The Ladies of The View Talk Lesbianism

So, here's the thing: I tend to identify as straight because I am in a long-term relationship with a man, I've primarily been attracted to men, I've never been in a long-term relationship with a woman, and thus I get all the privileges of heterosexuality. I've fooled around with other girls, back when dinosaurs roamed the earth, and I've had a queer poly relationship with two men, and I strongly believe that my sexuality is dynamic—and that deviation from a static sexuality at a fixed point on a spectrum makes me queer by most straight standards, but doesn't always make me queer by most queer standards.

So I'm a straight-queer sorta gal. But labels are not what this post is about. It's about the fluidity of sexuality, and how the ladies of The View don't dig variability, man.


[Transcript below.]

Where to begin? Well, although Behar is certainly the voice of reason compared to Hasselbeck's nonsense, I don't particularly love the idea that women who come out as lesbians late in life were necessarily closeted all along. I'm sure that's true for many women, but why is it so hard to conceive of a woman (or a man, for that matter) whose attractions, or choices, change over hir lifetime?

We're always so desperate to talk about sexuality as if it isn't a choice, ever, for anyone, lest we create a crack into which homobigots can insert their argument that it's an American-wrecking lifestyle choice that makes the Baby Jesus cry buttplug-shaped tears or whatever, but, you know, maybe we should be talking about sexuality in a way that says even if it is a choice, people who love and fuck and live with and parent with and grow old with or have one-night stands with people of the same sex are deserving of equal rights because it's no one else's goddamned business and MREWYB.

Personally, I'd like to create space for the women who choose to be lesbians later in life, instead of telling tales about how they just "didn't know" they were lesbians until they woke up one morning with a voracious appetite for cooter, or whatever magical awakening they're meant to have had.

And let us not fail to mention how this entire either-or conversation the View ladies are having totally erases the existence of bisexual women.

I'm not even going to bother deconstructing the foolishness emanating from Hasselbeck's garbage-brain. Suffice it to say I do not agree that late-life lesbianism is primarily attributable to sexless spinsters who are just looking for passionless companionship and fall into the arms of the nearest accommodating lesbian because all the good men are occupied applying copious amounts of Just for Men to their temples and chasing co-eds. Yawn.

[Via.]
Whoopi Goldberg: There is a rise…in late-blooming lesbians. More and more women are choosing same-sex partners, even after decades of heterosexuality. Why do you think that is?

Sherri Shepherd: Is that saying as women get older, it's just like a 'been-there-done-that' kind of thing, and I'm open to—

Elizabeth Hasselbeck: No—no, and I'll tell you what's happening: All the older men are going for younger women, leaving the women with no one!

Joy Behar: So that's why they're suddenly sleeping with women? That's ridiculous.

[a bunch of stupid crosstalk]

Behar: You act like women are in jail—we're not in jail! I—

Hasselbeck: No, but you're searching for a companion that understands you, and if all the men who— Say you were in a heterosexual relationships; you're looking for that, but the men who are of your age, have had similar experience, are off chasing a little young—

Behar: Yeah, but, Elizabeth, being a lesbian, being gay is not just, you know, holding hands and walking through the tulips.

Hasselbeck: I understand that, but—

Behar: There are things that people do, sexually—

[crosstalk]

Hasselbeck: Thank you for educating me! [sarcastically]

Behar: Wait a minute; I'm not finished. But I don't think that you suddenly wake up and say, "You know, I think I wanna do that." You wanted to do it; you were just trapped in a system that said "Get married."

Shepherd: So you're saying all along—

Hasselbeck: Maybe, maybe not!

Behar: All along you knew you were gay, and you just didn't either admit it or you didn't acknowledge it or you didn't know it, maybe—

[crosstalk]

Hasselbeck: —but maybe there's also— We've done studies that women aren't necessarily needing something sexual; they're more needing something in terms of—

Shepherd: Companionship.

Hasselbeck: —companionship, at a certain age.

Open Wide...

Blog Note re: Recent Donations

I have a policy of writing thank-you notes to everyone who sets up a subscription or makes a one-time donation to Shakesville, and I was just trying to catch up on my note-writing when I accidentally deleted a whole bunch of emails from May and June I hadn't had a chance to respond to yet. I don't even know how the fuck I did it, because they're not even in the trash file—they're just…gone.

I started going through my PayPal records one at a time to recover the email addresses, but that process was so time-intensive it was taking away from the work people donate to support. Ugh.

