Bros: "When Will I Be Famous"
Quote of the Day
"We treat each other with respect or we find another place to work. Period."—Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on there being "no gray area" about how servicemembers should conduct themselves with regard to a repeal of DADT. I totally agree.
Also: Adm. Mullen rulez.
[Via scatx.]
Friday Blogaround
This blogaround brought to you by Shaxco, official sponsor of power-lounging.
Recommended Reading:
Sady: On Jezebel's Apology for That Piece
Fannie: Women's Sports and the Lavendar Menace [TW for homophobia, Christian supremacy]
Echidne: How's That Bipartisanship Working for You?
Peter: The new Obama fault line on the left: 'He's a closet Republican' vs. 'He's an inept Dem'
Adrienne: This Is Just Wrong [TW for racism]
Andy: The Rapture is Coming on May 21, 2011; Noah's Ark in 2014
Leave your links in comments...
Unemployment Round-Up
Yikes. The monthly jobs report for November was Not Good.
New York Times—Disappointing Job Growth in U.S. as Jobless Rate Hits 9.8%:
In a jolting surprise to the economic recovery and market expectations, the United States economy added just 39,000 jobs in November, and the unemployment rate rose to 9.8 percent, according to the Department of Labor.Wall Street Journal—Economy Added Fewer Jobs Than Expected in November: "The weaker-than-expected data caused the dollar to weaken against the yen and euro and other major currencies. Treasurys rallied on the report. The U.S. unemployment rate has now been above 9% since May 2009, or 19 months. That matches the longest stretch at such an elevated level since World War II."
November's numbers were far below the consensus forecast of close to 150,000 jobs added and an unchanged unemployment rate of 9.6 percent.
More than 15 million people remained out of work last month, and 6.3 million of them have been unemployed for six months or longer.
New York Times—Unemployed, and Likely to Stay That Way: "This country has some of the highest levels of long-term unemployment — out of work longer than six months — it has ever recorded."
Steve Benen: "The awful monthly jobs report should wake up Washington."
Blog Note
Misty is in town visiting for the weekend, so posting is going to be light from me today. (And from Misty, heh.) We have lots of sitting on the couch talking about stuff to do!
USA: Beacon of Stupid - Christine O'Donnell Gets a Book Deal
Sure:
NEW YORK (AP) — Christine O'Donnell has lost an election, but gained a book deal.The most valuable thing Christine O'Donnell could write—a feminist piece about being the target of a literal witch-hunt in the year 2010—is the last thing she'd actually write. It's just going to be a bunch more Tea Party nonsense, intended to show the supposed power of the Tea Party.
The Delaware Republican and Tea Party favorite, defeated in last month's voting for the U.S. Senate, will offer her take on the campaign and her "frustrations" with the political process, St. Martin's Press announced Thursday.
(Oops!)
St. Martin's Press is just hoping to capitalize on the fact that Tea Partiers are bound to buy something as unremarkable (and otherwise ignorable) just to show that the Tea Party can rank high in book sales. Which is a reason to publish a book, but I'm not sure it's a very good one.
Question of the Day
What is the best gift you've never gotten? By that I don't mean the most expensive, indulgent luxury item you can imagine, but some little thing that any old friend or lover could buy you without much trouble or unreasonable expense, which would be perfect for you, but no one's ever thought to buy it.
The first time we did this question, my answer was "a set of really good knives," which my mom has since bought for me and I love dearly. She also recently bought me a mandolin slicer that I adore.
I'm surprised no one's ever bought me a subscription to People magazine. It is, of course, a total garbage nightmare, but it's always in my bathroom, because it's perfect toilet reading: Mindless bullshit in short chunks. And I always get teased for buying it, but everyone loves reading it when they poop at my house!
Today in Fat Hatred
by Shaker Esme, a law student at Washington University St. Louis, who is taking a short break from studying for finals to bring you this special message. She is both fat AND bisexual, and is sure that the combination of those two characteristics just blew your mind!
[Trigger warning for fat hatred, body policing, and homophobia.]
