Bronski Beat with Marc Almond: "I Feel Love"
Seen
On a church sign this weekend:
This, in a state with 10% unemployment, 14% of its population living below the poverty line, one of the highest rates of personal bankruptcy in the nation, and the fifth highest foreclosure rate in the nation—more than 15% of homeowners in Indiana who have a mortgage are in arrears or in foreclosure.
Having been raised in a Christian tradition, I know the sign, which had no other content or context, was about the "wealth" of god's love and how it doesn't matter if you lose your house in this life because you'll have a mansion in the clouds someday after you die—but not everyone is a god-believer, and not every god-believer is a Christian, and not every Christian subscribes to that particular flavor of Christianity, which leaves a whole lot of people for whom a sign declaring "You're Wealthy!" won't exactly resonate as a celebratory exclamation.
I'm not saying that congregation doesn't have the right to believe they're wealthy, or to put that shit on their sign out front. I'm just saying it strikes me as a rather spectacularly unkind thing to do, given the fact that a hell of a lot of people who pass it will not read it as a declaration of eternal triumph as much as a hostile, taunting reminder of their dire financial circumstances in the here and now.
Ur So Gay
I was playing around in the app store on my phone this weekend when a great idea came to me. Why don't I see what gay-themed apps might be available? Whoops!
I discovered no less than six apps under the gaydar monicker. (Gaydar 3000, Gaydar 2.0!, GAYdar+, to name a few.) And what do these products do? They're all the same, more or less.
To wit, the description from Gaydar Pro:
Are you Gay? Are your friends Gay? With Gaydar Pro you can easily find out! Tilt your phone towards the target and the meter will go full on Gay Crazy! Scan their Thumb print to detect their level of gayness. Use Homo-Recognition to take a picture of the gay target and watch the rainbows take over! Send picture to friends!
OMFG, that is soooooooooo hee-larious! HA ha ha! Ur a total gaywad! Because there is nothing funnier than calling someone a fag! Oh, my aching sides!
Okay, I know. It's just a joke. I should lighten up. No one ever got hurt by being called a homo, right? Right?
(p.s. This is a good gaydar app, at least from the description.)
Clusterbuck
Yesterday, Republican US Senate candidate for Colorado Ken Buck—who opposes abortion even in cases of rape/incest and has engaged in professional rape apology—appeared on Meet the Press this weekend, where he endeavored to make it clear that he's not just a rank misogynist with intractable hostility toward the notions of autonomy and consent, but is also a gross homophobe who believes being gay is a choice, even though "birth has an influence over it, like alcoholism and some other things."
David Gregory: In a debate last month, you expressed your support for Don't Ask, Don't Tell [and] you alluded to 'lifestyle choices.' Do you believe that being gay is a choice?You know, the funny thing is that I would not be axiomatically in disagreement with an argument that went something like: "I believe that sexuality exists on a spectrum, is fluid for many people, and, through some combination of genetic predisposition and cultural influence—nature and nurture, if you prefer—we all come to arrive at an individual sexuality along that spectrum, a journey which is less choice for some than others, but we should all be free to choose whatever we like for ourselves, including those with whom we consensually partner, and no one choice should be privileged above another."
Ken Buck: I do.
Gregory: Based on what?
Buck: Based on what?
Gregory: Yeah. Why do you believe that?
Buck: Well, I guess you can choose who your partner is.
Gregory: You don't think it's something that's determined at birth?
Buck: I think that birth has an influence over it, like alcoholism and some other things, but I think that basically you have a choice.
Gregory: That put him outside the mainstream of views on this?
Michael Bennet: I absolutely believe he's outside the mainstream of views on this.
Which it almost sounds like Buck could be saying—until he gets to that whole "ya know, like alcoholism" thing, which implicitly construes homosexuality as a disease. If pressed, I imagine Buck might come out with some evangelical mumbo-jumbo about how homosexuality, like alcoholism, is a test from god, a temptation that moral people are meant to avoid. I grew up hearing stuff like that: We're challenged not to steal when the collection plate passes by, and gay people are challenged not to succumb to their naughty, naughty same-sex urges. Because those are totally the same thing. (And "we" and "gay people" are always mutually exclusive groups.)
