[Trigger warning for homophobia]
The New York State Senate has yet to vote on allowing gay marriage. It has, however, voted to protect military families from homophobic protesters.
I get it. Having to deal with abrasive bigots is a real drag. I mean, it seriously blows to have people singling you out, insisting that Jesus thinks you're a horrible person who deserves to be treated like crap.
I call that Thursday.
Or Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday, Saturday, or Sunday.
The State of New York could be remedying some of the institutional discrimination that gay couples face. Instead, it decided to deal with the less controversial issue of whether friends and relatives of deceased veterans of a military that still won't allow gay people to serve openly will have to overhear homophobes saying bad things about them, First Amendment be damned.
If there's one thing we all agree on, it's that homophobia is unacceptable. At least, it is when the targets are presumably straight.
Priorities
Monday Blogaround
This blogaround brought to you by Shaxco, makers of Deeky's Cough Drops.
Recommended Reading:
Andy: REPORT: GOP Still in Stalemate on NY Marriage Equality Vote; Could Take Days
Andrew: Iceland Is Crowdsourcing Its New Constitution
Steph: [TW for self-harm] In Appreciation of Fathers Who Have Daughters
Ben: How Far Should We Trust Health Reporting?
Solange: [TW for racism] NBC News Has No Business Using Offensive "Anchor Baby" Slur
Melissa: [TW for sexual violence] Interview with Lisa F. Jackson, Director of Sex Crimes Unit, a Documentary Airing Tonight on HBO
Tami: Meditations on Hall Pass: Maybe this is why married women don't have sex "enough."
Leave your links and recommendations in comments...
Important News: I Got a Haircut
Last Thursday, I got a haircut. I immediately began writing a post in my head. Thankfully, it turned out that last week there was also an op-ed on women and fashion in The Chronicle of Higher Education. Now I'm not going to look like a narcissist, which I dare say is the most use the Chronicle's ever been for me.
In her essay, Laura Sloan Patterson talks about burgeoning blogs on “academic fashion.” I agree with her key points. First, teaching is a highly performative, and yes, “erotic” act. Second, female college professors should feel free to dress however they want to on the job, even if that involves dressing up or “creating identity, subverting class or gender norms, performing self, and appreciating aesthetic beauty.” I'm not necessarily here to pick a fight with her.
However.
I think Patterson's essay is missing a key bit of analysis. If we're going to talk about the role women's fashion choices play in their work with students, I think we should also look at how women's outfits impact their careers. Women's fashion choices often influence their work life, and often in ways that men's choices do not.
About my haircut.
Last spring, I put a few bright red streaks in my hair. They looked good. Since that worked out so well, I went full on red. Magic marker red. If I do say so myself, my hair was fucking awesome.
Let's take a break for a wee autobiography. I'm thirty-two years old. I received my Ph. D. at age twenty-eight. I'm a transsexual woman, and in addition to not knowing how much passing privilege I have from day-to-day, I don't go to any great lengths to hide this fact. I'm also a lesbian lady, so there's that. For the last fifteen months, some or all of my hair was bright red.
I don't teach at Seton Hall (or Princeton). The median age of the students I work with is around thirty-eight. The bulk of my faculty colleagues didn't get their Ph. D.'s in their twenties. Without having access to the data, I assure you that I'm one of the five youngest members on the faculty, even though I've been here three full years.
Does anyone see where I'm going with this?
I'm not going to talk about my career trajectory, or my college's review process. I'm bold, but I'm not naïve. What I will say is that more than one student and/or advisee has questioned my competence. This sort of thing shows up on performance reviews. Issues have been raised by colleagues.
I'm working on it. Last Thursday, I got a haircut.
Now, I'm not complaining about my new 'do. On the contrary, I love it. My red hair was pretty faded and frizzy. Now my hair is a nice dark brown, with a hint of red. I think it suits me:
[Sweaty derby professor does not care what you think of her haircut. Note that the fingernails compliment the hair. Fashion!]
I also took down all the roller derby posters in my office. My framed primer on unicorn anatomy is now tucked away in a corner where I can see it, but students can't. You know, it's in the kind of nook where I started squirreling away pictures of the lady who isn't my husband.
Let me be clear: I'm also working on the academic end of things. However, teaching is performance. My queer lady performance was a bit of a stretch. I mean, I was playing a college professor, but, you know, bright red hair doesn't exactly scream “I have a Ph. D. from a major research university, have published research articles in all sorts of peer-reviewed journals, and have totally taught this shit before.”
