Jimmy Ruffin: "What Becomes of the Brokenhearted?"
Daily Dose of Cute
Fluffy ball of kittiness!
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: Rape culture; sexual violence; victim-blaming.]
"All she would have had to do was to close her legs...it's as simple as that. Why didn't she do that? ...The reason she didn't do that was because the sex was consensual, as easy as that."—Wellington NZ Defense Attorney Keith Jefferies, during his trial defense of a club bouncer who raped an inebriated 20-year-old woman in an alley after promising to get her into the club, which her friends had already entered.
Wellington Rape Crisis manager Natalie Gousmett called Jefferies' argument "disgusting" and "disrespectful," which is polite.
The good news is that Jefferies' client was found guilty, despite his reprehensible victim-blaming.
Obamacare Update
As mentioned, President Obama gave an address earlier today addressing some of the concerns about the implementation of the Affordable Care Act. Video of the address is available here. A complete transcript of the address is available here.
Over at Think Progress, Igor explains "Everything You Need to Know about Obama's 'Fix' for Insurers Canceling Plans."
I dunno.
Ideally, the promise never would have been made in the first place that people who liked their plans would definitely be able to keep them. But we're well past that now. At this point, I'd rather the administration have simply said they were mistaken and push hard on the reason that people are losing their plans is because they're insufficient and enrollment in the ACA will offer better options.
I'm not sure how this is going to shake out, except for the fact that insurance companies will exploit it as tenaciously as they can to justify raising premiums.
This Shit Doesn't Happen in a Void: Anti-Semitism
[Content Note: Anti-Semitism, Holocaust denialism]
Yesterday, a group of conservative Catholics interrupted a Buenos Aires interfaith observation of Kristallnacht being held at the Metropolitan Cathedral. The ceremony had a long history under the current pope who, as Buenos Aires Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, co-celebrated the observance with Rabbi Abraham Skorka every year. Skorka was there again this year, and described the appalling scene:
“The cathedral was full, with people standing, prepared for a profound act of introspection, when a group of about 40 people began to recite from the Christian liturgy, the ‘Our Father,’ and began to hand out little pieces of paper saying that Jews were blaspheming the place,” Skorka said.Skorka said protesters made cutting comments like “the Jews killed Jesus.” He said one Jew confronted them, saying, “My grandmother died in Auschwitz,” to which an activist replied, “Do you believe that lie?”
The leader of the South American branch of the Society of Pope Pius X, Christian Bouchacourt, has identified the protestors as members of his organization, and offered this explanation for their actions:
“This wasn’t a desire to make a rebellion, but to show our love to the Catholic Church, which was made for the Catholic faith,” Bouchacourt said. “A Mass isn’t celebrated in a synagogue, nor in a mosque. The Muslims don’t accept it. In the same way, we who are Catholics cannot accept the presence of another faith in our church.”
Oooookay then! Please overlook the hate, folks! We're just trying to show our love!
Ugh.
First and foremost, my deepest sympathies to the Jewish participants in this ceremony. There are no words to fully describe the hurt and betrayal, the trauma, of being welcomed into a space intended to be a safe one, and then have it shattered by violent assholes who replicate the very prejudices that you and your allies are trying so hard to combat. I cannot even imagine the pain of Holocaust denialism and ancient anti-Semitic slurs in the midst of a Kristallnacht-related gathering.
Secondly, it's not a coincidence that (as Melissa noted last Friday) antisemitic incidents are quickly rising in Europe. That in New York, two separate investigations into antisemitic bullying and antisemitic hate crimes were announced this week. That a Very Serious politician like Ron Paul can participate in an antisemitic conference without the slightest concern about negative repercussions.
I don't care if you believe in god/dess/(s/es) or not-god, if your worldview is informed by science, rational philosophy, religion, magic, or some other factor(s). I do care if you think your worldview justifies (or necessitates) oppression of the marginalized. This shit doesn't happen in a void. And neither did Kristallnacht.
[Commenting note: Comments debating or discussing the orthodoxy of the attackers' religious beliefs make the space unsafe, and are off-topic. This is not a post about whether or not they are good Catholics/Christians.]
Specs
[Content Note: Teasing.]
