Quote of the Day

"The lawsuit claims that evidence was presented to the grand jury in a manner markedly different than in previous cases heard by the same grand jury, with the 'insinuation' that Brown was the 'wrongdoer' rather than Wilson."—From a Reuters article on the lawsuit brought by Grand Juror Doe against St. Louis County prosecutor Robert McCulloch, who the juror alleges misrepresented the case against Officer Darren Wilson in the shooting death of Ferguson teenager Michael Brown.

The suit argues that state laws prohibiting the grand juror from talking about the case are unconstitutional. Jeffrey Mittman, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union in Missouri, said the Brown case is an important public policy issue and the grand juror should be allowed to speak about the proceedings.

After the Nov. 24 announcement by McCulloch that the grand jury decided not to indict Wilson, and the release by McCulloch of evidence presented, some critics accused the prosecutor of unfairly skewing the process in favor of the police officer.

A spokesman said McCulloch had no comment on the lawsuit.

The lawsuit claims that evidence was presented to the grand jury in a manner markedly different than in previous cases heard by the same grand jury, with the "insinuation" that Brown was the "wrongdoer" rather than Wilson.

It also claims the prosecutor's office presented applicable laws to grand jurors "in a muddled and untimely manner" unlike presentations in other cases.

The grand juror also contends that McCulloch's public statements about the decision not to indict were not "entirely accurate," including the "implication that all grand jurors believed that there was no support for any charges," the lawsuit stated.
Two things: 1. McCulloch should be out of a job. Period. 2. There is no double jeopardy attached to a failure to indict. Conceivably, another prosecutor could bring the case to another grand jury, and Wilson could still be indicted for the crime. That is not likely, but it is possible. He was not acquitted; he was simply not charged.

Open Wide...

Um.

Emily Atkin at Think Progress: "A Nuclear Plant Leaked Oil into Lake Michigan for Two Months Straight."

A cooling system attached to a nuclear power plant in southwest Michigan was steadily spilling oil into Lake Michigan for about two months, the Detroit Free Press reported Saturday.

Approximately 2,000 gallons of oil from a cooling system at the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant leaked into the lake last year, according to an event notification posted on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission website. The leak started on October 25, and was isolated on December 20, the report said. Plant officials reportedly notified the State of Michigan of the leak on December 13.

Bill Schalk, communications manager for the Cook Nuclear Plant, assured the Detroit Free Press that there would be no impact on the lake.

"One of the first things we did when we looked at the potential for a leak is examine the lake," he said. "Oil floats on top of the water and you see a sheen, but we could find no evidence of oil in our reservoirs, in the lake or on the beach. It has been dispersed."

Others disagree that just because the oil is dispersed, there no threat to the lake and its ecosystems. Michael Keegan, director of the nonprofit Coalition for a Nuclear-Free Great Lakes, lamented that the oil would not be recoverable, and questioned whether plant officials truly knew how much oil had spilled into the lake, considering they didn't know the leak had been happening for two months.

"What's concerning is they don't really know the extent of the leak," he said. "Nearly two months later is the first determination they make that they have an oil leak? It speaks to the quality assurance of all of their other systems."
That's putting it politely.

But, hey, the communications manager for the plant tells us not to worry because there will be "no impact on the lake." Sounds legit! If there's anyone we can trust, it's the communications manager for the plant that didn't realize it was spilling toxic garbage into our drinking water for two months.

Open Wide...

Finish This Sentence

The best film I saw in 2014 was...

...Interstellar. I saw a lot of great films this year, but that was the one I saw most recently, so it's fresh in my mind and thus my answer.

Your answer doesn't have to be a film that was released in 2014; just one you saw for the first time last year.

Open Wide...

The Monday Blogaround

This blogaround brought to you by the color orange.

Recommended Reading:

Batocchio: Jon Swift Memorial Roundup 2014

Mali: [Content Note: Racism] "What White Publishers Won't Print:" Systemic Racism in (Institutionalized) Knowledge Production

Ragen: [CN: Fat hatred] When Fitness Becomes Fat Hate

Anne: [CN: Sexual coercion; abuse; fat hatred] FRIENDS: Where Are They Now

Kyler: [CN: Homophobia] Jeb Bush Still Thinks Same-Sex Marriage Should Be Put to a Public Vote

BYP: [CN: Racism] Target Refuses to Apologize for Racist 'Annie' Ad

Jay Smooth: [VIDEO; CN: Racism] On Truces, and What Real Peace Requires

Leave your links and recommendations in comments. Self-promotion welcome and encouraged!

