Archive for Politics

Day Late, Dollar Short

d’Fuh?

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) plans to review the Senate testimony of U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel A. Alito to determine if their reversal of several long-standing opinions conflicts with promises they made to senators to win confirmation.

Specter, who championed their confirmation, said Tuesday he will personally re-examine the testimony to see if their actions in court match what they told the Senate.

“There are things he has said, and I want to see how well he has complied with it,” Specter said, singling out Roberts.

So you helped push through a couple of extremist ideologues who turned out, shockingly, to be extremist ideologues…and you’re upset because they told you they weren’t?

Let me put this as nicely as possibly, Arlen: you were the fucking stupidest guy on the face of the planet to believe them. Of course they were going to say whatever they needed to say to get confirmed.

And now the damage is done. Thank you, Arlen. Thank you very fucking much.

Harrassment in an Elevator

Karen of Girls Read Comics (And They’re Pissed) shares her experience of attending a feminist con, and of a brief moment in an elevator when she left the safe space of the con. (Backstory; she is attending a costume party dressed as the Black Canary, which is to say, in a black bodysuit, fishnets, and a blonde wig.)

Until, going to the bathrooms on the second floor alone, I stepped into the elevator. It was filled with men who were all taller than me, and not wearing WisCon badges. They looked surprised and pleased as I got in. And I felt uneasy and self-conscious before I had time to think of why.

“Well, hey, now,” one guy murmured. “Hey there.”

“Yeah,” another chuckled.

“Second floor, please,” I said.

“Hey!” someone else said. “What’s going on on that floor?”

“Costume party.”

“Well, can we go?”

They laughed appreciatively. I said “No.” And I got out.

And that was it. They didn’t say anything foul, they certainly didn’t touch me, and it wasn’t even close to harassment by the standards of our society. So why was I shaky and scared and angry afterwards?

Two things:

1) At the costume ball, my clothing – fishnets, black leotard, blonde wig – was coded “superhero”. In the elevator, it was coded “stripper”.

2) Everyone is conditioned to assess women primarily by how sexually attractive and/or available they appear to be. Making that assessment clear is normal. Vocalizing that assessment is normal. Blaming women for others harassing or abusing them based on how attractive they are or what they were wearing at the time is normal.

If you’re gearing up to say something like “But nothing really bad happened!” or “Well, what did you expect?” or “Come on, weren’t you looking for attention?”, or “They were just being nice!”: don’t.

I know that those men almost certainly meant me no harm; they probably thought expressing a wish to follow me to a party was a compliment. It is entirely possible that none of them have ever imagined being in an enclosed space with a group of big strangers eyeing you up and asking if they can come with you could be a frightening experience. Our culture is set up so that they’ve never had to.

This and like incidents have happened to me, like many women, time and time again: strange men telling me to “smile!”; strange men shouting “Show us your tits!” as they drive past; strange men groping my breasts and ass in crowded train carriages.

(Women also buy into the patriarchal imperative to judge women primarily by their physical appearance, and that is also extremely unpleasant. However, as it is far less likely that women will follow such assessment with rape or other violent crime, it is generally much less threatening when a woman says, “You look like a whore.”)

If a woman doesn’t want to be viewed – for some weird reason – as a sex object, her choices are limited. She can be visibly angry or ignore harassment, in which case she is a FRIGID BITCH who can’t take a COMPLIMENT from NICE GUYS. Or she can be pleasant in an attempt to show them she’s actually a human being, in which case she may be ASKING FOR further “compliments” with her MIXED SIGNALS.

Or she can stay at home.

This is a perfect condensation of female experience and of the threat of sexual violence that permeates women’s lives. It’s so ordinary. The only thing extraordinary is that Karen writes about it, and writes well, and understands what it means. What it means, and the experience, is invisible. Like water to fish. Unless we write and talk about it. And of course, if we write and talk about it, we take the same risks; of being called bitches, being subjected to Denial of Service attacks, being told we’re overreacting, being marginalized, dismissed, or attacked more. Those are the conditions of the patriarchy in which we live.

