Sophs
Metasophs
Matrimonially Speaking
"October Surprise you!" "No, October Surprise YOU!"
So, the big election news today is all about marriage. Straight marriage. Technically speaking, divorce. The primary sources being the very reputable Daily Mail and TMZ. Good grief, this election.
1. The Daily Mail reports (link goes to NY Mag's coverage) that Donald Trump's promised "October Surprise" is the BOMBSHELL REVELATION!!!!1!! that there is a rumor in the world that the Obamas had divorce papers drawn up more than a decade ago during a rocky point in their marriage. Even if that is accurate, the worst part about this story is that anyone thinks it's any of our business.
The hilarious thing about a conservative trying to make hay out of that story—besides the obvious and laughably stupid implication that it's supposed to reflect the state of their relationship now—is that, if the Obamas were on the verge of divorce and then found a way to move past problems and stayed together, that's exactly what conservatives say married couples should do.
So what's the story? That the Obamas have an imperfect relationship, like everyone else? OH NOES! Spoiler Alert: Living progressives (as opposed to the ones built out of straw by conservatives) don't actually believe the President and First Lady are infallible deities.
(Incidentally, questioning the legitimacy of the President's marriage in addition to questioning the legitimacy of his birth is, ya know, just a wee bit totally fucking racist.)
2. Meanwhile, TMZ reports that Gloria Allred's promised "October Surprise" is the sealed divorce record of a Mitt Romney associate on whose behalf, his ex-wife alleges, Romney lied under oath about the value of stock he held.
During [Staples' founder Tom Stemberg]'s uber nasty divorce case with ex-wife Maureen, Mitt Romney gave a deposition and testified during the trial that Staples was worth virtually nothing. Romney testified that the company was worth very little and Tom was a dreamer and "the dream continues."It doesn't sound to me like Romney did anything provably criminal, by which I mean he was testifying to his opinion, so even if he lied under oath (ha ha he definitely did), it's impossible to prove.
Romney characterized the Staples stock as "overvalued," adding, "I didn't place a great deal of credibility in the forecast of the company's future."
Partly as a result of Romney's testimony, Maureen got relatively little in the divorce, but we're told just weeks after the divorce ended, Romney and Tom went to Goldman Sachs and cashed in THEIR stock for a fortune.
So what's the story? That Mitt Romney is an unethical dirtbag? Yeah, no shit.
I'll keep you posted on these BLOCKBUSTER STORIES!
Random Nerd Nostalgia: Great Costumes! Very Stealthy!
[Image description: Nightwing, Deathstroke, and Jericho are featured splashed across the cover of Tales of the New Teen Titans. Nightwing is a white man wearing a blue, black, and gold costume with a mask and a ginormous collar. Deathstroke is male-bodied and completely covered in his orange, black, and blue costume. He wields a gun, holds a staff, has a weapons belt, and is wearing boots that rival the size of Rhode Island. Jericho is a white man with curly blonde hair, wearing a white puffy shirt, a plumb-colored vest, bright purple boots, bright blue tights and cape, and gold trim. The story title is "The Judas Contract:There Shall Come a Titan."]
Let me be clear: these are all characters I actually like, and I looooved reading this story when it first came out. Nightwing's emergence from the Robin identity was a great storyline. Deathstroke is one of my favorite villains ever, especially as a "grey" figure who is sympathetic, and sometimes allies with the good guys (I even collected his independent title). And Jericho was a compelling figure with a great backstory, and one of the rare super-powered PWD who showed up in the pages of pre-Crisis DC comics.
But c'mon. Deathstroke the stealthy assassin in his bright orange moon boots? Nightwing, the guardian of the shadows, in his swoopy electric blue collar? Jericho, mild- mannered and unprepossessing, wearing castoffs from the "Safety Dance" video? These are not stealthy. As in, not even a little bit stealthy.
Ah, the 1980s. I guess you really had to be there.
This Is Reproductive Coercion
[Content Note: Reproductive coercion.]
About a million years ago, Aphra Behn observed in comments the absurdity of failing to identify anti-choice legislation as "reproductive coercion," which is the term for a partner interfering with a be-uterused person's desire to be pregnant or not pregnant.