It's too bad that the language of choice surrounding sexuality exists almost exclusively in arguments about how queer people could choose to not be queer, if they really wanted to—because when the best argument against Buck's nonsense is, "Nuh-uh! Queer people can't help who they are!" that doesn't feel very much like a win to me.
In a better world, Gregory wouldn't be pointing out that Buck's views are outside the mainstream because he believes being gay could be a choice, but because he believes that, if it is, people should necessarily choose otherwise.
So, about Haley Barbour and Clemency...
[TW: Violence]
Last week I (following the lead of Bob Herbert and others) posted about the Scott sisters, who, without clemency from Gov. Haley Barbour, will die in prison for the heinous crime of supposedly asking some guys to steal $11. This weekend, Herbert wrote a column in which he explored Barbour's record on clemency. As the kids say, it's very, uh, interesting. In that he pardoned nice guys who happened to kill women. Really.
But before I go any farther, I have a confession to make. In addition to being a political junkie, I've also got a fair number of personal ties to the Magnolia State. So I know who Haley Barbour is. To be blunt, I don't much care for the guy.
Despite this, I really do hope he'd listen to me when it comes to the Scott sisters. Even though I'm a queer as fuck socialist, I do know a thing or two about politics.
Here's the thing: Regardless of what he does, Governor Barbour isn't going to score any points among the left, or in social justice circles, because he's Haley Barbour. But he's also not going to lose any points by, say, listening to the DA who feels that two life sentences is a bit harsh for supposedly having some kids rob some guy of $11. If we're going to reduce ourselves to "counting points", I don't see a real downside to not letting a couple of women die in prison for no particular reason. And Maude, I hope we're not deciding this on a point basis. Of course, technically, we're not deciding anything-- what I meant to say is that I hope Gov. Barbour is using some less cynical system to decide whether to let two women die in prison.
Barbour could let Jamie and Gladys Scott die in prison (and as I previously mentioned, Jamie has developed end stage renal failure, so time is of the essence here). Alternatively, he could do the thing (where potential adjectives Barbour may choose might include Christian, gentlemanly, or moral) and release the Scott Sisters after serving over 15 years in prison for a crime they may well have not even committed.
Who, precisely, is the constituency being served by this injustice? (Now is the point in the story where I mention that Jamie and Gladys Scott are black). Allowing this injustice to stand doesn't merely lose one followers, it's flat out scary; it's 'I'm going to think twice about visiting friends in Mississippi lest I run across the guy that for some reason is in charge of Mississippi State government' scary. What, precisely, is the counterbalancing upside?
Anyhow... Bob Herbert's update which is now also my update: Governor Barbour has pardoned or suspended the sentence of some guys before. Five guys, to be precise. As Herbert notes, all five guys were very guilty of very violent crimes. But, and here's the thing, they were all nice guys. No, really, I'll let you ponder that with your jaw on the ground as you sift through the archives of nice guydom:"Radley Balko, in an article for Slate*, noted that none of the five men were given relief because of concerns that they had been unfairly treated by the criminal justice system. There were no questions about their guilt or the fairness of the proceedings against them. But they did have one thing in common. All, as Mr. Balko pointed out, had been enrolled in a special prison program “that had them doing odd jobs around the Mississippi governor’s mansion.”
The idea that those men could be freed from prison and allowed to pursue whatever kind of lives they might wish while the Scott sisters are kept locked up, presumably for the rest of their lives, is beyond disturbing."
Maud, who tipped me off to this update, also noticed an, uh, interesting trend amongst the newly freed men: four of the five killed one-time wives or girlfriends. But they were such nice guys. Wow.
One would like to think clemency also applies to people who were denied justice.
Gov. Barbour's office can be reached at 1-877-405-0733, or by mail at: P.O. Box 139, Jackson, Mississippi 39205. The email is: governor@governor.state.ms.us.
Free The Scott Sisters, a blog maintained in part by the Scott sisters' mother, Evelyn Rasco, has more information.
