It's Delightful, It's Delicious, It's De-Lovely...

...it's De-lurk Day! We haven't had one of these in quite some time, so all you Shaker lurkers who rarely or never pipe up, don't be shy; say hi!

image of me concealing half my face
Cheeky devils!

And, as always, no one should feel obliged to stop lurking. These threads are a meant as a safe and easy space for people who do lurk to pop in if they want to, and some people have used them as a springboard to regular commenting, but that doesn't have to be the case at all.

Lurking is one of many ways to be part of this community, and if lurking feels best to you — lurk away! lurk away! :)

Open Wide...

#365feministselfie: Week 2

Last week, I noted that I was again going to participate in the #365feministselfie project, now entering its fifth year, and asked if anyone was interested in a regular thread to share selfies. It seems like a weekly thread was the consensus, so here is a thread for Week 2!

A few of my selfies over the last week and a half:

image of me, a fat white woman, making a stinkface, wearing a plaid shirt with my hair pulled up
This weather tho.

image of my socked legs from the knees down, beside Dudley the Greyhound on the couch
It's cold. The only thing for it is snuggling.

image of me with my friend K, a black woman; we are out at a restaurant, and I am holding up a drink; she is wearing a red sweatshirt and I am wearing a brown cardigan over a green cami
With my dear friend K — and a giant Bloody Mary!
(Shared with K's permission.)

image of me from the shoulders up, smiling while holding a Frida Kahlo figurine
With my Frida Kahlo figurine, a gift from the inimitable Portly Dyke. ♥

Please feel welcome and encouraged to share your own selfies in comments, or share your thoughts on the project, or solicit encouragement or advice, or do whatever else feels best for you to participate, if you are inclined to do so!

Open Wide...

Donald Trump Is a Racist

[Content Note: White supremacy; nativism.]

Of course Donald Trump is a racist. He has an explicitly white supremacist, nativist agenda. His moniker for that agenda, "America First," is anti-Semitic. He surrounds himself with racists. He has lived a life full of demonstrable racism, a public record of which begins with a campaign of housing discrimination in the 1970s. He announced his candidacy with a speech that was openly racist. He doesn't even bother using dogwhistles.

That Trump is racist is a fact as obvious and certain as the existence of the sun.

And yet.

Yesterday, after it was reported that, during a White House meeting with lawmakers about "protecting immigrants from Haiti, El Salvador, and African countries as part of a bipartisan immigration deal," Trump asked "Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?" and then suggested that the U.S. should instead get more immigrants from countries like Norway, the political press is behaving as though he suddenly and unexpectedly crossed a line.

The most egregious offender is the New York Times, for which David Leonhardt penned a column headlined: "Time to Say It: Trump Is a Racist." The column itself documents Trump's history of racism, but the headline (almost certainly written by someone other than Leonhardt) is awful — because it is long past time to say it. The headline, however, is also accurate — because the political press has been appallingly reluctant to say it.


And a reluctance to say it would be one thing. But those of us who have been saying it, loudly and unapologetically, for years were silenced — or, worse, demeaned as hysterics — often by members of the same political press now declaring that Trump has crossed a line.


I'm old enough to remember when Hillary Clinton gave an entire speech about Trump's white nationalism, and the political press barely cared.

This isn't about credit. This is about the fact that people have been saying Trump is a racist, and if the political press had listened to us, instead of treating us like fringey crackpots while fetishing white Trump voters and misrepresenting their own bigotry as "economic anxiety," maybe we wouldn't be in a situation where the President of the United States is a malicious, reprehensible racist in the first place.

And that's important. Because the President of the United States being a white supremacist, nativist dirtbag has consequences. And they are rather more serious than the cringing embarrassment the cishet, American-born white men who run most newsrooms feel when the president refers to countries populated with brown people as "shitholes." They are consequences like getting kicked the fuck out of the country you call home.

Anyway. I liked Don Lemon's take. Not coincidentally, I might add. This is how he opened his show last night.

This is CNN Tonight. I'm Don Lemon. The President of the United States is racist. [pause] A lot of us already knew that. [pause]

Today, President Trump, talking with lawmakers in the Oval Office about immigrants from Haiti, from El Salvador and Africa, said, and I quote, "Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?" But you know who he did say he would welcome here? He said the U.S. should bring in more people from countries like Norway.

