Hosted by elephants.
Question of the Day
When was the last time you made a homemade gift for someone, and what did you make?
Any occasion counts: Birthday, Christmas, graduation, just because, etc. And anything you make counts, too: Art, a card, handmade soap, a casserole, cupcakes, whatever.
Photo of the Day
Saturday night in the US, there was an extraordinary blood moon lunar eclipse, which @yorobephoto captured in stunning time-lapse. If you missed the eclipse, there are more terrific images here.
I Can Get on Board with This
[Content Note: Scatological humor.]
Unfortunately, I didn't see this until after April Fools' Day, but our old pal Flula has a great suggestion for how to exponentially improve the shittiest holiday of the year, and I am definitely on board and prepared to put this into effect next year on April 1st!
Flula, a young, thin, white man wearing a blue stocking cap and a purple t-shirt, speaks in German-accented English directly to the camera:
Boom! Hey, guys—it's Flula! How are you? I hope you are great! Guess what is me? I'm perhaps not so great, because a holiday is here that is here and it is called the April Fools' Day. I don't understand this "holiday"—Number One: It is no holiday; I see peoples working. Number Two: Why are we doing this?
[blinks]
It seems just like rude—a rude time! People are saying things all the time, like: [mimes conversation between two people]
"Hey how are you?"
"I am good."
"Guess it what! I have five legs and an eye on my shoe!"
"Oh, really?"
"No! April Fools'! You are stupid! I did it!"
[makes face at camera]
This is a rude time! I would like to take it back this holiday. No more April Fools' Day; we make it April Cools Day. Because everyone is cool on this day. [serious face; mimes another conversation]
"Hey, man! I like your shoes and also your hair!"
"Oh, really?"
"APRIL COOLS! You're cool!"
"Oh, thank you, man!" [makes 'see?' expression; mimes another conversation]
"Hey, you! I like your career decisions, and also you have a nice job, and also your resume has no spelling errors!"
"Really?"
"APRIL COOLS!"
[makes an impressed face]
That sound like a nice time! I should wish all my friends and Hamburgers an April Cools Day. APRIL COOLS DAY! Spread it like a virus!
And if you don't do it, I shall poopoo on your house. [long pause]
APRIL COOLS!
Thank you for watching. Please spread it now April Cools Day to all of your friends and home-dudes and -ladies.
If you'd like to see more films and videos from me, Flula, please click it. [points to subscriber info which has appeared on screen] Subscribe it in the place! Subscribe it! Or would you like some more videos of my face and my body? [points to an inset video which has appeared on screen] Ohhhhhh! Or would you like to see me saying the word schnudel schniedel! 500 times? Then click here! [points to an inset video which has appeared on screen] Peace out! [pretends to fist-bump the camera] Boom!
This F#@king Guy
[Content Note: Homophobia; homophobic slur; Christian Supremacy.]
Yes, yes you are. The grossest and the worst.
Republican presidential wannabe and human nightmare Rick Santorum, on the endless quest to out-gross himself, defended Indiana's "religious freedom" law over the weekend, because of course he did:
Former Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum invoked on Sunday the "God Hates Fags" slogans on signs from the virulently anti-gay Westboro Baptist Church to defend the right of businesses to deny services in public accommodations.First of all, being asked to print materials that are personally demeaning to you is not parallel to, say, baking a cake for a wedding that has literally zero effect on your life. That is a deeply mendacious false equivalency.
"If you're a print shop, and you are a gay man, should you forced to print 'God Hates Fags' for the Westboro Baptist Church because they hold those signs up," Santorum said. "And this is really the case here: Should the government force you to do that? And that's what these cases are all about. Because this is about the government coming in and saying, 'No we're going to make you do this.' And this is where I think we just need some space to say, 'Let's have some tolerance be a two-way street.'"
Secondly: LOL FOREVERRRRR at this fucking guy yammering on about tolerance being a "two-way street," when just last month he was advocating for teaching the Christian Bible in public schools.