Mrs. Rasco asks that her daughters' many allies contact the parole board:
Shannon Warnock - Chairman
Bobbie Thomas - Board Member
Clarence Brown - Board Member
Betty Lou Jones - Board Member
Danny Guice - Board Member
State of Mississippi Parole Board
660 North Street
Suite 100A
Jackson, MS 39202
Fax: (601) 576-3528
H/t: Maud
---
*Although it would be unwise to overlook (and Herbert didn't) the work of the Jackson Free Press on this story. They've been researching Barbour's pardon records since day one:"At the Jackson Free Press, we believe it is vital for media, and especially women, inside the state to get these stories out there about violence against women and why it's not taken seriously enough. Barbour's unilateral pardoning of these murderers is one major reason. It is also disturbing when the women doing this difficult, and often thankless, enterprise reporting to reveal these truth about violence against women are not given the credit for their reporting, and it goes to men outside the state."
Today in Rape Culture/Assvertising
[Trigger warning for stalking]
Video description and transcript below the fold.
I have a football game on right now, and this Bud Light ad just aired. It's no secret that beer ads tend to promote regressive gender stereotypes. This particular ad (entitled "Persistence"), however, puts in extra effort. First off, as an ad, it's just stupid. Big walking beer bottles and sheaves of wheat? Really? Then come the gender stereotypes: "he" goes out to clubs every night; "she" likes chatting with her girlfriends and quiet walks on the beach. Worst of all is the presentation of stalking as romantic, which is a central narrative of rape culture. The idea is that at least a "little" stalking is absolutely necessary to a romantic relationship. There is a "fine line between romance and stalking", the ad tells us, and he "walked it like a pro". A pro. A professional stalker, that is.
But hey, giant walking bottles of beer will be giant walking bottles of beer, amirite?
Extra sneaky-jackass points for putting the words of praise for stalking into the mouths of women.
I'll add that the use of a ridiculous anthropomorphic beer bottle to stalk a big bunch of anthropomorphic wheat makes it that much easier for people to say, "it's just a silly ad--nobody would think this was real! Sheesh, where's your sense of humor?!" Which is beyond disingenuous, of course, because there would be no "humor" in the ad if real men did not stalk real women.
Video description:
A big walking Bud light bottle and huge walking stalks of golden wheat appear spending time together, walking on the beach, etc. Golden Wheat has lunch with her friends and chats with them. The Bud Light bottle is seen out alone at a club, with a woman grinding against him on a dance floor. The Bud light bottle stands beneath Golden Wheat's window, playing music, then climbs up to her window on a ladder. The three female friends of "Golden Wheat" talk about how they didn't think the relationship would work at first, but now they see that Bud Light and Golden Wheat are good together.
Transcript:
At first, we were against it.
He's so not your type.
He goes out like every night.
You know, eventually, he took to what she liked and he learned about her and he really made an effort.
But there really is a fine line between romance and stalking.
Yeah, but he walked it. Like a pro.
Introducing Bud Light Golden Wheat. Light Beer. Huge Flavor. They hooked up, and you're gonna fall in love.
Open Thread
Hosted by Kermit the Frog.
This week's open threads have been hosted by the color green.
And Kermit knows, it ain't easy being green.
The Virtual Pub Is Open
[Explanations: lol your fat. pathetic anger bread. hey your gay.]
TFIF, Shakers!
Belly up to the bar,
and name your poison!
Today's Edition of "Conniving and Sinister"
See Deeky's archive of all previous Conniving & Sinister strips here.
[In which Liss reimagines the long-running comic "Frank & Ernest," about two old straight white guys "telling it like it is," as a fat feminist white woman (Liss) and a biracial queerbait (Deeky) telling it like it actually is from their perspectives. Hilarity ensues.]
Action Item
[Trigger warning for self-harm.]
I had no idea that the White House has a "policy of not sending condolence letters to the families of service members who commit suicide," which not only dishonors the service of those troops but also stigmatizes mental illness.
It shouldn't need to be said that someone who takes hir own life in a war zone died from combat just as surely as someone who died from a bullet shot from an enemy gun. And given the number of suspicious suicides (see, for example, Pfc. LaVena Johnson) during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, this policy is almost certainly denying condolence letters in cases where soldiers have been assaulted and killed in staged suicides to cover up the crime.
The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention and Mental Health America are gathering signatures for petitions to change the policy. You can sign them here and here.