Here's the fun bit. While I do enjoy dressing up and showing my own fashion sense, more often than not I show up to work in jeans, (red!) sneakers, and t-shirt. If I don't have any meetings or student appointments, I'm usually grading, shuffling paperwork, reading, or writing, and I'm in a hurry to do it. And frankly, I'm never not at work. I check my work e-mail on Sunday nights and I grade whenever I have the time, wherever I happen to be. Between work, family, and personal commitments, I simply often don't have the time (or money) to dress the way I'd prefer.
My casual wardrobe garners mixed reviews, too. I've been told I look like a student. My students are free to dress however they want, so I'm not even sure what that means.
Here's the thing: Nobody (to my knowledge) has ever said, “I don't think that red-haired queer lady knows what she's doing.” I have absolutely no way of demonstrating that I, Kate, the person, am behind these negative reviews. What I can say is that I haven't noticed very many men (in my case, I haven't noticed any) wresting with similar issues.
My fashion sense can be too young, too old, too sexy, too serious and unapproachable, too sloppy, or too anything. People are always going to judge whether or not I look up to the job. As a woman, and a feminine one to boot, I'm guaranteed to not always make the grade. I can't win at fashion.
While I agree that women should feel free to dress as they'd like at the office, I think it's naïve to ignore the very real price we may pay for the privilege. We're walking a tightrope, and it's not one of our own making. Without challenging the sexist basis on which society assigns us worth, we'll never be free to be ourselves. That, in my opinion, is a fight worth having.
Tweet of the Day
@BarackObama: "As this campaign ramps up across the country, we want to know: what would you like to see us tweet about?"
LULZ.
I replied: "The war on women, and how it actually exists and stuff."
[H/T to @ScottMadin.]
Number of the Day
72%: The percentage of US voters who "believe the United States is involved in too many foreign conflicts and should pull back its troops, according to a new poll conducted for The Hill. Seventy-two percent of those polled said the United States is fighting in too many places, with only 16 percent saying the current level of engagement represented an appropriate level. Twelve percent said they weren't sure."
The hilaritragic thing about the not-sure 12% is that some of them aren't sure if maybe we need to be in more foreign conflicts. "We're only in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, and Yemen...? Couldn't we maybe drop some bombs on a few other countries, too?" Yikes.
Outrage!™
So this weekend was the US Open (a golf tournament). The only news I had heard about it (re: saw headlines on FB or Twitter) was that some young (his age seems important in the reporting) dude from Northern Ireland shocked everyone with his Golfing Awesomeness.
But Rory McIlroy (who I just looked up) was not the only part of the Open that got certain people all discombobulated. NBC, who showed the tournament on air, also managed to stir up some excitement. NBC did a trite opening montage showing school children reciting the Pledge while various shots of servicemen (I did not see any servicewomen) raised the American flag. Can't forget the dramatic voice-over about how grand, serious, and awesome we are interspersed with pictures of DC monuments (who will apparently watch the new winner, ah, win). Which all seemed weird to me until I realized that the tournament was held at the Congressional Country Club (just outside of Washington DC). Well, it's still a little weird because golf tournament but at least it doesn't seem so out there given the location.
So why the excitement over the montage? Because NBC axed the words "under God" from it (you can watch the intro here). So a whole shitload of people swallowed a huge dose of Rageahol mixed with Moral Panic and expressed their Outrage!™ to NBC. So much so that by the time the tournament was over, Dan Hicks was on air issuing a mea culpa:
It was our intent to begin the coverage of this U.S. Open championship with a feature that captured the patriotism of our national championship being held in our nation's capital for the third time," Hicks said. "Regrettably, a portion of the Pledge of Allegiance that was in that feature was edited out. It was not done to upset anyone, and we'd like to apologize to those of you who were offended by it."Well, now I'm offended by it (not really, more contemptuous)--but not for the same reasons those angry viewers were offended, I'm sure. I wonder if those people who got so outraged by this editing even realize that the Pledge was written by a socialist--a real socialist, not the sort of "Obama is a socialist!" ignorance thrown about today by some people--Baptist minister and it neither included the phrase "under God" nor "the United States of America". That the "under God" part was added in 1954 as propaganda to "distinguish us" from the Scary Godless Commies (the USA part was added in 1923). I'm going to go with no, they don't realize it. Or maybe they just don't care because 1950s cheap political ploys are something they particularly enjoy and reflect their sort of patriotism.