And CNN is told that he went on to say, "Why do we need more Haitians? Take them out." [pause]

Those comments are frankly disgusting. There's other language I'd like to use, but we are on television. But you know what? They're not shocking. Not even really surprising. Because this is who Donald Trump is. This is what he thinks.
Yup.

Open Wide...

Here Is a Thing That Is Still Happening

Yesterday, I shared an exchange I had on Twitter with Washington Post columnist Gene Weingarten. Today, that exchange has continued, after Weingarten publicly accused me, in a thread on which I was tagged, of being unethical.

Weingarten: In retrospect, I am very glad I did not ask her the question, and actually grateful to her for shutting me down, b/c I have no doubt our correspondence would have wound up in her Twitter feed with me as an evil part of the patriarchy.

McEwan: .@geneweingarten just publicly said there is "no doubt" that I would have made private communications public in order to demonize him as part of a feminist agenda. That is an incredible and unsubstantiable attack on my character. And why? Because I had the unmitigated temerity to ask him why he wanted to speak to me privately.

* * *

It's pretty interesting to me that a guy who asserted his reputation should be enough to convince me to speak to him privately, thus indicating the value he puts on reputation, decided to go after my reputation.

Which, by the way, is personal, since, unlike Weingarten, I don't have the benefit of trading on the reputation of an employer, specifically a major institution like the Washington Post. My reputation is based entirely on my actual ethics as an individual.

Anyway. Weingarten wasn't letting it go.

Weingarten: Ma'am, I had a respectful question to ask her about one of her tweets. Nothing that would have bothered her at all. Nothing suggesting misogyny. This would be funny without the ugly undercurrent which I fear we both contributed to.

McEwan: Hey, Gene. Why don't you take your ire and direct it at the men who have warranted my eminently reasonable caution instead of directing it at me?

Weingarten: And BTW, if I had sent you an objectionable DM I think you'd have every right to publish it. The SENDER of a DM has no right to expect privacy if he does something bad.

McEwan: Whether you think I would have had "the right" to do that is not relevant to the fact that you PUBLICLY STATED that there was "no doubt" I would have published it in furtherance of a feminist agenda. That is an accusation that I am unethical. On no basis but your hurt feelings.

Weingarten: Melissa, this has mushroomed over nothing. I feel bad about it. FWIW, I could not publicly tell you the subject of my question for reasons you would have completely understood, and nothing I was going to ask you was insulting in any way.

McEwan: It has not "mushroomed over nothing." You used my polite request to know why you wanted to speak to me privately to publicly accused me of implying you're abusive; publicly said I insulted you; and now have publicly accused me of being unethical. That is not "nothing" to me.

Weingarten: Okay. Well, this was disturbing. I'm sort of glad we corresponded, though. FWIW, I never intended to stalk, harass, appall or hurt you in any way. I clearly got you angry, and apologize for that. Signing off now.

McEwan: "I clearly got you angry." I'm not angry, Gene. I'm contemptuous.


Given that he'd seeingly flounced, I thought that was it. But naturally, he wasn't done.

Weingarten: Noted! Well, I am not. But I AM shellshocked!

McEwan: Is that your excuse for your unaccountable decision to publicly assert that I would have, with "no doubt," publicly shared our private communications and twisted them to accuse you of misogyny?

To that, I have received no reply.

Open Wide...

Open Thread

image of a pink couch

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

Open Wide...

Question of the Day

Suggested by Shaker cichy_polak: "What is your most hilarious kitchen disaster?"

All I will say is that it was during college, and it involved a small grease fire and me running around in circles shouting, "Get the baking soda! Get the baking soda!"

Everyone was fine, lol.

Open Wide...

We Live in a World Where This Happens


Video Description: Two humpback whales, probably a mother and adolescent calf based on the difference in size between them, gracefully "dance" through the ocean water together, and it is stunningly beautiful. Set to "Le Carnaval des animaux, No. 13: Le Cygne," performed by the Philharmonia Orchestra in London.

Open Wide...

Discussion Thread: Self-Care

What are you doing to do to take care of yourself today, or in the near future, as soon as you can?