[H/T to Greg Mitchell.]
Really, USA...
I just honestly cannot say this enough: Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels should not be our president.
A VAT? Seriously?!
I know you're thinking: Sure, Liss, but he can't be serious. That idea's as stupid and hackneyed as privatizing state tollways! No one would actually do something so foolish!
Whoooooooooooops.
While We're (Still) on the Subject of Television...
...can we spend a few moments talking about this guy?
[Image Description: A photo of fashion designer Mondo Guerra, who is a contestant on the current and eighth season of the design competition reality show, "Project Runway."]
I really liked Mondo right from the start; his aesthetic totally does it for me, and I thought he seemed—from the highly subjective editing, of course—like a rather nice and interesting guy. But now, as the season winds down to its final episodes, my adoration is in full bloom, and I can tell you the exact moment it happened.
Episode 7: "What's Mine Is Yours." Mondo is paired up with the highly unpopular Michael C, who the other designers have decided is a talentless hack, despite the fact that Michael Kors and Ninagarciafashiondirectorformarieclairemagazine, not to mention Heidi and the guest judges, generally like his work. Mondo's unhappy. But he treats Michael C with professionalism and decency, and, to his surprise, discovers he kinda likes Michael C and thinks he's rather more talented than he's been given credit for.
Cut to Mondo in a talking head segment, looking straight into the camera and saying, matter-of-factly, "Basically, I was being a dick."
Well. I've been there. Though not on national television.
Last night, tasked with naming the two designers he'd choose to go to Fashion Week with him, Mondo again spoke about how he had underestimated Michael C. It taught him something about himself, he explains.
He's graceful and dignified in a way that few people are about their own mistakes. And he's talented as fuck. And funny as hell. And brave. And adorable.
Maude, I hope he wins.
[Commenting Note: Spoilers up to and including last night's episode are okay, but if you know anything about fashion week etc., please leave that out of the thread or include a big ol' spoiler warning.]
Bi-Monthly Reminder & Thank You
This is, for those who have requested it, your bi-monthly reminder* to donate to Shakesville.
Asking for donations** is difficult for me, partly because I've got an innate aversion to asking for anything, and partly because these threads are frequently critical and stressful. But it's also one of the most feminist acts I do here.
So. Here's the reminder.
You can donate once by clicking the button in the righthand sidebar, or set up a monthly subscription here. We first made the Subscribe to Shakesville page available last March, which means most of the subscriptions are running out and have to be renewed if you want to keep your subscription active.
Let me reiterate, once again, that I don't want anyone to feel obliged to contribute financially, especially if money is tight. Aside from valuing feminist work, the other goal of fundraising is so Iain and I don't have to struggle on behalf of the blog, and I don't want anyone else to struggle themselves in exchange. There is a big enough readership that neither should have to happen.
I also want say thank you, so very much, to each of you who donates or has donated, whether monthly or as a one-off. I am profoundly grateful—and I don't take a single cent for granted. I've not the words to express the depth of my appreciation, besides these: This community couldn't exist without that support, truly. Thank you.
My thanks as well to everyone who contributes to the space in other ways, whether as a regular contributor, a guest contributor, a moderator, a transcriber, or as someone who takes the time to send me the occasional note of support and encouragement. This community couldn't exist without you, either.
---------------------
* I know there are people who resent these reminders, but there are also people who appreciate them, so I've now taken to doing them every other month, in the hopes that will make a good compromise.
** Why I ask for donations is explained here.
While We're On The Subject
ABC has struck a deal with popular website Awkward Family Photos to turn the concept into a TV show. For those not aware, Awkward Family Photos is a blog that is made up exclusively of awkward family photos. Just photos, of families, that are awkward. The photos are awkward. The families, not neccesarily so. There are no characters on this website. No stories. Just photos some people might find odd. How does this translate into a television show? (Hint: It doesn't.)
I Write Letters
Dear TeeVee show directors,
When you have two characters in a car talking, the driver still needs to watch the road. Even as s/he addresses the person in the passenger seat. Seriously, it is ridiculous when the driver (usually a man) gazes with oblique intensity as he delivers his monologue while the car hurtles forward smoothly--no tire-squeals, no horn-blares, no crashes, no citations for running red lights.