I was 9 when I got my first pair of glasses.
I was so excited—not only could I see better, but both of my parents wore glasses and so, for reasons that surely made sense to my child's mind, getting glasses made me feel grown up.
Naturally, the teasing began instantly. Four eyes. Google eyes. Nerd. Even as a child, it didn't bother me as much as it simply perplexed me. Yes, I was wearing glasses. Yes, my thick lenses make my eyes look different. Yes, I am a nerd. Well observed.
This continued for five years, until I got my first pair of contacts at age 14. I wore them every day, from the moment I awoke until the moment before I hopped into bed. My glasses were there only in case of emergency—although there was never an emergency. When I tore one of my contacts, in the days before bottomless boxes of disposables, I wore it anyway. If I knew I was risking damage to my eye, I didn't care.
It wasn't because of the teasing about my glasses that I didn't wear them. It was vanity, and that not about my glasses, either. When I was younger, I had terribly oily skin, and having glasses sat upon the bridge of my nose turned my entire nose into a shiny mess.
"Your glasses make you look like a frog, and your nose looks like an oil slick," said one of my seventh-grade male classmates, while we sat in the library, supposed to be writing book reports. It was the "oil slick" that got me.
Many years later, I was having a routine annual eye exam when my eye doctor told me that my eyes weren't getting enough oxygen from wearing my contacts so frequently. The veins (or arteries? I don't remember) in my eyes were growing thicker and into places they shouldn't be, in search of oxygen. If I kept it up, I would eventually go blind.
So I started wearing my glasses again.
I have been wearing my glasses almost exclusively for quite a few years now, and I still get the occasional comments about them. I have had other adult human beings actually say to me, out loud, "Guys don't make passes at girls who wear glasses." Blink. I get emails telling me my glasses are ugly; have deleted irrelevant comments on YouTube about my "googly eyes." Last weekend, I wore contacts to a friend's comedy show, because of a perniciously sore zit on the side of my nose, and someone told me how much prettier I look without my glasses.
It's such a strange thing to me, the negative commentary on wearing glasses. It always has been.
They help me see. And because my vision is so poor without them—I cannot read the clock at the side of the bed at night; I am the kind of myopic that makes Piggy's broken glasses one of the most terrifying scenes for me in Lord of the Flies—they help me to live safely. They help me read, and they help me cross streets.
I love my glasses, and I am so grateful for them.
[Related Reading: Thumbs Up for Adaptive Eyewear.]
Time Magazine Brofiles Brogods of Brofood
[Content Note: Misogyny; fat hatred.]
In the United States, the latest cover of Time features a fat joke. Elsewhere, the cover showcases "The Gods of Food: ... the People Who Influence What (and How) You Eat."
Eater:
[The issue] focuses on "influencers" in food, including the cover chefs, Blue Hill chef Dan Barber, food writer and Cook It Raw creative directorAndrea Petrini, food scold Michael Pollan, famous Spanish chef Albert Adrià, and chef/cookbook phenom Yotam Ottolenghi. Based on the online table of contents (subs. required), it seems the only woman profiled as an influencer is Aida Batlle, a fifth generation coffee producer in El Salvador who has worked with respected American coffee retailers like Stumptown and Blue Bottle. The magazine's list of the 13 Gods of Food highlights no female chefs.I can't really do a better job of skewering Time than Eater's Hillary Dixler did in an interview with the section's editor, but there are a couple things that have been bothering me. I'm sure yinz will have fun with the rest of the piece in the comments. (FWIW, I first found out about the whole debacle when Anthony Bourdain tweeted that the interview was "shameful shit." Tony Bourdain thinks Time should be ashamed of itself, and he's fucking Bourdain.)
I could have swore we were just celebrating how some dudes were cooking for free, so it's always interesting to be reminded about how highly lauded professional chef are supposedly all men. [Cough. Except for these ladies Cough. (via)]
1) I am rolling my eyes SO HARD at the omission of Alice Waters. Before I was born, the lady was popularizing organic food. If you've heard of sustainable food, CSAs, rooftop tomatoes or slow food, Alice Waters has influenced "what [you] eat, and how [you] think about it." Time gave Dan Barber (who worked for Waters) an article in the Gods section. Michael Pollan has a piece in there, and Waters basically invented his career. René Redzepi has made a name for himself hawking (for good money, I might add) whatever the fuck twigs and berries he can scavenge from the Danish land (and sea) scape, and Time put him on the cover. No offense to Redzepi (or his food), but that just doesn't happen without Waters paving the way.