If you are someone who has a hard time engaging in self-care, or figuring out easy, fast, and/or inexpensive ways to treat yourself, and you would like to solicit suggestions, please feel welcome. And, as always, no one should offer advice unless it is solicited.

* * *

It has been really cold for fully one million days now, and all I've wanted to do is shove some spicy chili in my mouth to deal with feeling constantly chilly, so, this morning I got up and prepared all the ingredients for my homemade chili and put them in the slow cooker.

And now it's bubbling away and making the whole house smell amazing. I can hardly wait to tuck into this for dinner tonight! Yum!

image of chili cooking in a crockpot

Open Wide...

Kids Today: A Queen at Medieval Times Edition

Outside Chicago, in the suburb of Schaumburg, lies the Medieval Times Dinner and Tournament, which, for its entire 35-year existence, has featured a king overseeing the castle. Until now.

Amanda Marrazzo at the Chicago Tribune: A Girl-Power Moment for Medieval Times, Where a Woman Has the Lead for the First Time.

Somehow the world has not tumbled off its axis! The walls of the fake castle still stand!

MAGIC IS REAL!

Not only do girls like 12-year-old Jadyn Enas of neighboring Aurora love it — "I like the queen better," Jadyn said. "A queen can do the same thing a king can do!" — but boys are into it, too.

"I love it, it's awesome," said 11-year-old Jacob Serrano, wearing his crown from the crowd, waving his yellow flag and declaring the scene before him "revolutionary."

...The updated narrative has aptly landed, if not by design, in a cultural moment of women's marches, #metoo reckonings, and female superheroes — something Jacob's 12-year-old brother Jeremiah also picked up on.

The role reversal "goes along with modern-day people wanting equality for men and women," he said.

It's "important for the boys to appreciate that women can hold same roles as men," said their father, Juan Serrano.
Juan Serrano, you and any other parent(s) your sons may have are doing something very right!

I am completely delighted by these kids' excitement at Medieval Times having its first queen, and fairly giddy reading that, after the show, "boys and girls of all ages posed for photos with the queen." Magic really is real.

I will confess, however, that I did have to laugh at this comment from the dude who wrote the show: "I am proud to say I was working on this show 18 months ago. We are ahead of the trend."

I mean, Pharaoh Sobekneferu was ruling Egypt 3,823 years ago, so the queen trend has been around for a minute.

cartoon image of me winking

Open Wide...

Daily Dose of Cute

image of Dudley the Greyhound standing in the living room, looking at me plaintively with huge, round eyes
"But whyyyyyy can't I have one thousand more treats?
Howsabout five hundred, then?"

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

Open Wide...

We Resist: Day 357

a black bar with the word RESIST in white text

One of the difficulties in resisting the Trump administration, the Republican Congressional majority, and Republican state legislatures (plus the occasional non-Republican who obliges us to resist their nonsense, too, like we don't have enough to worry about) is keeping on top of the sheer number of horrors, indignities, and normalization of the aggressively abnormal that they unleash every single day.

So here is a daily thread for all of us to share all the things that are going on, thus crowdsourcing a daily compendium of the onslaught of conservative erosion of our rights and our very democracy.

Stay engaged. Stay vigilant. Resist.

* * *

Here are some things in the news today:

Earlier today by me: "None of this was what I thought was going to happen." and Malice Is Trump's Governing Principle: Medicaid Edition and Here's a Real Thing That Just Happened.

Charlie Savage, Eileen Sullivan, and Nicholas Fandos at the New York Times: House Votes to Renew Surveillance Law, Rejecting New Privacy Limits.
A yearslong effort by a bipartisan group of lawmakers to impose significant new privacy limits on the National Security Agency's warrantless surveillance program fell short on Thursday, as the House of Representatives voted to extend the legal basis for that program by six years with only minimal changes.

The vote, 256 to 164, centered on an expiring law, Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act, which permits the government to collect without a warrant from American firms, like Google and AT&T, the emails and other communications of foreigners abroad — even when they are talking to Americans.

Before approving the extension of the law, the House voted 233 to 183 to reject an amendment that proposed a series of overhauls. Among them was a requirement that officials get warrants in most cases before hunting for and reading emails and other messages of Americans swept up under the program.

