Daily Dose of Cute

image of Matilda the Fuzzy Sealpoint Cat sitting in a chair facing one way, while Olivia the White Farm Cat sits beside her facing the other way
Yin and yang.

image of Sophie the Torbie Cat sitting beside Matilda the Fuzzy Sealpoint Cat in the same chair
One normal sized adult cat, and one TITCHY WEE ADULT BABY CAT!

Obviously, this chair is the BEST CHAIR EVER, especially for cats who like to snuggle. One day, I expect I will find all three of them snuggled in it together, and then I will explode from overwhelming cuteness.

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

Open Wide...

In the News

Here is some stuff in the news today...

[Content Note: White supremacy; racist threats] Police have arrested the person who made a terroristic racist threat against the black students, faculty, and staff at Mizzou: "After University of Missouri (Mizzou) students and faculty successfully lobbied to push President Tim Wolfe and Chancellor R. Bowen Loftin out, the victory has been marred by anonymous threats against students of color. 'I'm going to stand my ground tomorrow and shoot every black person I see,' one anonymous YikYak user wrote Tuesday. Another warned people not to come to class. Campus police arrested someone who they say was posting threats with multiple accounts to YikYak Wednesday. ...MUPD released the name of the suspect Wednesday morning. They have arrested 19-year-old Hunter Parks, who is not a student at the university, for allegedly making terroristic threats on social media. He is being held on $4,500 bond at Boone County Jail." I repeat: The biggest terrorist threat in the US is white supremacy. Period.

[CN: Rape culture; anti-immmigrationism] In New Zealand, Prime Minister John Key went on a tirade in which he said that among the New Zealanders being detained by the Australian government are "rapists, some of them are child molesters, and some of them are murderers." He accused MPs who expressed concern about the detainees of "backing the rapists," and several female MPs took objection. "On Wednesday, Green party co-leader Metiria Turei told the Speaker that as a survivor of sexual violence she was deeply offended by Key's remarks: 'As the victim of a sexual assault, I take personal offence at the prime minister's comments, and ask that you require him to withdraw and apologise.' Her comments were echoed by Green MP Catherine Delahunty, who was told by the Speaker to stop and sit back down. When other female MPS, including Labour's Nanaia Mahuta, Clare Curran, and Megan Woods, along with Green MP Marama Davidson, repeated the call for Key to apologise with reference to their own assaults, Carter ordered them to stop... Despite the warning, MPs continued to stand to urge the Speaker to take action. Green MP Marama Davidson was then thrown out of the House, followed by Poto Williams." Got that? Female MPs stood up and publicly disclosed being sexually assaulted and were thrown out for it. Fucking hell.

[CN: Transphobia] This kid is terrific, even though I am so sad and angry he is obliged to say anything at all: "Twelve-year-old Evan Singleton has a message for anyone who questions his transgender status... 'I'd say, 'Well, you’re not the person to tell me who I am.' ...[T]hey have no right to come into my life and tell me what I need to do. That's what my parents are for, and my parents are doing a great job raising me. I do my chores, I clean my room, and I help out. Not to gloat, but I'm a great kid, I'm getting A's and B's in school, and they have no right to come telling us, our family, what to do.'" Kids today. Get ON my lawn!

[CN: Rape culture; child sex abuse; description of assault at link] I have a lot of complicated feelings about sex offender registries—especially around requiring registry of people convicted of statutory rape when the perpetrator is just over the age of consent and the victim is just under the age of consent and asserts it was consensual, and around the fact that registries tend to entrench the idea that children are more likely to be victimized by strangers—but I don't think that the current proposals to basically just abolish the registries do much good in addressing many of the valid concerns about the registries, especially when there isn't much else in place to handle offenders with a high rate of recidivism.

[CN: War on agency; hostility to consent and privacy] Carly Fiorina continues to be terrible: "Republican presidential hopeful Carly Fiorina is lending her support to the latest in a string of perennially unsuccessful California ballot measures to mandate parental notification for minors seeking abortion care in the Golden State. The California Supreme Court struck down a forced parental notification law nearly 20 years ago and similar ballot measures have repeatedly failed to win sufficient signatures or votes. But this go-around, the former Hewlett-Packard chief is backing a new ballot measure in robocalls to Californians." Fuck's sake.