2) Time profiled David Chang (and Redzepi) in an article titled "The Dudes of Food." I want to dislike Chang, because he's everywhere these days. He's got his own culinary magazine that features other prominent New York food types. He's got a few restaurants in New York, with cookbooks to match. The first season of Anthony Bourdain's The Mind of A Chef followed Chang for 16 episodes. I got to see Chang golfing, Chang getting drunk, Chang hanging out with Aziz Ansari, and Chang generally goofing off.
Here's the thing: I think it would be pretty cool to hang out with Dave Chang. He's a cool dude. But that's just it: David Chang being a cool dude is not a reason to put him on the cover of Time magazine. The reason to put him on the cover is that he can cook. I happened to be in New York last week, and was able to sneak in a bowl of Momofuku (Chang's first restaurant) ramen, and even though I know this is the most obnoxious thing I could possibly say: IT TOTALLY CHANGED HOW I THINK ABOUT RAMEN.
The problem here isn't that Chang is getting accolades, it's that women who are equally talented aren't sharing in the spotlight. Time can throw around words like "reputation" and "influence" all it likes, but the bottom line is that the media (and the culinary industry) doesn't give women the same space to goof off as it does men. Women have to be serious about their talents, lest folks dismiss them as unskilled. Of course, behaving professionally is also likely to get a woman labelled as an icy bitch who isn't a team player. All of which plays into the whole "boys club" dynamic that Time claims to be merely chronicling.
Malarkey. Time needs to own that shit.
In the News
Here is some stuff in the news today!
President Obama will speak later this morning "to announce a patch to his signature health care law to address mounting concerns over canceled insurance plans."
[Content Note: Sexual violence] It's pretty neat how this column about allegations that Florida State quarterback Jameis Winston sexually assaulted a woman asserts that sexual assault is "one of the worst crimes you can imagine" but nonetheless engages in some fun rape culture tropes: "Only time will tell whether these allegations are true." As if rape convictions reflect the truth of allegations. And I love that it is State Attorney Willie Meggs who is "one man capable of standing between Famous Jameis and the sporting world's most prestigious individual award." Actually, I'm pretty sure that the responsibility for that might rightly lie with Winston. Yeesh.
Two teenagers from Fair Immigration Reform Movement Youth In Action confronted House Speaker John Boehner at a diner and made it evident, once more, that Boehner is a jackass and his party is the worst.
[CN: Sexual violence; disablism] Supporting the Troops: "A new report by the ACLU, the Service Women's Action Network, and the Veterans Legal Service Clinic at Yale Law School alleges that the US Department of Veteran's Affairs (VA) discriminates against thousands of Military Sexual Trauma (MST) survivors seeking mental health disability benefits."
Jorge Odón, an Argentine car mechanic, has invented a device that helps deliver babies stuck in the birth canal. "The idea came to Jorge Odón as he slept. Somehow, he said, his unconscious made the leap from a YouTube video he had just seen on extracting a lost cork from a wine bottle to the realization that the same parlor trick could save a baby stuck in the birth canal. ...Unlikely as it seems, the idea that took shape on his counter has won the enthusiastic endorsement of the World Health Organization and major donors, and an American medical technology company has just licensed it for production. ...Doctors say it has enormous potential to save babies in poor countries, and perhaps to reduce cesarean section births in rich ones." Neat!
[CN: Hostility to consent] Two Secret Service agents have been dismissed from President Obama's detail after allegations of misconduct that include one of the agents having been "allegedly discovered attempting to reenter a woman's room after accidentally leaving behind a bullet from his service weapon." WHUT.
But don't they know she hasn't proven herself worthy yet?! "Jim Messina and John Podesta, top former aides to Barack Obama and Bill Clinton respectively, are currently in talks to co-chair a board backing Hillary Clinton—a plan that, should it come to fruition, would be a dramatic early symbol of party unity behind the former secretary of state."