The legislation still has to go through the Senate. But fewer lawmakers there appear to favor major changes to spying laws, so the House vote is likely the effective end of a debate over 21st-century surveillance technology and privacy rights.
"Warrantless wiretapping" was a massive concern during the Bush administration; I can't even imagine how many posts I wrote about FISA during the Bush years. FISA is one of the central reasons that I get extremely annoyed when I see nostalgia for George W. Bush's presidency, and one of the primary examples of how his presidency laid the groundwork for Donald Trump's.

Naturally, this bill didn't pass without a hefty dose of Trump fuckery:


Two things: 1. As Illinois Attorney General candidate Renato Mariotti‏ pointed out, "when judges sign FISA warrants to authorize surveillance, they make a finding that the target of the surveillance was acting on behalf of a foreign power." Whooooooops!

2. Trump subsequently posted a contradictory tweet reading: "With that being said, I have personally directed the fix to the unmasking process since taking office and today's vote is about foreign surveillance of foreign bad guys on foreign land. We need it! Get smart!"

So now we get headlines like this one at Axios: Trump Stuns Republican Leaders with Tweeted Policy Backflips.

Honest to Maude, if Republican leaders still have the capacity to be "stunned" by evidence that Trump has no fucking idea what he is talking about when it comes to any policy ever, they are even stupider than I thought, which I didn't even believe was possible.

* * *

[Content Note: Disablism] Lena H. Sun and Juliet Eilperin at the Washington Post: Trump Administration Freezes Database of Addiction and Mental Health Programs.
Federal health officials have suspended a program that helps thousands of professionals and community groups across the country find effective interventions for preventing and treating mental illness and substance use disorders.

The National Registry of Evidence-based Programs and Practices is housed within the Health and Human Services Department's Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

The registry, which was launched in 1997, offers a database of hundreds of mental health and substance abuse programs that have been assessed by an independent contractor and deemed scientifically sound. Getting a program or therapeutic approach included in this registry amounts to receiving federal recognition as an evidence-based practice. Mental health and addiction specialists say they rely on this database as a key source for finding appropriate and effective therapies.

...Administration officials confirmed that the contract for running the database has been terminated. A new entity will take over the program's duties. A director for that new group was announced Monday, but no other staff is in place. Agency spokesman Brian Dominguez said Wednesday the new entity is "working closely" with other parts of the agency to "institute an even more scientifically rigorous approach to better inform the identification and implementation of evidence-based programs and practices."

Officials declined to say why the registry was suspended, nor did they give specifics about how the new approach will work, when it will launch or whether existing validated programs will be included.
This is terribly concerning, especially since administration officials refuse to provide a rationale for suspending the registry. Fucking hell.

[CN: Racism]


In resistance to the onslaught of Trump administration cruelty masquerading as policy, California and New York, among other states, are pushing back in interesting ways:

Sam Levin at the Guardian: California in Revolt: How the Progressive State Plans to Foil the Trump Agenda.

Bill McKibben at the Guardian: New York City Just Declared War on the Oil Industry.

I feel this state-level pushback is critically important — and yet, at the same time, it scares me, because it's vanishingly unlikely to convince Trump to back off. Instead, he will escalate, which in turn will strain the boundaries of the republic to a breaking point.

We are legitimately concerned about Trump starting a nuclear war; I think we should be equally concerned about his starting a civil war.

* * *

[CN: Sexual abuse; revenge porn] Melanie Schmitz at ThinkProgress: Missouri Governor Allegedly Took Nude Photo of Woman, Threatened to Release It If She Exposed Affair. "A report by News 4 KMOV this week detailed shocking allegations against Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens (R), who is accused by one woman of threatening to release her nude photos if she ever went public with their affair."

As Sarah Felts observed on Twitter: "Greitens didn't deny the allegation that he led a woman into his basement, tied her up, blindfolded her, & then took a naked photo of her to use as blackmail. That's the lede. Not the affair." Absolutely right.

[CN: Sexual harassment and assault] Daniel Miller and Amy Kaufman at the LA Times: Five Women Accuse Actor James Franco of Inappropriate or Sexually Exploitative Behavior. "Tither-Kaplan is one of five women who, in interviews with The Times, accused Franco, 39, of behavior they found to be inappropriate or sexually exploitative. Four were his students, and another said he was her mentor. In some cases, they said they believed Franco could offer them career advancement, and acquiesced to his wishes even when they were uncomfortable. 'I feel there was an abuse of power, and there was a culture of exploiting non-celebrity women, and a culture of women being replaceable,' said Tither-Kaplan, who was one of many women who took to Twitter on Sunday night to vent anger over Franco's win." Fuck James Franco. Seethe.