Funny how Santorum's "two-way street" looks a hell of a lot more like a one-way street traveled exclusively by steamrollers.
One of the things about Christian privilege—like any other kind of privilege—is that the people who have it take it so deeply for granted that they don't even really see how vast and pervasive their privilege really is.
Non-Christians in the United States must navigate Christian culture all the time, and are frequently coerced into participating in or complying with Christian practices and traditions. Sometimes that conflicts with our own beliefs. If the laws in this country actually did create an actual, equal, real two-way street, Christians who enjoy an enormous amount of privilege right now at the expense of non-Christians would be very unhappy indeed to see what that really looks like for them.
There are a whole lot of Christians in this country who love playing martyrs and diligently ignoring the enormous privilege they already enjoy, and thus imagine it's reasonable to expect that they should never, ever, have to do anything at all that makes them the tiniest bit uncomfortable and to demand as much under the guise of "religious freedom."
If this is a game they really want to play, they're going to be very unhappy with the end results.
Daily Dose of Cute
"THE DRAWSTRING OF YOUR HOODIE IS MIIIIIIINE!" Chomp chomp battle. "What?"
As always, please feel welcome and encouraged to share pix of the fuzzy, feathered, or scaled members of your family in comments.
The Monday Blogaround
This blogaround brought to you by sunshine.
Recommended Reading:
Trudy: [Content Note: Body and choice policing] What's Really Going on with the Sexist Backlash Against Selfies
Aura: [CN: Racism; police brutality] Death of 14-Year-Old Latino Killed by Chicago Police Kill Labeled 'Suicide'
Emily: [CN: War on reproductive rights] Chris Christie Joins GOP Presidential Hopefuls, Supports 20-Week Abortion Ban
Yesha: [CN: Misogynoir] Cosmopolitan Kills Black Styles to Let White Girls Live
Squinky: So You've Been Called Out: A Handy Guide to Receiving Social Justice-Related Criticism on the Internet
Paige: High School Senior Discovers DNA Mutations That Could Resist Meningitis, HIV
Sean: The Reality of Time
George: Black Holes May Bleed Meaningful Information About What's Inside
Leave your links and recommendations in comments. Self-promotion welcome and encouraged!
The Make-Up Thread
Here is your semi-regular make-up thread, to discuss all things make-up.
Do you have a make-up product you'd recommend? Are you looking for the perfect foundation which has remained frustratingly elusive? Need or want to offer make-up tips? Searching for hypoallergenic products? Want to grouse about how you hate make-up? Want to gush about how you love it?
Whatever you like—have at it!
* * *
Please note, as always, that advice should be not be offered to an individual person unless they solicit it. Further: This thread is open to everyone—women, men, genderqueer folks. People who are make-up experts, and people who are make-up newbies. Also, because there is a lot of racist language used in discussions of make-up, and in make-up names, please be aware to avoid turns of phrase that are alienating to women of color, like "nude" or "flesh tone" when referring to a peachy or beige color. I realize some recommended products may have names that use these words, so please be considerate about content noting for white supremacist (and/or Orientalist) product naming.
In the News
Here is some stuff in the news today...
[Content Note: War; death] Kenya has responded to the the assault by the militant Islamist group al-Shabab at Garissa University last week, which left 148 people dead, by sending fighter jets to Somalia to bomb al-Shabab's military positions. "The warplanes had targeted two camps in the Gedo region, used by al-Shabab to cross into Kenya, [a military spokesman has told the BBC]. ...Kenyan army spokesman David Obonyo told the BBC that the military had responded to 'threats' by launching the air strikes on Sunday night in the remote region. Two camps had been destroyed, he said, adding: 'The bombings are part of the continued process and engagement against al-Shabab, which will go on.' ...President Uhuru Kenyatta had vowed to respond to the attack 'in the severest way possible'."
