gently, civilly).
At first, I thought my reaction to her use of this term was me "just" being offended by the ablism demonstrated (which would have been enough) -- but I realized later that another thing that grated on me was that she seemed to me to be using this ablist term in order to sound cool. There is just something about the emphasis she uses when she says it that rings to me of the 11th-grader who's trying to get in with the popular kids. It seems out of place in the midst of her usual Rhodes-Scholar presentation, and it jars the hell out of me every single time. I want to say to her: "Rachel, you're the first out news-lesbian headlining her own show on a major network. You're cool enough already."
I think it's important for me to know why I'm speaking or writing as I am. I think it's important for me to be clear about my intention when I communicate.
For me, the only reason to post something like this to a blog is to communicate and connect with other people, with the intention of raising their consciousness (and my own, which happens for me both during the writing process and subsequent discussion in comments), and I don't think I'm going to be very effective at that if I am leaning on idioms that a) have underlying meaning that I don't support, b) are inserted to somehow buff up my image rather than communicate my point, or c) I already know are likely to offend people that I want to communicate and connect with.
I have found, in every single case where I have used an offensive word or phrase, or undermined my own communication by employing an idiom which was rooted in the language of oppression that there was a readily accessible alternative. Let me repeat that-- I have found in every single case that there were other words available.
Other words that not only didn't alienate my intended audience, but which usually spoke my point more eloquently.
To those who would argue that maintaining this level of consciousness about language is an onerous burden laid upon them by the evils of political-correctness, I will simply say:
There are over 200,000 words in the Oxford English Dictionary -- many of them languishing in the linguistic lethargy of left-behind lingo. If you really don't care who you offend, or how much you sabotage your own communication in the process of maintaining your "with it" factor, you might actually sound edgier if you use something like "That's so absolutely inverted" instead of "That's so gay" -- because never forget -- the really cool kids don't repeat the offensive slurs -- they invent them.
And for those of you who find that the effort toward clear, responsible communication is a yoke which does not chafe you, remember -- there is no shame in visiting Thesaurus.com.
In other words, there are always other words.
Murray Hill Inc. for Congress!
Eliminating the need of a front of a congressperson, Murray Hill Incorporated has filed to run in Maryland's 8th Congressional District (Republican) primary. From their press release:
“Until now,” Murray Hill Inc. said in a statement, “corporate interests had to rely on campaign contributions and influence peddling to achieve their goals in Washington. But thanks to an enlightened Supreme Court, now we can eliminate the middle-man and run for office ourselves.”
Murray Hill Inc. is believed to be the first “corporate person” to exercise its constitutional right to run for office. As Supreme Court observer Lyle Denniston wrote in his SCOTUSblog, “If anything, the decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission conferred new dignity on corporate “persons,” treating them — under the First Amendment free-speech clause — as the equal of human beings.”
Murray Hill Inc. agrees. “The strength of America,” Murray Hill Inc. says, “is in the boardrooms, country clubs and Lear jets of America’s great corporations. We’re saying to Wal-Mart, AIG and Pfizer, if not you, who? If not now, when?”
Murray Hill Inc. plans on spending “top dollar” to protect its investment. “It’s our democracy,” Murray Hill Inc. says, “We bought it, we paid for it, and we’re going to keep it.”
[...]
Murray Hill Inc. plans on filing to run in the Republican primary in Maryland’s 8th Congressional District. Campaign Manager William Klein promises an aggressive, historic campaign that “puts people second” or even third.
“The business of America is business, as we all know,” Klein says. “But now, it’s the business of democracy too.” Klein plans to use automated robo-calls, “Astroturf” lobbying and computer-generated avatars to get out the vote.
National Fuckery League
[Trigger warning.]
I don't guess I'm the only person who's noticed that the NFL has a violent fuckneck problem. There are, to be sure, a lot of good guys in the NFL, but holy hell are there a lot of bad ones, too. And I'm not even talking about the guys with gun charges, or criminal mischief charges, or DUIs, or drug busts. Or even the guy with the dogfighting ring. I'm talking about the alleged rapists and domestic abusers. The guys who hurt women, and hurt them badly.
Today, there are two more stories of NFL players being accused of violent acts against women. Angelina Mavilia, a trans woman, alleges that NFL cornerback Eric Green sexually assaulted her
then got "extremely agitated and threatening," according to court documents, and warned: "This never happened. You'd better not tell."And Supriya Harris alleges that running back Steven Jackson attacked her while she was nine months pregnant (with his child) and then instructed her to tell hospital staff that her injuries were the result of falling in the shower.
Naturally, I do not know the veracity of these individual allegations. But I do know that the NFL has a problem. And I also know that all their ostensible efforts to change the culture don't mean shit, as long as the culture includes transmisogynist/homophobic hazing and banter like coaches still calling their players "ladies" and players still calling each other "fags."
These men spent egregious amounts of time in an environment in which anything considered feminine is dehumanized. And pretending that subjecting oneself to, and participating in, such ritualistic dehumanization doesn't have any practical consequences only increases the number of people who are going to get hurt.
If the NFL wants to get serious about its violent fuckneck problem, they can start with banning hate speech on the field and in the locker rooms. And follow that with a zero tolerance policy on sexual violence and domestic assault.
Because right now? Your policy sucks. And everyone knows it.
Inside The Technology Hatch
Steve Jobs unveils Apple's newest gizmo, the iPad. The bazillionaire is pictured here demonstrating the popular app Sawyer's Sweaty Abs. The unit will retail for $815 and is guaranteed to deflect flaming arrows. In the event of a water landing, the iPad can be used as a flotation device.
Quote of the Day
"We live in a dangerous world. What we can't do at a time when we're in two wars and we have a very determined enemy in Al Qaeda, we can't stand down." — David Axelrod, Senior Adviser to President Obama, explaining why the President's proposed spending freeze excludes the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security.
Let's Hear It for the Girl
The other day I said that if health care/insurance reform does happen, it may well be because Congressional Dems made it happen despite the president. I should have added: And because of Nancy Pelosi.
[At a press conference], a striking quote from Pelosi underscoring her determination to get health care done:And unlike some other Democrats we could mention, she's still trying to get the Senate to include a public option. Otherwise known as the thing that would make this thing national healthcare reform.You go through the gate. If the gate's closed, you go over the fence. If the fence is too high, we'll pole-vault in. If that doesn't work, we'll parachute in. But we're going to get health care reform passed for the American people.It's often been observed that this health care fight is the defining moment of Pelosi's career, and that victory would seal her place as one of the most powerful House Speakers in modern history. She seems to realize this, too.