Aphra was maybe not the first person on the planet to make that observation, but it was definitely the first time I recall seeing those dots being connected. That I recall it so precisely is evidence of how powerful an idea it really is, this notion that an intimate partner seeking to control a person's reproduction is a Terrible Thing, but, when the GOP does it, it's Moral Values.
So I was really thrilled to see this morning that the Guttmacher Institute is overtly defining government intervention in reproductive decisions as reproductive coercion.
Not only that: The odious Hyde Amendment is specifically called out as evidence of reproductive coercion in US governance.
And why should it not be? What is the difference between the government restricting via legislation a pregnant woman from accessing abortion, and a partner restricting via threats and intimidation a pregnant woman from accessing abortion? What is the difference between a partner flushing a woman's birth control pills down the toilet, and the government denying via legislation access to contraception?
The only difference is remove.
We are being reproductively coerced by our government. It must end.
You can read Sneha Barot's full analysis, "Governmental Coercion in Reproductive Decision Making: See It Both Ways," here.
In The News
[Content note: homophobia]
News and Information:
Ellen DeGeneres received the Mark Twain Prize for American Humor at the Kennedy Center on Monday.
Why I Hate Sports: Part 8,678,024: Cardinals fans unleashed a torrent of homophobic tweets after their loss to S.F. this weekend.
Denny's is rolling out a Hobbit-themed menu. Sure. Why not.
Bill and Melinda Gates gave $500,000 to Washington state's marriage equality campaign.
Meanwhile, bigoted douchebags in NY lost their appeal to overturn that state's marriage equality law.
Jay-Z and Beyoncé can't trademark the name of their daughter, Blue Ivy, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has ruled.
Poppers might cause permanent eye damage, warns a UK hospital.
Watch this: Canadian actor and internet personality Jon LaJoie appears in a clever video standing "against" marriage equality.
Another Republican Genius on Rape
[Content Note: Rape culture.]
Just yesterday, I had the (rare) occasion to deliver some good news out of my state of Indiana on reproductive rights.
Today, I bring you the news that our Republican Senate candidate, Richard Mourdock, was asked during a debate with his Democratic challenger, Joe Donnelly, whether abortion should be allowed in cases of rape and incest.
Now, this is a question that shouldn't need asking, for about a dozen different reasons, but Mourdock's answer is precisely why it gets asked.
I struggled with it myself for a long time, but I came to realize that life is that gift from God. And, I think, even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen.There ain't enough fuck you in the world for this guy.
Naturally, Mourdock reacted with huffy indignation when asked after the debate if he believed rape is part of his deity's plan—an eminently reasonable question given that he said "it is something that God intended to happen."
"Are you trying to suggest somehow that God preordained rape, no I don't think that," Mourdock said. "Anyone who would suggest that is just sick and twisted. No, that's not even close to what I said."So, basically, his deity would never orchestrate a rape, but would definitely exploit a rape to impregnate a rape victim. Cool. Sounds great. Where do I sign up to worship this excellent decision-maker?
Anyway.
In January of this year, Rick Santorum said something similar: "I've always, you know, I believe and I think the right approach is to accept this horribly created—in the sense of rape—but nevertheless a gift in a very broken way, the gift of human life, and accept what God has given to you."
And I'll make the same observation about Mourdock now that I made about Santorum then: This guy is so catastrophically incapable of self-reflection that he is able to acknowledge that rape (forcing a woman to do something with her body she doesn't want to do) is a Terrible Thing, while simultaneously asserting that the denial of abortion (forcing a woman to do something with her body she doesn't want to do) is a Moral Imperative.
I'm really hard-pressed to see why I should be any less contemptuous of a man who sits (or is campaigning to sit) at a big mahogany desk in Washington making decisions about my body without my consent than I should be of a man who used physical force to make decisions about my body without my consent.
Undoubtedly, Mr. Mourdock would be outraged and horrified to be compared, even obliquely, to a rapist.
As well he should be. I am horrified to have to make it.
Of course, a man who holds the position that he should be able to legislate away my bodily autonomy and supersede my consent about what happens to my body shouldn't be too goddamned surprised by the comparison.
