Peaceful for Whom?

[Content Note: Hate crimes.]

I've got a new piece at Shareblue questioning for whom, exactly, this is a "peaceful transition."

Beginning in the weeks before the election, when Donald Trump began asserting the election was "rigged" — a claim he abandoned once he won the Electoral College — there was emphasis on how our democracy survives via peaceful transitions of power from one administration to the next.

But the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate groups and hate crimes, told NBC News that over "300 incidents of harassment or intimidation have been reported following Trump's election Tuesday night," dozens of which NBC has independently verified.

Among them are racist, anti-Semitic, Islamophobic, homophobic, transphobic, and misogynist attacks. Many of them have been explicitly connected by the perpetrators to the election of Trump.

...The transition has not been peaceful for the marginalized people targeted by these attacks.
There is more at the link.

I really can't state this more plainly: Insisting on the narrative that this is a "peaceful transition of power" while hundreds of hate crimes are being reported across the country is dangerous and cruel erasure in service to the normalization of Trump's extremism.

Open Wide...

Yes, Harry Reid.

I never would have predicted that Harry Reid would emerge as our champion in the wake of this defeat, but strange days. It's demoralizing to consider he feels empowered to say this stuff, at least in part, because he's retiring, but, on the other hand, as long as he's saying it, I'm here for it.

Many of our fellow Americans believe that Trump's election validates the kind of bullying, aggressive behavior Trump modeled on a daily basis. How do we teach our children that bragging about sexual assault is abhorrent if we rush into the arms of a man who dismisses it as locker room talk? We failed to hold Trump accountable; we all bear a major responsibility for normalizing his behavior.
There is much more to Reid's extended comments on the floor of the Senate. You can view the entire thing at Shareblue, care of my colleague Tommy.

Thank you, Senator, for leading the way. Now I just hope others will follow.

Open Wide...

Open Thread

image of a red couch

Hosted by a red sofa. Have a seat and chat.

Open Wide...

Question of the Day

Suggested by Shaker yes: "What documentary would you recommend and what is it about?"

Baraka, about which I wrote a bit here.

Open Wide...

Two-Minute Nostalgia Sublime



Leonard Cohen: "Anthem"

[For Shaker JulianaSundry.]

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...

I Mean


[Photo in tweet is a screencap from a CNN broadcast advertising a for-profit CNN book titled "UNPRECEDENTED" about the 2016 election.]

Did these assholes not already make enough money off this election, by giving Trump eleventy zillion dollars of free advertising to pump up their ratings and thus their advertising dollars? JFC.

Open Wide...

Recommended Reading

[Content Note: Misogyny; racism; abuse.]

Nikole Hannah-Jones in the New York Times: "The End of the Postracial Myth."

Melissa Jeltsen in the Huffington Post: "Trump's Election Raises Fears of Increased Violence Against Women."

Ellie Shechet in The Slot: "Pour One out for the Women Journalists Covering Donald Trump."

Paul Bradley Carr for Pando: "Silicon Valley's 'Come to Satan' Moment."

John Scalzi: "The Cinemax Theory of Racism."

Tobias Stone: "History Tells Us What May Happen Next with Brexit & Trump."

And here's my latest for Shareblue: "Senator Boxer Introduces Bill to Abolish Electoral College."

Open Wide...

Daily Dose of Cute

image of Zelda the Black and Tan Mutt sleeping on the couch, smiling
Happy Zelly even smiles while she sleeps.

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

Open Wide...

This Is Not a Consolation


There are people who are currently consoling themselves with the notion that the president-elect is an empty vessel of sorts. They imagine that maybe he won't be so terrible, because he's easily influenced by the people around him.

I cannot state this more firmly: That should not be a consolation. That is a grave concern.

Because, even if it is true, the president-elect has surrounded himself by people with very dangerous and destructive ideas.

Mike Pence is an extreme right-wing ideologue. Rudy Giuliani is an extreme supporter of militarized policing. Steve Bannon is a white nationalist—and a self-described Leninist:
"Lenin," he answered, "wanted to destroy the state, and that's my goal too. I want to bring everything crashing down, and destroy all of today's establishment." ...He included in that group the Republican and Democratic Parties, as well as the traditional conservative press.
If Trump is an empty vessel, these are the people whose ideas are going to fill it.

Some people, many of whom I deeply respect, have posited that President Obama was operating on this premise when he held a perplexing press conference yesterday. That he's hoping to flatter Trump into taking his counsel. That might work in the short-term, but, eventually, Obama goes away—and the people who are left behind will have Trump's ear.

Trump, as I wrote repeatedly during the campaign, is a deeply insecure man. And because he is so insecure, he doesn't have the strength to stand up to confident characters in his inner circle.

There is no solace in the idea he's a weak, empty vessel. There is only more reason to resist.

Open Wide...