So, I'm sorry for getting so behind in the first place, and I'm sorry that I totes fucked up and deleted those emails, and I'm sorry that now I'm not going to be able to send personal thank-yous to a lot of people.

Thank you to each of you. I am truly grateful for your support of this community and my work to manage it. And my apologies for not saying that personally.

[I will just quickly acknowledge here that some people will inevitably read this as some sort of backhanded fundraiser. I know I'm opening myself to that charge, but it was more important for me to say thank you than to avoid criticism, and all I can say is that this is not intended as a plea for donations. It is genuinely just to say thank you for donations received and offer my apologies for fucking up.]

Open Wide...

Federal Judge Puts Hold on Controversial Part of AZ Immigration Law

It's far from over, though:

In a ruling on a law that has rocked politics coast to coast and thrown a spotlight on the border state’s fierce debate over immigration, United States District Court Judge Susan Bolton in Phoenix said some aspects of the law can go into effect as scheduled on Thursday.

But Judge Bolton took aim at the parts of the law that have generated the most controversy, issuing a preliminary injunction against sections that called for officers to check a person’s immigration status while enforcing other laws and that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times.

Judge Bolton put those sections on hold while she continues to hear the larger issues in the challenges to the law.

"Preserving the status quo through a preliminary injunction is less harmful than allowing state laws that are likely preempted by federal law to be enforced," she said.

"There is a substantial likelihood that officers will wrongfully arrest legal resident aliens," she wrote. "By enforcing this statute, Arizona would impose a 'distinct, unusual and extraordinary' burden on legal resident aliens that only the federal government has the authority to impose."

Open Wide...

Daily Dose o' Cute


Olivia, daydreaming of Two-Legs dropping a tasty morsel of chicken.

Or turkey. Turkey will do, too.

Open Wide...

You Know What You Need?

The Brady kids singing "It's a Sunshine Day":


Synopsis:
The Brady kids fucked up and can't afford to purchase the silver platter (it's all Jan's fault, duh) they'd picked out for Carol and Mike's anniversary. So they go down to the Pete Sterne Amateur Hour and perform "Keep On" (dig the jumpsuits) on live television in the hopes of winning a fat check. Their band's name is The Silver Platters. Get it? Well, they lose. (Sad face.) But Carol and Mike and Alice see their performance and buy the platter themselves. Heartwarming. The above clip is their rehearsal number "It's a Sunshine Day."
Can't you dig the sunshine? Well? Can't you? I can, sure, but the fucking humidity gets me every time.

[Cross-posted.]

Open Wide...

Wednesday Blogaround

This blogaround brought to you by Shaxco, makers of Deeky's Snark-Packs, for your lunchtime snarking needs.

Recommended Reading:

[TW for stalking] Irin: Stalking Is About to Get Harder

Andy: Only 10% of the Pentagon's 'DADT' Surveys Have Been Returned

Sinoangle: Wardrobe Issues

[TW for sexual assault] C.L.: All Your Boobs Belong To Us: Some Thoughts About Consent While Female

Historiann: Why has The One fallen short?

[TW for disordered eating] Harriet: Poor Dr. Lundberg

[TW for trans-related discussion of names assigned at birth] Jessie_C: "...but she was born as..."

And check out Tami's and Renee's new True Blood podcast.

Leave your links in comments...

Open Wide...

Assvertising

Best Buy's got a new commercial advertising its Geek Squad tech repair services:


[Transcript below.]

Well, it's a good thing that women aren't routinely objectified and women in technology aren't routinely marginalized, or else this ad would be wildly offensive!

Best Buy, naturally, has every right to communicate that women's primary value to them is as fetishized sex objects. Message received. The (substantial amount of) money I spend at tech stores (and have in the past spent at Best Buy) will be taken elsewhere.

Contact Best Buy's "Diversity & Inclusion Team" here.
Scene: A Best Buy store. A white mother and her white, college-aged son are browsing laptops, with the help of a Best Buy employee, who is a young black man. There is a sign reading: "Buy a laptop, get a geek."

Son [looking at a particular laptop]: Man, this is perfect.

Employee: Great. Well, with every laptop, you get a geek, so, take your pick. [He gestures at the wall, and they walk over, where adult humans are packaged in clear boxes as if giant dolls.]