[CN: Guns; domestic violence] Meanwhile: "Republican presidential candidate Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey conditionally vetoed a bill on Nov. 9 which would have banned those convicted of domestic violence and individuals subject to a domestic violence restraining order from owning a gun. In his rejection message, Christie suggested harsher penalties for perpetrators of domestic violence and making it easier for victims to buy guns." Unfuckingbelievable.

Oh, Jeb! You know you're the candidate of the future when you get the coveted Bob Dole endorsement. Woof.

Neat! "Astronomers have identified the most distant object yet in the Solar System. Observations with Japan's Subaru telescope reveal the likely icy body to be some 15.5 billion km from the Sun—about three times further away than even far-flung Pluto. Scientists say their initial studies suggest that the object—catalogued as V774104—is some 500-1,000km across. It will need to be tracked over time to learn the shape and extent of its orbit through the Solar System."

Yessssssssss: "David Bowie Releases Extended 'Blackstar' Snippet: 'Last Panthers' preview offers 90-second glimpse at singer's throbbing, darkly orchestral new album title track."

And finally! Happy Bunny is happy! Aww lol.

Open Wide...

Today in Terrorism We'll Call Anything Else

[Content Note: Terrorism; white supremacy; racism; anti-semitism; Islamophobia.]

The word "terrorism" is nowhere in this AP article about five white supremacists who have been "charged in Virginia with trying to illegally buy weapons and explosives to use in attacks on synagogues and black churches."

Robert C. Doyle and Ronald Beasley Chaney III tried to buy an automatic weapon, explosives and a pistol with a silencer from three undercover agents posing as illegal firearms dealers, FBI agent James R. Rudisill wrote in an affidavit filed Monday in U.S. District Court in Richmond.

Doyle, 34, and Chaney, 33, are charged with conspiracy to possess firearms after being convicted of felonies, according to the affidavit.

An associate, 30-year-old Charles D. Halderman, is accused of plotting to rob a jeweler and use the money to help Doyle buy land and stockpile weapons for "an impending race war," the affidavit says. He is charged with a robbery conspiracy.

...Meanwhile, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reported that Chaney's father, 58-year-old Ronald Beasley Chaney Jr., and 52-year-old Terry Gunn Chaney were charged with drug and firearms offenses after Henrico County police executed a search warrant at a home in Highland Springs on Sunday. The newspaper said Terry Gunn Chaney is "believed to be'" the wife of Ronald Beasley Chaney Jr.

...According to Rudisill's affidavit, Doyle and the younger Chaney "ascribe to a white supremacy extremist version of the Asatru faith," a pagan sect that emphasizes Norse gods and traditions. The affidavit says the FBI learned that Doyle planned to host a meeting at his home in late September to discuss "shooting or bombing the occupants of black churches and Jewish synagogues, conducting acts of violence against persons of Jewish faith, and doing harm to a gun store owner in the state of Oklahoma."
White supremacists are walking into black churches, Sikh temples, and Jewish centers and opening fire, black churches are being torched by white arsonists, black students are being threatened on their campuses, violent incidents of anti-semitism and Islamophobia are on the rise, and our media and politicians still pretend that the biggest terrorist threat in the US is Islamic extremists and that #BlackLivesMatter activists are dangerous.

(And many attacks on abortion clinics, women, LGB people, and trans people are perpetrated by men affiliated with white supremacy, too.)

The biggest terrorist threat in the US is white supremacy. Period.

Open Wide...

Round Four Wrap-Up!

[Content Note: Racism; xenophobia.]

Last night was the fourth Republican debate (only seven more to go!) and I did end up watching it and live-tweeting it, which naturally I deeply regretted, because these bozos are the wooooooooorst!

image of all eight participating candidates, with their own special labels added by me: John Kasich BUH; Jeb Bush ZUH?; Marco Rubio UHH; Donald Trump FUH; Ben Carson GUH; Ted Cruz WUH; Carly Fiorina MUH; Rand Paul HUH?

Here's a collection of 11 allegedly interesting moments from the debate. I guess they're "explosive" by the standards of a flop debate populated by boring drips.

The main takeaway from this debate, aside from the obvious fact that none of these jerkwads should be allowed anywhere near the Oval Office, was that this is a profoundly racist and xenophobic party that literally has nothing to offer but fearmongering and aggression toward any perceived threat to white male supremacy and the American hegemon.

"We must take our government back" was a big theme of the evening. Carly Fiorina explicitly said those exact words, twice.