[CN: Misogynoir] Mia McKenzie breaks down why Lily Allen's video for "Hard Out There" is exploitative racist garbage. Also? I'm getting reeeeeeeal tired of female pop stars being celebrated as feminist champions for publicly judging other female pop stars.
[Note: Video ad begins playing automatically at link] Scientists are finding out new things about black holes, and it is very interesting!
Maya Rudolph is getting her own primetime variety series at NBC. YAY I LOVE HER.
The Latest Obamacare News
[Content Note: Disablist language.]
There is a lot being written right now, in media that leans left and leans right (as well as media that pretends it doesn't lean either way), about Obamacare being in trouble. Democrats are starting to distance themselves from the legislation. There is nothing but bad news about when Healthcare.gov is going to be fully functional. And the lie that people would be able to keep their policies is turning out to be a major problem.
Much of what's being written is so full of disablist language ("Democrats are going crazy" or "Healthcare.gov is crippled") that I don't even want to link to it, but Ezra Klein's piece here is pretty good.
This is my current concern: If this health insurance reform fails, especially since it's widely regarded and referred to as healthcare reform, it's going to set back meaningful healthcare reform—single-payer, universal healthcare, i.e. Medicare for all—for who knows how much longer. It would be a very long time before a healthcare reformer can make a proposal without the specter of failed Obamacare haunting the national discourse.
I wish Democrats up for reelection would not be so quick to distance themselves from the legislation for that reason alone. Of course, I also understand wholly being a Democrat who was assured they could sell it to their constituents on the lie they would definitely be able to keep their healthcare if they liked it, and now look like liars or bozos.
What a mess.
Ads Update
I have gotten a lot of emails from people who are being served the video pop-up ads, and I just want to say, again, that I am so sorry. I've looked at the code, and, best I can tell, they're being served by Google. Blogger (a property of Google) has no active support, so I've tweeted at them to try to get some sort of help, explanation, and/or response, but they have not replied. So, this morning, I tried tweeting at Google's AdSense account, with the hope that maybe they will respond.
I am just so sorry, and I am absolutely sick over the fact that ads are being served in this space, and I have no way of stopping it. I just want to let you know I'm working on it, and I am trying to get it resolved.
Question of the Day
Suggested by Shaker newdealwithit (one of my favorite commenting handles of all time, btw!): What is your "favorite Shakesville piece/concept you have shared with a loved one (for example, The Terrible Bargain, Expect More, etc.) and how did they respond"?
Shaker Thumbs
We haven't had a Shaker Thumbs in more than a year (!), so we're long overdue. Shaker Thumbs is your opportunity to give a thumbs-up or thumbs-down to a product or service you have used and that you'd recommend to other Shakers or warn them away from.
Today, I am giving a big thumbs up to my Joseph Joseph Elevate™ Carousel:
This, from the product description, is what makes the utensils so fantastic: "Each tool has an innovative weighted handle with an integrated tool rest, ensuring that, when an Elevate™ utensil is placed down, its head is always raised off of the work surface." No more constantly washing my spoon rest after every time I cook, and no more getting food on the counter if I set a utensil down in the middle of cooking. They are THE BEST!
Here's the pasta spoon on my counter, so you can see what I mean.
I got this set a long time ago, probably at least a year ago now, and I use them all the time. They've been through countless hand-washings and dishwasher cycles. They've held up beautifully. I got a set for my friend Ari for her birthday, and she loved them so much she bought a set for another friend, who loved them so much... Et cetera.
They're a little pricey, but, in my experience so far, totally worth the cost. They've held up way, way better than any cheaper utensil set I've ever had.
(Also: I got my set on eBay, for less than the retail price. If you keep your eyes peeled, you might find a good deal, too!)
Just to be abundantly clear, I am not affiliated in any way with Joseph Joseph, nor am I receiving any form of payment for recommending this item. It's just a thing I've personally found super useful and am happy to recommend.
Another Day; Another Public Marriage Proposal
[Content Note: Public proposal; misogyny; emotional auditing.]