[CN: Class warfare; classism; choice policing; food insecurity] This is awful: "Anger toward those living below the poverty line seems to only be increasing. Maine and Missouri have proposed bills limiting residents' food choices if they use SNAP. Missouri House Bill 813 would bar the state's 930,000 food stamp recipients from using their benefits to buy cookies, chips, soda, energy drinks, steak and seafood. (The legislature also implemented mandatory drug testing for TANF applicants in 2011.) If the bill becomes law, a Missourian can't buy a can of tuna with an EBT card. Tortilla chips to go with salsa? Nope. Flank steak—tough, stringy and the only cut of beef I can afford—is off-limits, too. Who are these people, and what makes them think that what we eat is their business? And given that the average food stamp allotment in my state in 2013 came out to just $1.41 per person per meal, I wonder if they understand that recipients couldn't buy lobster if they wanted to." People are entitled to food. And they are entitled to whatever the fuck kind of food they want and need.
[CN: Racism; police brutality] This piece by Anita Chabria for the Guardian about California's lynching law, which is being (mis)used against protesters, is a must-read. Absolutely rage-making.
[CN: Classism; disablism; misogyny] This piece by Jorge Rivas for Fusion about how consolidation of HIV/AIDS funding might diminish healthcare access for poor HIV+ women and children is also a must-read: "The Obama administration says consolidating the two programs will reduce redundancies and relieve administrative burden. (Last year, 67 percent of groups funded by Part D also received funding from Part C.) It also says the consolidation will increase points of access for the population. But advocates for women and children with HIV say they're concerned the new proposal doesn't specify what portion of federal dollars would fund services for women and children, who have unique health-care needs."
Whooooooooops! "Likely Republican presidential contender Jeb Bush, who was popular among Spanish-speaking voters while Florida governor, marked himself as 'Hispanic' on a 2009 voter registration application, The New York Times reported on Monday. The newspaper posted a fuzzy copy of the form, which it said it obtained from the Miami-Dade County Elections Department. The circle marked 'Hispanic' was checked. The next circle said 'White, not Hispanic' and was not checked. 'My mistake! Don't think I've fooled anyone!' Bush wrote on Twitter on Monday, responding to a message from his son calling him an 'honorary' Latino.' (Please note that Bush's son is himself Latino, as his mother is Latina.)
This is a pretty cool headline: "Is Hillary Clinton Any Good at Running for President?" Well, considering she almost won her party's nomination, I'd say yes. But what do I know?
You go, grrl! "Mieko Nagaoka, a 100-year-old Japanese woman, became the first centenarian to complete a 1500m swim in a 25-meter pool, according to weekend reports. Nagaoka completed 30 lengths of the pool in 1 hour, 15 minutes, 54 seconds, in a masters event in Matsuyama, Japan, on Saturday. ...'I feel relieved that I could complete swimming 1500m,' Nagaoka said though her son, according to CNN. 'But I will still continue swimming ahead.'"
Neat! "NASA's Hubble Space Telescope has photographed a set of wispy, goblin-green objects that are the ephemeral ghosts of quasars that flickered to life and then faded. ...The ethereal wisps outside the host galaxy are believed to have been illuminated by powerful ultraviolet radiation from a supermassive black hole at the core of the host galaxy. The most active of these galaxy cores are called quasars, where infalling material is heated to a point where a brilliant searchlight shines into deep space. The beam is produced by a disk of glowing, superheated gas encircling the black hole."
BOOOOOOOOOOO! "Director David Lynch has confirmed he will not direct the sequel to Twin Peaks, citing disagreement over money. Writing on Twitter, Lynch said he had not been given enough money 'to do the script in the way I felt it needed to be done'. 'This weekend I started to call actors to let them know I would not be directing,' he added." Well, shucks.
And finally! "28 Majestic Owls Caught on Camera." Oh, owls. How I adore you.
Rolling Stone, Jackie, and What Went Wrong
[Content Note: Sexual assault.]
Yesterday, the Columbia Journalism Review published a comprehensive report on the failures of Rolling Stone's story on the reported gang rape of a University of Virginia student known as Jackie. It is a thorough and damning document, and I highly recommend taking the time to read the report in its entirety.