Mom: Look at all these fabulous geeks. There are so many. [They walk past an Asian man in a box, then a white man in a box, and then come to a black man in a box.] Look at this one. It helps you [reading info on box] "video chat with Mom."

[Son comes to a stop in front of a white woman in box; she is young, thin, conventionally beautiful, brunette, with her hair up in a bun, and wearing glasses—a sort of classic "sexy librarian" look.]

Son: Bingo.

Mom [pointing at black male geek]: Look at this one—you can video chat with me, honey.

Son [staring, gape-mouthed, and moving closer to white female geek]: Mom, go get the car.

Mom [to employee]: He's in such a hurry to learn!

Voiceover: Buy a new laptop and get Geek Squad support for six months—online, on the phone, or in-store.
[Assvertising: Parts One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven, Eight, Nine, Ten, Eleven, Twelve, Thirteen, Fourteen, Fifteen, Sixteen, Seventeen, Eighteen, Nineteen, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 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, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113.]

Open Wide...

Two Minute Nostalgia Sublime



Eddie Cantor: "Makin' Whoopee"

Open Wide...

Apparently We Don't Miss You At All

Remember that dopey billboard with a picture of W that asked all passing drivers if they miss him yet?

Well, at long last there is a response:


"No."

The mustache is a nice touch.

[H/T to ThinkProgress]

Open Wide...

Seen


[Click to embiggen.]

If you can't view the image, it's a picture of the side of a car wash bearing the words "Support Our Troops" flanked by two American flags. Below, there are three sections. On the left: "WWII: 1939-1945." In the middle, a picture of a coiled rattlesnake labeled "Don't Tread on Me," next to "Vietnam: 1959-1975." On the right: "September 11: 2001-Present."

1. I've no idea why WWI, Korea, the first Gulf War, or any other wars in which the US were involved are not on the wall. Maybe the owner(s) of the business only had family members serve in the referenced conflicts, but it's not like the average passer-by knows that (if it's even the case). The Korean War is known as the Forgotten War (or the Unknown War), and its exclusion is cringe-inducing.

2. "September 11" isn't a war.

Open Wide...

Open Thread

Photobucket

Hosted by Eddie Cantor and Benjamin H. Grumbles.

Open Wide...

Question of the Day

What's your favorite snack?

I'm not really a snacky person, but I'll usually pick potato chips before anything else. As of this weekend, I am officially in love with these.

Open Wide...

Ambassador Dudley

As I mentioned earlier, Dudley was an ambassador for his rescue organization at the County Fair this weekend. Most of the dogs there were fosters who are available for adoption, but Dudley and another grey girl were there as rescues who had found a home. Dudz did so well; he just worked and worked and worked the crowd—friendly and sweet and gentle with every baby and kid and adult who stopped by. He didn't lie down once for the first three hours, and, when he finally got tired, he laid down then rolled onto his back with his pink belleh in the air and legs all akimbo, looking cute as hell and letting strangers rub his tum.

I was ridiculously proud of him. On the way home, I told him that he saved other dogs' lives by being such a good boy—"Now these dogs will get adopted, and then the volunteers can foster new dogs, which means more dogs will be rescued!"—and Iain couldn't stop chuckling at me. "What are ye LIKE wif that dog?!"

It's just a turn of (Scottish) phrase, but I guess I'm like someone who knows how close her beloved companion came to getting killed, just because he wasn't going to make anyone any money anymore.


Beautiful Brindles.


Duke has a little rest from being professionally cute.


Dudz makes friends with Naomi, while Clayton hangs out nearby.


Greys, greys everywhere!


Naomi, chillaxin'.


Ambassador Dudz.


The gorgeous and tremendously sweet Clayton, who has
the biggest paws I've ever seen on a greyhound!

It was quite genuinely amazing to see Dudley in action. From a shy little guy who peed submissively every time I tried to leash him to a confident guy with an exuberant nature who put a smile on the face of everyone who approached him.


Dudz, right off the track, on left. Dudz at the dog park, two weeks ago.

The rescue saved Dudley. And it couldn't make me any happier that he's eminently willing (and able) to be an ambassador for the people who saved him, in order that we might pay it forward to another deserving dog.

Open Wide...

Justice Not Served

[Trigger warning for sexual assault.]