Open Wide...

Daily Dose of Cute

image of Sophie the Torbie Cat standing on me, kneading my belly with her front paws
Wee Sophs, kneading my belly.

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

Open Wide...

David Bowie Is

image of a video installation also featuring costumes from the 'David Bowie Is' exhibit at the Chicago Museum of Contemporary Art
From "David Bowie Is": Bowie sings "Starman" on Top of the Pops

Yesterday, on the very last day of its run at Chicago's Museum of Contemporary Art, Iain and I—along with the Space Cowpokes, who were visiting from New Jersey—went to see "David Bowie Is," an extraordinary exhibit that documents Bowie's long and fascinating career.

(There is a great write-up here, if you want to read more about it.)

The exhibit itself, curated by Victoria Broackes and Geoffrey Marsh, is amazing—and the staff of the MCA did an excellent job working both the collection and the lines to get in, which were unbelievable.

image of the line outside reflected in the ceiling of the interior of the museum
Above: An image of the reflection of the line outside yesterday, from inside the museum.

We first tried to get in on Friday, as part of the limited walk-up traffic since advanced tickets were sold out, but were thwarted by the impossibly long line, our need to get home to the dogs, and the shitty weather. Sunday, it happened. And holy shit was it ever worth the effort.

I'm a major Bowie-head anyway (seriously: I don't get up at 6am on a sleeting Sunday which is the last day of my vacation for just anyone), but this exhibit just made me an even bigger fan (which I did not believe was even possible). It was curated so spectacularly, giving visitors the chance to explore the history of his career, his work, his social and cultural influences, his creative process, and who he is as an artist.

image of the David Bowie Is graphic on the outside of the MCA

I'm still processing everything I saw—we spent an hour and a half in the exhibit, and I could have easily spent double that—but here are a few of my immediate takeaways, which I thought might be of interest.

* One of the things I've always thought about Bowie, also reinforced by the documentary "Five Years," which I highly recommend, is that he is an exceedingly generous artist. He prolifically credits his collaborators, and he explicitly writes lyrics that leave space for people to imbue their own meaning. He wants his music to belong to and be meaningful to a vast audience.

* He's a sponge. He draws influence from a vast array of people and places and things. One of the things I really loved about the exhibit was its emphasis on what influenced Bowie, not just on the influence he has had on the culture and other artists. There is a strong implicit commentary on how art is an ongoing story, and a cultural property that belongs to us all.

* Related to the above two ideas: Bowie has an admirable and inspirational quality of wanting to be part of something bigger than himself, which is defined in part by sharing credit and acknowledging influences. He clearly doesn't find it diminishes his own work, but enhances it, by not insistently centering himself and asserting sole proprietorship. Which is not to say he doesn't take deserved credit and ownership, too. I mean, the man's a millionaire because he does. It's just striking that he has found some sort of balance (probably imperfect) between being a star and being an artist.

* He has tried lots and lots and lots of things. And not all of them have worked. But he's willing to experiment. Publicly. Which means a willingness to fail. Publicly. And that's okay.

* There was an interesting video installation that featured part of an old BBC documentary on Bowie. The commentary on the then-burgeoning star was fairly contemptuous, including a haughty sniff about how most of his fans were "14-to-20-year-old girls." This is something that feminist and womanist cultural critics still observe—how a largely young female fan base is used to discredit the integrity and value of artists. This, despite the fact that, over and over, young women have "discovered" and launched the careers of dozens of influential men and women. Like David Bowie, who is now considered so culturally important that he has a globally renowned exhibit dedicated to his career, which tens of thousands of people have clamored to get into.

Young women (and especially young women of color, in many cases) are drivers of culture, but they were, 40 years ago, and are, still today, demeaned as a substandard and virtually laughable audience.

Well. Maybe we should reconsider that.

image of me holding up Iain's and my tickets to the show
One very enthusiastic female David Bowie fan.

Open Wide...

Two-Minute Nostalgia Sublime



U2: "I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For"

Open Wide...

In the News

Here is some stuff in the news today...

WaPo: "Republican contest for 2016 race is heating up quickly." Translation: Here are a bunch of the same white dudes as always jockeying for position to be the absolute worst. Welcome to the year of our lord Jesus Jones two thousand and fifteen!

