Daily Dose of Cute

[Content Note: Video below briefly includes the dogs play-biting one another. They are not hurting each other at all (although Dudley is being annoying), but if that sort of thing bothers you, you might want to skip this one.]

Dudley spends his days napping. He is a very proficient napper! If there was a Dog Olympics, he would be the Michael Phelps of napping.

Greyhounds are sprinters, not marathoners, so they tend to have one HUGE burst of energy a day, and spend the rest of their days eating and sleeping, to get ready for the next HUGE burst of energy. And, once a day (at least), Dudley will EXPLODE into the backyard, and run around the back half of the garden, which he has turned into his own personal racetrack. And he will RUN and RUN and RUN, so fast that I can barely keep up with him with the camera.

But every once in awhile, he gets all petulant, and doesn't want to RUN, and instead wants to use his energy to annoy everyone in the house, lol. And first he'll sit in front of me and bark, and then Iain (if it's a weekend), and then he'll bark at Olivia, because he knows she's third in charge, and, when none of us respond to his entreaties, he'll go and try to get Zelda to play, and she never wants to when he's in That Mood, so he goes and nips at his plushy toys in a giant, ass-in-the-air playbow crouch, while his silly ears twitch in a hilarious way.

Video Description: Dudley looks at me plaintively, then starts trying to engage Zelda with playbiting, but she is having none of it, so he goes and jumps on his plushy toys lying on the floor, his ears turned backwards and bouncing in an extremely silly fashion. Zelda licks her paws, miffed that Dudley has ruffled her fur. Dudley nips at his toys. Then he stands in the middle of the room, looking perturbed, before walking away.

Naturally, I took him outside to play right after this. And I chased him until he RAN and RAN and RAN. And then he came inside and went to sleep.

image of Dudley the Greyhound sleeping soundly on the couch, his legs all tangled up
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Open Wide...

Two-Minute Nostalgia Sublime

Lynn Ahrens: "Interplanet Janet"

(Filling in for deeky while he rocks the Hollywood Canteen.)

Open Wide...

Here Is the Thing

[Content Note: Rape culture.]

Anthony Weiner sent sexually explicit pictures to at least one woman without her consent.

That is not merely unethical; it is also criminal.

He never faced legal consequences for his behavior, because he is protected by his privilege—and by our cultural tolerance of hostility to consent.

And then, after promising, pinky swearing, crossing his heart, Scout's honor, to never, ever, make such a terrible "mistake" again, he did it again.

And, sure, this time he sought consent, as far as we know, but that consent, such as it was, was deeply compromised by the power differential between them. Weiner preyed on a young woman, a woman who is much younger than he is and has much less life experience and much less power, who believed this Important Man was really in love with her, as he told her he was.

Now this young woman herself says she feels stupid and naive for believing him, for thinking they were really in love. But she shouldn't.

Because that's what predators do. They victimize people they perceive to be vulnerable to their predation.

I cannot put this any more plainly: Anthony Weiner is not just a public official with a "sex scandal." He is not just a guy with an overactive libido. He is not just a guy with bad judgment, or a self-destructive streak, or a lack of ethics, or a sex addiction.

He has repeatedly used his position, privilege, power, and access to solicit the sexual attentions of young women who do not have anything like the kind of position, privilege, power, and access he has. He isn't interested in an equal. He is, when necessary, indifferent to consent.

He is an unrepentant predator.

And anyone who is calling this by any other name is abetting exactly the kind of exploitation in which he's engaging.

Open Wide...

Wednesday Blogaround

This blogaround brought to you by Lord Summerisle.

Gaisu: New All-Women Jirga in Pakistan Takes Steps Toward Equality [Content Note: violence, murder, systemic misogyny]

Lynn: A War of Words: Toronto Goes Native, One Street at a Time [Content Note: rendering Native people invisible]

Lisa: The War on Blacks: Arrests for Marijuana Possession [Content Note: racism, systemic discrimination]

Monica: Jamaican Teen in Femme Attire Killed By Mob [Content note: murder, transphobia, Christian Dominionism, imperialism]

Gloria: Awed By the Public Library

DC Women Kicking Ass: On a Wonder Woman Solo Movie vs. “Hide the Girl” Strategy [Content Note: media misogyny]

Jason: An Appointment With the Wicker Man

Leave your links and recommendations in comments...

Open Wide...

