The Blow Monkeys: "Digging Your Scene"
On Equal Pay Day
Today is "Equal Pay Day," the day which "symbolizes how far into 2011 women must work to earn what men earned in 2010."
When you read/hear/think about Equal Pay Day today, remember that it is based on an average: Pay disparities across populations affect women of color, transgender women, women with disabilities, and/or single mothers without parenting help more profoundly.
Last year, the Ms. Foundation for Women, in conjunction with the Center for Community Change, completed a survey (pdf) which found that while four out of five US respondents described themselves "as very or somewhat concerned about the economy," and had been concerned for an average two years, "55% of African American women say they have been worried about it for five years or more" and "Latinas have been particularly hard hit, with two-thirds saying their personal situation has been affected by the country's economic situation and more than half reporting that they or someone in their household has lost a job in the past year."
The survey also found a stark practical effect of the pay disparity: "35% of women say they have $500 or less in savings. Latinas, in particular, report low levels of savings, with more than half saying they have $500 or less."
The reality that Equal Pay Day symbolizes is this: Pay disparity creates a hole out of which it's incredibly difficult to dig—and every intersectional marginalization of one's identity represents the real possibility that hole will be even deeper than average.
Next time someone mentions bootstraps to you, tell them you sold your bootstraps to pay the electrical bill on April 12.
Safer Healthcare in Illinois
[Trigger warning for sexual violence.]
It's kind of amazing that this restriction doesn't exist already, but Illinois state is working to pass a law that would prohibit convicted predators from practicing medicine in the state:
Health care workers would lose their licenses permanently upon conviction of a sex crime or forcible felonies under legislation the House overwhelmingly passed today.To address the inevitable protest: No, that does not mean any healthcare practitioner who is accused of a sex crime would immediately have to begin notifying all patients. There is, particularly in rape cases, a threshold of credibility that allegations must pass, often even despite guidelines that stipulate otherwise, before an official criminal investigation is opened.
Inspired by a Tribune investigation, the bill would require health care workers, including doctors, with charges pending to have chaperones with them if they keep treating patients before their trials. They would need to notify all of their patients in writing about any pending criminal allegations.
The measure now moves to the Senate. Sponsoring Rep. Will Burns, D-Chicago and 4th Ward alderman-elect, expects it to pass easily.
Burns hailed the series for pointing out the problems with current regulations and doctors and advocates of victims of sexual assault for being able to "get this done."
No person whose name is on a sex offender registry would be eligible to get a medical license under the bill.
And, by way of reminder, the narrative that there are multitudinous rape accusations levied by revenge-seeking women is also false, so, no, this does not "open a door" for vituperative (straw)women, either.
What this does is protect patients from predatory healthcare providers. The End.
[H/T to Shaker Loquamani.]
Anyone Got $2,000,000 They Can Loan* Me?
Last summer, amid the crashing economy, the Bethesda Theatre went belly up. The art deco movie house had recently undergone a $12 million renovation, but was unable to make it into the black. So the owners defaulted on the mortgage and the building was shuttered. An auction in June failed to attract any bidders, and the bank bought the venue back for a measly two million.
So, if you've $2 million you want to give me, I'm going to head down to BB&T and purchase a nicely refurbished, 700-seat theater (with concession stand!) and start Dr. Deeky's International Film Series. First up: "Cinema of the Weimar Republic"!
We'd open with Robert Wiene's The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari, because: duh. And obviously, there'd be a showing of F. W. Murnau's Nosferatu. Maybe the festival could close with latest restoration of Metropolis. If I could swing live accompaniment by a Weimar-era styled cabaret, that would be cool too. Or, (though less historically accurate (on many levels)) maybe a steampunk Theremin band.
A personal favourite of mine, Wegener's The Golem: How He Came Into the World would be included too, as would The Man Who Laughs starring Conrad Veidt. And Pandora's Box with Louise Brooks, too. Anyway, that's all just off the top of my head.
And somewhere in this, I'll figure out a way to get Nutriaman up on the screen. Probably after nunsploitation week.
Anyone with $2,000,000 please contact me ASAP.
* By which I mean "give."
#thingsfatpeoplearetold: Difficult, Heartbreaking, and Incredibly Powerful
by Brian Stuart, fat activist and author of the FA blog Red No. 3.
[Trigger warning for fat hatred.}
Since Saturday evening, fat people on Twitter have shared their experiences and stories under the #thingsfatpeoplearetold hashtag. As the name suggests, the meme discusses all of the things fat people are told their lives are. All the things they are told must be true. All the things they are told will come true. It is very difficult to read. The stories being shared are raw and emotional and run a gamut from casual injustice to outright horrors. They all share the same thread of having our lives defined for us without regard to our lived experiences, indeed often explicitly denying our lived experience. They are stories of people who feel entitled to tell fat people things about what their life must be. They are stories of fat people being "put in their place" by those with power and privilege. It is very difficult to read.