Congratulations to Madhu Kinnar, who was just elected India's first transgender mayor. May her tenure be productive and safe.

RIP Stuart Scott. [Video may autoplay at link.]

[Content Note: Racism] Over our winter break, it was revealed that House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-Acist) had spoken at a white supremacist shindig in 2002. And it turns out lots of people have a problem with that! GO FIGURE! But Republicans are digging in and defending him, because of course they are. It was just a big WHOOPSY, anyway. "In 2002, Scalise, then a state legislator, gave a speech about taxes in September 2002 before the European-American Unity and Rights Organization (EURO), an organization founded by former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke. After the speech was reported this week, Scalise apologized, saying he was not aware of EURO's platform when he spoke, and he certainly wouldn't endorse the activities of such a 'hate group'." Scalise is a busy man. He doesn't have time to learn how to use newfangled technologies like Google.

[CN: Police brutality] Does the NYPD even understand that protesting the protests of their brutality in the form of not policing poor communities by harassing people constantly over ever little thing, i.e. "work stoppage," is actually maybe not the effective demonstration they'd hoped?

Meanwhile: "Pittsburgh police chief angers officers with pledge to challenge racism." Got that? He pledges to challenge racism within his department, and his officers get offended. Perfect.

[CN: Terrorism] Jury selection is underway for the trial of Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev. "Over the next three days, about 1,200 people will be called to federal court to be considered as potential jurors. The first 200 were given initial instructions Monday by [Judge George O'Toole Jr.]. Twelve jurors and six alternates are to be selected. The judge said the trial will begin on Jan. 26 and will last three to four months."

[CN: Terrorism] Boko Haram continues to terrorize Nigeria: "Boko Haram militants stormed a key multinational military base in Nigeria, killing an unknown number of people and seizing weapons and vehicles as soldiers fled, a local senator said Monday."

This woman who got dumped the week of her wedding dealt with it (partly) in pretty much the most amazing way possible. "I can't even describe how liberating and cathartic the experience was for me." Right on!

And finally! Here is a video of some very proficient snuggling between an adorable cat and an adorable dog!

Open Wide...

Cis Allies and Trans Suicide

[Content note: suicide and transphobia]

On December 28th, Leelah Alcorn, a 17-year-old transgender girl took her own life. On Tumblr, she left a suicide note that discussed being rejected by her parents.

From USA Today on December 30th*:

"The only way I will rest in peace is if one day transgender people aren't treated the way I was, they're treated like humans, with valid feelings and human rights," Alcorn wrote in a post on Tumblr. [Tumblr has subsequently made the post private at her parent's request.]

Her parents, she wrote, wanted her to be a "perfect little straight Christian boy."

"My death needs to mean something," she wrote in the post, which she scheduled to appear the day after her death.

Her final public words: "Fix society. Please."
In the past week, Alcorn's story has gone viral. Many trans and cis people have been mourning her death and calling for greater awareness of the crisis of suicide in the trans community.

Someone** on my Twitter feed mentioned that cis people need to respond to this suicide in a very different way than trans people do. That's a very, very important point, and I want to take some time to spell out why.

Not all trans people attempt suicide, but an alarming number of us do (the latest estimate is 41%). It's hard coming to terms with being trans in a society that views trans as one of the worst things a person can be.

That's an understatement.

Most of us endure years or decades of being completely numb to the world around us. Even for those of us who go on to "succeed" by cis people's standards, deep scars remain.

I struggle with anxiety on a daily basis. I have on-and-off struggles with depression and thoughts of self-harm. Regardless of how I'm doing at any point in time, the odds are pretty good that someone I know is battling depression.

In my opinion, major depression is one of the foundations of the trans community. I'm not saying that to be, well, depressing. I just really need to get the point across that we spend our days worrying about our friends. I don't know who I might lose next. I don't know which of my friends might drop offline, reinvent themselves, or otherwise leave my circle of friends without warning. This sort of worry is pretty standard for us. Our communities are built around it.

This self-destruction and marginalization has let us to create powerful support networks. We do a lot to help each other. We check in on each other. We tell each other about our successes, and try to ensure that all of us have positive role models. We form our own support groups. We train each other, recruit each other, and when possible, hire each other. We share vital information and spare medication. We open our couches to each other. We even staff our own suicide prevention hotline.