Shaker The Great Indoors just sent me a heads-up that Mormon sect leader Warren Jeffs' rape convictions have been overturned by the Utah State Supreme Court:

Mr. Jeffs, the leader of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, an offshoot Mormon sect with an estimated 10,000 members, had been serving two consecutive sentences of five years to life after he was convicted in 2007 of being an accomplice to the rape of a 14-year-old girl from his church whose marriage he had presided over. But in a unanimous decision, the Utah Supreme Court ruled that a state judge had erred when he failed to tell the jury that Mr. Jeffs could not be found guilty unless he specifically encouraged the girl's husband to commit rape, which Mr. Jeffs denied doing.

The victim, Elissa Wall, had claimed that Mr. Jeffs forced her at age 14 to marry her first cousin, Allen Steed, who then raped her. Prosecutors argued that Mr. Jeffs knew the marriage would lead to nonconsensual sex but insisted that the union go forward anyway and told Ms. Wall to be an obedient and submissive wife, despite her pleas for a divorce.

But Mr. Jeffs's lawyer, Wally Bugden, argued that though Mr. Jeffs had indeed encouraged the marriage and counseled the couple to stay together, he had never intended for Mr. Steed, who was 19 at the time, to rape Ms. Wall.
So, here's what I don't understand: In Utah, a 14-year-old can legally consent to sexual intercourse only with someone who is less than 4 years older, thus making any sexual activity between a 14-year-old and a 19-year-old rape, irrespective of whether the 14-year-old gave consent.

If Jeffs encouraged these two to marry and have sex, he was de facto encouraging the husband to commit rape.

This whole case is totally fucked.

In the meantime, Jeffs isn't being given his freedom, despite Utah's attorney general admitting a retrial would be difficult, because there is "an outstanding warrant for his arrest in Texas, where prosecutors are seeking to extradite him to face a number of sexual assault charges, including one involving an underage girl with whom Mr. Jeffs is suspected of fathering a child with." Jesus.

[Commenting Guidelines: Please note that there are polyamorous members of this community who do not practice the sorts of gender-inequitable relationships that are a hallmark of the sort of polygamist community Jeffs oversees, so if you reference his polygamy for a legitimate reason in your comment, please be sure to use careful and specific language so as not to alienate those who practice an egalitarian polyamory.]

Open Wide...

Texting! With Liss and Deeky!

Liss: We are at the county fair. There's a pony with the hugest dong ever. I wanted to get a picture for you but I couldn't without making it obvious that I was trying to take the picture of the ginormous pony dong.

Deeky: LOLz for real.

Liss: I didn't want someone screaming THINK OF THE CHILDREN at me. LOL!

Deeky: Just tell em you're taking it for your mo friend and they'll understand.

Open Wide...

Breaking News: Shitty Relationships are Shitty for Everyone (or Today in What About The Menz)

by Shaker ExMo

So here's the deal, ladies. You've been taught from childhood that love and romance were your ticket out of unhappiness. Sure, you may have had a feminist aunt (or mother, or father), but your Seventeen, and later your Cosmopolitan, impressed upon you the importance of a (heterosexual, monogamous, racially homogenous) relationship. Part and parcel of this socialization is the belief that you are a delicate flower and that men, well, men could take you or leave you. They don't need to have a relationship to be happy. So you must be coy, play hard to get, and generally invest vast amounts of emotional energy, time, and money into getting, and then keeping, a man. Men are merely an audience for your pathetic display, and really, they are too simple and sex-obsessed to recognize how you are tricking them. Furthermore, they could give a shit about the quality of your relationship, so once you have done the right thing and wrestled you a good one, you must take it upon yourself to nag them into romancing you with consumer products.

Prepare to have your knickers knocked clean off.

Ready?

Men care about the quality of their relationships.

According to the New York Times (and to the study they are reporting on), previous hypotheses about the relationship between men and women's mental health and relationship status may not apply. The conventional wisdom, both among what the NYT calls "scientists of love" and in our popular culture, holds that being in a good relationship has more of an effect on women's mental health than men's. This wisdom, like most wisdom labeled "conventional," is based on about 50% actual data/science and about 50% total fucking bullshit.

It has been found, for example, that both men and women who are married (hetero/officially, more on that in a minute) can expect better outcomes on a variety of metrics. Married men live longer and are more physically healthy. Married women are less depressed. Both married men and married women are economically better off. These findings have been documented in a wide variety of studies in the social sciences.