There's nothing else left to say about these guys. (And I use "guys" advisedly: Santorum, Akin, Walsh, et. al.) They are so hostile to agency and consent that they write the actual victims of rape and unwanted pregnancy right out of any thought about pregnancy as a result of rape. They don't even acknowledge the existence, the very humanity, of women and other people with uteri, no less respect our right of self-determination.
No one who doesn't respect the agency and consent of half the population should be fit to hold public office in a democracy.
But in the US, it's now a required position of one of the two major parties.
Top Five
Here is your topic: Top Five Fictional Characters With Whom You'd Like to Have Dinner. Go!
Please feel welcome to share stories about why your Top Five picks are what they are, though a straight-up list is fine, too. Please refrain from negatively auditing other people's lists, because judgment discourages participation.
"They Are Very Attached to Each Other"
This story about Owen Howkins and his dog Haatchi, who totes rescued each other, will melt even the coldest of icy black hearts.
Owen Howkins, seven, and his trusted companion Haatchi have become inseparable after the family pet helped him overcome anxiety.
Owen became 'withdrawn' at school when he realised a rare genetic condition [Schwartz-Jampel syndrome, which means his muscles are always tense, and requires ongoing medical interventions] made him different to other boys and girls. [Being treated differently] left him scared to talk to people and worried about leaving his home in Basingstoke, Hampshire.
But now Haatchi - an Anatolian shepherd dog [who lost a back leg and most of his tail after injury and neglect] - has given Owen a new lease of life after dad Will Howkins [and fiancee Colleen Drummond, 41, who read about Haatchi's plight on Facebook] adopted the pet from a rescue centre. The pair can be seen walking down the road together after becoming the best of friends.
...Colleen said: "Owen used to be scared of strangers but he now wants to talk to everyone about Haatchi and wants to go out all the time to dog shows. The difference we see in him can't be put into words."
Are you kidding me?! Excuse me for a moment. I need to go give my dogs and cats enormous squeezy hugs.
And treats. SO MANY TREATS. All the treats.
Good News!
Indiana Planned Parenthood Ruling: Federal Appeals Court Says State Can't Cut Funding Over Abortions:
The state of Indiana cannot withhold Medicaid funding from the local Planned Parenthood affiliate because some of its clinics offer abortions, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.The war on agency is far from over, but this was an important battle to win.
The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a June 2011 injunction from a lower-court judge blocking a law that would have prevented Planned Parenthood of Indiana from participating in the state's Medicaid program.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services also spoke out against the law at the time, arguing in a letter to Indiana's state Medicaid director that the proposed change violates federal Medicaid rules by restricting beneficiaries' freedom to choose any qualified health care provider.
"We're really pleased, particularly in Indiana where the economy continues to be a challenge, that it's so clearly affirmed by the Seventh Circuit Court that it's appropriate for us to continue to serve as Medicaid providers," Planned Parenthood of Indiana President Betty Cockrum told HuffPost on Tuesday. "We've got 9,300 Medicaid patients, men and women, who rely on us for health and family planning services such as birth control, pap tests, breast exams and STD tests."
Planned Parenthood of Indiana receives about $3 million a year from the federal government and serves about 22,000 low-income patients using Titles X, V, and XX and Medicaid funds.
...The American Civil Liberties Union, which filed the class action lawsuit on behalf of Indiana Medicaid recipients, applauded the appeals court's decision on Tuesday.
"This law was an attempt by politicians to punish organizations that are providing legal services," said Talcott Camp, deputy director of the ACLU Reproductive Freedom Project. "Elected officials should not place politics above women's health."
Discussion Thread: Gross Halloween Costumes
[Content Note: Racism; misogyny; appropriation; objectification.]
Every year (or most years? some years) we have a thread about various inappropriate Halloween costumes. I thought it would be a good time to open a thread for general discussion, since we're nearing Halloween and because in the last week I saw two related things I wanted to share.
1. The Evolution of Halloween Costumes, From Girls to Women, which shows the differences in what costume-makers imagine a female person should look like as a nurse, bee, cat, etc. when a little girl, a tween, a teen, and an adult woman. It's one of those things we all know intuitively, but it's fascinating to see it put together like that.