If you're not part of our community, you don't see a lot of this. If you are, you might take it for granted or be caught up in the horizontal violence that plagues us. Make no mistake, though. Our community is tight and supportive, and has been for decades. In the past decade, we've increasingly claimed our identities, and have been connecting in ways that were once unimaginable.

For most of us who are trans, our reaction to Leelah Alcorn's death has been as deeply personal as it has been routine. We are hurting, but we are strong.

Meanwhile, many of our cis "allies" are hopping on the death of this young, white, presumably innocent, teenage girl to make it clear that they really care about us.

Allies have embraced #pinkforleelah, which asks people to show support for trans youth by paint their ring fingers pink on January 6th.

Allies have organized and attended vigils.

Dan Savage is outraged.

This is all fine and good. I appreciate it, even. But there's a world of difference between me painting my ring finger pink in support of a fallen sister and resolving to take care of my family and some cis person painting their nail so they feel like they've "done something."

We're already doing everything we can. What, exactly, are y'all doing, cis people?

I know, I know, #notallcispeople. But the overwhelming majority of you aren't doing enough for us. I'm lucky enough to have several cis people in my life who I trust. But a lot of them don't live anywhere near me. Those that do can't constantly follow me around offering me support. My wife can't even do that, although she came close in those early months a decade ago.

All of us are aware of the awesome power you have over our lives. It's not just that a parent can punish their child for coming out. You can hurt us at any time.

You can take away our hormones when we move, get thrown in jail, or just need to get a new doctor.

You hold meetings to decide where we can piss.

You hold meetings to decide whether we can come to your meetings.

Even those of us who have reclaimed our identities years ago are constantly under threat.

Once it becomes known that one of us is trans, many of our coworkers turn on us. Our friends become scarce, all while whispering reassurances about their one gay uncle. We may need to find new cities, and new careers.

We don't even need to choose to come out to be in danger. Some of you dox us for sport. Some of you do it in the name of journalism.

I'm sure we'll continue to talk amongst ourselves about how to handle the current crisis. Cis people don't get to lead that conversation. We don't care what you think. We're more concerned with what you do, or more often, what you don't do.

I understand all too well why you want to honor the passing of this one particular girl. If it feels right to you, do it. But do something for the rest of us, as well as for future generations of trans people. Make our humanity a priority on par with your own.

---
Crossposted from A Cunt of One's Own

*I'm not including the link, as the story uses the name Leelah rejected. Almost every story I've seen includes that bit of information.

**Apologies to whoever was talking about this-- I can't find your tweet, otherwise I'd cite it!

Open Wide...

Of Course

[Content Note: Racism.]

(I was in the middle of composing this post when my laptop died at the end of the year of our lord Jesus Jones two thousand and fourteen. It's still relevant, unfortunately, so here it is...)

So, one of the things to come out of the Sony hacking is a leaked email indicating that Sony Pictures' co-chair Amy Pascal would like Idris Elba to be the next actor to play the iconic role of James Bond. Which makes perfect sense, if you have ever watched Idris Elba onscreen for three seconds or less.

But Elba is black, so cue the caterwauling of aggrieved racists.

@JJ_Bola tweeted this collection of racists' responses to the mere suggestion that Elba—a fine actor and by all accounts a cool bloke—might be cast as Bond:

image of a collection of racist tweets

Yawn + seethe = contempt.

Everything about this is terrible in the most exasperatingly familiar way. And, once again, I am struck by the utter hypocrisy of those who love to pretend they don't know how culture works when they want to defend the status quo, but suddenly know very keenly how culture works when they want to express their profound grievance that it might change in a way that threatens their privilege.

screen cap of tweet authored by me reading:'Call out rape culture in a Bond film... 'Get a grip it's only a movie!' Cast black man as Bond... 'YEAARRGGH CANON NOOOOO DEATH OF CULTURE!''

Get to fuck, losers.

Open Wide...

Open Thread

Rosie the Riveter wielding a giant teaspoon.

Hosted by Rosie the Riveter.

Happy 2015, Shakers!

Over the holiday break, I submitted this entry to the #FeministNewYearResolutions hashtag on Twitter:

screen cap of tweet authored by me reading: 'Unhinge jaw; swallow patriarchy whole; shit it out; fertilize feminist garden. #FeministNewYearResolutions'

I feel as though that's a reasonable resolution. Please feel welcome and encouraged to leave your own Feminist New Year Resolutions in comments!

Open Wide...

Slàinte mhor a h-uile là a chi 's nach fhaic!

image of a teaspoon in a snow globe, with the words 'Happy Teaspoons to all...and to all a good fight.'