Today, CNBC's retail correspondent Courtney Reagan was surprised on-air by a marriage proposal, which her boyfriend Jared Baker had orchestrated with CNBC anchor Tyler Mathisen. Video of the proposal is here. I'm not going to embed it, because I refuse to give CNBC traffic and views for this stunt.
But here is a brief description: Mathisen, an older white man, is talking to Reagan, a kyriachetypically pretty white woman, about whether jewelry will be a hot item again this year for gifts. And then he asks about stores like the diamond retailer Jared—get it ha ha because her boyfriend named Jared is about to propose! Classic. Then Baker, a white man, walks onto the set, and he brings Reagan in front of the camera and starts telling her how they've been together a long time but he knew from the start that she was the one and says other super personal things that I shouldn't even know about two people whom I've never met, and then he gets down on one knee and proposes and puts a giant diamond on her finger and she says yes and all the kisses and hugs.
Oh, and this: She cries. A lot. Like, at one point she is actually sobbing.
Okay, so, as I've said like a million times, I hate public marriage proposals for reasons, and I hate public marriage proposals that are also pranks THE MOST, but a public proposal at a woman's workplace is also right at the top of the goddamn list.
With the caveat that not all workplaces are the same, lots and lots of employed women are obliged every day of our lives to moderate or straight-up hide our emotions, because we are incessantly emotionally policed. And while I am keenly aware many men are obliged to do the same, in many workplaces, a man who reacts to something professionally frustrating by expressing anger is not judged in the same way (or at all) as a woman who reacts to the same something professionally frustrating by crying.
Crying in the workplace is something that tends to be held against women forever.
It is not okay to cry if you are frustrated, marginalized, subjected to misogyny, paid less for the same job, sexually harassed, exploited, overworked, bullied, underestimated, left out of after-work drinks with the guys, told to fetch coffee, denied promotions, have sore feet that have been stuck in heels all day, or anything else that might reasonably elicit a tear.
But sobbing on-camera during a live broadcast because your boyfriend and male boss have conspired to arrange a marriage proposal smack in the middle of your workday is totally cool.
Sweet, even. Delightful. So terrific that the entire world should consume this moment.
Because when you're a lady being proposed to by a man, that's the right way to be a woman. As opposed to, say, an uppity bitch who thinks she deserves the same pay for the same day's work.
It sure is interesting, ahem, when we choose to negatively audit women's tears in the workplace, and when we don't.
(I hope you are happy, Courtney Reagan! I'm sorry I hate your marriage proposal!)
Whoa: Democrats to Introduce Bill to Prohibit State Legislatures from Chipping Away at Roe v. Wade
This is loooooooooong overdue, but I am nonetheless very excited about it [NB: Not only women need access to abortion]:
Following an unprecedented three-year wave of state legislative attacks on abortion and family planning services, a group of Democratic lawmakers in the House and Senate plan to go on the offensive Wednesday with a historic bill that would make it illegal for states to chip away at women's reproductive rights.The only problem, of course, is that the House of Representatives has a Republican majority that legislates on a platform of bigotry and garbage: "Blumenthal and his colleagues plan to introduce and discuss the bill in a press conference on Wednesday afternoon. While it has a strong chance of passing in the Democrat-controlled Senate, it faces nearly impossible odds in the House."
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) will introduce the Women's Health Protection Act of 2013, joined by Sens. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) and Reps. Marcia Fudge (D-Ohio), Judy Chu (D-Calif.) and Lois Frankel (D-Fla.). The bill would prohibit states from passing so-called Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP) laws, which impose strict and cost-prohibitive building standards on abortion clinics, require women seeking abortions to have ultrasounds, and create other barriers to abortion access.
...Blumenthal's bill wouldn't automatically overturn states' existing anti-abortion laws, but because federal law trumps state law, it would provide a means to challenge them in court.
That doesn't make proposing this bill nothing but a symbolic act. When the House fails to pass it, that gives Democrats running against Republicans in challengeable districts in 2014 a good argument for ousting Republican incumbents, in an election that will see many seats decided by women.
And apart from the politics of it: It's just the goddamn decent thing to do, irrespective of whether House Republicans will again mobilize to obstruct decency.