[CN: Sexual abuse] Mira Sorvino at the Huffington Post: An Open Letter to Dylan Farrow. "I am writing to express my belief in and support of you. ...I am so sorry, Dylan! I cannot begin to imagine how you have felt, all these years as you watched someone you called out as having hurt you as a child, a vulnerable little girl in his care, be lauded again and again, including by me and countless others in Hollywood who praised him and ignored you. ...We are in a day and age when everything must be re-examined. This kind of abuse cannot be allowed to continue. If this means tearing down all the old gods, so be it. The cognitive dissonance, the denial and cowardice that spare us painful truths and prevent us from acting in defense of innocent victims while allowing 'beloved' individuals to continue their heinous behavior must be jettisoned from the bottom of our souls." Sob.

What have you been reading that we need to resist today?

Open Wide...

Here's a Real Thing That Just Happened

The following is an exchange I just had on Twitter with Gene Weingarten, a Washington Post columnist:

Gene Weingarten: Hey, Melissa. Can you follow me for ten minutes so I can send you a DM?

Melissa McEwan: What is the nature of the conversation you want to have with me?

Weingarten: Just want to ask you a question in private. But if that's not okay, no problem.

McEwan: It depends on the nature of the question. In my experience, men usually request to DM me in order to subject me to misogynist abuse, frequently under the guise of "asking a question" about my work, and I am not interested in such an exchange. Hence my question to you.

Weingarten: Do you know anything about me, anything to suggest I would subject you to abuse? Anyway, not a problem. Good to meet you.

McEwan: No, I don't. That's why I asked the question and why I further explained I was asking based on my lived experiences, and not based on any assumption about you. But your reluctance to simply tell me the nature of your inquiry is fairly informative.

* * *

At this point in the conversation, a side conversation began as Rachel Joy Larris jumped in to try to help.

Rachel Joy Larris‏: Gene, Melissa is attacked a lot. She doesn't know you. She's being cautious granting you permission because her experience has shown even "blue checked" men in journalism don't always behave well (or ask good questions) in DMs. I understand your confusion, she's not being rude.

Weingarten: No problem, and I appreciate the clarification. I do find her suspicion insulting, but I've been insulted before and survived.

Larris: I'm telling you she's not insulting you. Her suspicion isn't insulting. It's her experience. I understand you think "but I'm me, I'm not all those other jerks" but she doesn't know that.

McEwan: Dude, try to put yourself in my position. Some guy you don't know personally, who's got a turd as his profile pic, wants you to meet with him privately. And when you ask why, instead of just telling you, he sends his Wiki page as though a professional bio is proof of good faith.

[He never responded to my entreaty for empathy, but continued with the main conversation thread.]

* * *

Weingarten: Okay! Glad to have engaged you. Thanks for taking the time to answer. This is me: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Weingarten

McEwan: I didn't ask for your bio. I asked for you to simply tell me the nature of your inquiry. Is it professional? Related to your work? To mine? Is it personal? Are you in search of a quote? I asked for help understanding why it needs to be a private exchange.

Weingarten: Seriously, never mind. No big deal. Honestly, it's kind of depressing to be subjected to this sort of suspicion. Be well. No rancor intended.

McEwan: Honestly, it's kind of depressing that this is the way a man in journalism responds when a woman asks the perfectly reasonable question: Why do you need to talk to me *in private*? Especially given the last few months.

Weingarten: Ma'am. Please.

McEwan: That you are more concerned about my "insulting" to [sic] you by trying to establish you have a valid reason to want to speak to me privately than you are about the fact that women have to go to these lengths to protect ourselves suggests I was right to ask in the first place.

Weingarten: No problem. I wish you the best.

* * *

And that was the end of our exchange, as I had no inclination to respond to someone wishing me "the best" when what he actually wishes is that I should feel bad for "insulting" him by trying to secure my own safety.