Despite the many grievous errors in the reporting process, Rolling Stone continues to defend its process, and the magazine's publisher, Jann Wenner, was quoted in the New York Times blaming the entire clusterfuck on Jackie:
In an interview discussing Columbia's findings, Jann S. Wenner, the publisher of Rolling Stone, acknowledged the piece's flaws but said that it represented an isolated and unusual episode and that Ms. Erdely would continue to write for the magazine. The problems with the article started with its source, Mr. Wenner said. He described her as "a really expert fabulist storyteller" who managed to manipulate the magazine's journalism process. When asked to clarify, he said that he was not trying to blame Jackie, "but obviously there is something here that is untruthful, and something sits at her doorstep."Leaving aside that this is gross victim-blaming, if one young woman is able to fundamentally undermine a journalistic process all on her own by being a manipulative storyteller, that doesn't suggest a very reliable process, Mr. Wenner.
Naturally, the takeaway from this will be (again) that Jackie is a liar, but the Columbia Journalism Review does not make that conclusion, just as investigating police did not. CJR reports that there were discrepancies in Jackie's story, that she was sometimes evasive, that she was scared, and that she nonetheless seemed credible to Rolling Stone until she didn't anymore.
And the report makes abundantly clear that she didn't seem credible anymore only after questions were raised about the story that have everything to do with failures in Rolling Stone's reporting process.
Which isn't really about her credibility at all, but theirs.
An argument could be made that Rolling Stone reporter Sabrina Rubin Erdely and her editors should have questioned Jackie's credibility—or at least her preparedness to move ahead as the center of such a big story on campus rape—but according to them, they didn't. Not until after publication. When it's pretty obvious they decided that throwing Jackie under the bus was a better strategy than holding themselves accountable for any reporting, editing, or fact-checking failures.
What silencing of doubts there may have been pre-publication, to which no one is admitting, may be attributable to the fact that Erdely—and the rest of the Rolling Stone team—were keen to use as the centerpiece of their story the most egregious, heinous example of campus rape they could find, which is something about which I've written before: Jackie was used "by someone who decided to take a pass on stories that weren't big enough; take a pass on survivors who weren't hurt badly enough. But Jackie's story was a 'blockbuster,' a 'massive scoop,' an 'intense story...sensational.'"
Occasionally, reporters working on stories about sexual violence have reached out to me seeking advice for how to write about the subject. And the advice I offer tends to fall into three general categories:
1. How to conduct a sensitive interview with a survivor that doesn't make them feel unsafe and doesn't push them.
2. Center always that you're talking to a person. Even if reporters want one survivor's individual case to be representative of a larger issue of the rape culture (e.g. campus rape), they have to remember their subject is a person and hir lived experience, not their assault.
3. If they have any doubts at all, if they can't stand behind the survivor 100%, don't use them as a source. Not just because if questions arise post-publication, that can make life harder for other victims and advocates (although that, too), but because it's not fair to a survivor to compromise their trust and safety by putting their story out into the world if you're not going to have their backs.
The CJR report addresses the importance of this pact between survivor and reporter, too:
Problems arise when the terms of the compact between survivor and journalist are not spelled out. Kristen Lombardi, who spent a year and a half reporting the Center for Public Integrity's series on campus sexual assault, said she made it explicit to the women she interviewed that the reporting process required her to obtain documents, collect evidence and talk to as many people involved in the case as possible, including the accused. She prefaced her interviews by assuring the women that she believed in them but that it was in their best interest to make sure there were no questions about the veracity of their accounts. She also allowed victims some control, including determining the time, place and pace of their interviews.This is the responsibility of anyone who agrees to tell a survivor's story: To do everything in one's power to make sure that survivor is protected from inevitable blowback. And, if you can't do that, be prepared to walk away.
If a woman was not ready for such a process, Lombardi said, she was prepared to walk away.