Via Facebook, Pam Spalding of Pam's House Blend shared this article from Mother Jones: Army Kicks Out More Gays Than Fat Soldiers. The article takes the tone that kicking gays, lesbians, and bisexuals out of the Army is somehow far worse than kicking someone out for being fat (ignoring, of course, the existence of GLB folk who are fat).
As Congress prepares—again—to debate Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Mother Jones has unearthed data showing the Army in recent years has been tougher on purging gays from the ranks than soldiers who are physically unfit for duty.”I completely agree that Don't Ask Don't Tell is a terrible thing, and something that should have ended a long time ago. It's absolutely ridiculous that it's still going on, in the face of all the evidence that it's a harmful, discriminatory policy. But fighting for LGBT rights doesn't give you carte blanche to get mad that the Army isn't discriminating enough against fat people. And make no mistake, this article is not about the Army needing to discharge soldiers for failure to pass fitness tests. This is an article about the Army needing to discharge fat people. For being fat.
But the Army's recent discharge statistics given to MoJo by a government source, suggest that the service has been far more concerned about its soldiers' sexual orientation than their waistlines, muscular endurance, or cardiovascular ability. In fiscal 2007 and 2008, the Army brass threw out 592 enlisted members for violating DADT—more soldiers than it ejected for excessive body fat or fitness-test failures combined. (emphasis original)Yeah! How dare the army not worry about soldiers' waist lines! I know that when my country needs defending, it's important to me what size pants my defenders are wearing.
The service's response was to ease its fitness standards and make it harder for commanders to discharge overweight or underperforming soldiers. (emphasis mine)That's an or right there. In other words, the author feels that someone who is overweight but not underperforming should be discharged. As in OH NOES THEY AREN'T KICKING OUT THE FATTIES WHO PERFORM UP TO THE STANDARD
And of course, what would a fat-hatin' article be without a little humor.
"In '08-09 it was so bad that I had a warrant officer who demanded we get him XXXL flight uniforms," one active Army officer tells Mother Jones. "He couldn't wear the new [camouflage] pattern ones because they didn't make them for a guy who was 313 lbs." The officer added, "Some people really are too big to fail, I guess."Yes, the officer demanded a uniform that fit. What an ungrateful asshole. It's almost like he wanted to be clothed while he does his job in service to our country. Silly fat people, clothing, respect, and honor are for skinny people!
Some people really are too big to fail, I guess.
This is the line that really pisses me off. This author is honestly comparing this officer's desire to serve his country with a massive bailout of corporations that have engaged in all kinds of reckless and awful behavior, and helping to drive our country into a recession. This guy's fatness is, apparently, equivalent to destroying the economy.
I hate crap like this. I hate that the liberal bastions that are supposedly a haven for us hate us, and will publish tripe like this, without so much as even considering the possibility that being fat doesn't necessarily preclude one from being in the military. And so, Mother Jones, I wish to inform you that skinny doesn't mean fit, and fat doesn't mean incompetent. I can heartily assure you that when I was in the “healthy” weight ranges of the BMI, I couldn't run a mile in under 15 minutes.
"If military bases and military schools become focal points for advancement of the gay agenda, we can expect serious repercussions among the families of the volunteers who make up our armed forces," the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins wrote in an op-ed Monday.Yes, we're not kicking fat people out of the army because of the fat agenda. You caught us. Here we are, wielding all this power in society, us fatties. It's a shame that hate groups like the FRC aren't hating on enough categories of people to satisfy Mother Jones.
His editorial never addressed the advancement of a fat agenda in the military.
The table of statistics is similarly awful.
Would Mother Jones be happier with Don't Ask Don't Tell if the Army was also kicking out more fat people for being fat? And people of color for not being white? And women for not being men? They are advocating discrimination, provided that the discrimination is against the right bogeyman for their tastes. This table shows that individuals are already being discharged from the military solely on the grounds that their body fat is too high, without evidence that they cannot meet fitness standards. The military is already kicking out fat people for the sake of fatness. But apparently, the Army is just not discriminating enough for Mother Jones. In fact, if one looks at the spreadsheet of all the statistics, the Army wasn't even keeping track of people kicked out for failing the fitness tests until 1994, only those kicked out on the basis of body fat.
