[Content Note: Christian Supremacy.]
Last week, I shared that Pope Francis had reversed course on two millennia of Catholic doctrine and declared that atheists aren't axiomatically terrible garbage demons after all! But whooooooooooooops! It turns out we still are, and Vatican spokeslord the Rev. Thomas Rosica has issued some helpful explanatory text which explains that "all salvation comes from Christ, the Head, through the Church which is his body. Hence they cannot be saved who, knowing the Church as founded by Christ and necessary for salvation, would refuse to enter her or remain in her." That's obviously a perfect explanation in several ways.
There's a lot more, but the basic gist is that Catholics are still meant to believe that atheists will be consigned to eternal hellfire by a vengeful god. Along with everyone else who isn't Catholic. Wheeeeee!
"And everything felt right with the universe again."—Shakesville 5:29.
Btw, my favorite headline about this cool reversal goes to Cahir O'Doherty at Irish Central: "Vatican corrects infallible pope: atheists will still burn in hell." LOL!
Whoops Your Infallibility!
Rep. Michele Bachmann Won't Seek Reelection
OH NO! Ha ha just kidding. In a nearly 9-minute video, Representative Michele Bachmann (R-Eallyawful) announced that she will not be seeking reelection to Congress. We're all devastated, I'm sure. Who's gonna hide in the bushes and awkwardly kiss George W. Bush and say ALL THE TERRIBLE THINGS now?! (Prolly Darrell Issa.) Anyway, here is the video, which is obviously terrific.
Because of its length, this transcript took all fucking morning to do, and naturally I could not resist inserting some commentary along the way, which is in brackets. Enjoy!
* * *
Michele Bachmann, speaking directly into the camera in front of a library backdrop, while stirringly patriotic music plays in the background: My good friends: After a great deal of thought and deliberation, I have decided next year I will not seek a fifth Congressional term to represent the wonderful people of the 6th district of Minnesota. After serious consideration, I am confident that this is the right decision.
For some, a single two-year House term is enough service; for others, ten terms, or two decades in the House [MATH!], is still not enough service. Our Constitution allows for the decision of length of service in Congress to be determined by the Congresspeople themselves, or by the voters in the district. However, the law limits anyone from serving as President of the United States for more than eight years—and, in my opinion, well, eight years is also long enough for an individual to serve as a representative for a specific Congressional district. [HA HA SHE'S JUST LIKE A PRESIDENT, Y'ALL!]
Be assured, my decision was not in any way influenced by any concerns about my being reelected to Congress. [Of course not.] I've always in the past defeated candidates who are capable, qualified, and well-funded—and I have every confidence that, if I ran, I would again defeat the individual who I defeated last year, who has recently announced that he is once again running.
And rest assured, this decision was not impacted in any way by the recent inquiries into the activities of my former presidential campaign or my former presidential staff. [Heavens no.] It was clearly understood that compliance with all rules and regulations was an absolute necessity for my presidential campaign, and I have no reason to believe that that was not the case.
Last year, after I ran for president, I gave consideration to not running again for the House seat that I hold; however, given that we were only nine months away from the election, I felt that it might be difficult for another Republican candidate to get organized for what might have been a very challenging campaign—and I refuse to allow this decision to put this Republican seat in jeopardy, and so I ran. And I won. And I felt last year the Republicans had a significant opportunity to win both the Senate and the White House, and finally put our country back on the track of greatness and American exceptionalism.
That said, different from some, I've never considered holding public office to be an occupation. I've considered it to be both an honor and a privilege, but most importantly a significant responsibility. And even when it means resisting the policy positions of many in my own political party, I've always strived to be first and foremost a public servant, and do what is best for the people, and never acquiesce to being a political servant. There's a difference.
Feel confident, over the next eighteen months, I will continue to work one hundred hour weeks, and I will continue to do everything that I can to advance our conservative constitutional principles that have served as the bedrock for who we are as a nation. And I will continue to work vehemently and robustly to fight back against what most in the other party want to do to transform our country into becoming—which would be a nation that our founders would hardly even recognize today. ["What the devil is a mobile phone?"—George Washington. "Feel confident, over the next eighteen months, I will robustly try to rid this nation of everything the founders do not recognize!"—Michele Bachmann, via carrier pigeon.]