It's not surprising that people were pissed off and NBC felt it had to go on air to apologize. No, not surprising. Just stupid.
[Related Reading: Comparative Religiopolitics, Today in Dumbassery, To Pledge or, you know, not, Liberty and Justice For All, Be Patriotic. Or else.]
Psych!
Hey, remember in 2007, when then-candidate Barack H. Obama said some bullshit about not letting people buy their way into government...? Whoooooooooooops! Just kidding. An analysis of the big donors to the '08 campaign has found that the bundlers, people who raise large sums of money for a candidate by soliciting donations from other supporters, were rewarded for their fundraising efforts with jobs in the administration.
"We found that nearly 200 of the bundlers had obtained administration posts for themselves or their spouses," said Fred Schulte at the Center for Public Integrity, one of three reporters who worked on the project.Emphasis mine. Now, mind you, this is standard operating procedure in Washington: You give me money and help me get elected; I give you (or your spouse, or your kid) a job.
He said the jobs the bundlers got ran the gamut: ambassadorships, positions on advisory boards that help make policy, jobs at the Department of Justice, Federal Communications Commission and other federal agencies.
Bigger bundlers did better. In the top tier, each bundler delivered at least $500,000 in contributions to the campaign. Eighty percent of them went into the administration, often as ambassadors.
Just because it's typical doesn't make it right, but this backscratching bullshit is nothing that other administrations (and other elected officials, including virtually every member of Congress) haven't done. Thing is: All of those other folks didn't explicitly campaign on NOT DOING IT.
When the Center for Public Integrity released the report last week, critics were quick to recall how candidate Barack Obama had attacked lobbyists and special interests in his February 2007 announcement speech.HOPE AND CHANGE, MOTHERFUCKERS!
"They write the checks and you get stuck with the bill," Obama said at the time. "They get the access while you get to write a letter. They think they own this government, but we're here today to take it back."
White House spokesman Jay Carney tried to brush off the report.
"The fact that individuals who have been appointed also supported the president is hardly a story," he said.
When reporters pressed him, he defended the hires.
"Being a supporter does not qualify you for a job or guarantee you a job," he said. "But it does not disqualify you, obviously."
[H/T to Eastsidekate.]
Men Are From Blah Blah Women Are Yawwwwwwwn
by Shaker Maveri4201
[Trigger warning for misogyny and g ender essentialism.]
Another day, another science reporting fail. I stumbled across this WebMD article as a suggestion from Google (why it thought this would be relevant to me, I'm not sure). What caught my eye was the rather odd title:
When Wives Don't Sleep, Marriage SuffersWell, the title seemed half reasonable. If either partner doesn't sleep, it would be reasonable to expect that a marriage would suffer (most people I know get grumpy with less sleep). But why just wives? And why marriages, specifically? Couldn't any relationship suffer from lack of sleep?
The article begins...
When couples fight, sleep often suffers. Now a new study shows that the reverse may also be true. Not sleeping well, it seems, can make for a rockier relationship.Leave it to our wonderful media to turn that into "When Wives Don't Sleep, Marriage Suffers," because, after all, everyone knows that women along determine the happiness of a marriage—while they sleep. Men have nothing to do with that. Because those "less positive" interactions are just from women's lack of sleep, and not from any issues that may be causing a lack of sleep.
The study, which was presented at the SLEEP 2011 conference in Minneapolis, found that wives who have trouble falling asleep are more likely to report negative interactions with their spouse the next day. Husbands were also affected, rating the couple's interactions as less positive the day after their wives tossed and turned.
When women had trouble falling asleep at night, they were more likely to report more negative and fewer positive interactions with their spouses the next day.Yes, very curious. Perhaps there is more going on here than just sleep problems?
Husbands also reported fewer positive interactions when spouses couldn't fall asleep easily.
Curiously, however, husbands' sleep difficulties didn’t seem to affect couples' relationship interactions.
Let's introduce the study's parameters, shall we?