Larry Summers Is Not the Man Person for This Job

Larry Summers is reportedly the leading candidate to replace Ben Bernanke at the Fed, and this is terrible for a whole lot of reasons, as detailed by David Dayen for Salon.

Summers would get the nod over the previous favorite, Fed vice chair Janet Yellen, in part because top-level officials have stressed to the President that Yellen is somehow "not strong enough" for the job, and would subsequently lack the confidence of financial markets. This gender-coded whisper campaign against the woman who would become the first female Fed chair in history is in line with an undercurrent of sexism about the selection — and the fact that Summers has an unfortunate history on this, from infamous comments he made while President of Harvard University (alleging there exist "innate" scientific aptitude difficulties for women) just amplifies the potential problem for the White House with its liberal base.

But the gender issue, important as it is, may be more of a cover for what sources see as an ideological preference inside the White House for Summers over Yellen, one that could not only reverberate into catastrophe for the Administration politically, but may spell danger for millions of unemployed, under-employed and low-wage Americans, whose interests would again be held subservient to that of the financial system.

...Larry Summers has perhaps the worst track record of any major economic figure in America. And the Federal Reserve plays a key role, perhaps the primary role, in regulating banks. Led by point person Daniel Tarullo, the Fed has recently doubled leverage requirements for the largest financial institutions. It's hard not to see the Summers pick as designed to babysit Tarullo, and blunt any policies that come down hard on the banks. Tarullo and Summers are personally close, but Summers typically listens to his own set of sources on financial regulation – the ones in the very expensive suits – and this has had disastrous consequences for over 15 years.

...[Summers] failed upwards by taking a lead position on the Obama economic team, and the man responsible for much of the financial crisis would set to fix it. He predictably failed again. ...So on fiscal, debt relief and monetary terms, when the economy was reeling and everything counted, Summers missed on all three.
I recommended reading the whole thing.

Larry Summers shouldn't be allowed anywhere near the Federal Reserve on his professional track record alone. But he also shouldn't be allowed anywhere near any job in any administration which is ostensibly supportive of women, if that administration doesn't want to communicate to women that gender essentialist rhetoric used to demean us isn't a problem.

Of course, this president has already communicated that pretty clearly by giving Summers multiple jobs in the White House (where he marginalized female staffers) and by making a HA HA FUNNY JOKE about how Summers is a rank misogynist.

Larry Summers is terrible for the economy. He is also a terrible choice for an administration whose party is pretty obviously coasting on a reputation of being "pro-women" by simply not being as explicitly horrendously anti-woman as their opponents.

Open Wide...

WTF

Buzzfeed has revealed the identity of the young woman who reported sexting with Anthony Weiner after his resignation from Congress. I am not going to link to it. She explicitly said she did not want to reveal her identity, and then they identified her, care of a source "who has known [her] since high school."

I can't even begin to say how wildly inappropriate that is.

Open Wide...

In Totally Not Surprising News

[Content Note: Fat Hatred, Rape Culture, Reproductive Health, Economic Disparity] 

In a move that comes completely as a surprise to everyone who hasn't been paying attention to the national discourse about employment, healthcare, and Evul Fatties!!1!, employer Pennsylvania State University is imposing a $100 monthly surcharge on employees who don't meet new health [sic] requirements:

...instead of offering “carrots” to its employees for seeking preventive care, Pennsylvania State University starting this fall is opting for the “stick,” imposing a $100 monthly surcharge on those who don’t meet new health requirements.

[...] By November, faculty and their spouses or domestic partners covered by university health care must complete an online wellness profile and physical exam. They’re also required to complete a more invasive biometric screening, including a “full lipid profile” and glucose, body mass index and waist circumference measurements.
Hey, that sounds awesome and not horrifyingly invasive in an Orwellian corporate dystopia sense! I am only sorry that Penn State didn't opt for the full Republican healthcare package of mandatory trans-vaginal ultrasounds once a month to see if their "pre-pregnant" employees really are pregnant! I am sure that is a healthcare package that ALEC lobbyists are pitching right now somewhere and I cannot wait for that day!

I'm sure that will be stage 2, after we take care of surcharging all the fatties in an economic punishment model that will certainly not leave them with less money to allot to their monthly healthcare which might have the unfortunate side-effect of reinforcing the false impression that fat people simply are unhealthier than thin people by virtue of their fat as opposed to by virtue of the constant social and economic pressures levied on them by others! Because fairy dust, or something!

