There have been a lot of updates and we're continuing to get additional information, so I'm moving this back to the top of the page for a bit.
[Content Note: Guns; violence.]
The US Navy is reporting that around a dozen people have been injured and there may be fatalities at the Washington Naval Yard this morning, after a shooter (or multiple shooters) fired on employees in the Naval Sea Systems Command Headquarters building.
Reports are very preliminary at this point, so I'm cautious about passing on information. Please note that this information may change. Eyewitnesses say the gun used appeared to be an assault rifle, and that the shooter was a man dressed in all black. Police are looking for as many as three shooters at the moment, but it's not clear if there actually were three separate shooters or, if as frequently happens in mass shootings, the chaos makes it seem like there were multiple shooters when there was only one.
The (or one) shooter barricaded himself in a room in the building late this morning, and has reportedly been killed by police.
I will continue to update as information becomes available. Please feel welcome and encouraged to leave information in comments, especially if you see contact info about where to check on employees at Building 197.
UPDATE 1: Security teams have entered a second building looking for a second shooter. Just to be clear, it's not yet confirmed (that I've seen) that there is a second shooter, but there have been reports of shots fired, so authorities are following up on those reports.
UPDATE 2: There are now reports that no additional shooters have been identified, and that the single shooter has been "neutralized." Whether that means killed or taken into custody, I don't know at this point. The additional shots fired have been attributed to tactical teams shooting open locked doors.
UPDATE 3: There are confirmed fatalities at the scene, but the number is not known. Three people have been taken to a local hospital with critical injuries, but, according to a press conference with a hospital spokesperson, all three are alert and are expected to recover. The hospital says they expect to receive more injured victims.
UPDATE 4: Per the US Navy: "Family members looking for information about their loved ones can call 202-433-6151 or 202-433-9713."
UPDATE 5: Multiple news outlets are now reporting the shooter is dead. It is not known at this time whether he shot himself or was killed by authorities.
UPDATE 6: According to DC Mayor Vincent Gray, 12 people have been killed in the shooting. I don't even know what to say. My condolences to their families, friends, and colleagues. I hope the survivors will get the support that they need.
UPDATE 7: President Obama has made a statement on the shooting: "We're confronting yet another mass shooting and today it happened on a military installation in our nation's capital. It's a shooting that targeted our military and civilian personnel. These are men and women who were going to work doing their jobs and protecting of all of us. They're patriots. They know the the dangers of serving abroad, but today they faced the unimaginable violence that they wouldn't have expected here at home." I don't really agree with the President that this sort of violence in the US is unexpected. It has become too routine to reasonably assert that it's unexpected, I'm afraid.
UPDATE 8: According to the LA Times, an anonymous law enforcement officials says: "Federal officials have identified a 34-year-old man from Fort Worth, Texas, as the shooter responsible for killing 11 people at the Washington Navy Yard on Monday. The shooter, who was killed by police during a gun battle some two hours after the initial shootings, was a government civilian contractor new to the Washington, D.C., area." The name of the shooter has not been released.
UPDATE 9: The AP has identified the shooter as Aaron Alexis. According to one federal law enforcement official, "Alexis was a 34-year-old from Texas. He is believed to have a criminal record there and to be a holder of a concealed carry weapon permit. That official says Alexis is believed to have gotten into the Navy Yard by using someone else's identification card. It is not yet clear if that individual was an accomplice or if that person's ID card was stolen."
Shooting at the Washington Naval Yard
Monday Blogaround
This blogaround brought to you by coconuts.
Recommended reading:
Spectra: Dear Western Saviorists, Stop Reducing Africa to a Play Pen for Your Personal Development [Content Note: The post at this link includes discussion of racism, cultural colonialism, appropriation.]
Darren: Why America Should Not Tolerate Low Pay for Fast Food Workers [Content Note: The post at this link includes discussion of exploitation, racism, and misogyny.]