On the White Women Who Voted for Trump

[Content Note: Racism; misogyny.]

This is a terrific piece by Amy Alexander on the racial motives of some number of the white women who voted for Donald Trump.

Exit-polling data from CNN tells the tale:

  • Total percentage of white women who voted for Trump: 42 percent;
  • White women ages 30-44 who voted for Trump: 42 percent;
  • White women ages 45-64 who voted for Trump: 53 percent;
  • Percentage of white women with college degrees who voted for Trump: 45 percent.

...The patriarchal motif looms large in attempts to answer the question of what white female supporters hope to gain by voting for Trump. It isn't strictly a zero-sum game of reaping "gains" per se, as much as it is holding ground that some white women perceive as being theirs alone: The white women who approved of Trump as leader of the free world are betting on his ability to preserve their protected status.

Whether they acknowledge it or not, white women do enjoy a higher rung on the social and economic order in the U.S. than do black and Latino women. The perceived "halo effect" of being in close proximity to powerful white men appears to be at the least a subtext of what drove some white women to vote for Trump.

I'm not qualified to make a deep dive into the history of psychosocial causal factors for why some white women apparently still harbor such virulent fear and resentment of black men. And it also must be said that by now, versions of this resentment are directed at black women. This dynamic likely did inform the decisions of millions of white women who voted for the GOP candidate Nov. 8.
All of this is spot-on. (And please click through to read the whole thing.) I also want to add that, in addition to the racism that may have motivated (or at least certainly wasn't a deal-breaker) for Trump voters, a deep misogyny was at work, too.

Some observers have already noted the internalized misogyny potentially at play, including Aphra, but we need to be honest about the overt misogyny expressed by lots of white women, too.

Particularly in the direction of Hillary Clinton.

In my experience, the women who are most likely to express overtly misogynistic statements about Clinton—she's a "horrible woman," a "bitch," and worse—are the women who share the most in common with her: White, cis, straight, Christian, married, mothers/grandmothers, with a career.

Now, to be abundantly clear, I'm not suggesting that women who are nonwhite, trans, queer, non-Christian, unmarried, not parents, and/or not doing paid work have never expressed overt misogyny toward Clinton. Nor am I suggesting that every white, cis, straight, married, moms doing paid work have expressed such.

After all, minus the Christian and parenting parts, I am one of those women. And I've spent as much time as anyone else (and way more than most) defending Clinton from misogyny.

What I am saying is that the women whose identities most closely align with Clinton's generally tend to be the ones from whom I've heard the most vicious naked misogyny. (This is about proportionality; not universality. There's no need to point out exceptions in comments. That would be derailing.)

This correlation is not a coincidence. Women are socialized to relate to each other competitively, and to regard each other with suspicion, as we are urged to see each other as competitors for the same limited resources.

And we are more subtly socialized to regard the women who are the most like us as our chief competitors.

Thus, women who share the most in common with Hillary Clinton are more likely to regard her with both suspicion and disdain. Which inevitably spoils into sour resentment, when she achieves things they have not.

What did that bitch ever do to deserve what she's got?

And one of the things women who internalize these views are disposed to resent is support, because it's one of the resources women, all women, are most likely to lack.

Intersectional feminism is the cure for many of these ills, but, as we are all too well aware, the majority of women are not intersectional feminists. And so, stuck with the divisive misogyny with which our patriarchal culture socializes us, they gaze at an ambitious and successful woman, who is buoyed by millions of enthusiastic supporters, and they boil over with resentment.

A toxic envy that she has something they believe they never will, because such resources for women (they believe) are finite. And she took too much for herself. Fucking cunt.

Worse, they saw her talking about what she would do for people of color, for LGBTQ folks, for disabled people. But what was she promising to do for white women? Lots, as it happens. But none of it sounded like she was promising to protect white women from those other people. (Because she wasn't.)

So here we are, at the intersection of racism and misogyny. Just like a lot of the white men who voted for Trump.

This shit is ugly. And it's going to take a long time and a lot of work to dismantle. But it starts with speaking frankly about what it is.

And the truth is, a lot of white women are rank misogynists. And they voted against Hillary Clinton, in part, because of that.

Open Wide...

This Is Very Troubling


This is extraordinary on a number of levels, not least of which is that Trump's kids will still be running his business.

And, on a side note, even a blind trust wouldn't solve the massive conflict of interest problem, because Trump's portfolio of equity and assets isn't a bunch of diversified investments, but mostly his own real estate property and product lines. Even if it were all dumped into a blind trust, he'd still know where he owned hotels, golf resorts, etc. and where his apparel etc. are manufactured. The only solution to this humongous conflict of interest is complete divestment, which has never been on the table.

Anyway.

It's deeply concerning that Trump would even be asking for top secret security clearances for his children, given the provisions against nepotism in the White House. Especially because there's zero chance he'll abide by existing regulations and norms.