This isn't about "Fat Acceptance 101," though many fat activists are among those posting. This is more about what happens when people take fat shaming for granted and thus feel empowered to define the fat experience for fat people and enforce it on those who don't fit those definitions. #thingsfatpeoplearetold is not about what Fat Acceptance wants to do, but about why we need Fat Acceptance. These are stories about what fat people are put through by those waving the banner of "good intentions". It's not just for fat people to commiserate, but also shows us all just what our culture of fat stigmatization is resulting in. It's very difficult to read.
It is difficult because the stories carry so much truth.
I started the hashtag with some posts of ironic fat shaming but my attempts to exaggerate for effect were betrayed by the true hostility fat people are subjected to in the name of our own good. As outlandish as I was, people really do think fat people should be denied clothing and jobs lest we think it's okay to be fat. After me, the meme took off with a stream of tragic and all too real attacks that fat people endure regularly. After the first day, I collected some of the posts for my blog, but it was really overwhelming. The life of a fat person is full of indignities and it was all too easy to catalog them but so difficult to be confronted with these truths.
One person would talk about how they were told they would be pretty if they would just lose weight and a dozen would follow along the same lines. As would stories of those who were more direct in demeaning a person as "ugly." As would stories of people told they'd never find love in a fat body. Or if they did find a partner, the person would just use them for sex. And if their partner didn't just use them for sex, then there must be something wrong with them for being attracted to a fat person.
Someone would talk about being turned away from a clothing store and then another person would have the same experience. Others talked of being told they would only be accommodated if they bought their clothes online. More chimed in with lack of access to jobs, homes, and health care. If a fat person defied any of these pronouncements in any way, they spoke of having their lives and experiences denied. They couldn't really have low blood pressure. They couldn't really be getting married.
The hostility fat people experience is extreme. One woman spoke about being on an operating table for a C-section and having a surgeon mock her fat, suggesting they get rid of it while they've got her open. Another spoke of sitting in an ambulance while a police officer refused to believe she was raped. Others were told they should be happy to have been sexually assaulted. We heard about how transgender persons were belittled for being too fat to pass. We heard about fat people who were sick and were denied treatment until they lost weight. Fat mothers were told they were selfish for being fat because they would orphan their children. Or that their children would never love them. Or that they'd just ruin their children's lives so maybe the baby should just die in the womb. People who were told they would die before their 21st birthday (or 30th, or 40th, as the needs of the threat demanded). It is very difficult to read.
In reading it, though, the universal nature of these experiences became unmistakable. I don't want to link to individual tweets, because what has really struck me with #thingsfatpeoplearetold is how no story was expressed alone. The things one fat person was told, another was told as well. Reading the stories is heartbreaking. Reading of the mistreatment and disrespect invites despair and it invites anger. It should. In recognizing this treatment as wrong, as an injustice, we should be angry about what is being done to fat people; what is being done to ourselves. We can also find inspiration, though. None of us are alone in what we have endured. In our darkest moments, we are not alone. It is frustrating and sad that we are not alone because others have had to see the same abuse, but it is also empowering to recognize this shared experience. It is empowering to see so many come together to share their stories.
I've always felt like I've been a very fortunate fat person. I am privileged in a lot of ways. I did not grow up fat. I'm a man. I'm also relatively small for a fat person. I still saw myself in so many posts. I've seen how other fat people are mistreated and it has always motivated me to speak out. What #thingsfatpeoplearetold has become is something I never could have imagined, but I am so glad for all of the stories being shared. They remind fat activists like myself of what we are fighting against and who we are fighting for.
These stories are difficult to read and they are difficult to write, but I would still invite you to do both. #thingsfatpeoplearetold are potent reminders of just what fat shaming results in and also of the importance to change. Everyone sharing their experience is displaying a level of strength and courage that those who say the things fat people are told would deny. Fat people face many difficulties, but we can still have the power to speak out and let others know what we experience and that we are not alone. They may be difficult to read, but they are incredibly powerful.
[Related Discussion Threads at Shakesville: I Was Fat-Shamed, I Fat-Shamed Someone, When Fat-Shame Stopped Me, When Fat-Shame Didn't Stop Me, Fat Stereotypes, Fat Limitations.]