To top all of this off, though, is the aggravation I get from reading the statistics included in the article. There's no information to indicate whether there are more people who can't meet fitness standards in the Army than there are gay people in the army. There are no statistics here, like if you're gay, you have a n% chance of being kicked out, and if you don't meet the fitness standards, you have a n-1% chance of being discharged. There's just raw numbers with none of the necessary context.
Trust me on this one, you don't want to read the comments. We're talking fat hate, homophobia, and all kinds of other assholery.
This post is not about comparing the oppression of gay, lesbian, and bisexual individuals and the treatment of fat individuals. This is entirely about Mother Jones' argument that fat necessarily disqualifies one from being considered capable.
Palin Pile-On
Sarah Palin is used to getting flack from the Democrats and liberals; she is counting on it for book sales and TV appearances. But now she's starting to get it from Republicans. First, Joe Scarborough, the former GOP Congressman from Florida and current MSNBC morning show host, told the GOP to, using her own phrase, "man up," and confront the former half-term governor of Alaska about her plans to destroy the GOP.
Palin is not a stupid woman. But like the current president, she still does not know what she does not know. And she does know how to make millions of dollars, even if she embarrasses herself while doing it.Now Ed Rollins, a former political adviser to Ronald Reagan and GOP big-wig, is throwing in his two cents and telling Ms. Palin to stop comparing herself to Ronald Reagan.
That reality hardly makes Palin unique, but this is one Republican who would prefer that the former half-term governor promote her reality shows and hawk her books without demeaning the reputations of Presidents Reagan and Bush. These great men dedicated their lives to public service and are too good to be fodder for her gaudy circus sideshow.
If Republicans want to embrace Palin as a cultural icon whose anti-intellectualism fulfills a base political need, then have at it. I suppose it’s cheaper than therapy.
But if the party of Ronald Reagan, Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio wants to return to the White House anytime soon, it’s time that Republican leaders started standing up and speaking the truth to Palin.
You're a media star and a great curiosity. You were plucked out of political obscurity because of the whim of presidential contender John McCain, who didn't know you and made you into an overnight sensation. You performed well for three weeks in the campaign, did better than expected against Joe Biden in the debate and then you self-destructed.Now far be it from me to come to the defense of Sarah Palin as a political contender or possible presidential candidate; she has heretofore shown as much depth of intellectual curiosity and understanding of real world issues as the thickness of a skin on the top of a cup of cafe con leche. But I can't help notice that both Mr. Scarborough and Mr. Rollins are being a just a tad misogynistic in their dismissive tone of Ms. Palin, as if to say "run along, little lady, the menfolk have some serious work to do here." It reinforces the point that the straight white men will not surrender the leadership of their party to someone who isn't just like them. After all, no one on the Republican side of the aisle delivered that sort of patronizing tsk-tsking about George W. Bush, who was as woefully dim about the issues as is Ms. Palin. Not only was his ineptitude not considered a disqualifying factor, but it was reframed as evidence of what a charming "everyman" he is. Mr. Bush became the guy everyone wanted to have a beer with for the same reason that Ms. Palin is told to go back to Alaska.
You clearly weren't ready for prime time, but neither was your running mate. After the election, you quit your day job as governor of Alaska with 18 months left in the term and went out and made a fortune making speeches and selling a book.
It was certainly your right, and you're not the first one to cash in on fame. Millions of Americans love you, and I am sure millions more hate you. Unfortunately, that's what happens in politics.
You can be a contender for the Republican nomination in 2012, but you're a long way from being the nominee. You're going to have to beat some very formidable candidates with way more experience and far superior knowledge on issues foreign and domestic. And to rate your chances today, I would put them at "possible" but not "probable." It's an all-uphill battle.
Right now, polls indicate you wouldn't carry your home state of Alaska.