In case it isn't manifestly evident, here is my conundrum: Today, the creator of the Shitty Media Men is trending on Twitter. Just yesterday, the Washington Post, Weingarten's employer, suspended one of their reporters for 90 days, following an investigation that confirmed reports of his "inappropriate workplace conduct," which suggests to me that the WaPo isn't taking this issue seriously enough.

What I'm working with is the knowledge that lots of men in journalism (like in every other field) are abusive and exploit women's trust to harm them, and the knowledge that the employer of a man asking me to communicate privately with him will probably not respond well if I decide to trust him and he betrays that trust, and a lifetime of experience of men presenting themselves in good faith only to take advantage of me, as well as the knowledge that if a woman trusts a man and he harms her, she will be blamed.

I also knew that, even if a man tells me he wants to speak privately for a valid reason, he might nonetheless use private access to me to send me a graphic photo. Of his genitals, or of a violent scene. Or a photo of me that has been photoshopped in disturbing ways. This has happened to me.

So all I can do is ask. Which I did.

And not only would Weingarten not answer me, but he accused me of insulting him even in the asking.

This is what women are facing. And this is how we are routinely treated, even by the men who haughtily assert that they are one of the "good ones," as they dogwhistle at us what bitches we are, for having the unmitigated temerity to doubt them.

Open Wide...

Malice Is Trump's Governing Principle: Medicaid Edition

In yesterday's We Resist thread, I mentioned the Trump administration's threat to make employment a requirement of accessing Medicaid, noting that the entire Republican agenda at this point is just straight-up, brazen, unfathomable malice.

And here we are:


I don't even know what else to say. We are being governed (such as it is) by cruel men. And cruel men given unlimited power hurt people, ruthlessly and relentlessly.

This administration could never have been anything else. It is exactly what anyone paying attention anticipated — and urgently warned — that it would be.

Open Wide...

"None of this was what I thought was going to happen."

[Content Note: Rape culture.]

After Harper's scheduled for its March edition an article by anti-feminist Katie Roiphe, in which she was preparing to out the anonymous creator of the Shitty Media Men list, an outpouring of righteous contempt for Harper's exploded on Twitter — and then the creator decided to steal their despicable thunder, by outing herself.

Moira Donegan at the Cut: I Started the Media Men List; My name is Moira Donegan.

This is what shocked me about the spreadsheet: the realization of how badly it was needed, how much more common the experience of sexual harassment or assault is than the opportunity to speak about it.

...I was incredibly naïve when I made the spreadsheet. I was naïve because I did not understand the forces that would make the document go viral. I was naïve because I thought that the document would not be made public, and when it became clear that it would be, I was naïve because I thought that the focus would be on the behavior described in the document, rather than on the document itself. It is hard to believe, in retrospect, that I really thought this. But I did.

In some ways, though, I think the flaws in the spreadsheet were also a result of my own cynicism. At the time when I made it, I had become so accustomed to hearing about open secrets, to men whose bad behavior was universally known and perpetually immune from consequence, that it seemed like no one in power cared about the women who were most vulnerable to it. Sexual harassment and assault, even when it was violent, had been tolerated for so long that it seemed like much of the world found it acceptable. I thought that women could create a document with the aim of helping one another in part because I assumed that people with authority didn’t care about what we had to say there. In this sense, at least, I am glad I was wrong.
It is a powerful piece, and I implore you to go read the entire thing.

Donegan reveals in the piece that one of the consequences of creating the list and having it explode in ways she did not anticipate was losing her job.

I don't know what her future will be, although I fervently hope that it will be full of opportunities. Were I an editor at a major publication, she would be precisely the sort of person I'd want to hire: Fierce, brave, and a terrific writer.

Open Wide...

Open Thread

image of a yellow couch

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

Open Wide...

Question of the Day

Suggested by Shaker ivyceltriss: "Do you dream in color, any other senses involved?"

I do dream in color, and all my senses are involved! I dream so vividly that I have many times been relieved, or disappointed, to wake up and realize that I was only having a dream and not actually living whatever it was about which I was dreaming.

Open Wide...

Wednesday Links!

This list o' links brought to you by chicken soup.