I proudly have and I promise you I will continue to fight to protect innocent human life, traditional marriage, family values, religious liberty, and academic excellence. ["I will continue to hate everyone who isn't like me, as well as science."]
Whether working in a bipartisan way to gain federal approval to finally build an immensely significant and long overdue bridge in our district, working to reopen a much-needed regional airport in the district, being the primary sponsor of the bill that recently passed in the House to repeal Obamacare, to recently flying to London to be one of three people to represent the United States of America at the funeral of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who, among her other accomplishments, together with Ronald Reagan, was responsible for bringing down the Soviet Union, to working to alleviate all the stifling economic restrictions that banks and businesses must now endure since the enactment of Dodd-Frank legislation. [That sentence went nowhere.]
I've called out the Muslim Jihad terrorists for who they are and for the evil that they perpetrate upon our people. [Ha ha BRAVE HERO!] And I've demanded that this administration never, under any circumstances, subordinates our national security for the administration's weak version of political correctness. I've identified at the outset of the so-called Arab Spring this administration's foreign policy blunders, and how those blunders have contributed into turning the Middle East into a devastating, evil, Jihadist earthquake. [Whut.]
I've pointed out this administration's despicable treatment toward our great friend and ally, Israel, and, at the same time, giving little more than lipservice to the ever-increasing and dangerous nuclear threat of Iran. Making publicly clear this administration's outrageous lack of action in Benghazi, Libya, and the subsequent political cover-up, which resulted in the deaths of four honorable, dedicated public servants. [That random sentence fragment just literally suggested the cover-up itself resulted in the deaths of four public servants, as opposed to the actions of terrorists. Cool claim!]
I've also called out this administration and the Treasury Department for allowing—and perhaps even for encouraging—partisan, selective enforcement against American citizens based upon their political beliefs that aren't in line with those of the administration.
I've also demanded consistently a balanced budget and fiscal responsibility—that this be a preeminent government requirement, so as to avoid the dangers of a future of financial calamity for our children, and the ultimate risk of the destruction of our entire economic system. May it never be.
My core of conviction on these principle issues, and more, will continue, in a steadfast manner during the remainder of my term and beyond. Because, you see, my decision to seek federal office, both in my initial running for the House and my decision to run for the presidency of the United States, was based solely on my heartfelt concern for our country's future.
Unfortunately, today I'm even more concerned about our country's future than I have ever been in the past. [Soooooooooo why not run again, then? Because only serving for eight years LIKE A PRESIDENT, which has nothing to do with how you'd totally lose nor possible impending ethics charges, is more important than your heartfelt concern for the future of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?!] On so many issues, we're clearly on the wrong track—but, looking forward, after the completion of my term, my future is full; it is limitless; and my passions for America will remain. And I want you to be assured that there is no future option or opportunity, be it directly in the political arena or otherwise, that I won't be giving serious consideration, if it can help save and protect our great nation for future generations.
I fully anticipate the mainstream liberal media to put a detrimental spin on my decision not to seek a fifth term, as since I was first elected to Congress many years ago, they always seem to attempt to find a dishonest way to disparage me. But I take being the focus of their attention and disparagement as a true compliment of my public service effectiveness. [HA HA PERFECT.]
To my many good friends and supporters, I will continue to fight for public policy that is first and foremost in the best interest of the citizens of the United States at large. [Like that regional airport? "THANKS!"—All citizens of the US, for sure.] To my detractors, my work continues for your best interests, as well. [HA HA NOPE!] I especially want to thank my wonderful husband Marcus, for thirty-five terrific years [is she quitting him, too?], our five children, our twenty-three foster children, my family, you, my loyal supporters, and all the people in the sixth Congressional district, for this unbelievable opportunity to serve all of you for these years. [JESUS FUCKING JONES WRAP IT UP ALREADY] And I want to thank god, for his blessings upon the United States of America. You see, it is god who has given me the strength, the conviction, and the personal fortitude to fight to enhance the safety, security, longevity, and well-being of our blessed nation, the United States of America.