For the study, researchers recruited 35 healthy married couples and had them wear sensors that monitor movement for 10 nights. The average age of study participants was 32.Let's start with "35 healthy married couples." It would seem that the only requirement for participation in this study would be couples who reported no regular sleep problems. But "healthy" has so many connotations, and so many different ways of being defined, depending on who's doing the defining. It isn't even totally clear here whether "healthy" refers to the physical health of the spouses, the emotional health of the spouses, the "health" of the marriage itself, or some combination thereof.
During the day, spouses were asked to keep diaries detailing how they were getting along.
They rated how strongly they felt positive things, like feeling close to their spouse and valued, and whether or not they talked about their feelings with their partner.
On the negative side, they were asked how much they felt criticized, dismissed, ignored, or whether they were having an argument.
The problems continue right after the word "healthy." Why was this study restricted to married couples? Unless there is some magic in that little legal document, married couples aren't the only ones who have "negative interactions." The study makes any relationship other than a privileged heterosexual marriage invisible. That's hardly surprising but not very useful.
Also not useful: Tired gender-based stereotypes:
On days when husbands reported more positive interactions with their wives, the husbands got less sleep.Nudge, nudge, wink, wink.
"Shorter sleep duration itself is not necessarily meaning that you sleep poorly," says study researcher Wendy Troxel, PhD, an assistant professor of psychiatry at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine.
"Couples that have more positive interactions during the day may be engaging in other activities in bed at night," she says.
"We're stoic," says William J. Strawbridge, PhD, an adjunct professor in the Institute for Health and Aging at the University of California in San Francisco. In a study published in 2005, Strawbridge also found that poor sleep was related to marital dissatisfaction.So men are stoic sex beasts who don't care about interacting with their spouses. (Unless it's to "engage in other activities" with them.) And women?
"It's true that men just don't want to talk about stuff like that and don't seem as sensitive to it. Interaction in a marriage is more important to a woman than to a man," he says.
"Women tend to be more sensitive to the highs and lows of relationships and they tend to be more communicative when they're feeling the stress," Troxel says.You knew that was coming! Once again, ScienceTM proves that men are from Mars and women are from Venus. Can't argue with that, can you?
Actually, I can. 35 couples and no control group? I think you skipped a step. As mentioned earlier, relationships beyond heterosexual marriage were not considered. At all, from what I can tell. If they wanted proper control groups, same-sex partners would be the perfect control. They may not be legally married, thanks to the law, but could easily have been in a committed relationship just as long as those in the study.
The average age of this study was only 32; it is not stated how long the average marriage of the group was, but it couldn't have been that hard to find same-sex partnerships that mirrored the study group. If the couple were both men, did neither partner's sleep difficulty result in morning tensions? If both women, did each one's sleep problems affect their morning? I only have the questions—the research should have been providing the answers if they wanted to reach the above conclusion.
So once again we have the perfect storm—half-baked study, half-assed reporting, and another ScienceTM Tribute to misogyny. Women are, once again, all to blame for marriage problems. You know it's true—women wrote the study and the article.
Note: I have yet to find the reference to this study (perhaps because it has only been presented at a conference), but here is some previous work of head researcher Dr. Troxel. Dr. Troxel seems obsessed with marital quality but uninterested in anything other than heterosexual relationships.
SCOTUS Strikes Again
Breaking News from Reuters: The US Supreme Court has ruled for Wal-Mart in the landmark class-action gender discrimination case, in which women sought to sue Wal-Mart for institutional gender bias.
Female employees asserted that Wal-Mart routinely discriminated against them in pay and promotions, with male coworkers getting higher salaries for the same work and promotions despite less experience.
You can read the opinion here (pdf).
In other news, the US Supreme Court rejected a climate change lawsuit against five big power companies. That decision is here (pdf).
America 2.0: Of the people corporations, by the people corporations, for the people corporations.
Daily Dose of Cute: Sweet Baby Girl
Moon on left, Feather on right
A couple of years ago, Moon decided that he had enough of this world, though he fought valiantly to stay around as long as he could. Late last night, Feather decided it was time to join him.
The great thing about Feather was how well she could adapt to any situation. Whether it was moving twice to new homes, or dealing with Moon after a hospital visit, or dealing with the aftermath of a volatile kitty when she was first adopted, Feather always took things in stride. She also always acted like she was 5, regardless of her actual age.
Even after Moon died, she came into her own and actually relished the opportunity to be the sole cat of her kingdom. She started talking much more and was always ready to jump onto my lap when I would sit down by my desktop downstairs.