Taking back the country/government is a classic GOP dogwhistle, serving to communicate to the non-wealthy, non-corporate conservative base that the Republicans will protect them from the emergent menace of liberals, brown people, immigrants, atheists, feminists, same-sex couples, jihadists, socialism, and trans people in their bathrooms. GOP operatives spend vast amounts of time, energy, and money ginning up outrage and fear over imaginary threats, only so candidates can stand at a podium and promise to deliver salvation from the onslaught. It's a grossly cynical piece of politicking, and it's also all the Republicans have got, because they sure don't have any serious policy ideas.

Last night, however, Fiorina wasn't even blowing this particular dogwhistle in the context of a supposed assault on conservatives' moral values and the very fabric of the nation. Instead, it followed critiques of Big Government and profligate spending and corruption and cronyism.

The government, argued Fiorina, like many of her compatriots onstage, is a shambles—and we must take it back!

But...from whom?

Republicans control both houses of Congress and a majority of state legislatures. There is a slim conservative majority on the Supreme Court (especially on issues relating to corporations, lobbying, and federal powers). If Fiorina wants to take the government back, and the conservative crowd cheering in agreement wants to take the government back, that's an indictment on Republican governance.

I have never heard people with as much power as rich white US conservatives whine so obsessively about having to upend the power structure, without a trace of self-awareness or irony.

People who have bought wholesale into the narratives of self-determination, of rugged individualism, of bootstraps, into the gilded myth of the American Dream, have been left with nothing but impotent anger—and, having been encouraged to make no social contract, to depend on no one but oneself, to hoard all the rewards of the success that bootstrapping was supposed to yield and share naught, they've now been left with no one to blame but themselves as it has all gone wrong.

And, weirdly, that is exactly what they're doing. They're blaming themselves, as they cry desperately about the need to take back the government. But they're doing it without acknowledging that they are the ones from whose responsibility it needs to be taken. Their elected representatives. The people whose sacred covenant with its straight, white, patriarchal, Christian Supremacist base has been: Vote for us, and we'll protect you.

Even though voting for Republicans has meant giving away their standard of living, their children's education, their jobs, their civil liberties, their national security, their environment, and their economy—all in exchange for the gossamer promise of a return to a time that never happened in a country that never really existed.

To assuage invented fears.

On this, the non-wealthy, non-corporate conservative base and I agree: We need to take our country and government back. But they clearly don't know from whom it needs to be taken. They are, after all, cheering candidates running for the presidency who want to give them more of the same, under the pretense that they are outsiders to the system—and to the majority ruling that system who promise protection to their base and deliver instead nothing but exploitation and thievery.

(And delivers far worse to the people they scapegoat in order to deflect deserved blame.)

It's a neat trick the Republicans pull. And their base just keeps falling for it. They can't believe there was a scapegoat hidden in that magical hat!

image of a rabbit with a goat's head being pulled out of a top hat by a magician

Honestly, conservatives: What you need to take back is your support of these assholes who are promising to save you in a bid to exploit you. Because at the moment all you're doing is hating all of us right into oblivion.

I will never, ever, comprehend people who would rather lose everything than share a little.

Open Wide...

Veterans' Day

image of three US veterans: a Latina woman, a Latino man, and a black man

Today is Veterans' Day in the US.

Veterans' Day is a weird sort of day for me to recognize, because I don't feel like I'm honoring our servicemembers to treat them as a monolith with an easy catchphrase like, "I support the troops."

I remember seeing a segment on CNN, on Veterans' Day several years ago, about a young man getting the Medal of Honor, who said quite candidly that he was angry to be getting it, because it comes at such a cost. Some generic, feelgood, unqualified, blanket statement about supporting the troops doesn't get at that complicated reality; its vagueness feels like cowardice.

On the other hand, I don't feel like I'm particularly honoring them by pointing out that among the troops are war criminals and thieves and miscreants who harm their fellow soldiers, whose behavior I categorically do not want to support, or by using this day to talk about my objections to the multiple wars and not-wars we're currently fighting, even as I acknowledge the soldiers who honorably staff those wars don't have a choice where they're sent.

It's easy to politicize this day, especially during a presidential election, to talk about which candidates are putting forth meaningful proposals to begin to address some of the ways in which we've let down our veterans, and which candidates are engaging in more of the bellicose grandstanding that suggests we will never not be at war, ever again. But I don't want to do that, either. Not today.

Which always leaves me not really knowing what to say.

So I'll just say this: Thank you to all the women and men who have served this country with decency in a military capacity, who have been willing to risk their lives to defend its borders, resources, and people.