I say to each one of you: God bless you, and god bless the United States of America. [Amen. What is the name of this country again?]
Um.
[Content Note: Rape culture.]
So, RAINN's Scott Berkowitz wrote an op-ed for CNN about Maryland v. King, in which the Supreme Court will decide the future of DNA evidence taken from suspects and/or the CODIS system in which DNA markers are stored. It's an interesting piece, although it's certainly an incomplete discussion without caveats about how DNA evidence is only as reliable as the people collecting and processing it are ethical.
Anyway. It's worth a read, with the note that there are descriptions of violent crimes against women in the piece.
I do wonder, however, if CNN could have possibly found a more absurdly inappropriate image to accompany the article.
The fuck, CNN? An image of a disembodied mouth that reads female with a swab positioned to enter the barely parted lips, handler of swab totally removed, is about the most inappropriate possible image that could have been used in association with a story about DNA collection from suspects and its efficacy in solving rape cases, of which the victims are disproportionately women and the perpetrators disproportionately men.
Not only is the (intentional? unintentional?) innuendo of this image pretty evident, which is a gross accompaniment to a story about rape, but when I look at this image, because the mouth reads as female, what I see is a victim being swabbed as part of a rape kit, which is not at all the focus of this case.
So if I'm instead meant to see a rapist, ha ha, well isn't it just perfect that the one time a human that reads female is supposed to represent "default human" is when that form is meant to be a suspected rapist.
Question of the Day
We've done this one before, but not for a long time...
What turn of phrase makes your teeth grind every time you hear it?
For the purposes of this question, we'll take all inherently offensive phrases (e.g. those with racist origins, or containing a gendered slur, etc.) out of contention. And it's not a question about a phrase that people frequently get grammatically wrong (e.g. "should have went" instead of "should have gone"), either.
It's about clichés, idioms, aphorisms, slivers of so-called conventional wisdom, and assorted one-liners of various stripes that just get on your nerves, either for no real reason other than you just bloody hate them or because they communicate an idea or attitude you can't abide.
My answer is: "Life isn't fair."
While it's aggravating when someone uses the phrase in a well-meaning but misguided attempt to be commiserative about something that either needs a better display of empathy or the wisdom of silence (like, say, when you've just lost a good friend suddenly at a young age), it's when those three horrid little words are offered up flippantly in response to a genuine injustice that I go all SET PHASERS TO FUCK OFF.
Extra bonus rage points earned by the even more excruciating "Nobody ever said life was fair."
I am not a violent person, Shakers, but when some privileged wankstain meets a legitimate grievance of the marginalized with a chorus of life ain't fair, I want to punch inanimate things.
Tom Hardy and a Puppy Go for a Hot Air Balloon Ride in an Undisclosed Location
"Tom," said the puppy, glancing out over the world below, "do you remember that conversation we were having about the phrase 'common sense'?" And Tom said, "Uh-huh." And the puppy said, "I want to throw the phrase 'conventional wisdom' in the same garbage bin." And Tom said, "Agreed." And then they floated, quietly.
My Life
[Content Note: Street harassment; ageism; fat hatred.]
This weekend, I was standing out on my front porch, peering at the robins' nest from a distance, trying to see if the eggs had hatched yet. It's important to note that while I was doing this very mundane thing, I was wearing a very mundane pink t-shirt and a very mundane pair of blue jeans. I was barefoot. My hair was tousled, not looking particularly stylish or particularly unstylish. Just a middle-aged white lady, standing outside her small and unremarkable home, looking at a birds' nest.
My neighbor, a white man in his 90s, was bent over in the middle of his front lawn, doing a little gardening around a tree. He was wearing a very mundane plaid shirt and a very mundane pair of khaki trousers while doing this mundane task in front of his small and unremarkable home.