This one's tough because I got her first. I've been through a lot of things in the time she was with me, and I'm especially grateful she was there during the really tough times. And now, she gave me the honor of being able to see her off with her last breath, without having to call in the vet.
And to Norway I say this: I commit her spirit back to your forests, for other Forest Cats to view and acknowledge as their model.
Fuck All Ya'll: We Ain't Paying Shit!
[Trigger warning for sexual violence; clergy abuse.]
In its continuing effort to alienate every last person with a shred of decency from its congregant ranks, the Catholic Church is contesting a jury verdict awarding $5 million to a former altar boy sexually abused by a priest on the basis that the verdict "exposes the citizens of Illinois to gross violations of their religious liberty."
Attorneys for the Catholic Diocese of Belleville contend that if a jury verdict awarding $5 million to a former altar boy sexually abused by a priest is allowed to stand, the religious liberty of Illinois citizens could be undermined.This whole argument is, of course, hogwash. Many public institutions are required to do background checks on employees, and many private institutions do them as a matter of course, because they are liable for people in their care. Schools, hospitals, residential care facilities have all been sued (successfully) because they failed via negligence to protect people from sexual predators.
...In legal documents filed Wednesday with the Illinois Supreme Court, St. Louis attorney David Wells, who represents the diocese, argued that a 5th District Appellate Court ruling announced in January upholding the $5 million verdict "exposes the citizens of Illinois to gross violations of their religious liberty." He contends that the appellate court ruling improperly held the diocese to a higher standard than law allows simply because it is a religious organization.
In a 19-page petition, Wells stated that the verdict and appellate court ruling was based on an unconstitutional premise: that the diocese had a duty to protect and warn Wisniewski about Kownacki based solely on religious doctrine and belief.
"A court interpreting and applying religious doctrine violates both Illinois and federal guarantees of religious liberty," Wells' petition stated.
The Catholic Church is, in fact, not being held to a higher standard. It's the usual misdirection to obfuscate the reality that the Church expects to be held to a lower standard, because, as per usual, the diocese knew about the priest's predatory behavior and concealed it from parishioners:
Kownacki, 76, who has stated he will not comment, was removed from ministry because of allegations of sexual misconduct. He was named as a defendant in another sexual abuse lawsuit filed by Weilmuenster that resulted in a $1.2 million payment by the Belleville Diocese in 2009.The Church's argument asserts that being held accountable for shielding known pedophiles is an encroachment on its religious liberty.
Testimony in the Wisniewski case stated that the diocese knew that Kownacki was dangerous but continued to transfer him to other parishes without warning parishioners.
And not only is that argument being made in court documents, but Bishop Edward Braxton sent a letter to parishioners telling them "that their religious freedom could be eroded if the judgment stands."
Nothing surprises me anymore when it comes to clergy abuse and the Catholic Church's defenses thereof, but I am absolutely sickened by it.
I feel for every survivor in that diocese who received a letter from the Bishop arguing that accountability for shielding predators is an encroachment on religious liberty. What an absolute betrayal of trust.
And I can't even begin to imagine being the survivor to whom the verdict awarded payment, only to have to listen to the Church whine about the injustice of it all. Gross.
[H/T to @matttbastard.]
Big Tent
One of the many geniuses of the Republican Party, who were gathered in New Orleans over the weekend for the Republican Leadership Conference, thought it would be a great idea to hire comic Reggie Brown, who is an Obama impersonator, to do an appearance at the conference. Brown spent about 15 minutes doing wildly inappropriate material, including racist jokes about the president and his family, gay jokes, and fat jokes, among other garbage.
Eventually, Brown was pulled off the stage—but only when he started doing material about the Republican candidates: "Fake Obama began to make fun of Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), but then he was suddenly ushered off stage." After having also made jokes about Mitt Romney, Tim Pawlenty, and Donald Trump.
Of course. But at no time during the preceding 15 minutes of bigoted humor, directed at the actual president and his family, was there a problem:
Eventually, RLC President and CEO Charlie Davis made the decision to pull him offstage, and a man came onstage to physcially escort Brown off.Republican math: Racist jokes about the president = Funny / Hacky jokes about Tim Pawlenty getting his foot surgically removed from his mouth = TOO FAR!!!