And this: When I write about social justice issues every day, I'm advocating for veterans.

I'm advocating for veterans whose bodies and/or minds were changed by war when I write about disability and healthcare access. I'm advocating for veterans who were sexually assaulted when I write about the rape culture. I'm advocating for veterans who are not allowed to serve openly when I write about LGBTQIA rights. I'm advocating for veterans who are denied opportunity and equal pay when I write about gender equality. I'm advocating for veterans when I write about visibility of people of color. I'm advocating for veterans who are not getting adequate healthcare, who are homeless, who are unemployed, when I write about funding a comprehensive social safety net. Whenever I'm writing about people in need in the US, I'm necessarily writing about veterans.

If we center that idea, if those of us who are not veterans or active military ourselves vigilantly remember that veterans are part of our community, not a community separate from our own, and that when we advocate broadly for social justice we advocate for veterans, every day really is Veterans' Day.

Please feel welcome and encouraged to drop suggestions in comments for how to teaspoon on behalf of veterans today and every day.

I will suggest making a donation, if you can, to the Pets for Vets program, which trains and matches shelter animals with veterans, for companionship and/or service.

Open Wide...

Open Thread

image of a black top hat

Hosted by a top hat.

Open Wide...

Question of the Day

Suggested by Shaker masculine_lady: "What are some of your favorite words, in any language?"

Tintinnabulation!

Open Wide...

Round Four

Tonight is the fourth Republican presidential primary debate, which will be hosted by Fox Business and the Wall Street Journal. That already sounds amazing!

Are you so excited for another presidential debate?! If you are so excited about another presidential debate that you can barely contain your enthusiasm, please check this box: □

Tonight's debate will feature a mere eight candidates on the main stage: Jeb Bush, Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, Carly Fiorina, John Kasich, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, and Donald Trump.

Chris Christie and Mike Huckabee aren't polling high enough to make the cut, so they'll be relegated to the also-rans pre-debate, alongside Bobby Jindal and Rick Santorum.

I have no idea if Jim Gilmore, Lindsey Graham, and George Pataki are participating, and I don't care, because I am definitely not making even a modicum of effort to pay any attention to that sideshow to the shitshow.

Am I going to watch the debate? Maybe! Am I going to live-tweet it? Maybe!

Irrespective of my debate decision-making, here is a space for discussion about the debate, before and during. Spoiler Alert: Donald Trump is going to say a lot of garbage words!

Open Wide...

Shaker Gourmet

Whatcha been cooking up in your kitchen lately, Shakers?

Share your favorite recipes, solicit good recipes, share recipes you've recently tried, want to try, are trying to perfect, whatever! Whether they're your own creation, or something you found elsewhere, share away.

Also welcome: Recipes you've seen recently that you'd love to try, but haven't yet!

Open Wide...

Two-Minute Nostalgia Sublime



TV on the Radio, featuring David Bowie: "Province"

Open Wide...

Quote of the Day

[Content Note: Christian Supremacy; homophobia.]

"Any president who doesn't begin every day on his knees isn't fit to be commander-in-chief of this country."—Republican presidential candidate Senator Ted Cruz. Who, just to be clear, is talking about praying. Ahem.

Cruz made this cool statement at the National Religious Liberties Conference in Iowa last week, "an event organized by extremist right-wing pastor Kevin Swanson, who earlier in the program proclaimed that, according to the Bible, 'the sin of homosexuality...is worthy of death.'"

So, according to Cruz, atheists aren't fit to be commander-in-chief. (Presumably, Cruz believes that only Christians, and a very particular subset of Christians at that, are fit to be commander-in-chief, and just doesn't give a rat's ass that there are other religious traditions in which people quite literally start every day on their knees in prayer.) That's a pretty unsurprising assertion coming from Cruz, who is an unapologetic Christian Supremacist.

Still. Here we are, in the year of our lord Jesus Jones two thousand and fifteen, and it remains utterly uncontroversial among millions of USians for a presidential candidate to say that atheists (and other non-Christians) are unfit for the presidency.

Awesome.

Open Wide...

The Thought Police

[Content Note: Emotional auditing; projection.]

Over the past month or so, I've read so many retreads of familiar handwringing about "thought police" and "political correctness" and how what amounts to asking people to be kinder is having a "chilling" effect on freedom of expression.