Lindsey: Feminism and Race: Just Who Counts as a 'Woman Of Color'? [Content Note: The post at this link includes discussion of racism in the feminist movement.]
Jamilah: Is the NFL Blacklisting Kerry Rhodes Because He Might Be Gay?
Sean: Dark Energy Detectives
Tressie: On Loving Libraries
Nicole: The Self Care Corner: Create Your "Calm Down Kit"
Leave your links and recommendations in comments...
Breaking Bad Open Thread
[Content Note: Descriptions of violence. Spoilers are being VERY SPOILERY in this thread, so consider yourself warned! THERE ARE BIG TIME SPOILERS, is what I'm saying.]
Shorter Recap: !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!! HOLY SHIT THIS SHOW.
Longer Recap: This episode DESTROYED ME. After it was over, Iain told me I looked like I'd just been in a fight, because I was so emotionally drained. I AM VERY INVESTED IN THESE CHARACTERS. I texted Deeky last night that when I watched Talking Bad, AMC's recap series, and saw Dean Norris (Hank) who was one of the guests, I felt an emotional relief I didn't even know I needed, just seeing him alive. Vince Gilligan, you devil!
So, the episode opened with a flashback to Walt's and Jesse's first cook in the RV, which just happens to be the same site where Walt buried his money and where the previous episode ended with the shoot-out that we thought wrecked all our shit, until this week's episode unearthed some more shit that needed to be wrecked even harder. "Oh, you thought you didn't have any shit left to be wrecked? SURPRISE!"—This Show.
And it's a terrible and funny scene, which reminds us that, once upon a time, Walt was just a goofy chemistry teacher in his underpants who lied to his wife about having to work at the carwash when he was really cooking meth in the desert, and Jesse was just a goofy kid who pretended to be a ninja when he was bored. Slowly, Walt and Jesse and the RV fade from the screen, and after the green smoke of the opening credits, the empty desert is filled with the aftermath of the shoot-out with the Swastika-necks. Gomey is dead. RIP Gomey. Hank has been shot in the leg, and it doesn't look good.
Hank crawls toward Gomey's abandoned shotgun, as if it will do him any good, and Head Swastika-neck, aka Jack, steps on the gun and points his gun at Hank's head. One of the Swastika-neck minions finds Gomey's DEA badge, and this is the end for Hank. Walt shouts for Jack to stop. He tells Jack that Hank will let them all go, that the DEA isn't even in the loop, but Hank, the constitutional opposite of Walt sniveling cowardice, lies and tells Jack that the calvary is on the way. He glares at Jack with steely resolve, knowing he is a dead man already and resolving to go with dignity, as Walt offers up his buried money—all $80 million (!!!) of it—to Jack if only he'll spare Hank.
Hank tells Walt: "You're the smartest guy I ever met, and you're too stupid to see he made up his mind ten minutes ago." He looks up at Jack from the ground, and tells him: "Do what you're gonna do." A single shot echoes through the desert. And I gasp and say, "No," in the quietest voice, even though I knew that this was going to happen.
Walt crumples to the ground in a stupid heap and cries like a stupid jerk, and I hate him so much.
The Swastika-necks are still happy to help themselves to his money, though! Because Jack is generous, he leaves Walt one barrel of money, and then makes him shake hands to agree that they're square. Walt, who still can't acknowledge his own accountability for anything, turns his rage about Hank's death onto Jesse, and says to Jack: "Pinkman. You still owe me." Jack tells Walt they'll still kill him if Walt can find him, and Walt snarls, "Found him."
Jesse is dragged from beneath Walt's black muscle car, where he has been hiding all along. Jack points his gun at Jesse's head. "Good to go?" he asks. And Walt nods. WALT IS SO TERRIBLE! FUCK THIS GUY! Just as Jack is about to pull the trigger, Todd nonchalantly mentions to his uncle that he be willing to torture Jesse to see what he told the DEA about them, before they kill him. Jack concedes the kid has a good point, and asks Walt if it's okay if they torture Jesse and THEN kill him, and Walt's all, "Sounds great! Have an A-1 day!"