2. Over the weekend, I watched the Halloween episode of Chopped, a cooking competition show on the Food Network, which originally aired in the US last Tuesday. In the opening segment of the show, the three judges were wearing costumes, and Chef Marc Murphy's costume, such as it was, was "Mexican."
I took this picture and sent it to Deeks, who also loves Chopped and was appropriately contemptuous with me. We chatted about it on Twitter a bit at the weekend, too, where Amadi joined in our disdainful snarling.
It is incredible (if unsurprising) to me that in the year of our lord Jesus Jones two thousand and twelve there are still people who think that wearing stereotypical markers of another ethnicity is a "costume." I hope Chef Aarón Sanchez gives Murphy an earful of whatfor next time they judge together.
ANYWAY! Have you seen any objectionable/inappropriate/contemptible costumes so far this year? What are your least favorite class(es) of costumes generally? Ever wear a costume you now regret? Do you have trouble finding prefab costumes for your kids that aren't terrible? Discuss.
Quote of the Day
"Despite our disagreement with Governor Romney on the issue of marriage, on balance it is clear that in today's economic climate, concern for the future of our country must be the highest priority. We are Republicans, and we agree with Governor Romney's vision for America in which success is a virtue, equal opportunity is ensured, and leaders recognize that it is the American people, not government, that build our nation and fuel its prosperity."—Log Cabin Republicans Executive Director R. Clarke Cooper, on the endorsement of Mitt Romney by this group of gay Republicans who are evidently so privileged relative to the rest of their community that same-sex marriage is the only issue that matters to them.
And even that not so much, compared to "moral imperative" of "understand[ing] that businesses need less government regulation and lower taxes."
Ah, well, what's a little state-sanctioned hostility to bullied queer teens compared to lowering taxes for millionaires? I mean, after all, if success is a virtue then getting bullied must be evidence of a personal flaw. Get yourself some bootstraps, losers!
Listen, I get that the Log Cabin Republicans, like Republican women who want the ability to control their reproduction, calculate that voting for Republican economic policies is more important than voting for social policies from which they'll benefit. I get that they are prioritizing economic self-interest over social self-interest.
But there is a limit to the benefits of voting for one's economic self-interest when that vote will ultimately subvert the economic security of vast numbers of one's countrypeople whose fortunes are interconnected with one's own.
I am an economy voter, too—but because, in addition to a sense of compassion and compatriotism I have for my fellow 99percenters, I have rational self-interest that acknowledges we are all in this thing together.
In The News
[Content note: misogyny, homophobia, gun violence]
Non-Debate News:
Change.org has decided to change its policies to allow for corporate advertising, Republican Party solicitations, astroturf campaigns, anti-abortion or anti-union ads and other controversial sponsorships.
Peter Gabriel wants people to recreate scenes from "Sledgehammer." Neat!
Two members of Russian feminist punk band Pussy Riot were shipped to remote Soviet-era labor camps yesterday.
Just four days after approving a policy aimed at protecting the rights of transgender students, an Illinois school board has rescinded it.
Punters at one of London's oldest gay pubs are campaigning to stop the popular watering hole from being closed and turned into apartments.
Here is a totally reasonable way to carve a pumpkin. (p.s. This is not reasonable.)
The latest polls suggest that President Obama's victory in Ohio could be a foregone conclusion: Obama holds a double digit lead among those who have already voted.
UK schools are being encouraged to start planning their activities for LGBT History Month by celebrating the life of Alan Turing.
Tweet of the Day
Mitt apparently had no binders on foreign policy
— John Kerry (@JohnKerry) October 23, 2012
Photo of the Day
After the debate, the candidates' families joined them onstage, as is tradition, and AP photographer Rick Wilking caught this moment of President Obama greeting one of Mitt Romney's grandsons:
[Click to embiggen.]
I find this image so moving. For all the reasons I find all the pictures of President Obama interacting with children moving, but also because Mitt Romney has been very disrespectful toward the President during these debates, and, after the last debate, Mitt Romney's son Tagg said he wanted to "take a swing" at the President—yet President Obama still treats even the youngest members of their family with respect and kindness, giving a little boy a quiet moment to shake the President's hand.
[Related: President Obama and Kids.]