Clearly, Erdely was not prepared to walk away. To the contrary, Jackie was continually pursued even when she would cease communication for weeks at a time. Her story was too "explosive" to walk away from.
Erdely and Rolling Stone were not centering Jackie as their subject, but her description of her assault.
Erdely said she was searching for a single, emblematic college rape case that would show "what it's like to be on campus now … where not only is rape so prevalent but also that there's this pervasive culture of sexual harassment/rape culture."Any campus sexual assault case would have been "emblematic" of the epidemic of sexual assault on college campuses. Jackie's case was chosen because it was worse ("sensational" and a "massive scoop") than the typical case. Because Rolling Stone was more concerned about a "blockbuster" story than a verifiable one told by a survivor behind whom they were willing to put their unyielding support.
Lots went wrong with their journalistic process, but that was only after lots went wrong with their decency process.
That the best they've got in response is "Jackie manipulated us" is a good indication they've got no intention of scrutinizing either process, to make sure this sort of colossal failure does not happen again.
Which should concern anyone who genuinely cares about ending sexual assault.
I will leave you with this: For three years, long before Jackie's story was even published in Rolling Stone, the University of Virginia has been under federal investigation for Title IX violations specifically related to sexual violence. Three years. The investigation is open and ongoing.
Bigotry Pays
[Content Note: Homophobia; Christian Supremacy.]
Last week, an Indiana pizza place who announced they would refuse to cater a same-sex wedding if asked, became the centerpiece of another firestorm surrounding Indiana's passage of a garbage "religious freedom" bill. Many progressives responded with classist sneering, and many conservatives responded by donating to a fundraiser for the owners of the pizzeria, raising more than $800,000.
A couple of points:
1. It's utterly contemptible that there are always people who are happy to make sure that bigotry pays.
2. One of the reasons I argued vehemently against a broad boycott of the entire state is because I knew it would not hurt our conservative leadership. Over and over, I said that plenty of conservative money will flow in from out of state as reward for this shit, because that's what always happens. And the fundraising for this pizzeria is just a small example of that.
3. One of the alternative suggestions to a boycott which was made repeatedly by progressive Hoosiers was targeted funding of businesses who promised to serve everyone and/or organizations in Indiana which are working on behalf of equality. Did any of those businesses or organizations raise $800,000, or anything like it, from progressives who were outraged? Nope.
Once again, conservatives mobilized with their wallets, and progressives supported a boycott that has seen Hoosier businesses who will employ and serve everyone have orders canceled just because they are headquartered in Indiana.
So who's really "winning" here?
In good news, the Indiana Assembly added some language that ostensibly means the RFRA cannot be used to discriminate against queer Hoosiers (and others), but the RFRA still needs to be repealed in full—because there remain exemptions from the amendment for religious organizations, who are still free to discriminate.
And, despite prohibitions on discrimination on the basis of sex, for example, refusing to provide service to abortion-seeking or contraception-seeking women is not generally considered sex discrimination, because the objection is considered to be to "abortion/contraception," not to "women having control over our own reproduction."
There's no comprehensive victory until RFRA is thrown in the garbage where it belongs. But I understand why it seems like a victory to people looking in from the outside, who imagine that these (limited) protections solve the problem, and who believe there was no other way to achieve this important but partial measure besides screaming boycott.
We've still got a lot of work to do, and we still need help to do it.
The Virtual Pub Is Open
[Explanations: lol your fat. pathetic anger bread. hey your gay.]
Belly up to the bar,
and name your poison!
Programming Note: We're going to have a few mods out over the next few days, and I could really use a break, so we're wrapping up early this week, and we will be back on Monday. If you're a person who marks Easter or Passover, I hope you have a nice holiday, and, if you're a person who doesn't, I hope you just have a nice weekend!
Number of the Day
[Content Note: War on agency.]
235: The number of abortion restrictions which have been proposed in US state legislatures since January of this year.
There have been at least 235 anti-choice bills introduced in state legislatures in the first three months of 2015—bills that would place restrictions on abortion providers or erect barriers to abortion access, according to analysis by RH Reality Check.Fucking hell.