It is at this point, I think: I could not hate Walter White any more than I hate him right now. And Vince Gilligan is all: "HA HA WRONG AGAIN!"
Walt shouts for the minions dragging Jesse away to wait, only so he can inform Jesse: "I watched Jane die. I could've saved her, but I didn't." He is enjoying this moment, as he deals Jesse the final blow of betrayal, and Jesse crumbles. FUCK YOU, WALT, YOU NIGHTMARE OF HUMANITY.
Surely, I think, I couldn't hate him any more than this. But Vince Gilligan isn't done with me yet.
Daily Dose of Cute
Zelly, snuggling on my lap over the weekend. Because she's a 60-pound lapdog.
As always, please feel welcome and encouraged to share pix of the fuzzy, feathered, or scaled members of your family in comments.
In The News
Here is some stuff in the news today.
In Colorado, the ongoing flooding has damaged or destroyed as many as 19,000 homes, and more than 10,000 people have been evacuated.
Larry Summers has pulled his name from consideration for Fed chief. Good.
[Content Note: Racism; there is also disablist language at the link] Nina Davuluri, an Indian American woman representing New York, won the Miss America pageant last night, and racist bullshit ensued. I am, naturally, not surprised, but I am very angry at yet another display of such ignorant garbage.
Verizon is challenging Net Neutrality again. Poor Verizon. Not making enough money. Boo-hoo etc.
[CN: Hostility to agency] Australia will debate a personhood law. Fuck.
In news that isn't news: Polls still find Hillary Clinton to be the frontrunner for the 2016 Democratic nomination, despite the fact she's announced no intention to run, and there's no clear Republican frontrunner. Which middle-aged white guy would YOU like to see lose to Hillary Clinton?
And finally: Footballers in the UK are asked to don rainbow laces in support of The Right Behind Gay Footballers campaign, and Queens Park Rangers midfielder Joey Barton has already found an adorably creative use for the laces!
Failure to Serve and Protect
[Content Note: Police brutality; guns; violence; racism.]
Charlotte-Mecklenburg (North Carolina) Police Officer Randall Kerrick, 27, is in custody and has been charged with voluntary manslaughter after fatally shooting Jonathan Ferrell, 24, "a former Florida A&M football player who had apparently been seeking help after surviving a major car crash early Saturday morning." Kerrick is white; Ferrell is black.
The Charlotte Observer reports that the car crash was so severe that Ferrell likely had to "pull himself out" of the wreckage. He then walked to the nearest house, about a half mile away, to seek assistance. But the local resident whose home Ferrell arrived at was frightened that he was attempting to burglarize her after not recognizing him.So, just to recap: An unarmed man injured in a car accident seeks help at a nearby home, and the neighbor is frightened and calls police, whom the man approaches imagining they are there to help, and instead they taser him and then shoot him.
The resident then made a 911 call and three officers arrived at the scene. According to police accounts, Ferrell, who is African-American, acted "aggressively" and charged towards the officers. Officer Thornell Little of the Hickory Grove division of the CMPD responded with an unsuccessful attempt to fire his Taser at Ferrell. Police say that when Ferrell continued to charge toward the police, 27-year-old officer Randall Kerrick discharged his weapon several times, eventually killing Ferrell.
A police investigation has found that "the shooting of Mr. Ferrell was excessive. ...Our investigation has shown that Officer Kerrick did not have a lawful right to discharge his weapon during this encounter."
As it should be. Despite the obvious attempt to cover Kerrick's ass by accusing Ferrell of "aggressively" approaching police. But it's rage-making that Ferrell was harmed in the first place. No matter how accountable the cops are ostensibly willing to be after the fact.
And I seriously question whether that "aggressive" framing would have failed to stick if Ferrell had not been a well-known collegiate athlete.