Well, I didn't quite want to end the year this abruptly, lol, but my laptop really didn't cooperate with my plan! The good news is that it's back in working order, and that I had backed up everything before the hard drive died, so I didn't lose anything major. Phew. Except Windows 7 haha. I'm now on Windows 8, and obviously I hate it because I am a human being and not a monster.

(Just kidding! I'm sure I will love it and also I am definitely a monster. Rrrowwwr.)

Anyway! Most of the contributors and mods are (or will be) traveling and holidaying over the next week and a half, so we're taking some time off to rest and renew, and we will return Monday, January 5, at which time we will resume your regularly scheduled abundance of feminist commentary, political snark, pop culture deconstruction, cute things, pretty pictures, and sundry shenanigans.

Thank you for another great year, Shakers.

And when we return, it will soon be time for another presidential election to begin in earnest. Are you so excited?! I BET YOU ARE SO EXCITED YOU CAN'T WAIT YOU ARE ALL HURRY UP AND GET HERE ELECTION AND PLEASE PLEASE MITT ROMNEY RUN AGAIN AND STAND IN FRONT OF ALL THE GIANT FLAGS!

Please indicate your excitement by checking this box: □

As they say, see you next year!

[My thanks to JupiterPluvius for the phrase used in the image.]

Open Wide...

Blog Note

Welp, my laptop just died. It started making a horrendous grinding sound, and then crashed, and won't restart, so I think the hard drive is fucked. The local repair shop opens at 10 CT, so I'll take it over then and hope they can sort it out quickly. In the meantime, I'm without a computer. I'll keep you posted.

Open Wide...

Open Thread

image of a Speak & Math electronic toy

Hosted by Speak & Math.

Open Wide...

Question of the Day

Suggested by Shaker lupinella12: "What 'out-dated' fashion choice will you always make?"

LOL all of them?

Open Wide...

Awwwwww lol

Let's all watch (or read the transcript of) this puppy dancing excitedly when zie spies hir owner arriving to pick hir up from doggy daycare:


Video Description: A small chocolate poodle stands on hir hind legs behind a short pet gate at a doggy daycare center. Zie looks at the glass door, where owners arrive to collect their pets, dancing excitedly, hopping from one leg to another, wiggling hir wee butt. When hir owner's legs come into view, zie hops straight up and down with uncontainable excitement. Hop hop hop hop hop hop hop! Dance! Wiggle wiggle! Hop hop hop! Dance!

[Via Stacey.]

Open Wide...

YES! A+ Casting!

The Good Wife is probably my favorite currently airing show on television. There isn't a weak spot among the entire cast: Everyone is brilliant. So it's really saying something when I say that Mike Colter, who plays Lemond Bishop, is a stand-out among the excellent cast. And now Marvel has cast him as the titular character in their Luke Cage series for Netflix:

Marvel and Netflix have cast "The Good Wife" star Mike Colter as comic book hero Luke Cage, Marvel announced Monday. Colter will make his debut in "Marvel's A.K.A. Jessica Jones" in 2015, before going on to headline his own Netflix series.

During the course of an investigation in New York City, private investigator Jessica Jones (Krysten Ritter) encounters the enigmatic Luke Cage — a man whose past has secrets that will dramatically alter Jessica in ways she could never have imagined.

"Mike embodies the strength, edge and depth of Luke Cage," said "Jessica Jones" showrunner Melissa Rosenberg. "We're excited to have him bring this iconic Marvel character to life."

"Fans have longed to see Luke Cage … and in Mike we've found the perfect actor," said Jeph Loeb, Marvel's Head of Television.
Yes, yes you have!

image of Mike Colter, a young, thin, black man with a shaved head and a van dyke

I CAN'T WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIT!!!!!!!

Open Wide...

Let's Be Radical

[Content Note: Misogyny; choice policing.]

Here is something I wrote once:

I respect women, and I love them. And when I take stock of all the issues disproportionately affecting women across the globe, what I see is lack of respect and love for women so pervasive and profound that to merely assert to love and respect women yet remains a radical act.

...I love women. I respect women. I trust women. Not as part of some abstract, theoretical feminism but as part of an applied, practical feminism that urges me to love by nonjudgment, respect by listening, trust by supporting individual choices.
Here is something else I wrote:
There is a difference between not hating women and thinking of them as likable. I have crossed that bridge. And once you are on the other side, you realize how cavernous the space between the shores really is.