The Wednesday Blogaround
This blogaround brought to you by peas.
Recommended Reading:
Theresa: Ways You Can Find and Help Fam in the Wake of Typhoon Haiyan
Imani: [Content Note: Racist appropriation; anti-choice fuckery] Abortion Is Not Like Slavery, So Stop Comparing the Two
Sy: [CN: Disablism] Congress Votes to End the Outdated Ban on HIV Organ Transplants and Research
Andy: [CN: Transphobia] Inclusive Locker Rooms are Like Hooters for Transgender Kids, Says Bill O'Reilly
Jamilah: [CN: Homphobia; abuse] Angel Haze Talks Surviving Sexual Abuse, Coming Out, and the Church
Chloe: [CN: Racism; misogyny] I Wonder Why the GOP Is Blocking These Nominees
Noah: [CN: Misogyny; racism] What Joss Whedon Gets Wrong About the Word 'Feminist'
Atrios: It's Always So
Miss Cellania: Oscar the Grouch vs. Grumpy Cat
Leave your links and recommendations in comments...
Discussion Thread: Fat Tax
[Content Note: Fat hatred; discrimination.]
Earlier today, I published a quote about insurance companies' strategies to deny healthcare coverage to fat people. Among these strategies is making insurance prohibitively expensive via fines if people don't meet a specific BMI or achieve certain movement goals or participate in a diet program.
Fat people are essentially fined for being fat, irrespective of why they are fat or whether it is possible for them to be not-fat without actually making themselves less healthy.
There are all kinds of "fat taxes" that fat people have to pay, whether it's our clothes costing unreasonably more, or being charged for a second airplane seat, or being paid less. Fat taxes are openly advocated by economists and corporate shills and anti-fat crusaders.
One of the most interesting "fat taxes" I have observed is the disproportionately higher cost of exercise equipment that accommodates higher weights. It is possible to find a basic treadmill with a 300lb weight limit for $200. The cheapest treadmill I saw with a 400lb weight limit is this otherwise very basic model, costing $500.
Those may not be precisely the cheapest versions of each weight limit on the entirety of the internets, but they are a fair representation of average prices for very basic models. If someone wants a 400lb weight limit on a treadmill with lots of bells and whistles, get ready to spend a minimum of two grand.
I don't guess I need to note the irony of fat taxes on exercise equipment, when everyone from here to the White House is shouting at fatties to get moving.
And of course I understand that reinforcing equipment for greater weight capacity means some additional cost. The issue is the disproportionate additional cost. In exercise equipment. In plus-size clothes. In everything that is made specifically for fat folks.
Anyway. There are lots of examples of fat taxes that aren't necessarily evident to not-fat people. In the interest of educating allies, and perhaps opening some minds among antagonists, please share your experiences with hidden (or not-so-hidden) fat taxes in comments, my fellow fatties.
Photo of the Day
NASA's Cassini-Huygens spacecraft — in service since 1997 and in orbit around the ringed giant since 2004 — took pictures of Saturn and its rings during a solar eclipse on July 19. It acquired a panoramic mosaic of the Saturn system that allows scientists to see details in the rings and throughout the system as they are backlit by the sun. This mosaic marks the third time Earth has been imaged from the outer solar system. It is the second time it has been imaged by Cassini from Saturn's orbit. This annotated image shows Earth as a tiny dot. [Image and text via.]Neat! And here is an enlarged part of the image, showing Earth:
Wow. This quintessence of dust.
Daily Dose of Cute
"What?"
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: Fat hatred; eliminationism.]
"Weight requirements are an effective way to make it harder for people with obesity to qualify for full health coverage. Some programs can verge on discrimination."—Ted Kyle, lead author of a study released today by the advocacy group Obesity Action Coalition and founder of Conscienhealth, a Pittsburgh-based company that advises other companies on obesity programs.
Quoted in yet another article about the reprehensible strategies insurance companies are using to try to deny healthcare coverage to fat people.
"Some programs can verge on discrimination." Ha ha ya think?
Let's be very clear about this: For-profit insurance companies are actively trying to find ways to deny fat people access to healthcare. And there are still people who believe that there is not an eliminationist campaign against fat people in this country.