My sincerest condolences to Ferrell's family, friends, colleagues, and teammates.
The Latest on Syria
The United States and Russia have reportedly reached a deal that would see Syria's arsenal of chemical weapons destroyed:
The United States and Russia reached a sweeping agreement on Saturday that called for Syria's arsenal of chemical weapons to be removed or destroyed by the middle of 2014 and indefinitely stalled the prospect of American airstrikes.Meanwhile, Syrian rebel forces are still pleading for US airstrikes, and General Salim Idris, the head of the Western-backed rebels' nominal military command, the Supreme Military Council, isn't happy with the compromise: "All of this initiative does not interest us. Russia is a partner with the regime in killing the Syrian people. A crime against humanity has been committed, and there is not any mention of accountability." So, it basically looks like we've managed to make everyone pissed off at the US at this point, even as we continue to try to thread the needle in the worst way:
The joint announcement, on the third day of intensive talks in Geneva, also set the stage for one of the most challenging undertakings in the history of arms control.
"This situation has no precedent," said Amy E. Smithson, an expert on chemical weapons at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies. "They are cramming what would probably be five or six years' worth of work into a period of several months, and they are undertaking this in an extremely difficult security environment due to the ongoing civil war."
George Little, the Pentagon press secretary, emphasized that the possibility of unilateral American military force was still on the table. "We haven't made any changes to our force posture to this point," Mr. Little said. "The credible threat of military force has been key to driving diplomatic progress, and it's important that the Assad regime lives up to its obligations under the framework agreement."Secretary of State John Kerry (Bad Cop) reiterated yesterday that the "threat of force is real" if Syria doesn't comply with handing over their chemical weaponry, while President Obama (Good Cop) stopped by This Week with George Stephanopoulos in order to put a hopeful spin on the emergent diplomatic resolution, noting that "a actual, verifiable deal that will begin that process" hasn't been struck, but "the distance that we’ve traveled over these couple of weeks is remarkable."
So that's where we are. "Comply or we bomb you! (But please don't make us bomb you.)"
Discuss.
Happy Birthday, Mustang Bobby!
Happy Birthday to youuuuuuuuu!
Happy Birthday to youuuuuuuuu!
OMG it's your sweet sixty-fiiiii-iiiiirst!
Happy Birthday to youuuuuuuuu!
Happy Birthday, Mustang Bobby!
*mwah*
The Virtual Pub Is Open
[Explanations: lol your fat. pathetic anger bread. hey your gay.]
(See what I did there?)
TFIF, Shakers!
Belly up to the bar,
and name your poison!
This is so the worst thing you're going to read all day.
[Content Note: Misogyny; gender essentialism; heterocentrism; religious supremacy.]
Everyone in the multiverse (and thanks to each and every one of you!) has sent me this heapshit article: 6 Reasons (+2) to NOT Send Your Daughter to College.
It was "6 Reasons" when it was first published, but the author added two more "just in case 6 weren't enough."
Anyway. This article is self-evident horseshit. And the "Fix the Family" site, run by two straight white Catholic dudes, is about as representative of all Catholics as Bill Donohue's one-man "Catholic League" is.
Suffice it to say, this female lapsed-Lutheran atheist who in part chose the Catholic Loyola University over a number of other, more prestigious universities because the Jesuits seemed the most passionate about actually educating me (as opposed to assuring me a degree from their institution would totes guarantee me a giant salary), finds it pretty amusing to treat "Catholic doctrine" and "educating women" as mutually exclusive concepts.
Fatsronauts 101: How Can I Love My Body?
[Content Note: Discussion of fat bias; self-image.]
Shaker M emailed me to ask if I had any suggestions for concrete steps a fat woman who wants very much to love her body can take to start that journey.
(Please note: No one is required to feel any particular way about hir own body. This piece is specifically geared toward people who want to love their bodies as they are. It may also not be particularly helpful to people with body dysmorphic disorders or fear of/lack of access to cameras.)