Thinking of women as likeable in a misogynist culture is truly a radical act.
And here is one more thing:
Recognizing that people are different, that their circumstances and lived experiences and needs are different, is crucial to being expansively pro-choice.

So is understanding, and acknowledging, that many women don't have meaningful choices at all, sometimes in multiple areas of their lives.

Thus, here's the question I keep coming back to: How is it feminist to judge a woman's choices when she doesn't have any good ones?

Feminism that is not expansively pro-choice is neither relevant nor accessible for women with limited choices. And I don't know that there are any women who have the freedom to live undilutedly feminist lives, who never have to compromise on their ideals in order to survive or avoid harm. If a failure to perfectly exemplify and embody some very specific definition of privileged feminism at all times is a disqualifying act, then I imagine none of us are feminists.

...We are all, I imagine, keenly aware that there is a feminist yardstick against which women's choices are measured—a yardstick whose increments of acceptable choice vary depending upon in whose hands it's held.

The mainstream feminist movement is compromised by privilege—and unexamined privilege has created a space in which the pernicious culture of judgment can proliferate. Sometimes in the form of overt hostility, as in the case of trans*-exclusive radical feminists who actively seek to deny trans* women a seat at the table. And sometimes in the form of the simple but harmful failure to understand the diversity of demands on the lives of women.

Unexamined privilege makes it terrifically easy to elide that marginalized women are compelled to enact multiple levels of performance and conformance to attain access. For example, the obligation to "turn off" different and/or more parts of our- or themselves in the workplace, in order to be considered "professional," in ways that have nothing to do with basic vocational competency.

Did you make the wise feminist choice to be born with what Corporate America deems professional hair? Or do you need to make a choice to "do something" with your hair that someone else might deem an unfeminist choice?

...There are billions of women on the planet who live their lives making choices every day, and very few, if any, of us have lives so privileged that we can make them in a consequence-free vacuum where the only criteria can be whether they conform to a narrowly-defined version of feminism, the architects of which often casually ignore meaningful disparities in available options among women.

The truth we must recognize is that adherence to a privileged version of feminism is a luxury.

And putting women's choices up for debate ignores that truth.

...One of the most important things I have ever done for my own sense of value, one of the most profound kindnesses I have ever offered to myself, is to take a long look at the deeply unreasonable, inherently condemnatory, nakedly cruel, worth-subverting, oppression-entrenching, target-moving, can't-bloody-win culture of judgment in its impossibly merciless face and tell it to fuck off.

I am not pro-judgment. I am pro-choice.
Liking women, respecting women, trusting women to make the best choices for themselves is a radical act in a misogynist culture. Being comprehensively pro-choice instead of policing women's choices is a radical act in a culture in which we are exhorted to judge and condemn other women.

And, in a world that hates women and holds us in contempt, perhaps the most radical feminist/womanist act is creating space for women to love ourselves.

To hold ourselves in esteem.

Judgment and love are incompatible. Policing and esteem are incompatible.

It is eminently possible to critique the culture in which women's individual choices are made, and the cultural narratives that may affect our decision-making processes, without condemning those individual choices—or the women making them.

Let us be radical. Let us not treat as an aside whatever cultural imperatives inform and oblige women's choices. Let us center the realities of a misogynist culture. Let us center the idea that the way sexism visits privileged and marginalized women "is similar in its devastation but often unique in its practice." Let us replace the instinct to judge one another with the urge to understand one another.

The world looks very different once you replace "I don't think you should feel that way" with "I want to understand why you feel that way."

We will never change the world if we cannot even change the way we approach it.

[Originally posted December 10, 2013.]

Open Wide...

Quote of the Day

[Content Note: Torture.]

"Starting a criminal investigation is not about payback; it is about ensuring that this never happens again and regaining the moral credibility to rebuke torture by other governments. Because of the Senate's report, we now know the distance officials in the executive branch went to rationalize, and conceal, the crimes they wanted to commit. The question is whether the nation will stand by and allow the perpetrators of torture to have perpetual immunity for their actions."—The New York Times editors, in an editorial headlined, simply and bluntly, "Prosecute Torturers and Their Bosses."

Open Wide...

Daily Dose of Cute

image of Matilda the Fuzzy Sealpoint Cat sitting on my lap and looking wide-eyed at something behind me
"Whazzat?!"

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

Open Wide...