What has also been documented, however, is a difference in the way that women and men express psychological distress. What it boils down to is that men are more likely to turn that distress outward, and engage in risky (like substance abuse) or violent behaviors, while women are more likely to turn that distress inward, which tends to manifest as depression or unhappiness. So, while women who are single, or otherwise not able to check off the "married" box on a survey, may also have higher levels of depression or other types of emotional distress, their male counterparts will not manifest that distress in the same way.

So what happens is we have the popular media (like the NYT) reporting on studies and saying women are more depressed than men about their relationships. And as we know, this shit does not occur in a vacuum. Only in a culture where women's experiences are devalued to the point that their emotions are used against them to further denigrate their experiences, can news stories about depression and relationship status gain traction.

But this new study suggests that men (specifically, young unmarried men around the age of 20 in the city of Miami) benefit more than women from a good relationship and are hurt more than women by a bad relationship. How can that be so? Men are unfeeling bastards who could give a shit about how good our relationship is, right? They are just in it for the sex and the conquest, right? Now my little lady brain is confused.

The biggest problem with this article (and, I should say, a problem that is not evident in the original study) is that it conflates the findings of this study, that apply to young men engaged in non-marital relationships with earlier research that applied to married men in a different age cohort. Could it be that men of my father's generation were socialized differently than the men in my husband's generation? No, not in America, where individualism rules.

Furthermore, the NYT manages to, hold your breath, blame women for men's sudden rushes of unpleasant emotion. To wit, "And pity the men, their anguish so long overlooked. One hypothesis of the authors suggests that while women have outlets for emotional engagement in the form of intimate friendships, men are adrift without the ongoing care of a female soul mate." Because our responsibility as women, obviously, is to coddle men and "take care of them" and be their mothers. Because that is how healthy relationships are built and maintained. Excuse me while I vomit.

There are other problematic elements of this story, and admittedly with this line of research. Most research being published now is based on survey instruments that were written 20 years ago, and that come with other various limitations. There is not much focus among "love scientists" on gay/lesbian relationships, or non-marital monogamous relationships, or non-monogamous relationships. Until the point that relationships that are deemed "unconventional" are studied by social scientists with the same vim and vigor that the heterosexual marriage is fetishized in popular culture, shit like this is bound to get published.

Side note: I first heard of this story when a colleague posted the link to the NYT story on their Facebook page. The thumbnail was of Mel Gibson, a man who is demonstrably not dealing well with a failed relationship. Coincidence?

Full disclosure: I personally know both authors of the JHSB article, and have worked with them both. They are not aware that I am writing this and are not connected to it in any way.

Open Wide...

Daily Dose o' Cute

Here's a special treat for the equestriphiles among us... This weekend, we were at the County Fair, because Dudley was being an ambassador for the greyhound rescue (more on that later), and I had to duck quickly into the big barn to visit the horses and cows and pigs, since, as I explained to Deeky (to his amusement), I pretty much love anything that smells of hay and poop, and have ever since I was a kid and touched the velvety muzzle of our neighbor's horse for the first time.*

Among the many beauties was this truly breathtaking horse (a blond Clydesdale, or Belgian draft horse, or possibly a cross), whose enormity isn't done justice in these images. I would have had Iain stand next to her for scale, but we had to take turns running in, since we had Dudz with us.


[Still pix below the fold.]







--------------------------------

*

Yes, that's my wee diaper-sagged ass feeding carrots to Todie, a horse owned by neighbors. I was about thirteen months old in that photo, which was taken the summer of 1975. Mama Shakes and I used to walk down to the pasture, which was maybe 100 yards from our house, and it always seemed like the longest walk in the world, because I couldn't wait to see Todie, and his small companion pony Princess.

Open Wide...

Speaking of...

Liss' post below about David Brooks reminded me of this bit of nonsense PBS posted to Facebook a few days ago:


"Too liberal"? Really? Whatever.

Open Wide...

Today's Edition of "Conniving and Sinister"



Blank

See Deeky's archive of all previous Conniving & Sinister strips here.

[In which Liss reimagines the long-running comic "Frank & Ernest," about two old straight white guys "telling it like it is," as a fat feminist white woman (Liss) and a biracial queerbait (Deeky) telling it like it actually is from their perspectives. Hilarity ensues.]

Open Wide...

Papers, please

What happens when you turn imprisoning human beings from a grave governmental responsibility into a private money-making business?

Law enforcement agents begin to be required to ask anyone who seems suspicious to prove they shouldn't be locked up.

Open Wide...