And I do have suggestions! Or, at least, I can share with you some things that I've done which have been helpful.
First of all, I want to mention two experiences that a lot of fat people have shared with me, both of which are also things I've experienced myself:
1. The experience of seeing old pictures of oneself and thinking, "I looked fine there, and I thought I looked terrible at the time!" And/or: "I wish I could go back and tell myself then that I shouldn't be concerned about how I look."
2. The experience of seeing pictures of other fat people, of the same size as or larger than oneself, and thinking how beautiful they look. Or, at the very least, failing to hold them to the same negative judgments one holds oneself.
Notice that both of these center around images, and judgment of people in images. That's not coincidental. Because seeing ourselves realistically, seeing ourselves as we actually are, is a key tool is loving ourselves. We can't love ourselves as we are if we don't acknowledge what our bodies really look like.
I used to loathe having my photograph taken (for reasons aside from my appearance), but allowing my picture to be taken, taking pictures of myself, and asking for pictures to be taken by people I trust in moments I was feeling confident, and then looking—really looking—at myself in those photos, and also in videos, helped give me a better perspective on what I actually look like, as opposed to what I imagined myself to look like (which was always way worse than the reality).
Me, chilling on the porch, working on my greys.
At first it was hard, because I was judging myself not based on what I was actually feeling about my own body, but about what I was supposed to feel based on the biebillion metric fucktons of fat bias with which I'd been indoctrinated. I wasn't assessing how I looked to myself as much I was how I am perceived by others.
Back to those two aforementioned experiences, then:
1. I realized that this picture, in this moment, would in future look to me the same way I was looking at old pictures of myself. I resolved that I would not wait until the future to tell the present me to love how I look in this moment.
2. I realized that if this picture was of anyone else, I would not judge the person in the photo the way I judge myself. What if this was some other woman? What would you say about her? I resolved that I would not assess my own pictures with negative judgments I would never in a million years wield against another person.
With these resolutions in mind, I saw pictures of myself in a new way. I saw them through gentler eyes. And without the filter of judgment my culture exhorts me to use, using the standards of love and acceptance I would extend to any other person, photos of myself actually looked different to me. Literally different. I saw myself in a way I had never seen myself before. It was a genuine revelation.
I am not the first fat activist to make this suggestion. There are many amazing woman and men who have written about the value of taking pictures of oneself in order to facilitate a realistic (and lovable!) self-image. It is a widely recommended strategy because it tends to be an effective one for a lot of folks. We are taught to be afraid of seeing ourselves as we really are, but it only really looking at ourselves that we see our true selves, and not a self onto which we project narratives of hatred and shame as we quickly look away from a photo, from the mirror.
This is not an easy journey. And I want to say again, because I feel like I can't say it enough: There's nothing wrong with you for not feeling brave every day. There's something wrong with a world that necessitates our having bravery to participate in it.
In those moments where you are feeling brave, though...take a picture.
[Note: I realize that this suggestion is not helpful for people with visual disabilities that make photographs and video useless tools. I welcome and encourage suggestions on applications/variations that would work for Shakers with visual disabilities.]
Friday Blogaround
This blogaround brought to you by stars.
Recommended Reading:
TLC: The Container Store Supports and Celebrates Trans Employee Ayden Oliver
Fannie: Women's Sports No Haven for LGBT Athletes [Content Note: The post at this link includes discussion of homophobia and misogyny.]
Aunt B: Well, Here's the Bad News [Content Note: The post at this link includes discussion of sexual assault.]
Trudy: On Street Harassment: The Incident Count [Content Note: The post at this link includes discussion of street harassment and victim-blaming.]
Jamilah: What the NSA's Spying Has to Do With Racial Justice
Jill: Transgender Teen Drama Series Coming to the CW
Angry Asian Man: The Adventures of Sikh Captain America
Leave your links and recommendations in comments...