Recommended Reading:

Anita Kumar at McClatchy: [Content Note: Nativism] GOP Negotiators Say Trump Aide Stephen Miller Is Standing in the Way of an Immigration Deal

Matt Zapotosky at the Washington Post: Mueller Adds Veteran Cyber Prosecutor to Special-Counsel Team

Ayana Byrd at Colorlines: Trump Administration Has Extensively Removed Climate Change Info from Federal Websites

James Grebey at Inverse: [CN: Rape culture; abuse apologia] On Stan Lee: Can't Believe I Have to Say This, But Age Isn't an Excuse for Sexual Assault

Rob Haskell at Vogue: Serena Williams on Motherhood, Marriage, and Making Her Comeback

Ryan F. Mandelbaum at Gizmodo: What the Hell Is Going on with This Comet?

David Shiffman at Southern Fried Science: Dear Shark Man, Do Sharks Fart?

Robyn Pennacchia at Wonkette: [CN: Transphobia] Roseanne Connor Does Not Deserve What Roseanne Barr Is About to Do to Her

Kaitlyn Tiffany at the Verge: Black Panther Had the Biggest First Day Ticket Presale of Any Marvel Movie

Monica Roberts at TransGriot: 45th Anniversary of School House Rock

Laura Vitto at Mashable: Please Look at This New Baby Sloth Named Vivien

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

Open Wide...

Fat Fashion

This is your semi-regular thread in which fat women can share pix, make recommendations for clothes they love, ask questions of other fat women about where to locate certain plus-size items, share info about sales, talk about what jeans cut at what retailer best fits their body shapes, discuss how to accessorize neutral colored suits, share stories of going bare-armed for the first time, brag about a cool fashion moment, whatever.

* * *

image of me in a mirror, wearing a white crocheted top over a pink cami, ankle-length blue jeans, and brown ankle boots
Cheery duds for my therapy appointment!

I really loved the outer piece I'm wearing here when I saw it in a photo somewhere, and I searched everywhere until I finally found it — at Montgomery Ward!

It's at the end of its season, so the bad news is that a bunch of the sizes are sold out, but the good news is that, if it's still available in your size, you'll be able to grab it for a discounted price. I managed to get it at the discounted price while there was an additional promotion going on that lowered the price even further. Woot!

Here, I'm wearing it over this Double Layered Chiffon Cami from Torrid. That color is almost sold out, but if you search for "chiffon cami" at Torrid's site, you'll find a lot more options. Torrid's also currently having a 25% off sale online, btw.

Anyway! As always, all subjects related to fat fashion are on topic, but if you want a topic for discussion: What's in your closet that you wear if/when you want to dress yourself in something cheery?

Have at it in comments! Please remember to make fat women of all sizes, especially women who find themselves regularly sizing out of standard plus-size lines, welcome in this conversation, and pass no judgment on fat women who want to and/or feel obliged, for any reason, to conform to beauty standards. And please make sure if you're soliciting advice, you make it clear you're seeking suggestions—and please be considerate not to offer unsolicited advice. Sometimes people just need to complain and want solidarity, not solutions.

Open Wide...

The What Happened Book Club

image of Hillary Clinton's book 'What Happened' sitting on my dining room table, with my Hillary action figure standing on top of the book, her arms raised over her head

This is the twelfth installment of the What Happened Book Club, where we are doing a chapter a week.

That pace will hopefully allow people who need time to procure the book a better chance to catch up, and let us deal with the book in manageable pieces: I figured we will have a lot to talk about, and one thread for the entire book would quickly get overwhelming.

So! Let us continue our discussion with Chapter Twelve: Country Roads.

* * *

Oh man, this chapter. It is really tough reading What Happened one chapter at a time, while also spending my time documenting the horrors of the Trump administration. Here I am, in one minute writing about Trump's Justice Department stripping the citizenship of an immigrant as part of its heinous nativist agenda, and in another minute reading Hillary Clinton's writing about the reasons she supposedly "failed to connect with white working class voters."

Something I've mentioned a lot when I've been writing on the subject of voters who "eagerly preferred to listen to men who told them what they wanted to hear than a woman who told them the truth" is the way that Hillary's words about coal miners were twisted completely out of shape — and how she was obliged to apologize for telling the truth.