Trump Threatens to Pull a Perot
Well, if he wants to help Obama walk right back into the White House, this is the way to do it:
Real estate mogul Donald Trump suggested Tuesday he might run for president as an Independent if he's unable to win the Republican nomination in 2012.This guy is all talk. He's not gonna spend his hard-earned (lulz) Celebrity Apprentice cash on a vanity presidential run when there's so much pristine Scottish seacoast to destroy.
Trump, the reality TV star who has been flirting with a run for president, suggested that other Republicans vying for the party's nomination are concerned he might wage a third-party campaign, which Trump said he thought was a viable path to the White House.
"The concern is, if I don't win, will I run as an Independent? And the answer is probably yes," Trump said in a video interview with The Wall Street Journal.
..."To be honest with you, I think it'd be very, very bad for the Republican Party, because they did some polls recently where I get 29 percent as an Independent. That's a lot — far more than Ross Perot ever got," Trump said.
Question of the Day
What is your favorite guilty pleasure movie?
Mine is Dirty Dancing. It's actually a meaningful film to me, for all the reasons I wrote about here, but, if I'm honest, sometimes I just want to watch Jennifer Grey spin dizzily almost off her feet (@ 3:55) and see Patrick Swayze's muscles sliding beneath his skin (@ 2:50). I've watched that film a truly embarrassing number of times.
Quote of the Day
"When the only acceptable discourse is between The New Republic and The Free Republic, what you're going to get is basically a solidly Republican outcome."—Atrios, on how the apathy/hostility toward the progressive left leaves us drifting infinitely rightward.
See also Digby's great post today on the same subject here: "The fact is that there is no liberal establishment willing to validate liberalism."
I was thinking about an old piece I'd written, almost six years ago now, about how progressives are politically homeless in the US. When I dug it out, I was bitterly amused to discover that it was spawned by a piece from Barack Obama's senate campaign stump speech in which he was rather generous toward then-president Bush.
Said I: "Obama isn't up for reelection next year, but I expect he'll be stumping for other Dems who are, and I hope his tune has changed. I've not a smidgeon of tolerance left for anyone, of any party, who would leave our political passion without a home."
lulz
Hollywood Hates Saying Goodbye
Video Description: A collection of film clips showing characters ending phone calls by hanging up the phone without saying goodbye.
I absolutely love this video, because that shit has been driving me totally trucknutz for years, along with "Failure to Close Front Door" and "Leaving On Headlights."
[Via Gabe.]
Yawn Barf Fart
Willard "Mitt" Romney announces he's forming an exploratory committee to run for president.
True Fact: Romney's primary qualification for the office of the presidency is "patriotic posing."
In which I confuse 2011 with 1935
As I was heading home from the office this afternoon, I noticed it get really dark and hazy out. A warm front has moved in (It's 84 at the moment!), and rain is supposedly on the way. I wasn't sure what the haze was. Rain, maybe? It didn't really look like it. In any case, visibility was really low. And then it hit me. I was looking at the old Carrier plant.
[Workers take apart a Carrier warehouse this February.]
Carrier, which proudly advertised on the sides of its warehouses that it was "World's Largest Air Conditioning Company", was a fixture in Syracuse for generations. Several years ago, the company moved the bulk of its manufacturing jobs out of town.
In the past year, Carrier (which is now owned by United Technologies Corporation), has been working at an increasingly rapid pace on disassembling many of the old manufacturing and warehouse facilities on its East Syracuse campus. Today was no different, with the noticeable addition of very strong winds. What I was seeing was dust and dirt from the piles of rubble forming a thick soup across Carrier Circle.
In other words, visibility was noticeably reduced in Syracuse this afternoon as the remainder of the city's manufacturing base was literally carried away with the wind. Maybe we could get the federal government to install some windbreaks.
Cross-posted: Duck! Duck! Gay Duck!
Number of the Day
$698 billion: The US' military spending last year, via Think Progress: "U.S. spending on the military last year far exceeded any other country. We spent six times more than China — the second largest spender. Overall, the world expended $1.6 trillion on the military, with the United States accounting for the lion's share."
[Every policy proposal] must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs, balance between the private and the public economy, balance between the cost and hoped for advantages, balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable, balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual, balance between actions of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress. Lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration. The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their Government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of threat and stress.—That radical progressive peacenik, Dwight D. Eisenhower, January 17, 1961.
...[The] conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence—economic, political, even spiritual—is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet, we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources, and livelihood are all involved. So is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Eisenhower was a five-star general, Supreme Commander of the Allied forces in Europe during World War II, the first Commander of NATO, and a Republican president who campaigned on defeating "Communism, Korea, and corruption," yet continued New Deal policies once in office and warned, in his farewell address (excerpted above), against giving undue influence to the military-industrial complex.