Meanwhile, Mark Pauly, professor of smarty-ness, is baffled by this move by Penn State:
Mark Pauly, a professor of health care management and business economics at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, said he’d heard of a few other employers using the “stick” approach, but not for so “daunting” a menu of exams.

“The evidence does not really support the idea that this forced wellness helps, but employers these days are afraid to try anything else,” he said in an e-mail. “It is a mystery to me why Penn State would start irritating their workers.”
Why, it's almost like employers are confident that there are more workers than there are jobs in this economy and that they can therefore pass the cost of healthcare to their employees with impunity, because what are the noisy cattle going to do about it, huh? And perhaps they've also realized that a divide-and-conquer strategy that plays into the prejudices of the privileged in order to marginalize the oppressed tends to go over a little better with the populace! You know what they say: a spoonful of privilege helps the corporate dystopia go down!

Moving on to another Privileged Man Who Says Things, professor Jonathan Levin inadvertently admits that these healthcare "incentive" programs are all functionally identical across the board and that the only real difference between voluntary "carrots" and mandatory "sticks" is wishful thinking crossed with magical unicorn farts:
Although not immediately clear, Levin suggested that Penn State’s plan could still fall into the first category if “framed” differently.

“The upshot of incentive programs is that people end up with different financial rewards,” he said. “If you think of the people who get less as the baseline, those who get more are getting a ‘bonus.’ If you think of the people who get more as the baseline, those who get less are getting a ‘penalty.’ ”
Ha ha, which is totally not news to the fat people who have been economically disadvantaged by these programs and the fat hatred that they breed and reinforce in our coworkers since day one. Which is why the Penn State decision is actually not shocking at all to most fat people, most allies of fat people, and the corporate overlords hell-bent on oppressing fat people! This news is only a surprise to privileged people who choose not to deal with this shit on a daily basis! Yay!

(Hat tip to Shaker Kathy_A.)

Open Wide...

Open Thread

image of actress Marilyn Monroe

Hosted by Marilyn Monroe.

Open Wide...

Question of the Day

Suggested by Shaker newdealwithit: "What is your refuge when the world is a garbage nightmare? (It could be an actual physical space, a person, a comforting thought or memory, a pet, an activity, a song, a book, a movie, etc.)"

Open Wide...

Anthony Weiner, Again

[Content Note: Hostility to consent.]

Anthony Weiner admits sexting continued after 2011 resignation from Congress. Huh.

New York City mayoral candidate Anthony Weiner, who resigned from Congress in 2011 after a sexting scandal, admitted Tuesday that his shenanigans continued even after he stepped down.

...Weiner issued a statement after a gossip website called The Dirty published an interview with an anonymous woman who claimed she had an online relationship with him between July and November 2012.

...The Dirty claimed that Weiner — who allegedly used the alias Carlos Danger — met the unnamed 22-year-old woman on the social-networking site Formspring in July 2012, sent her sexually explicit photos and had phone sex with her before the relationship "fizzled" that November.

He promised her a job and a condo, said the site, which posted some explicit messages and pictures.
Everything I feel obliged to say about this, I already said on Twitter:

image of tweet reading: 'This is your regularly scheduled reminder that Anthony Weiner did not have at least one woman's consent for dick pix'
[Link goes to this post.]

image of tweet reading: 'So ha ha ha Carlos Danger, but this isn't a 'sex scandal.' It never was. Unless you erase Weiner's hostility for consent.'

image of tweet reading: 'Anthony Weiner doesn't hold himself to account for violating consent, but we sure as hell should have.'
[Link goes to this post.]

image of tweet reading: 'Cuz, not for nothing, folks, but hostility to consent doesn't mean you messed up. It means you're a predator.'

This fucking guy.

Open Wide...

Spooner Guilty; Life in Prison

[Content Note: Guns; racist violence.]

John Henry Spooner, a 76-year-old white man who shot 13-year-old black teenager Darius Simmons at point-blank range after erroneously accusing Simmons of stealing from him, has, after being found guilty last week, been sentenced to life in prison.

The judge could have allowed for the possibility of parole after 20 years, but rejected that option, citing Spooner's lack of remorse and desire to also kill the teen's brother.
Even the best possible legal outcome does not feel like justice when a 76-year-old man will spend the dwindling twilight of his life behind bars for stealing an entire lifetime from a boy.

I hope this brings Darius Simmons' family some measure of peace.

Open Wide...

Cool Democracy We've Got

[Content Note: Voter suppression; racism; classism.]