And yet me must speak, and keep speaking, and speak so often that it is the deniers who sound marginal and meaningless.

More fear-mongering

Today Skeletor Michael Chertoff announced he has a “gut feeling” that we’re going to be hit by terrorists this summer. There’s no specific evidence, he just feels it.

It is obvious to me that this is just another “nexusmoment; a shiny scary object to distract us from the news of the day. Which today includes “testimony” by a former White House aide who will refuse to answer actual questions, at the President’s orders, as well as the news of yesterday’s testimony by former Surgeon General Richard Carmona about how the Surgeon General’s office has been politicized and functionally destroyed.

These items, as well as the increasing bad news from Iraq and the dissent within Bush’s own party about it, are the real “gut” indicators towards terror. Except that this is such old news, such a repeated cry of Wolf, that hardly anyone is even bothering to point it out.

Subgenius Custody Case’s Tragic Conclusion

The Wild Hunt is today reporting that Rachel “Reverend Magdalen” Bevilacqua has lost custody of her son.

It is unclear what will happen at this point, Bevilacqua is mired in over 70,000 dollars in legal bills (click here if your interested in helping her out with those bills), and she may not be able to afford appealing to a higher court. No official statement by Bevilacqua has been made at this time.

My previous posts on this issue:
First
Then
And then
And finally.

Variegated Hardwood Theology

I read this over at Shakesville, and I was going to comment, but then comment became post (as sometimes happens).

We believe in an Almighty, we believe in the freedom for people to worship that Almighty. They don’t. They don’t believe you should worship the way you choose. They believe the only way you should worship is the way they choose. And, therefore — and, therefore, they will do anything they can to spread that ideology.

The notion that “We believe in an Almighty” is so destructive, so harmful, so vile. It is what Chuck Colson thinks.

“We” sometimes believe in an Almighty. We sometimes believe in an Almighty, but a qualitatively different one than the dog-whistle intends us to hear. We sometimes do not believe in any supernatural being at all. We sometimes aren’t sure. We sometimes believe in one, or many supernatural beings who are not Almighty (that is, who is or are not omnipotent).

The varieties of religious thought in the U.S. are vast. “An Almighty” is a bad meme. It is as bad as “Judeo-Christian.” It sweeps vast diversity under a rug that should not be covering the beautiful and variegated hardwood. It doesn’t begin to touch upon who we are as a people. It seeks to restrict us, and it seeks to exclude and marginalize many of us.

Don’t let it. Don’t shrug when you hear these things. Say no.

Say no.

Wicked

We saw Wicked yesterday. We had an amazing experience in pretty much the worst seats in the house. It was fun and funny and smart and touching and wonderfully written and full of surprises. All that.

But it turns out it’s also feminist.

The word “feminism” is never spoken. Indeed, neither is the word “women” except perhaps in passing. No one talks about women or sisterhood or empowerment. Not one bit.

But Wicked passes the Bechdel Movie Test (aka the Mo Movie Measure). The show is about two women (Glinda and the Wicked Witch of the West) and their relationship to each other. Secondarily, there are other relationships, including the Witch’s with her sister and her father, and both women’s relationships with male and female teachers and a romantic handsome prince. But primarily, it’s about the women.

Not to make a point, not to Say Something About Women, but because these are two complex and fascinating characters that carry the show, as complex and fascinating characters can do. And what’s remarkable, what’s practically bizarre, is that a relationship between two fully-fleshed women is so rare that it strikes me as feminist to even see it. (Which is the point of Bechdel’s test.) I mean, I watch these two women on-stage, singing to each other, about each other, and I’m suddenly struck by what an odd thing I’m seeing.

It shouldn’t be odd. It should be human. But there you are.

The Glee of Misogyny

So I watched Olberman tonight. I don’t always watch, and I usually love him, but I have noted a certain misogynous tinge to the show, and geez Pete did I notice it tonight.