She opens this chapter by talking about that incident, and, because it is such a critical example of how she was punished for her honesty with voters, I want to recount the entire section here:
"We're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business." Stripped of their context, my words sounded heartless. Republican operatives made sure the clip was replayed virtually nonstop on Facebook feeds, local radio and television coverage, and campaign ads across Appalachia for months.

I made this unfortunate comment about coal miners at a town hall in Columbus just two days before the Ohio primary. You say millions of words in a campaign and you do your best to be clear and accurate. Sometimes it just comes out wrong. It wasn't the first time that happened during the 2016 election, and it wouldn't be the last. But it is the one I regret most. The point I had wanted to make was the exact opposite of how it came out.

The context is important. The moderator asked how I would win support from working-class whites who normally vote Republican. Good question! I had a lot to say about that. I was looking right at my friend, Congressman Tim Ryan, who represents communities in southeastern Ohio suffering from job losses in coal mines and steel plants. I wanted to speak to their concerns and share my ideas for bringing new opportunities to the region. Unfortunately, a few of my words came out in the worst possible way:
Instead of dividing people the way Donald Trump does, let's reunite around policies that will bring jobs and opportunities to all these underserved poor communities. So, for example, I'm the only candidate who has a policy about how to bring economic opportunity, using clean renewable energy as the key, into Coal Country. Because we're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business, right, Tim? And we're going to make it clear that we don't want to forget those people. Those people labored in those mines for generations, losing their health, often losing their lives to turn on our lights and power our factories. Now we've got to move away from coal and all the other fossil fuels, but I don't want to move away from the people who did they best they could to produce the energy that we relied on.
If you listened to the full answer and not just that one garbled sentence pulled out of it, my meaning comes through reasonably well. Coal employment had been going down in Appalachia for decades, stemming from changes in mining technology, competition from lower-sulfur Wyoming coal, and cheaper and cleaner natural gas and renewable energy, and a drop on the global demand for coal. I was intensely concerned about he impact on families and communities that had depended on coal jobs for generations. That's why I had proposed a comprehensive $30 billion plan to help revitalize and diversify the region's economy. But most people never heard that. They heard a snippet that gave the impression that I was looking forward to hurting miners and their families.

If you were already primed to believe the worst about me, here was confirmation.
This looms large in my mind as a perfect and terrible example of everything that was wrong with the 2016 campaign. Because it wasn't just Republican operatives who made sure that voters heard Hillary's words stripped of their larger context: It was the political press, and it was also her primary opponent, Bernie Sanders.

It's also scorched into my memory because it's so emblematic of mendacious discrediting campaigns against feminist women. One of the most ubiquitous strategies used against feminist and womanist writers and activists, including me, is to rip words from their context of communicating care for some issue or community in order to imply precisely the opposite — that we don't care about that issue or community.

Hillary Clinton and the Coal Miners is painfully familiar.

And it never ceases to infuriate me that our garbage political press continually plays into this profoundly dishonest and harmful strategy, either deliberately or due to the lack of editors who can recognize the pattern and thus avoid replicating it.

Moving on...

Another passage that really stood out to me in this chapter was Hillary talking about how the election was driven by resentment:
Usually when I meet people who are frustrated and angry, my instinctive response is to talk about how we can fix things. That's why I spent so much time and energy coming up with new policies to create jobs and raise wages. But in 2016, a lot of people didn't really want to hear about plans and policies. They wanted a candidate to be as angry as they were, and they wanted someone to blame. For too many, it was primarily a resentment election. That didn't come naturally to me. I get angry about injustice and inequality, abuse of power, lying, and bullying. But I've always thought it's better for leaders to offer solutions instead of just more anger. That's certainly what I want from my leaders. Unfortunately, when the resentment level is through the roof, your answers may never get a hearing from the people you want to help most.
Yes. I think Hillary was good at validating people's anger, but she didn't express their anger. And that's because of who she is temperamentally, but also because women simply aren't allowed to publicly express anger the same way that (white, cishet) men are.

And, even if we were, Hillary Clinton was never going to be viewed as a sufficient conduit and representative of white supremacist, patriarchal rage.

Which is to her credit.

Open Wide...

Daily Dose of Cute

image of Matilda the Sealpoint Cat, curled up on the floor in a fuzzy little ball
Little old lady Tils, curled up for a nap on a cold winter's day.

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

Open Wide...