I looked in the direction of my neighbor's home, opposite the direction of the nest, when I heard loud, almost shouted, laughter. It was coming from a young white man, hanging half out the window of a grey truck with a camper back. "HA HA HA!" he shout-laughed. "OLD MAN!" He started the shout-laughing again before he caught site of me and yelled: "OH MY GOD! FAT CHICK! HA HA HA! FAT CHICK, TOO!" This all happened in a moment, as the truck cruised by our homes. I looked back at him, curiously, as he shouted: "OLD MAN AND FAT CHICK! SCORE!"
The driver of the vehicle, presumably his friend or brother, another young white man, high-fived him. They laughed raucously. What a great day! An old man AND a fat chick! Out on their lawns. Living life.
SCORE.
I wasn't even angry, or hurt, or...anything really. It was like watching a context-less scene from one of David Lynch's early shorts, if David Lynch shot in over-saturated color and hated people. Confusing.
I just watched the scene, almost as if I weren't a part of it, and the first conscious thought I had was that it would be perfect if someone drove by listening to a David Byrne song, any David Byrne song, really loudly, right at that moment. But nobody did. It was just the sound of more cars passing, as the young men's laughter faded into the distance.
My neighbor didn't even look up. His hearing is fine. He has had almost 100 years of trying to make sense of a young man laughing at an old man. Maybe he has decided it doesn't make sense no matter how much time you spend on it, or maybe he remembers being a young man who laughed at old men once; maybe it makes all kinds of sense to him. Either way, he didn't react—at least in no way I could discern from my bit of grass.
I guess I probably looked like I didn't react, too. Because I just turned my face back to the birds, and went on about my mundane business precisely as I'd been the moment before. But I was thinking about what it must be like to be the kind of person who gets so excited about the hilarity (?) of seeing an old man and a fat chick just being in their front yards. I was thinking about how you get to be the kind of person who has your own image, people who look like you, avatars for "normal humankind," reflected back at you so thick, so undiluted with human diversity, that just seeing a person who is older than you, or fatter than you, or a different gender than you, is notable. And strange. And funny.
And I was thinking about how it is people just like the guys who passed me in the truck—"FAT CHICK! SCORE!"—who routinely filter my life through their validity prisms to find my perceptions wanting, despite a lack of empathy so cavernous that the mere sight of me is like finding an easter egg in a video game.
Soon the thought fell away, and I went back to standing on the tips of my bare toes, trying to spy a hint of blue eggs in the nest.
More Breaking News
Republican former Senators Bob Dole and Olympia Snowe say their party is garbage. (I'm paraphrasing, but only slightly.) Ha ha thanks. We know.
Another Typical Obama Administration Cover-Up!
[Content Note: References to drug use.]
This morning, Examiner.com had a SUPER article about how President Obama was high on cocaine during the Benghazi attack, because OBVIOUSLY HE WAS if you're PAYING ATTENTION and don't have your HEAD IN THE SAND because you're a MOONBAT OBAMABOT! Or whatever.
Anyway. Naturally, I emailed this article to Deeky with the note: "Sounds legit."
I wish I could share it with all of you, too, but for some reason (and by "some reason," I mean LIBERAL MEDIA CONSPIRACY CONSPIRING TO THE BURY THE TRUTH!) the article has been removed:
Luckily, during our subsequent exchange this morning, I sent Deeks this picture of Al Pacino in Scarface, from the infamous mountain o' cocaine scene, into which someone has photoshopped a smiling snowperson with a jaunty cap:
And that picture coincidentally has exactly as much relevant newsworthiness as the now-deleted Examiner.com story, so.
Discussion Thread: Touching/Not Touching as Control
[Content Note: Hostility to consent; bias against marginalized bodies.]
Against the backdrop of Beyoncé getting "spanked" onstage by some random asshole who felt entitled—and empowered by a misogynist and racist culture—to touch her body without her permission, I've been having an excellent conversation on Twitter with Trudy, Ana, Shane, and others about touching and not touching as a form of control and/or shaming.