The Supreme Court's garbage voting rights decision last month paved the way for this shit: "North Carolina on Cusp of Passing Worst Voter Suppression Bill in the Nation." Among the new requirements being proposed to access voting:

Implementing a strict voter ID requirement that bars citizens who don't have a proper photo ID from casting a ballot.

Eliminating same-day voter registration, which allowed residents to register at the polls.

Cutting early voting by a full week.

Increasing the influence of money in elections by raising the maximum campaign contribution to $5,000 and increasing the limit every two years.

Making it easier for voter suppression groups like True The Vote to challenge any voter who they think may be ineligible by requiring that challengers simply be registered in the same county, rather than precinct, of those they challenge.

Vastly increasing the number of "poll observers" and increasing what they're permitted to do. In 2012, ThinkProgress caught the Romney campaign training such poll observers using highly misleading information.

Only permitting citizens to vote in their specific precinct, rather than casting a ballot in any nearby ward or election district. This can lead to widespread confusion, particularly in urban areas where many precincts can often be housed in the same building.

Barring young adults from pre-registering as 16- and 17-year-olds, which is permitted by current law, and repealing a state directive that high schools conduct voter registration drives in order to boost turnout among young voters.

Prohibiting some types of paid voter registration drives, which tend to register poor and minority citizens.

Dismantling three state public financing programs, including the landmark program that funded judicial elections.

Weakening disclosure requirements for outside spending groups.

Preventing counties from extending polling hours in the event of long lines or other extraordinary circumstances and making it more difficult for them to accommodate elderly or disabled voters with satellite polling sites at nursing homes, for instance.
Emphasis original.

Digby notes: "In case you were wondering, 40 of North Carolina's 100 counties were under the jurisdiction of Section of 5 of the Voting Rights Act. It's so lucky that the Supreme Court recognized that nobody is trying to suppress the vote anymore so there's no need for any of that."

The Republican Party has no interest in democracy, representative or otherwise. They want a corporate-funded dictatorship, masked by the thin veneer of an ostensibly democratic election to give their coup the stamp of legitimacy among the fearful bigots still scared or cruel or daft or uninformed enough to vote for them.

Which is to say nothing of the enlightened opportunists who know exactly for what they're casting a vote, and happily participate in the ridiculous ruse, because they regard cheating as a feature of the Republican Party, not a bug.

Open Wide...

RIP Angela Deskins, Shetisha Sheeley, Shirellda Terry

[Content Note: Murder; rape; misogyny.]

The bodies of three missing women have been found in East Cleveland: Angela Deskins, 38; Shetisha Sheeley, 28; and a third woman who currently remains unidentified Shirellda Terry, 18.

The man who is believed to have murdered them, Michael Madison, 35, is under arrest and "being held on a $6 million bond after being charged Monday with three counts of aggravated murder and three counts of kidnapping. ...If convicted of the murder charges, he could face life in prison. The kidnapping charges each carry a possible sentence of three to 10 years in prison."

Madison is a registered sex offender who, in addition to various drug and disorderly conduct charges, "was arrested in 2001 on charges of attempted rape, gross sexual imposition, and kidnapping. He pleaded guilty as part of a plea bargain to attempted rape in 2002, and was sentenced to four years in prison."

Which obviously wasn't enough.

I don't know what the solution is for repeat sexual offenders, but I do find it curious that there are all kinds of popular proposals to keep repeat drug offenders (who may only be personal users) off the streets forever, but none of the same political will to seriously curtail the freedoms of men who repeatedly abuse women, even when there is evidence their crimes are escalating.

I feel helpless in these moments. There is one killer, but there is an entire culture that abets violence against women, and I am part of it. I am tasked with dismantling it, if I want it to change.

My sincerest condolences to the families, friends, and colleagues of Angela Deskins, Shetisha Sheeley, and Jane Doe Shirellda Terry. I am so sorry.

And my heart is with the women of greater Cleveland, many of whom must feel absolutely terrorized by the quick succession of very public cases of harm done to women, especially women of color, by terrible men.

[Note: The post has been updated to reflect the name of the third victim now that she has been identified. My thanks to Von for the heads-up.]

Open Wide...

Quote of the Day

"New Mexico's guarantee of equal protection to its citizens demands that same-sex couples be permitted to enjoy the benefits of marriage in the same way and to the same extent as other New Mexico citizens."—New Mexico Attorney General Gary King (D-Ecent), in written arguments filed with the New Mexico State Supreme Court, saying his office will not defend a ban on same-sex marriage and urging the justice to "invalidate the state's ban on gay marriage if they agree to resolve the issue in a lawsuit filed by two Santa Fe men who were denied a marriage license."