"I pulled him off the stage," Davis acknowledged afterward. "I just thought he had gone too far. He was funny the first 10 or 15 minutes, but it was inappropriate, it was getting ridiculous."
[Transcript available here. There is also closed-captioning on the video.]
Happy Juneteenth!
I would like to offer my best wishes for safe and happy Juneteenth celebrations to those who celebrate and/or observe the day 1, and to encourage those who don't know about it to learn about the holiday and its importance. Please note there are also extensive links for research at AfriGeneas, linked below, including the text of the Emancipation Proclamation itself.
In honour of the day, with kind permission of the author, a poem by Sojourner Kincaid Rolle, published at AfriGeneas for Juneteenth 2004:
Free at Last, a poem for Juneteenth1 Americans, particularly, though there were many freed people who made their lives in southern Ontario and other parts of Canada, too, at the northern end of the Underground Railroad, and others still who emigrated to Liberia and other destinations outside North America.
General Granger brought the news to Galveston:
'The war is over! '
The Emancipation Proclamation has declared,
'All who live in bondage here shall be free.'
Every year in the land of the Lone Star State,
Resounding from sea to sea,
the sons and daughters of those who were held
shout: , 'Free at Last, Hallelujah, I'm free.'
Leaving their shackles where they fell on the ground,
after 300 years of forced bondage; hands bound,
descendants of Africa picked up their souls
departed for the nearest resting place.
Some went no further than the shack out back
hard ground for a bed hard labor to stay alive
Them that stayed said, 'This is my home
Even though I can't really call it my own.'
Some went to the nearest place of worship
perhaps to a clearing in the grove
or some hollow place in the underbrush
Said 'Jesus, Thank you for delivering me'.
Some ran as fast as they could
into the service of another man
Working for a meager pittance
one backbend short of being a slavehand.
Some went to the closest speakeasy
toasted the Union and Lady Luck,
patted each other on their whip-marked backs,
drank themselves into oblivion.
Some swam the way of the river
following the Rio Grande or the up-flowing Mississip
Hastening to get as far away as they could
Thrusting their futures into unknown sanctuary.
Some went straight to the promise land,
heart couldn't take this earthly joy no more.
Some kept running forever
like a stone unable to grasp the firmity.
No matter where they went
They said, 'I an where my soul wants to be'.
I will always remember; I will never forget
Now I can shout 'Hallelujah, I'm free'
-- Sojourner Kincaid Rolle
Sunday Shuffle
Cheating a bit (though it IS in my collection):
Possibly one of my favorite music videos ever--the sheer joy and fun the band has is wonderful. However, Clarence "Big Man" Clemons passed away yesterday from complications from a stroke he had several days ago:
Clarence Clemons, the legendary saxophonist in the E Street Band who played alongside Bruce Springsteen for the past 40 years, died on June 18th. Clemons had suffered a massive stroke on June 12th. While initial signs had been hopeful after his hospitalization and two subsequent brain surgeries, he reportedly took a turn for the worse later in the week. He was 69.Below is Bruce, intro'ing the Big Man during a show in London:
Bruce: Wooo! And last but not least! I want to say London is finally read for the Minister of Sooooooouuuuuullll! Secretary of the Brotherhood! Probably the next King of England! Gimme a C! L! A! R! E! N! C! E! What's that spell?!Bruce Springsteen & the E Street Band were a large part of the soundtrack to my childhood--my mom was a big fan. I also love their music myself, now. Thanks for the music and the memories, Big Man. They were great gifts. RIP.
Crowd: Clarence!
Bruce: What's that spell?!
Crowd: Clarence!
Bruce: What's that spell?!
Crowd: Clarence!
Bruce: I have seen the future and the whole fuckin' thing and it's Big Man Clarence Clemons!
Happy Fathers' Day
Papa Shakes and Me, May 1977
Happy Fathers' Day* to all the Shaker fathers and grandfathers and godfathers and uncles and male guardians of various description whose love and care, for the fortunate among us, made us who we are.
--------------------
* Being celebrated in the US and some other places today; it is celebrated on other days in other countries.
Open Thread
Hosted by a Fail Whale statue.
This week's open threads have been brought to you by whales. Like owls, whales are awesome.
Open Thread
Hosted by a papercraft whale bank. I'm pretty sure Tubby Eat Coin is one of Iain's nicknames for Liss. (Download the pattern here; bottom left under free downloads.)
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!