Olberman closed the show with a snide story on Paris Hilton’s release from prison and the papparazi frenzy that surrounded it. Which, let’s face it, deserved a snide story. His guest on the topic was Michael Musto. Who quipped “As Martin Luther King said, ‘Free at last, Hallelujah, I’m free at last!'” (Yes, he got the quote wrong, but it was mildly amusing.) He then said,

“He also said, ‘Bimbos belong behind bars.'”

Thud.

Why? Because the media frenzy surrounding a meaningless socialite isn’t funny enough unless it’s misogynist? Because we can’t really poke fun at a woman unless we call her a slut? Because bimbos really do belong behind bars and white men on TV get to be the arbiters of bimbohood?

It’s just not funny if we’re not putting women in their place and insulting their sexuality. It’s just not.

Later, Musto said that such-and-such was as unlikely as “Heidi Fleiss opening a soup kitchen. Or opening her legs for free sex.”

Because sluts are funny.

The thing is, with the Paris news, these guys are delighted because they don’t have to hide it. They have the perfect excuse to trot out all their hatred for the bitchez and the pussy and how dare bitchez have pussy? It’s safe to hate Paris.

But we should recognize that it’s not Paris they hate. It’s women. She’s just a convenient example.

Having a Choice

I had a conversation with my son about abortion.

Actually, I’ve had more than one. We talk about politics, about blogging, about feminism, about all these things. And at some point I knew I had to make the personal political, and the political personal. What he didn’t have, what our intellectual conversations weren’t providing, was a face on the issue, a human, real face.

So I told him. I had an abortion.

And here’s what I said: “I was twenty years old. I had left my first husband and was living in my mother’s basement.”

And he jumped in and said “…you had no choice.”

In that moment, I saw what the face of abortion was to him: It was compassionate to the point of pathetic. And that’s what we do, isn’t it? If we don’t slut-shame, we patronize. Poor sad girls with no choice, nowhere to go, no money. Tut tut we should support their right to make this sad tut tut choice.

And sometimes that’s true. Sometimes it’s the very end of an unraveling rope. Sometimes a life is at stake. Sometimes there’s just no other way.

But what I said was, “No. I did have a choice. I could have had that baby and scraped by somehow. But it wasn’t the life I wanted. I didn’t want to be a girl in a basement with a baby and a shitty job. So I made a choice.”

And see, that face isn’t much there in the abortion conversation. The face of a smart young woman who sees her life shriveling up and says NO WAY. Not going to happen. Not to me. Because I have a choice.

I think my son learned something from that conversation. I know I did.

Cause for Celebration in Massachusetts

Shiltone has the details.

Tough Enough

My favorite passage in Insurgent Mexico is this one, in which John Reed argues the Woman Question with Pancho Villa:

Once I asked him if women would vote in the new Republic. He was sprawled out on his bed, with his coat unbuttoned. “Why, I don’t think so,” he said, startled, suddenly sitting up. “What do you mean–vote? Do you mean elect a government and make laws?” I said I did and that women already were doing it in the United States. “Well,” he said, scratching his head: “if they do it up there I don’t see that they shouldn’t do it down here.” The idea seemed to amuse him enormously. He rolled it over and over in his mind, looking at me and away again. “It may be as you say,” he said; “but I have never thought about it. Women seem to me to be things to protect, to love. They have no sternness of mind. They can’t consider anything for its right or wrong. They are full of pity and softness. Why,” he said, “a woman would not give an order to execute a traitor.”

“I am not so sure of that, mi General,” I said. “Women can be crueller and harder than men.”

He stared at me, pulling his mustache. And then he began to grin. He looked slowly to where his wife was setting the table for lunch. “Oiga,” he said, “come here. Listen. Last night I caught three traitors crossing the river to blow up the railroad. What shall I do with them? Shall I shoot them or not?” » Read more..