Bravo to AG King, and bravo to the two men who were willing to apply for for a marriage license knowing they would be denied, just to get this ball rolling. It is immensely courageous to be the ones willing to walk this road.

Open Wide...

Daily Dose of Cute

image of Sophie the Torbie Cat sitting on her cat tree, looking intently at something out the front door
Sophie watches the birds on the front porch.

As always, please feel welcome and encouraged to share pix of the fuzzy, feathered, or scaled members of your family in comments.

Open Wide...

Whoooops Your Citations, Mitch Daniels!

Hey, remember that time when Mitch Daniels tried to save academic freedom by destroying it? When he claimed that Howard Zinn "falsified" his history and that God-fearing Americans Indiana students should not get credit for courses that include A People's History of the United States? When he threw around all of these critiques from other historians that allegedly proved that Howard Zinn was a witch lying Commie?

Welp! According to John K. Wilson of the Academe Blog, some of the historians Mitch referenced are not too thrilled about his citation. And not just because Mitch hasn't mastered Turabian:

Academe Blog posted Michael Kazin’s response last night, in which Kazin wrote that Daniels “should be roundly condemned for his attempts to stop students from reading Zinn’s big book and for calling Zinn a liar…” Kazin wrote about Zinn’s book, “chapters of it can be quite useful if contrasted with alternative interpretations.”

Sam Wineburg took to Twitter to respond to Daniels, writing: “Mitch Daniels uses my work to defend his shameless attempts to censor free speech. Shame!” Wineburg noted, “I have criticized Zinn but will defend to my death the right to teach him. Shame on Mitch Daniels.” He explained, “Mr. Daniels, free societies openly teach ideas we disagree with. We do not censor objectionable speech. Study your Orwell.” As Wineburg put it, “How could I possibly agree that ‘banning Zinn’ makes sense when I assign him in my own classes?”

Michael Kammen disagreed with Daniels’ belief that Zinn “intentionally falsified” his work. While Kammen might not recommend the use of Zinn’s book in schools today, it is “only because it was written 35 years ago and there are now more balanced and judicious treatments of the US survey.” Kammen also rejected Daniels’ view about banning Zinn’s work from professional development classes for teachers: “I think that some teachers might need to know about its emphases because when Zinn wrote the US history textbooks omitted a great deal. Although it is not a great book, it remains a kind of historiographical landmark. Teachers should at least be aware of it.” And Kammen emphatically opposed the idea of politicians deciding what books should be used in schools rather than historians and teachers: “Absolutely not!”

Whoooooooops!

See, this is the thing, Mitch. I, like most historians, can critique a work of history largely because historiography has moved on. This is not the same as "interntionally falsified." Historians aren't Doctor Who; we aren't able to travel forward in time and see what new materials are uncovered that may make our interpretations less viable. In the future.

And I'm also capable of disagreeing with other historians' interpretations without calling their works a pack of lies. Historians disagree about how to weigh one piece of evidence against another all the time. We have entire schools of thought that disagree with each other! This does not equal calling another historian a liar.

Nor does it mean banning their work from classrooms. Would you believe it, I *intentionally* assign opposing viewpoints on history in my classes, because I think students benefit from seeing that debate! To date, I haven't had any students morph into Marxist Red Anti-American Transformers just because they learned that historians disagree with each other. YMMV.

(And yeah, historians are sometimes petty. They sometimes trash work because they don't like each others' politics or just think someone is an obnoxious asshole at conferences. But you know what? That bad behavior does not give you license to imitate it.)

Make no mistake: there are historians who do falsify data or intentionally misrepresent their evidence. Sometimes for the sake of politics. There are those who are incompetent and unintentionally mess up what thye're trying to do. And these bad historians (mostly) get called out for it. But that is not what you are doing, at all.

You are intentionally twisting other people's critiques to fit your agenda. And frankly, you look like an uninformed ass doing it.

Historical arguments are supposed to be about the careful and honest use of evidence. You might try that sometime.

Open Wide...

Two-Minute Nostalgia Sublime

Crash Test Dummies: "Superman's Song"

(Filling in for deeky while he seeks Passage to Marseilles.)

Open Wide...

In The News

Here is some stuff in the news today!