[...]
Ms. Palin, serious stuff needs to be accomplished in Washington.
If you want to be a player, go to school and learn the issues. Put smart people around you and listen to them. If you want to be taken seriously, be serious. You've already got your own forum. If you want to be a serious presidential candidate, get to work. If you want to be an imitator of Ronald Reagan, go learn something about him and respect his legacy.
If you want to be a gadfly, just keep doing what you're doing.
There are plenty of reasons to be against Sarah Palin on any number of points, but the fact that she's a woman shouldn't be one of them.
Daily Dose o' Cute
Video Description: A short video of us playing tag with Dudley at the dog park. I can only ever tape so much of this because I want to just pocket the camera and PLAY!
As always, still pix of all the behbehs below the fold...
Tall.
Sleepy.
Pouncy.
Still.
SCIENCE!
Two interesting stories worth a discussion...
Discovery Changes Estimations of Stars and Planets in Universe:
Astronomers have discovered that small, dim stars known as red dwarfs are much more prolific than previously thought—so much so that the total number of stars in the universe is likely three times bigger than realized.Discovery Changes Understanding of What Constitutes Life:
...In addition to boosting the total number of stars in the universe, the discovery also increases the number of planets orbiting those stars, which in turn elevates the number of planets that might harbor life, [Pieter van Dokkum, a Yale University astronomer who led the research] said. In fact, a recently discovered exoplanet that astronomers believe could potentially support life orbits a red dwarf star, called Gliese 581.
"There are possibly trillions of Earths orbiting these stars," van Dokkum said, adding that the red dwarfs they discovered, which are typically more than 10 billion years old, have been around long enough for complex life to evolve. "It's one reason why people are interested in this type of star."
Scientists said Thursday that they had trained a bacterium to eat and grow on a diet of arsenic, in place of phosphorus — one of six elements considered essential for life — opening up the possibility that organisms could exist elsewhere in the universe or even here on Earth using biochemical powers we have not yet dared to dream about.
The bacterium, scraped from the bottom of Mono Lake in California and grown for months in a lab mixture containing arsenic, gradually swapped out atoms of phosphorus in its little body for atoms of arsenic.
...Caleb Scharf, an astrobiologist at Columbia University who was not part of the research, said he was amazed. "It's like if you or I morphed into fully functioning cyborgs after being thrown into a room of electronic scrap with nothing to eat," he said.
...Phosphorus is one of six chemical elements that have long been thought to be essential for all Life As We Know It. The others are carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen and sulfur.
While nature has been able to engineer substitutes for some of the other elements that exist in trace amounts for specialized purposes — like iron to carry oxygen — until now there has been no substitute for the basic six elements.
Quote of the Day
"I'm trying to catch my breath so I don't refer to this maneuver going on today as chicken crap, all right? But this is nonsense!"—House Republican Leader John Boehner, spittin' mad at House Democrats for pulling a tricksy political gambit to move ahead with a vote on extending tax cuts only for those making $250,000 or less.
Top Chef Open Thread
Top Chef All-Stars premiered last night, bringing back all our favorite cheftestants, as well as Mike Isabella. I was very excited to see lots of my old favies, especially Carla, who I will allow to sum up my excitement at her return (meta!):
This episode will be thinly sliced and served with spoilers, so if you don't want to know what happened, please pack your knives and go.
Number of the Day
$1,049,783,150: "Congressional earmarks have been one of the primary targets of the tea party, representing the nexus of the movement’s arch foes — government spending and Washington influence peddling. ... But it appears that tea party's self-proclaimed representatives in Washington haven't been putting their money where their mouths are. Hotline On Call reports today that members of House Tea Party Caucus, founded by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) to 'represent the views of our constituents,' requested over $1 billion in earmarks during the last fiscal year."
Principles!
Next Stop, Menstruation Huts!
What the everloving fuck: "Female staffers at a company in Norway have been told to wear red bracelets when they have their periods – to clue in the boss that this is the reason for more frequent bathroom visits."