Two-Minute Nostalgia Sublime
Queen: "White Queen (As It Began)"
This week's TMNS brought to you by songs with "queen" in the title.
Daily Dose of Cute
"No, YOU'RE fluffy!"
As always, please feel welcome and encouraged to share pix of the fuzzy, feathered, or scaled members of your family in comments.
Auditing Victims' Experiences
[Content Note: Sexual violence; rape apologia; auditing experiences]
Here is something that I should not have to say and yet apparently must be said: A disclosure that someone is a survivor of sexual violence is not an invitation for others to decide how that experience did (or did not) cause them to change. Nor is it an invitation for others to decide how that experience should (or should not) cause them to change. In short, a disclosure that someone is a survivor of sexual violence is not an invitation for others to audit their experiences for them.
When Richard Dawkins announced this week, speaking of his childhood molester (and inappropriately speculating on behalf of those of his peers who were also abused by the same man), that “I don’t think he did any of us lasting harm”, atheist blogger PZ Myers chose to respond by saying this:
I can think of some lasting harm: he seems to have developed a callous indifference to the sexual abuse of children.I know of only two ways to take this statement. One is to read it as a straight-up no-kidding seriously-meant armchair-psychiatrist-diagnosis suggestion that Richard Dawkins is a rape apologist as a direct result of being molested as a child. The other is to read this as a grossly unfunny "joke" where the punchline is that Richard Dawkins is a rape apologist as a direct result of being molested as a child.
I neither know nor care whether PZ Myers meant the statement in seriousness or in jest. The suggestion, whether serious or satirical, that Richard Dawkins is engaging in rape apologism not because lots of people engage in rape apologism in order to entrench their own social privilege nor because lots of people engage in rape apologism because they were indoctrinated into rape culture from an early age nor because lots of people engage in rape apologism for the vast, wide, varied, multiplicity of reasons why lots of people engage in rape apologism, but rather that he is doing so manifestly because he is a victim of sexual abuse is a truly odious and deeply harmful suggestion to make.
It is a suggestion which harms survivors of sexual violence in order to take pot-shots at a rape apologist not because his rape apologies are rank and disgusting, but because he himself is a victim of sexual violence. It is a suggestion which is born out of, and which upholds firmly, a Rape Culture which demands that all victims of sexual violence must react in the "right" ways (or else you weren't really abused) and which suggests that all victims of sexual violence are changed -- or, to use the language of rape culture, damaged -- in the "right" ways (or else you weren't really abused), and which then deliberately uses that enforced framework as an excuse to dismiss victims of sexual violence as overly-emotional, fundamentally-damaged people who shouldn't be listened to.
Survivors of sexual violence are not a monolith. Some of us may react to our victimization with one or more emotions; some of us may not feel a strong response or an emotional reaction to our experiences with sexual violence. Some of us may have differing reactions to our victimization at different times; some of us may maintain the same unwavering reaction to our experiences for our entire life. Some of us may feel changed by our victimization; some of us may feel unchanged by our experiences with sexual violence. Some of us may label all or part of some felt change as negative or harmful; some of us may label all or part of some felt change with positive connotations. There is no right or correct or standard way to react or respond or change or not-change as a result of sexual victimization.
It is wholly and completely up to the survivor of sexual violence to decide how, if at all, hir experiences with sexual violence have affected hir. Which is one of the many, many reasons why a disclosure that someone is a survivor of sexual violence is not an invitation for others to audit their experiences for them.
Richard Dawkins is a rape apologist, but it is not our place to assume or guess or joke or psychoanalyze from afar that he is a rape apologist because he is a victim of sexual violence. And just as Richard Dawkins is wrong to assert that his peers weren't harmed (because it is their right to determine whether they were or not), it is equally wrong for others to assert that Richard Dawkins was harmed when he says he wasn't, because it is his right to decide whether he was harmed or not.