One of the things I noted is how, as a fat woman, I get this from both angles: I am frequently touched without my consent as a woman because women's bodies are treated like public property. And as a fat person, I am frequently not touched—or it is made plain to me that touching me is HORRIBLE—by people whose job it is to touch me—healthcare providers, hairdressers, tailors, etc. (I was fortunate to not have this experience, but I know there are tattooists who refuse to work on fat bodies, as another example.) In both cases, the ultimate goal is to communicate to me that I am less than.
This is something that is not unique to people with fat bodies, of course. People with marginalized bodies of all sorts may experience the same refusal to touch and/or the touching of their "exotic" body and its fat or scars or skin color or particular hair type.
In what ways have you experienced touching or not-touching (especially nonsexual touching or not-touching) as a form of control and/or shaming in your everyday life, particularly in ways that intersect with the parts of your identity that are non-privileged?
In The News
[Content note: Kidnapping, rape]
It's Not Monday:
WELCOME TO OBAMA'S AMERICA!!!
A thick fog descended on Sydney causing ferry cancellations, flight delays and traffic difficulties. Visibility was reduced to just 100 metres in some areas of Sydney.
A new comic book is being planned to commemorate the 1969 Stonewall Riots.
The women kidnapped by Ariel Castro will have chance to adopt the dogs they bonded with during their imprisonment.
Republicans have their priorities in order.
The United States is the only highly developed nation that doesn't require employers to offer paid vacation time.
Some good advice. Really.
Daily Dose of Cute
Sophie and Livsy watch the birds out my office window.
Here's a little video of the girls birdwatching out the window—or, to be accurate, Sophie watching the birds and Olivia watching Sophie's flicking tail.
Video Description: Sophie the Torbie Cat watches the birds out the window, flicking her tail back and forth. Olivia the White Farm Cat sits on my desk, occasionally snapping at or batting Sophie's tail. Eventually, Sophie just hops up into the window, and Olivia gives me a "wevs" look.
* * *
As always, please feel welcome and encouraged to share pix of the fuzzy, feathered, or scaled members of your family in comments.
Quote of the Day
[Content Note: Misogyny.]
"Biggest mystery? Women. No one understands them. They don't even understand themselves. Books and books and books have been written about it, and no one understands it."—Republican Nebraska State Senator Bill Kintner, in a great interview where he also observes: "Men are very easy to understand. Very basic, very simple." Also: He loves bootstraps SO MUCH. He loves them almost as much as he is mystified by women.
But who isn't mystified by women, amirite? We don't even understand ourselves! LADIES.
[H/T to Shug.]
John McCain Went to Syria
[Content Note: War.]
I have now twice read this Daily Beast story, "Exclusive: John McCain Slips Across Border Into Syria, Meets With Rebels," and I still can't tell if sitting Republican Senator John McCain met with Syrian rebels with or without the knowledge and sanction of the US President. It doesn't seem to be an official diplomatic mission, since various news outlets are describing it as an "unannounced" and "surprise" visit.
So, basically Republican Senators are just doing whatever the fuck they want now, irrespective of the sitting President's wishes or strategies? Cool.
George Zimmerman Trial Updates
[Content Note: Racism; violence.]
Last week, I noted that the defense team for George Zimmerman, who stalked and killed teenager Trayvon Martin, was petitioning to get admitted into evidence Martin's cellphone texts, evidence of previous fights, school records, and THC blood levels on the day he was killed by Zimmerman. Many of these issues were covered in a pretrial hearing this morning, and there was some good news and some less good news:
9:15 a.m. ET: [Defense attorney Mark O'Mara] said Martin's suspension from school could be relevant and admissible depending on how the prosecution tells the jury why Martin was staying with his father when he was killed. Judge Nelson has granted the prosecution's motion to bar evidence of Martin's school suspension.So, a lot of wins for the prosecution, who want to make sure it is George Zimmerman on trial, and not Trayvon Martin.
9:20 a.m. ET: Judge Nelson has granted the prosecution's motion to bar evidence of Martin's past drug use. The admissibility [of the] toxicology report that indicates Martin had THC in his blood the night of the shooting will be addressed in another motion.