Come on.
Bones and Dexter, I'm looking at you.
Yeah, I know, Suspension of Disbelief and all. But Suspension of Physics? I think not.
Carry on,
S.
On the Telly
So, last night, I caught a few minutes of The Office, and I'm not sure what was going on, but I'm pretty sure they were jumping a shark and then circling back to blow it up with 10,000 nuclear bombs or something? Anyway, it was bad. Is what I'm saying.
Now in its seventh season, it's gotten to that point that all long-running sitcoms eventually reach, where even within the boundaries of the imaginary, unrealistic, impossibly silly world that the show has established, nonsensical and implausible things start to happen—and you have arguments with friends or siblings that start with your emitting an exasperated sigh and observing that the show has gotten really fake, and then go something like, "The whole show is fake." "Yeah, but that was fake even within the fakeness of the show." "That doesn't make any sense." "Even fictional worlds establish boundaries that come to feel tangible." "Ooh, is that something you learned while getting that English degree you've never used?" "SHUT UP I HATE YOU!" "This is why no one takes you seriously, because you get all mad about sitcoms."
But I digress.
The point is, there is a lot of stupid stuff about this show. But one of the stupidest has to be that they're keeping up the pretense of the "documentary." Several seasons ago, when it was obvious that NBC was going to, as per usual, wring every last ounce of joy out of the show by running it way beyond even the point where all the characters were hateful caricatures of their former selves, the writers should have phased out the talking head interview segments.
Instead, at this point, the viewer is meant to believe that a documentary film crew has been following this office for seven years, but the footage has never been cut into an actual documentary for broadcast.
Which I guess might itself serve as some kind of absurdist joke, if only the show hadn't lost its humor ages ago.
The format was successful for the original UK version on which NBC's show is based, because British television doesn't work the same way US television does. Twelve great episodes and a Christmas special is an acceptable run in Britain; here, that's a miniseries—and the model depends on a show having a long enough run that its producers can make money off endless reruns in perpetuity.
Quantity over quality.
Steve Carell, the star of the US Office is leaving at the end of this season, but they're going to keep the show on the air—keep those cash cows hooked up to the milkers, boys! Yeesh.
It isn't any wonder that the best episodic television these days is on cable, where the model looks much more like the British one—shorter and irregular seasons for shows aspiring to more than the cheapest possible filler between detergent adverts.
Hope and Change, Bitchez
Because I am a stupid ingrate who doesn't understand how politics works, this is the sort of thing that makes me very angry:
President Barack Obama is meeting with former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to talk about a pending arms treaty with Russia and other issues.Pathetic. As if this isn't a sop to the conservatives who the administration are INFUCKINGEXPLICABLY convinced will vote for them, if only they throw their base under the bus hard enough and look enough like the detestable Bush administration—a sop that's politically useless unless someone "leaks" it to the wire services.
A White House official said Rice and Obama have a "cordial relationship," and the president looks forward to Friday's meeting covering "a range of foreign policy topics." The official isn't authorized to speak publicly and insisted on anonymity.
Glenn notes why inviting one of the architects of the Bush torture regime to sit at the foreign policy table is evidence of, among other things, a fervent desire to maintain the status quo in Washington, rather than challenge it in even the most cursory way:
I realize this is very childish, shrill and unpragmatic of me. All Serious people know that it's critical to let Bygones be Bygones and that Serious National Security officials must meet with one another across partisan lines to share their wisdom and insights. Still, the fact that Obama is not only shielding from all accountability, but meeting in the Oval Office with, the person who presided over the Bush White House's torture-approval-and-choreographing meetings and who was responsible for the single most fear-mongering claim leading to the Iraq War, speaks volumes about the accountability-free nature of Washington culture and this White House.Let us recall, with bitter irony, that this was eminently predictable, but, when I wrote that post, pre-Disqus commenting system, it garnered about 400 comments, most of which were accusing me of being a racist hysteric who was in the bag for Clinton.
Good times.
[Previously in Third Term of Bush: One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven, Eight, Nine, Ten, Eleven, Twelve, Thirteen, Fourteen, Fifteen, Sixteen, Seventeen, and there are about a zillion more, but you get the drift.]