Blink.
[H/T to Shaker tereska13]
This is so the worst thing you're going to read all day.
Keeping Romance Alive in the Age of Female Empowerment.
It's hard to pick what my favorite passage is from that stinking garbage fart of an article, but I think I'm going to have to give my vote to: "The male ego can be a more fragile thing than the female ego, which is used to a regular battering and has hence developed a sense of humor!" Yikes.
Perhaps you'd like to contact the New York Times' public editor and politely inquire why it is that serious articles about women's/queer issues—like domestic violence, multigenerational parenting, homophobia's affect on children with gay parents, gender bias and sexual harassment, stalking, and rape—end up in the Style section, but articles like this piece of heteronormative, misogynist shit get filed in World News.
[H/T to Shaker Emily.]
Feel the Homomentum!
The Illinois Senate has passed a bill for civil unions.
Springfield, IL — Landmark civil unions legislation, giving committed long-term partners important legal protections afforded to other Illinois families, has cleared another hurdle as the Illinois Senate voted Wednesday to pass the bill.The legislation will probably be signed in the city of Chicago before the end of the year. I was watching the local news this morning and there's been a lot of spluttering from "family" organizations, but for the most part, the reaction has been very positive. Yay.
"There is electricity all around," The Civil Rights Agenda (TCRA) president Jacob Meister told ChicagoPride.com moments after the vote. "Today is a victory for our democracy and the fight for the civil rights of the LGBT community."
The Illinois Religious Freedom Protection and Civil Union Act (SB 1716) passed to cheers in the Senate by a 32-24-1 vote Wednesday. The bill passed the Illinois House by a 61-52 majority vote on Tuesday. (read full coverage of the House vote) The crucial piece of legislation now moves to Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn, who made a campaign promise to sign it into law.
What distinguishes this civil unions bill from others is that it adds visitation rights at hospitals and making end-of-life decisions to the couple.
And, of course:
State Sen. and Rev. James Meeks (D-Chicago), who is running for Chicago Mayor, was the only Democrat to cross party lines to vote against the bill. State Sen. Ira Silverstein (D-Chicago) is the only senator who voted present.I'm shocked! SHOCKED, I tell you!
LPGA Opens Its Ranks to Women Who Are Trans
The players have voted, and the requirement stipulating that members of the the women's professional golf association must be "female at birth" will be removed from the women's tour rules. The change should be final within a few weeks.
The change was prompted by a lawsuit filed by Lana Lawless, a woman who is trans and was disallowed from competing in this year's annual women's long-drive golf championship after the Long Drivers of America adopted the LPGA's transphobic policy. Once the players were asked to revisit the policy, they voted to change it.
Player Christine Kerr commented: "We certainly don't want to discriminate against anybody, that's not what the LPGA is about. And if she can qualify, she'll be able to play. We're like, the last sports organization to do it, it's just we've never really had to look at it before."
Quite obviously, the policy should have never been there in the first place, but it was, and inclusion moving forward is a great outcome.
[TW for non-consensual gender assignment] As an aside, "female at birth" rules are truly inane. What does it even mean to be "female at birth," really? It says "female" on my birth certificate, but I could be intersex and not even know it. It used to be routine (and still is, in many places) to assign infants as female after botched circumcisions or surgeries to "fix" atypical genitalia. Many (most?) people to whom this happens go through life never knowing about it. Nor would the LPGA, or anyone else who has "female at birth" rules. The idea that "female at birth" is protecting a sport (or whatever organization) from any women with an alleged (nope) advantage (nope) is predicated on disappearing all the women who are "female at birth" by virtue of a doctor's hand or the natural concealment of bits that might indicate otherwise to a culture who can't see intersex woman as a singular concept and not two mutually exclusive ones.
Point is, "female at birth" rules are pointless.
[H/Ts to Shakers cynical1 and koach. Commenting Guidelines: "B-b-but trans women have an unfair advantage!" and "Men will say they're trans just to compete against women!" will not be debated in this thread. Don't even go there.]