Thirty-two bills have been voted on and passed by at least one legislative chamber so far this year; 11 of those have been passed by both chambers, and have either been signed by the governor or are awaiting signature.
Almost every state legislature has been in session this year, and so far lawmakers in 39 states have introduced at least one bill to restrict reproductive rights.
Quote of the Day
[Content Note: White supremacy.]
"Instead of having a problem with Black Girls Rock, have a problem with the White supremacy that constantly tries remind Black women and girls that we don't. Direct your energy towards a world that refuses to recognize our collective humanity."—Bougie Black Girl, in a terrific essay responding to white people complaining about First Lady Michelle Obama participating in the annual Black Girls Rock event.
If you hear "Black Girls Rock" and immediately hear "White Girls Don't Rock," the problem is not with Black Girls Rock. The problem is with you.
[H/T to Mary Drummer. Related Reading: Janelle Monáe at Black Girls Rock.]
Pizza and Progressives
[Content Note: Classism; homophobia.]
So, one of the common responses I'm seeing—mostly on Twitter, although it came up in comments here, too—to the Indiana pizza place refusing service is: "Har har who even has pizza at a wedding?"
Poor people.
That's who has pizza at a wedding.
I mean, some people who have money to spend, but just want a casual wedding, have pizza at their wedding receptions, too.
But.
It's not unusual around here to see weddings, or funerals, catered by a pizza place. Pizza is all that many people can afford.
Weddings are often held in church basements, or the lodges of community organizations, or at VFW halls. Because that's also what people can afford.
Pizza, fried chicken, tacos, mostaccioli, giant trays of roast beef, potato salad, mixed greens. This is a pretty standard menu for lots of wedding receptions, funeral dinners, graduation open houses, church picnics, showers, retirements.
When people can't even afford pizza, we do pot-lucks. Everyone brings something, to celebrate.
That isn't unique to Indiana, of course. It's one of many places across the country where this is part of the culture.
By necessity.
This smug guffawing at the idea of catered pizza is just another indication that people don't understand and don't care about this state. This culture.
And it's many of the same people advocating withholding money from Hoosiers with a boycott who are then turning around and laughing at people who can't afford upscale catering.
Just stop. Please. Stop with the classist shit. It's so ugly.
Progressives should be ashamed of ourselves that the best we can do is laugh and point at poor people.
(And lest one imagine otherwise, plenty of the people whose celebrations I've attended with exactly that sort of catering are queer Hoosiers. This rhetorical buckshot is hitting the very people about whom they presume to care so much that they must boycott our state.)
I was told on social media that this rank classism is not intentional. It's "unwitting." What a neat word. What a useful word to elide what is, in actuality, cultivated ignorance against a "flyover" state not worthy of knowing.
Daily Dose of Cute
Happy Dog is happy. "It's a day!"
As always, please feel welcome and encouraged to share pix of the fuzzy, feathered, or scaled members of your family in comments.
The Wednesday Blogaround
This blogaround brought to you by plasters.
Recommended Reading:
TLC: This Transgender Day of Visibility, Trans Women of Color Educated the White House
Aura: [Content Note: Hunger strike; sexual abuse; misogyny; racism; anti-immigrationism; carcerality] Why Mothers Are on Strike at Karnes Immigrant Detention Center
Gersande: [CN: Online abuse; gaslighting] Flickering the Gaslight: Tactics of Organized Online Harassment
Ragen: [CN: Fat hatred; misogyny] The Fat Bitches Club
Paige: Robotic Bear Hopes to Relieve Hospitalized Kids of Their Anxiety
Anita: The Scythian: Sword & Sworcery
Diamond: "Douglas Family Gold": Gabby Douglas Gets Her Own Show
Leave your links and recommendations in comments. Self-promotion welcome and encouraged.
Two-Minute Nostalgia Sublime
John Mellencamp: "Small Town"
This week's TMNS features performers from Indiana.