This garbage is cyclical. It's grim predictions about how trigger warnings will ruin the world for three months, and then it's grim predictions about how affirmative action will ruin the world for three months, and then it's the thought police, and then it's something else, and then it's back to trigger warnings again, as though the same debate, such as it was, didn't just happen the year previous.

So we're in a "thought police" moment. Or, if you prefer, a "political correctness gone wild" moment.

And so, as a person who expects more, and thus is accused of being the thought police, let me just say once again: I am not the thought police.

Setting a higher standard and encouraging someone to reach for it, urging them not to settle into the well-tread grooves of their socialization but instead interrogate the vast and varied prejudices and myths with which they've been indoctrinated, isn't thought policing.

Asking someone to consider that maybe, just maybe, it isn't marginalized people who are too sensitive, but privileged people who are simply not sensitive enough, isn't thought policing.

Challenging someone to think about things in a way in which they may have never thought about them before isn't thought policing.

The entire rest of the world, with its privileging of men and straight people and cisgender people and thin (but not too thin!) and tall (but not too tall!) and able and healthy white bodies and religious people and people who have sex and people who can and want to be parents and the wealthy and the educated, and all the ways in which the rest of the world facilitates and upholds that privilege, and all the ways in which the rest of the world marginalizes and demeans and treats as less than all the people who deviate from those privileged "norms," and all the ways the rest of the world indoctrinates you into that system of privilege, and socializes you to believe it's the natural and right and immutable state of the world, and all the shills for the kyriarchy who fill the ether with self-reinforcing rubbish on a constant loop so you swim in a sea so thick with the detritus of Othering that you don't even notice it on a conscious level anymore, and all the bullies who manifest to kick you back in line if you do, if you have the temerity to question the message, and all the other bits and bobs of the brainwashing to which we are all subjected since the day we're born as part of scheme, nearly incomprehensible in scope, to ensure that challengers to these traditions are never made, and, if they're born, are squashed with the weight of mountainous tidal waves of blowback in the other direction…? The purveyors of that shit are the goddamn thought police.

And you know what one of the biggest lies they tell you is?

That it's the other way around.

Open Wide...

Daily Dose of Cute

image of Dudley the Greyhound curled up on the couch on his back, fast asleep
The biggest baby.

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

Open Wide...

In the News

Here is some stuff in the news today...

[Content Note: Class warfare] "Fast-food workers demanding a $15 an hour wage walked out in dozens of cities at 6 a.m. Tuesday, kicking off a year-long campaign to muster the political power of 64 million low-wage workers in next year's presidential election. The protests, which will take place in 270 cities, mark the workers' largest show of force in the three years since they launched a series of rallies to call for higher pay and the right to unionize, according to Fight for $15, which represents the workers and is backed by the Service Employees International Union. Tens of thousands of workers and supporters were expected to take part in Tuesday's demonstrations, which began around dawn at McDonald's outlets in downtown Brooklyn, Boston, and Philadelphia, among other locations. Protests in as many as 700 additional cities were planned by low-paid home care, child care, farm, FedEx, nursing home, and other workers throughout the day." I take up space in solidarity with these workers, who deserve a living wage for their labor.

[CN: Rape culture; description of sexual violence] I really fucking detest the compulsive structuring of every story regarding rape culture with a detailed description of a rape upfront, and, unfortunately, you must navigate that potentially triggering structure for this piece on destroyed rape kits, which is otherwise very good.

[CN: War on agency] Goddammit: "A reproductive health clinic in South Bend, Indiana, was forced to cease abortion care on Friday after allegedly violating anti-choice measures passed by the GOP-controlled legislature in 2014. The Women's Pavilion is the last of Dr. Ulrich Klopfer's clinics; his others in Gary and Fort Wayne have both been shuttered over the past two years. Klopfer, who was unavailable for comment, was scheduled to attend hearings on his appeal last Wednesday in Indianapolis, but agreed to drop his appeal after reaching a settlement with the Indiana State Department of Health (ISDH). There are now six abortion providers practicing in Indiana and none in the northern part of the state, according to ISDH."

[CN: Anti-immigrationism] Hoo boy. Judge Richard Posner may have been solid on same-sex marriage, but this anti-immigration bullshit about "pregnancy tourists" is heinous garbage.

Out magazine has revealed its Out100 cover star for 2015, and it is...President Obama. "Ally. Hero. Icon." Okay.