Whoooooooooops.
Maryland Senate Fails To Pass Gender Identity Anti-Discrimination Act
The Maryland Senate failed to pass the Gender Identity Anti-Discrimination Act today, which would have prohibited discrimination in the areas of employment, housing and credit. In a move similar to last month's marriage equality vote, the Senate today voted to recommit the bill to committee. The House previously passed the bill in an 86-52 vote.
Transgender Marylanders experienced poverty (making under $10,000 per year) nearly three times the national average; 12 percent reported experiencing homelessness; 17 percent said they were denied a home/apartment due to being transgender; and 22 percent reported having to find temporary spaces to stay in an attempt to avoid homelessness.
Rea Carey, Executive Director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force issued this statement:
"The Maryland Senate today turned its back on an opportunity to recognize and affirm our common humanity. As the startling statistics and heart-wrenching personal stories found in our national survey on transgender discrimination show, this bill would literally save lives. Income from employment is critical to paying for shelter, food, health care — critical to quality of life and even to survival. No one should fear being jobless, homeless and going hungry because of discrimination. Without legal protections, transgender people are made particularly vulnerable to this neglect, bias and abuse. Despite this setback, we are confident that Maryland will eventually join the many states that currently extend the essential security and nondiscrimination protections to transgender people. We will continue to stand with Equality Maryland until equality is achieved."
The Free State isn't feeling so free at the moment.
Check this out too, if you've a moment.
Coolest Video Stream Ever
Live streaming video by Ustream
A live bald eagle nestcam showing a vigilant parent watching over 3 behbehs.
An Idea
Hey, know what would be an awesome idea...? A channel that plays nothing but music videos all day, every day. They could call it "Music Television," and call the people who intro the videos "video jockeys."
Damn, that would be cool. Hard to believe with 600 million channels, something like that doesn't exist already.
Monday Blogaround
This blogaround brought to you by Shaxco, proud distributors of Deeky's Frozen Tacos. "They're yummity-scrumptious!"
Recommended Reading:
Andy: [TW for homophobia; clergy abuse] Catholic League Takes Out Full-Page Ad in NYT Blaming Priest Abuse on Homosexuality
Melissa: SNL, Helen Mirren's Boobs, and Older Women's Sexuality
The Angry Black Woman: A Morality Pill?
Brian: [TW for fat hatred] #thingsfatpeoplearetold: The First 24 Hours
scatx: SOME BOYS LIKE PINK and THAT SCARES FOX NEWS!
Lady T: [TW for intersexphobia] O Apatow, Where Art Thou?
Leave your links in comments...
The Facts of Life
A couple weeks ago I came across an older news item about a book being challenged in a Tampa (FL) public library. The book in question is: My Mom's Having A Baby. In the article it says things like:
We showed the book to several local parents who all felt the book went into too much detail for young readers. One parent said, "If you actually found this in the library, then I am very shocked."And then on the Powell's site, one review started off with:
We found a copy at the Temple Terrace Public Library. It was coded "J" for juvenile and in a section where only children 13 years of age and older are allowed to check-out a book without parent present.
The Temple Terrace Public Library operates independently of the Hillsborough library system. Challener said at the more than two dozen libraries run through the Hillsborough system, any child with a library card at any age can check out any book without a parent present, including My Mom's Having a Baby.
"By the time a kid needs to know all of these details they should not be reading a children's book," said Clearwater based Psychologist Lindsay Sinclair.
She said parents should begin talking to their kids about sex at about age 5, but she said that talk should only include the basics. Dr. Sinclair said by ages 9 to 11, when the body is changing, the conversation can be in greater detail.
She pointed out the risks in a child reading a book like My Mom's Having a Baby alone and without parental supervision.
Dr. Sinclair said, "They are getting into detail on the pain a woman feels in labor. I would think a child would be frightened for their mother. They really don't need to know how much pain is involved in childbirth."
I have a four year old that I wouldnt let look at the photos or even read this to her. The photos were not for her age group and the words were not right either. I wouldnt read this to my four year old and I think it's better for when you talk about sex to your child when they are older. ...So of course I had to see just what this book said! I put in a request with my own library and was able to pick up the book last week (which caused quite the amusing stir here in my house when it was noticed, LOL).