Republican Senator Mike Lee says that "he and other congressional Republicans would be willing to shut down the federal government in order to block further implementation of" Obamacare. Neat!

[Content Note: Homophobia] RNC Chair Reince Priebus isn't into gay tolerance. I also don't like the word "tolerance," but not for the reasons Reince Priebus doesn't!

In other news: "52% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents think the GOP leadership is talking the party in the wrong direction."

[Content Note: Rape culture] 11-year-old Yemeni Nada Al-Ahdal, who escaped from her parents and an arranged marriage with her uncle's help: "I'm a human being and I'd rather die than get married at this age."

Townhall.com is a cesspool of conservative nightmares saying terrible things, but this is low even by their garbage standards: "Conservatives Should Point and Laugh as Detroit Dies." It's also pretty ironic, given that institutional neglect is the centerpiece of conservative ideology. HA HA POINT AND LAUGH AT WHAT THE WHOLE COUNTRY WOULD LOOK LIKE IF WE INSTITUTED CONSERVATIVE POLICY ACROSS THE BOARD.

Pakistan has a dangerous shortage of water reserves.

[Content Note: Rape culture] The University of Southern California and Dartmouth College in New Hampshire are under investigation by the the US Department of Education for the mishandling of sexual assault cases.

[Content Note: Sexual harassment] A sexual harassment suit has been filed against San Diego Mayor Bob Filner, who recently agreed to be the keynote speaker at a benefit for sexual assault victims.

The world's biggest art player is now a woman, specifically 30-year-old Qatari Sheika al Mayassa bint Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani.

Japanese officials say radioactive wastewater from the Fukushima power plant is leaking into the ocean. Fuuuuuuuck.

Open Wide...

Race Had Something to Do With It

[Content Note: Violence; racism.]

Race "had nothing to do with" George Zimmerman stalking and killing Trayvon Martin, and race "had nothing to do with" the verdict of the almost entirely white jury that found Zimmerman not guilty of murder, or even manslaughter, in the killing of a black teenage boy. So say white supremacist apologists. Because they are mendacious fucks.

But race appears to have had something to do with this case:

The not-guilty verdict in the trial of George Zimmerman has produced dramatically different reactions among blacks and whites, with African Americans overwhelmingly disapproving of the jury's decision and a bare majority of whites saying they approve of the outcome, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

...The new survey underscores not only the gap between whites and blacks, but also how passionate many African Americans are about the case. Among African Americans, 86 percent say they disapprove of the verdict — with almost all of them saying they strongly disapprove — and 87 percent saying the shooting was unjustified.

In contrast, 51 percent of whites say they approve of the verdict while just 31 percent disapprove. There is also a partisan overlay to the reaction among whites: 70 percent of white Republicans but only 30 percent of white Democrats approve of the verdict. Among all whites, one-third say the shooting was unjustified, one-third say it was justified and the other third say they didn't know enough to have an opinion.
That's an interesting frame—that black people are "passionate" about the case, since "passionate" is frequently wielded as a dog-whistle against marginalized populations to suggest we are "oversensitive."

Another way to frame it is that black people are more engaged with this case because white privilege affords white people the luxury of apathy—and abets the pathetic fantasy that race is irrelevant in the stalking and killing of a black boy by a not-black man.

It also enables the garbage belief that these poll results are merely reflective of something within a void around the case, and not evidence of the racist culture in which the crime and trial happened in the first place.

White apologists will defend the disparity with tired arguments about how they are just more objective, ignoring that privilege doesn't not make one more objective; it merely gives one a different perspective—that of someone who benefits from oppression, as opposed to being marginalized by it.

The truth is, a justice system that systematically disenfranchises black jurors and disproportionately favors white jurors in a culture where whiteness is privileged and white people view themselves as objective arbiters of crimes that "have nothing to do with" race, is not a system of justice. It's an institutional-level Validity Prism.

Open Wide...

I Really Hope This Is True...

...because it would make me really happy:

Sacha Baron Cohen is just not seeing eye to eye with the remaining members of Queen who have script and director approval over that biopic on iconic lead singer Freddie Mercury. That film had Cohen circling the role but I've just learned he's now pulled out. The reason is that the band wanted to make more of a PG movie about Queen while Cohen was counting on a gritty R-rated tell-all centered around the gifted gay* singer.
Please please please let this be true. Cohen does indeed have an uncanny resemblance to Mercury, but I can't think of a worse person to play him, for a lot of reasons.

[*Mercury identified as bisexual.]

Open Wide...