[CN: Christian Supremacy; video may autoplay at link] Gold toilet aficionado Donald Trump has decided he's the new spokesperson for the entirely imaginary War on Christmas: "Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump weighed in on the day's controversy on Monday, floating the prospect of boycotting Starbucks after the coffee giant announced it would abandon its Christmas-themed cups. 'I have one of the most successful Starbucks, in Trump Tower. Maybe we should boycott Starbucks? I don't know. Seriously, I don't care. That's the end of that lease, but who cares?' Trump told a crowd in Springfield, Illinois, on Monday. 'If I become president, we're all going to be saying Merry Christmas again, that I can tell you. That I can tell you.'" OH GOOD BECAUSE I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYONE SAYING MERRY CHRISTMAS IN LIKE A WHOLE YEAR.

Some dude remembers Ben Carson's Yale Psychology Prank Test, so who's the jerk NOW for thinking the otherwise super honest and credible Carson might have lied about something?!

[CN: Appropriation; emotional policing] "The New Intolerance of Student Activism." I really do not understand this reaction to the students' protests at all. 1. It just seems like people are mad at these students for caring about each other and for demanding greater sensitivity. That's...odd. 2. What is the deal with defending Halloween costumes as some sacred goddamn ritual? This is no different than a student policy that prohibits other type of oppressive speech/behavior. But as soon as it comes to Halloween costumes...OMFG WE CAN'T REGULATE HALLOWEEN! WHAT WOULD JESUS SAY?

SeaWorld will "phase out controversial public displays by killer whales" by 2017. Good.

Awwwww: "Danny Boyle 'in grief' after David Bowie says no to musical." Oh well! As much as I love David Bowie, AND I LOVE DAVID BOWIE A LOT, I want him to have complete control over any project affiliated with his work, and I respect his decision.

And finally! "20+ Dogs That Don't Care About Your Personal Space." LOL. Facts.

Open Wide...

The Walking Thread

[Content Note: Descriptions of violence. Spoilers are lurching around undeadly herein.]

image of Aaron, looking sad
"Everything is my fault. I'll sit over in the corner and eat wet cigarette butts."

Did you think we were going to find out what happened to Glenn this week? HAHAHAHAHA OF COURSE NOT! There was no way we were going to find out what happened to Glenn this week! And we're probably not going to find out next week, either, because we still have Daryl to catch up with! So just settle in for MORE FILLER, ya jerks!

(I will tell you what happened with Glenn: NOTHING. Glenn is fine. The end.)

This episode opens back in Aarontown, present day, and everyone is cleaning up the corpses and the EMOTIONAL FALLOUT from the attack of the W-Heads and the deluge of zombies surrounding the encampment, thanks to Grimes' hot plan.

Michonne tells Maggie that Glenn didn't make it back and didn't send a signal. Glenn is dead! (Glenn is not dead.) We hardly have time to purposelessly mourn for Glenn before Grimes comes charging back toward Aarontown, zombies afoot, screaming to open the gate. Deanna stares at him, and I will her to give the order to keep the gate shut, but no such luck.

Grimes comes barreling in, and against a backdrop of snarling zombies smashing their decrepit bodies against the gate, Grimes gives a cool speech about how Daryl, Sasha, and Abraham will totes stick with his excellent plan that will definitely work, and will come in their vehicles and lure the zombies away. (To where? Who knows. If only there were a giant pit to put them in!)

The Aarontownians seem super dubious, but obviously the only thing keeping anyone alive is UNFALTERING TRUST IN LORD GRIMES, so Aaron pipes up to report that the W-Heads learned the location of Aarontown because of him losing his pack like a dum-dum. (Whut? Aren't the W-Heads exiled Aarontownians? They were the group that "didn't work out," were they not? Whatever. This show.) Aaron also tells them that Grimes is the greatest hero who ever heroed, so they all disperse without murdering Grimes. Damn.

Deanna meanders around in a daze. She's given up! Oh noes! The Aarontownians begin to raid the community pantry. They've given up! Oh noes! Deanna's not-dead son gives a cool speech about how they can't just give up, so they agree to not give up. Phew!

Everyone has definitely given up on Glenn, though, and his name is added to an In Memoriam wall. Maggie is all HELL NO, and she starts fixing to go find Glenn.

Aaron, however, sees what Maggie is up to and makes like Grimes. She needs a man to tell her what to do, and he tells her she can't go. She's all FUCK OFF, and he's like FINE I'LL GO WITH YOU THEN, and she's all NO, and he's like MEN IN THIS TOWN DO NOT HEAR WOMEN ASSERTING THEIR AGENCY YOU MIGHT AS WELL BE BLOWING ON A DOGWHISTLE LADY, and she's all OH YOU HAVE A POINT, and he's like I WILL SHOW YOU THE SAFE WAY OUT THAT I'VE NEVER MENTIONED TO ANYONE ELSE IN OTHER SITUATIONS WHERE IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN HANDY, and she's all COOL.

So they go to a sewer grate and go down in the remarkably walkable sewer system and try to find a way out. And naturally they come across some zombies, and Aaron has to kill one that's about to get the best of Maggie who has been a proficient zombie-slayer for years but is suddenly inept when a point about how women are wrongity-wrong about their agency needs to be made, and she insists she would have gotten it on her own, and Aaron is all OKAY PLAYER.

They find an exit, but it, too, is overrun with zombies, so Maggie just says forget it, and then gives a totally incoherent but I'm sure deeply meaningful gibberish speech in which she reveals she is pregnant. AT LEAST SHE CAN DO ONE THING RIGHT AS A WOMAN.

They go back, and Maggie erases Glenn's name from the wall. Aaron tells her that Aaron/Erin works as a boy's name or a girl's name, which makes no sense, because they are two different names. I'm sure Maggie is super grateful for the humble suggestion.

In other news, there's a whole thing with Tig Nocarl wanting to go outside the walls to find Enid, Ron (the older son of Blaura Blinney and Abusive Dead Pete) tattling on Tig Nocarl to Grimes, Grimes teaching Ron how to shoot, and Blaura Blinney giving a cool speech about how the Aarontownians need to deal with REALITY MAN then making out with Grimes ewwww gross.

There's also a whole thing with Doctor Zoey gaining confidence in treating people and then making out with Tara. Cute!

Meanwhile, Deanna is still totes out of it, but then is suddenly overcome by the holy spirit or whatever, and scribbles out some plans for expansion of Aarontown. Then she has a fight with her son, who says she's to blame for her husband's/his dad's and her other son's/his brother's deaths. He seems nice.

But CLEARLY what Deanna needed was a dose of the patriarchy, because now she's all fired up, and she goes medieval on a zombie. But of course she only stabs it in the chest, thus failing to kill it, and Grimes has to show up out of nowhere to finish the job. Covered in splattered blood (which is all over her eyeballs, her nostrils, and her lips, but doesn't make it into her bloodstream), Deanna tells Grimes she wants to live and that she wants Aarontown to survive.

Grimes tells her then she needs to lead the people, and OMFG she responds by telling him that HE IS THE LEADER THEY NEED.

This whole narrative arc about how the Aarontownians are naive dunderheads who don't understand reality and Grimes, with his deep dark familiarity with grim reality, is the only one who can save them reminds me of that old Frank Rizzo quote: "A conservative is a liberal who got mugged the night before," among the many iterations and variations of which is: "A liberal is just a conservative who hasn't been mugged yet."

The underlying idea is that liberalism (and associated ideas like peacefulness and diplomacy and multiculturalism) is an ideology that is embraced only by people who are catastrophically naive, who have never been harmed, who don't understand what people are really like.

Deanna, and the Aarontownians, could only maintain their simple, murderless, female-led ways while remaining detached from reality, and now that they've gotten a glimpse of reality, their only salvation is to join GRIMES GANG.

Nevermind that Aarontown seemed to be doing just fucking fine until Grimes showed up. Nevermind that it's easy to imagine that Aarontown would've dealt with the pit breach by simply plugging the damn hole (as Ethan Embry suggested). THE ONLY WAY IS GRIMES.

Thus, having submitted herself to Grimes and resigned her leadership role to him, Deanna is now fully ready for Grimes-style survival. She bangs back at the zombies banging on the fence.

But whooooooooooooooooooooooooops there is blood leaking through a crack in the wall! Because of course there is.

Next week: More of this garbage.

Open Wide...

Yup

[Content Note: Misogyny.]

So, a lot of conversations about the pay disparity in the film industry end up with someone, usually a dude who needs to 'splain at the ladies How the World Works, saying that the pay disparity is justified because male stars are bigger box office draws, thus justifying their larger salaries. Sure, films are art, but they are also commerce, LADIES.

Paul Feig, trollbuster and director of the all-female Ghostbusters reboot (among other female-centered comedies, like Bridesmaids and The Heat), took this argument head-on in a new interview, and it was terrific:

What are your thoughts on equal pay for women in Hollywood? If you felt your actress weren't being treated fairly, would you take a stand on their behalf?

I'm glad we're having this debate, but there are two levels of it. There's the business side of it where, leaving gender out of it, your paycheck is based on what you made previously. Nobody's going to get an enormous raise unless they prove that they're a box office draw. That's across the board, for men and women. Now if a woman is an equal box office draw and she's being paid less than a man, then that's criminal and I wouldn't allow that to happen.

But it's also a chicken-or-egg thing, because there aren't enough quality female roles to launch actresses to become box office draws, so it self-perpetuates. You're not giving women the roles to become big stars who command big paychecks. It's a bigger problem than a glass ceiling on paydays — we've gotta fix the scripts.

The conversation should be had, but an actress has to be given an opportunity to shine. Jennifer Lawrence should be paid every cent as much as her male counterparts, and probably more because she has proven to be a bigger draw. But Hollywood is not going to be altruistic about anything unless it means they're going to profit from it.

We need more leading roles for women, and they don't have to be "strong female characters," because I hate that term. People don't mean it in a derogatory way — they just mean "good" — but people have weaknesses and vulnerability and insecurity. They don't have to be superhuman, but if they're not completely human and relatable, then that's not a good role either.
Emphases mine.

That is perfect pushback on this notion that women shouldn't make as much because they don't draw as much box office and it's "crazy" to expect that there should be pay parity in a for-profit industry. Address why it is that women aren't drawing as much box office. Go right to the root of the inequity.

Fine: You want women to bring in as much before you pay us as much? Then give us great roles.

Write us great roles, produce great woman-centered films, give us directors who want to evoke tremendous (or cool, or flashy, or whatever) performances from women.

(I love the bonus commentary on "strong female characters," too, and how being one-dimensionally impervious is just as dehumanizing as a misogynist stereotype.)

This reminds me a lot of what Viola Davis said in her Emmy acceptance speech: "The only thing that separates women of color from anyone else is opportunity. You cannot win an Emmy for roles that are simply not there."

Better roles for women. All women. The end.

Open Wide...

Jeb Will Fix It!

[Content Note: Nazi reference; infanticide; anti-choicery.]

Recently, NYT Magazine asked their readers if they had the opportunity to travel back in time to kill Adolf Hitler as an infant, would they do it? The question sparked much debate blah blah fart, so the Huffington Post asked Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush if he would kill Baby Hitler.

When the Huffington Post asked the question, in an on-camera interview filmed on the Bush campaign bus in New Hampshire, the former Florida governor had a clear and quick response.

"Hell yeah, I would!" he said. "You gotta step up, man."

..."It could have a dangerous effect on everything else. But I'd do it. I mean – Hitler," he said, shrugging.
He later tweeted: "Gotta do it."

Yep. Just a grown man enthusiastically talking about murdering a baby.

There are, of course, other ways to answer this question besides enthusiastically talking about murdering a baby. Just off the top of my head: "No, but I would kidnap him and adopt him and raise him with the principles of pluralism and empathy." Kidnapping a baby isn't ideal, to put it mildly, but most people generally consider it to be preferable to murder.

Obviously, Bush hates pluralism and empathy as much as he seems to enjoy the thought of killing a baby, but, you know, he could substitute his own anti-genocidal ideas. Assuming he has some.

It seems like a gimme for a "pro-life" candidate, to suggest adoption as an alternative to killing Baby Hitler. But what do I know. Maybe the question was just too easy.

Perhaps the HuffPo should have asked Jeb Bush if he would support Adolf Hitler's mother having had an abortion. That would have really stumped him. The way the thought of murdering an actual child would never stump a "pro-lifer."

Open Wide...

Open Thread

image of a black cloche hat

Hosted by a cloche hat.

Open Wide...

Question of the Day

Is there anything you prefer not to do alone?

As always, "Everything" and "nothing" are perfectly cromulent answers.

There isn't much I mind doing on my own, and many things I prefer to do on my own, but one of the things I prefer not to do alone is eat. Obviously, since I work at home, I eat on my own at least once virtually every day of my life, so it's not something I'm incapable of doing. But I like eating with someone better, just because I love good conversation while sharing a meal.

That said, if the choice is between eating alone and company who makes me feel like shit about my food choices, I will take eating alone every single time.

Open Wide...

Two-Minute Nostalgia Sublime

[Content Note: There are flickery lights in this video.]



a-ha: "The Sun Always Shines on TV"

Open Wide...