So his kids will be running his private business while also privy to the nation's most sensitive classified information.

This is a major security concern.

It is also, to be totally blunt, a feature of despotism.

And, once again, I'll wonder aloud why it is that this nation's power brokers are taking the position that we must give Trump a chance.


Or, you know, than in Hillary Clinton's entire career. Which you wouldn't know, given the election coverage. During which the media reported endlessly about appearances of conflict regarding the Clinton Foundation, while lazily ignoring the glaringly obvious actual conflicts of interest awaiting Trump if he reached the Oval Office.

Which he will. Since no one with any power seems concerned with raising any of the number of disqualifying issues that have emerged even in the last week.

Open Wide...

Open Thread

Hosted by a turquoise sofa. Have a seat and chat.

Open Wide...

Question of the Day


How are you?

Open Wide...

Two-Minute Nostalgia Sublime



Jason Chu featuring Sarah Jake: "Marvels"

[My profound thanks to Shaker aforalpha for passing this along.]

Open Wide...

The Monday Blogaround

This blogaround brought to you by mint.

Recommended Reading:

Jennifer: What the Protestors Hope to Achieve

Meghna: [Content Note: Bigotry; privilege] Hey White People: You Need to Start Doing the Ugly Work That Isn't Safe for Us to Do

Fannie: [CN: Bigotry; bullying] Election 2016 Fallout Part 1: On Bullying

Ragen: What Do We Do Now?

Cat: [CN: Fat hatred] On Fat Girls and Social Justice

Amie: [CN: War on agency] What Will Reproductive Health Access Look Like Under a New President?

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

Open Wide...

Open Thread: Obama's Press Conference

President Obama is currently giving a press conference about the transition of the presidency. Here is a place for discussion.

To put it politely: I am very concerned about where this is going.

Open Wide...

RIP Gwen Ifill

image of Gwen Ifill
[Photo via Wisconsin Public Television.]

Legendary newsperson Gwen Ifill, a trailblazing Black female journalist, has died at age 61. My condolences to her family, friends, colleagues, and fans.
Ifill, the host of PBS' Washington Week, was a veteran Washington journalist who covered seven presidential campaigns and moderated the vice presidential debates in 2004 and 2008.

Ifill was also the best-selling author of The Breakthrough: Politics and Race in the Age of Obama.

In 2013, Ifill was named co-host of the PBS NewsHour. In an interview with The New York Times, she reflected on what her appointment could mean to a new generation.

"When I was a little girl watching programs like this — because that's the kind of nerdy family we were — I would look up and not see anyone who looked like me in any way. No women. No people of color," she said. "I'm very keen about the fact that a little girl now, watching the news, when they see me and Judy [Woodruff] sitting side by side, it will occur to them that that's perfectly normal — that it won't seem like any big breakthrough at all."
She was really extraordinary, and I will miss her work a great deal.

Ifill died in hospice after battling cancer. I had no idea she was ill; I don't believe it was made public. A number of people (myself included) questioned why she was not chosen as a debate moderator this cycle, and I guess now we know. I am so, so sad that she's gone.

Open Wide...

More of This, Please

Democratic leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi issued a statement on the president-elect's hiring of Steven Bannon as his Chief Strategist:

After winning the presidency but losing the popular vote, President-elect Trump must try to bring Americans together – not continue to fan the flames of division and bigotry.

Bringing Steve Bannon into the White House is an alarming signal that President-elect Trump remains committed to the hateful and divisive vision that defined his campaign. There must be no sugarcoating the reality that a white nationalist has been named chief strategist for the Trump Administration.

Democrats are committed to finding common ground for hard-working families. But we will stand our ground and strongly oppose attempts by this Administration to scapegoat and persecute Americans because of who they are, how they worship, or who they love.
Well. That's a start.

Open Wide...

They Rise and Fall with Us

[Content Note: Bigotry.]

I've got a new piece at Shareblue about the urgent need to cultivate empathy with marginalized people:

[I]n the wake of this election, in which white supremacy, patriarchy, heterocentrism, Christianity, and able-bodiedness were centered — and divergence from those privileges devalued — we must urgently focus on the cultivation of empathy with marginalized people.

And we must do it not just because it is the principled thing to do, but because we are one country — like it or not — and we are all in this thing together. We must demand empathy with us out of self-interest, and make clear that it is in the self-interest of people who resent us, too.

We are all in the same leaky, creaky, unreliable boat. And knowing that means understanding even the most voracious self-interest is best served by egalitarianism: A fortune is worth nothing at the bottom of the ocean, less than a single penny carried safely to shore.
There is much more at the link. And this is, in case it isn't evident, an upturning of the expectation that we empathize with Trump supporters.

And I will say once more: We will be light for each other in these dark times, and I commit to centering my love for you and myself in my resistance.

Open Wide...