9:25 a.m. ET: Judge Nelson granted the prosecution's motion to bar evidence that Martin had been in fights during opening statements, but she said it may be admissible if it becomes relevant, if the defense can authenticate it, and can overcome hearsay.
9:27 a.m. ET: The attorneys are now arguing over the admissibility of Martin's school records. O'Mara said it could become relevant depending on how the prosecution presents the case. Judge Nelson granted the prosecution's motion to bar the teenagers school records.
9:31 a.m. ET: Judge Nelson granted the prosecution's motion to bar Martin's text messages.
9:36 a.m. ET: The attorneys are now arguing over whether the jury will hear about Martin's TCH levels in his blood the night of the shooting. Defense attorney Don West is arguing that the drug can cause impairment and he enough in his blood the night to affect his behavior.
9:43 a.m. ET: Judge Nelson has barred evidence of Martin's THC blood levels from opening statements, and she will rule later on whether it will be admissible after she hears the defense expert's testimony about the marijuana use.
There is still the possibility that Martin's history of having been in fights could be introduced during the trial, but it's difficult to see how the defense will manage to meet the threshold of authentication and relevancy.
There's also the possibility that Martin's THC levels (indicating marijuana use) could be admissible, contingent on a defense expert witness who will have been hired and paid specifically because zie will say it's relevant. I'm hoping Judge Nelson will merely allow the hearing as a matter of course and then rule it inadmissible.
Again, I know defense attorneys have a job to do, and I know it's considered acceptable to put a victim "on trial" in order to defend their clients, but fuck it makes me angry. Especially in this case. All I can think is: Hey, George Zimmerman, if you thought Trayvon Martin should have faced a courtroom for his alleged fighting and drug use, then maybe you shouldn't have killed him.
Instead, George Zimmerman decided to be judge, jury, and executioner, and now wants to retroactively put Trayvon Martin on trial to try to justify what his defenders call vigilantism—a word which is itself implicitly misleading, because "vigilantism" suggests Martin actually did something wrong in the first place. And, as many others have also pointed out, there's nothing relevant to this case, to the altercation at its center, that Zimmerman and his defense team can offer about Martin, so they're just trying to get anything in the courtroom that a jury might interpret as "suspiciously black."
The Perfect News
[Content Note: Misogyny.]
Actual headline from the AP: "Jerry Lewis repeats his distaste for female comics." No, really.
"Ladies? Don't make him laugh." Ha ha great first line to a super story about how Jerry Lewis, who famously doesn't find women funny, still doesn't find women funny.
Hey, here's an idea: We'll all agree to assume that Jerry Lewis still doesn't find women funny, and continues to say stupid shit like "I cannot sit and watch a lady diminish her qualities to the lowest common denominator," unless and until he changes his mind, at which point THEN would be the perfect time to revisit Jerry Lewis' opinion on finding women funny.
Because, as it is, this isn't news. And if you really feel obliged to report regular updates after asking Jerry Lewis "if he had changed his mind at all because of performers like Melissa McCarthy and Sarah Silverman," as though Lucille Ball and Joan Rivers didn't exist, then less with the "Jerry Lewis repeats his distaste for female comics" and more with the "Misogynist dinosaur reiterates contemptible opinion about women."
[Related Reading: STFU, Jerry Lewis.]
Open Thread
Hosted by a memorial statue of fallen Navy Seal Team Six support member
John Douangdara and his military combat dog Bart.
The statue will be unveiled today, which is Memorial Day in the US, in Douangdara's hometown of South Sioux City. You can read more here about the statue, the sculptor, Susan Bahary, and what Douangdara's family and friends had to say about him and the statue. And here is more about Douangdara, right after he was lost. And here is a picture of Master at Arms Petty Officer 1st Class John Douangdara and Bart in service together.
* * *
As I noted on Friday, many of us have Memorial Day plans today, so we're taking the day off and we'll be back with a full schedule tomorrow.