We've always been honest and straight-forward about the "where babies come from" and "how does the baby get in there?" topics. We've never seen a need to not be--it's really all just simple biology. There's no need to be evasive or whatever, any more than one would be when talking about, say, digestion. Sure, there are aspects to discussing sexual health & sexuality that aren't suited to conversations with five year olds. That's why conversations are on-going and evolve as kids get older. We've also never, ever been people to assign "cutsey" names for body parts. I wouldn't call an arm or an ear something other than an arm or ear, why would I call a penis something else? /rhetorical
So anyway, that's the place I come from when looking at books like these. So, yes, it should be no surprise that I think the people who challenged it, the people the news showed it to, and that reviewer are wrong. The book is cute--bordering on cutsey--and factual, narrated by a little girl telling the story about how she & her family are expecting a new baby. It details fetal development during the pregnancy, mostly. It does have on one page a drawing of a naked man and naked woman (with drawings of the of the insides penis & testicles and the uterus/fallopian tubes). The part of the story on that page goes:
I wonder how our baby got inside my mom. One day, she and I have a nice talk about that.The next page describes sex in the most basic of terms:
Mom says it takes two people to make a baby. A man and a woman. Children can't make babies.
Tiny sperm are made inside a man's testicles. Tiny eggs are stores inside a woman's ovaries. A sperm and egg must join to make a baby.
When a sperm and egg come together, in a place called a fallopian tube, we say the egg is "fertilized". The fertilized egg moves down the fallopian tube and inter the uterus. There,a ll snug and safe, it grows into a baby.
But how the the sperm and egg get together I wonder?
Mom says that when a man and a woman love each other so much that they want to make a baby, they lie really close to each other and hug and kiss. All this hugging an kissing feels nice. It makes the man and woman want to get even closer to each other.And that's pretty much it for that. It's a blip, really, in the whole book. It reminds me quite a bit of how it went when my oldest child was four and I was pregnant with his brother (though he already had a sister, he didn't ask questions at the time I was pregnant with her). It's natural for kids to wonder "how babies are made" and "just how does the baby get IN there?"--and this book follows that.
The man puts his penis between the woman's legs and inside her vagina. After a while, a while liquid shoots out of the man's penis and into the woman's vagina. The liquid is full of millions of sperm. They swim up the woman's vagina, through her uterus, and into one of her fallopian tubes. If a sperm and egg join together, nine months later, a new baby will be born!
I want to go back to the original article when the psychologist said: "They are getting into detail on the pain a woman feels in labor." Not once does the book mention pain. The book says that the mom is having contractions and that "Mom does some special breathing to help with the contractions" (and it shows mom "breathing" with her eyes closed apparently making "puff puff" noises). It also shows the mom in labor making more "puff puff" noises and her face scrunched up while pushing. The books says: This is hard work for my mom. That's why everyone says she's 'in labor' right now." And that's it. If asked, I've told them that yes, it hurt. I've told them that every birth is different, everyone experiences it differently and for some people it might hurt less than others, and that there are lots of different ways to help with any pain someone might feel. It doesn't have to be "scary" (just as discussing sex doesn't have to be embarrassing or shameful). Anyway, my kids (ages 5, 6, 8, & 11) all picked up the book and read through it as I've had it laying around. Not a one remarked that the mom looked like she was in pain or anything. They did all ask about when they were born and their own birth stories and, of course, to hear the list of "who was the biggest baby".
In the end, the library decided that the book WILL stay on the shelves because:
Manager of Materials and Circulation Marcee Challencer said the book will stay in its collection and continue to be cataloged in the juvenile section. She explained the book's title and content are "more open" than similar books about pregnancy. Challencer said, "The openness has its place in the library collection and provides options for parents who are comfortable with it."Good.
Any child with a library card is able to check-out the book without parent supervision at libraries within the Hillsborough County system.
The book's author, Dori Butler, said in an email to ABC Action news that the book is intended to be read by a parent and child together. Local library leaders echoed that suggestion and added parents are ultimately responsible for what their kids are reading.
Speaking of challenged books, the ALA has released the list of 2010 Most Frequently Challenged Books:
1. And Tango Makes Three, by Peter Parnell and Justin RichardsonAs the ALA blog notes, And Tango Makes Three has been on the list for the past five years. Five years ago, I wrote a post about a challenge to it.
2. The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian, by Sherman Alexie
3. Brave New World, by Aldous Huxley
4. Crank, by Ellen Hopkins
5. The Hunger Games, by Suzanne Collins
6. Lush, by Natasha Friend
7. What My Mother Doesn’t Know, by Sonya Sones
8. Nickel and Dimed, by Barbara Ehrenreich
9. Revolutionary Voices, edited by Amy Sonnie
10. Twilight, by Stephenie Meyer
[Related reading: Water For No One,Banned Books Week 2010, A Novel Approach, But What About My Needs?, "No, God Hates Morons!"*, Harry Potter and the Half-Brained Dumbass, Banned Books Week 2006]
Also:
