My spidey-sense is tingling...
Almost too awesome to be true - check out this special Planned Parenthood issue of the Amazing Spiderman!
We're back, baby!
Wow - it's been awhile. It's like grad school sucked all the blog right out of me (ew?)... When reading and writing are done everyday for hours for school, taking the extra 30 minutes to write for 'fun' starts to feel - well, less fun. And yes, it does too take me 30 old minutes to take a ridiculous public figure, call him/her a bunch of names that are all variations of "Stupid McPoopypoop", swear a bunch of times, USE ALL-CAPS EITHER ANGRILY OR IRONICALLY, throw in a bunch of ellipses...and then [sigh] dramatically. Or something like that.
And it's not like I haven't been ranting and raving the past four months (I don't have the patience or the energy or the stomach to revisit the things that have boiling my blood thus far into 2007, so you'll just have to take my word for it). But instead, I've been having such a good week (sun is shining! Garden is growing! Tuition fees are paid!), for a number of reasons:
-Dearest friend Payton is storing a couple of boxes in my basement, within which are contained 2.5 seasons of Veronica Mars. This is a show I've been meaning to watch for a while, because of the endless endorsements it's been getting from people whose opinion matter to me (okay - mostly Payton and Joss Whedon. But between the two of them, they've pretty much got all the pop culture expertise anyone could need). Anyway, it took me and DD about 10 days to get through all of them, which isn't saying much for me, but DD rarely gives so much as a rat's ass about most TV shows (really, it's just this one and BSG). Honestly, watch this show, it is so freakin' good.
-Despite the fact that being brought into our home is a death sentence for (at the very least) fish and house plants, the gardens are back in bloom this year. Other than an improperly pruned lavender (and possibly a boxwood as well - it's still touch and go) they're looking good. It gives one a feeling of - what's the opposite of shame, again? - to have a green thumb as well as a cold hand of death.
-Rugby season! Now, using only the power of my imagination and my bottomless pit of rage, I will soon be tackling such Jerky McStupidfaces as John Baird and Justice Kennedy, while simultaneoulsy leading my army of 300 Spartans to victory...
[sigh]
Wait - so, pumping out kids isn't the healthiest thing in the world?
This just in from the land of the obvious - larger families are harder on the parents' health than small ones.
I'll wait while you fetch the smelling salts.
[waits]
Ha ha, just a bit of drollness in keeping with the absolute hilarity that anyone ever doubted that having zero control over reproduction is bad for women. From the article:
The researchers, from the University of Utah, analysed nineteenth century data from the Utah Population Database.
They found that the couples had an average of eight children each, but family size ranged from one to 14 or more children.
The data showed that the more children a couple produced, the higher their risk of early death.
The situation was worst for women, because they were affected by the physical costs of bearing the children. [emphasis mine]
Are you listening to this, Jim-Bob and Michelle?
Decemberween Round-up
Having just handed in my last paper of the term yesterday, I'm now trying to make up for the many weeks (and months) of neglect that most other non-school-related parts of my life have been suffering. Such as: talking to friends/family; drinking; watching season 5 of Xena; reading for pleasure; catching up on holiday cheer; successfully waging war on Christmas with wishes of 'Happy Holidays' (wishing people to be happy? Over the holidays? What an evil, oppressive sentiment! Time to go back to my original saying of "Shove a snowball up your a**!" Yes, much better.); drinking (the second one's a pre-emptive drink - it's only been one day, give me some time!) and finally, commenting on a few of the awesome and awful things that have been going around:
Item the first: Ironwoman sent me this vid a while back - coincidentally, the day myself and a fellow grad were discussing this exact topic - we laughed our collective asses off and raised our glasses to toast the destruction of the patriarchy (a fine toast if ever there was one). As much as this particular text is pretty funny, there's still an element of truth there as any woman who's worked in a male-dominated field will probably tell you. Like, say, being a political assistant who has to deal with smug little boys in expensive suits explain Parliamentary procedure to you incorrectly - and then smile at you smugly when you point out they're incorrect like a bunch of freakin' smugwads...you know, if I just had to pick a random example.
Item the second - don't know if this made the rounds outside the merry land of Blog, but my current academic institute was a hot topic for December, when the student union voted on a motion to deny support to anti-choice student groups, either through funds or use of space. Had a lively discussion in my class the next day about how I am ABSOLUTELY 100% SUPPORTIVE of this decision. FACT: CUSA is not the student government or the university government. FACT: A loss of $250 and a couple of spaces on campus is not an attack on free speech. FACT: The student union should stand up for the rights of students; groups that want to make 100,000 Canadian women into soulless murderers, groups that think the intelligence, humanity and morality are only carried on the Y chromosome, groups that would lie, threaten and manipulate women out of their rights, these groups have no place being funded or in any way supported by the students' union. Students shouldn't be supporting groups that then use the money to actively attempt to strip them of their rights; anti-choice groups deserve as much funding as KKK, Nazi or anti-LGBT groups. If they want to spout their hateful bullshit in the open air, they can pay to photoshop their own "OMG, look at this 8-week aborted fetus, yes, it DOES TOO have fingers and toes and weighs 6 pounds at 8-weeks, you baby-murdering whore!" photos.
Item the third - Apropos of nothing - Green Christmas this year, much like almost every single year of my child and no year of my adulthood. Save us Al Gore!
Item the fourth - How to sum up the movie (and, I'm assuming, book) Eragon: "Man, I hate being a teenaged-boy! I wish I lived in a different place, and was 17 going on 21, and had my own dragon that only served me, and magical powers, and a hot girl who was totally into me, and like, fought sorcerers and stuff...that would be soooo awesome."
That is all - happy holidays to you and yours!
Fear of cooties now extending to adults
Alright, so you've got an administering pandering to the fundies, depriving teenagers of accurate sex-ed information, leaving the USA with developing-country rates of teenage pregnancy, encouraging the spread of STDs and who knows what other consequences when you OUTRIGHT LIE to people instead of giving them the facts.
BUT now that's apparently not enough for them. They're not satisfied with lying and endangering teenagers - they want all those young, hot, single adults to keep in in their pants/skirts and stop having all that haawwt sex that makes those fundies green with envy...er, filled with righteous anger.
Listen, sex-haters - sorry that your sex lives are nothing but a endless stream of of awkward, embarassing, semi-consensual fumbling with all your clothes on and an angry sky God watching, but stop trying to make the rest of us suffer.
A much better article on this here.
The Choice of a New Generation
Hey y'all,
Like a lot of folks out there, I'm knee-deep in school and sinking fast...Those of you in school know what I mean, those of you being productive citizens will remember what I mean, so blogging has been a distant memeory for the past month. However, there's a couple of articles that have been stewing in my brain for the past couple of months, and in between bouts of drunken rage at The Man (and also The Man) I've been putting some specific thoughts together on the continued attacks on reproductive rights in the US and around the world.
What's gross and hateful and disgusting is that the fundies hide behind "Won't somebody please think of the innocent blastocysts!" when really, they're not just against that mystical "9 months minus a day" abortion that all women secretly long to have. They just don't see why should women have any reproductive rights at all. Not medical abortion, not preventative birth control, not anything. Because, after all, woman are here for one reason and one reason only - to be passive vessels for manly essence as decided by men who could never get anyone to bear their children voluntarily God.
Hat tip to Courtney who sent me this link which introduced me to that Kah-razy Karacter, Thomas Euteneuer. Like most self-proeclaimed experts on sex, pregnancy and child-rearing, Thommy has experienced none of those things. However, in his capacity as a Catholic priest, he does have the red phone to that big guy in the sky, and therefore feels qualified to dismiss contraception as it "interferes with a woman's duty to produce "a full quiver" of children for God." That's right ladies! In God's eyes, we are all his precious children/children factories. But hey, don't whine to Thommy about it - if God had wanted you to have an autonomous, spiritually-fulfilling life, he would have given you a penis. Duh!
Because obviously women aren't supposed to make reproductive decisions. I mean, when they do, look what happens (hat tip to Christine for the article): the crime rate goes down, thereby robbing fundamentalists of their "oh noes, society is crumbling!!11!1" arguments. And really, anyone who is actually surprised by the fact that women making their own choices is a good thing deserves the heart attack they get when it turns out that those walking sperm-incubators actually have the capacity to make moral decisions.
I mean, really - is this so controversial? Are we really all that surprised that when women can choose when to have children, said children are generally better cared for and less likely to wind up on the hopeless path of crime? And to those fundie groups that wave the strawman of adoption around, let me just point out three things: 1)Yes, there are plenty of families out there looking to adopt - healthy white babies. Which poor, non-white women don't tend to give birth to; 2)There are far more children without families than families looking to adopt; and 3)Denying reproductive control to women in order to turn them into broodmares for middle-class, white, Christian families is a terrifying and inhuman idea.
Anyway - just needed to get that off my chest. Next time I come up for air, I hope to deal with the issue of anti-contracpetion crusaders and how what they really need is a terrific lay with the consenting adult of their choice.
What have they done to my brain?
Normally a two-week (or more) hiatus would mean that I did something really awesome or exciting...alas, that is not the case. I have been, for lack of a better term "buckling down". "Hitting the books". "Being a goddamn student again". Seeing as I have been coasting along in "adult" mode for almost three years now, shifting back into "student" was is proving to be a challenge - you could say I ground the gears on the transmission of my life, and now mom won't let me take the car out again until I learn to use the clutch of life transitions properly. Or something.
Actually, it's not all that bad, and it's downright enjoyable in certain aspects. But there are definitely some notable differences, such as:
The death of the 9-to-5. Okay, maybe somedays it was 8-6, and others it was 9:30-3:30, but the point is, there was a pretty marked distinction between work and non-work, in terms of time and space. I've been struggling to keep that distinction, and the guilt-free reality TV watching it implies, but we'll see how long that lasts.
Everyday is casual Friday! This one's a bit of a mixed blessing. On the one hand, I love wearing jeans everyday. On the other hand, 2+ years of professional work means I only own two pairs of jeans suitable for non-yardwork-related activities. Not that that would have stopped me as an undergrad, but now I am old and uptight, I guess.
People ask for my opinion! Again, a mixed bag. At my job, it didn't happen much, 'cause quite frankly, my opinion was irrelevant. Which it still is, only now I am being graded on it.
Reading is a chore again! The job years were a book-lover's dream - now I am reading 10 times as much, and (of course) being graded on it. I do actually enjoy most of my readings, though, I just don't like the terror that sinks in when I am halfway through one particularly interesting article and realize that I have 12 MORE TO GO IN TWO DAYS, and that MY NOTES ARE INCOMPLETE and dammit if I have to read one more POST-MARXIST CRITIQUE OF ANYTHING I am going to need a WAAAY STRONGER DRINK, which leads me to:
Drinking in the afternoon is okay again! Is it noon yet? Who cares, nobody's juding you! Rampant alcoholism and unabashed binge-drinking is both accepted and expected!
And on that note - why yes. Yes it is past noon. Now if you'll excuse me, I have a date with 200 pages of feminist discourse and a bottle of dry gin...
For the last time, Donald Rumsfeld, repeat after me: Correlation does not equal causation
Like all exciting young sophisticates nowadays, DD and I spend many an evening working on our growing collection of puzzles and watching/making snarky comments at the evening news. Despite the somber anniversary which last night's program covered, the snarky comments flew fast and frequently. Not because there is anything remotely snarkworthy about the events of that day - far from it. But because certain individuals (who are either mayo-for-brains doofuses or who believe that we, the audience, are mayo-brained-doofuses, which is pretty goddamn frustrating either way because I don't want to listen to idiots or people who think I'm an idiot unless there is something in it for me, like unintentionally enlightening irony, or a doughnut) who kept on insisting that all the restrictions on freedoms and human-rights-violating laws were totally worth it because, hey, there hasn't been another terrorist attack in the US, has there?
So let's sum up this argument:
1)Since September 11th, 2001, there have been increased restrictions on freedoms.
2)Since September 11th, 2001, there have been no terrorist attacks on American soil.
3) Therefore, increased restrictions have prevented terrorist attacks.
HEY! This is a fun game! Let me try.
1)Since September 11th, 2001, people are more nervous when they fly.
2)Since September 11th, there have been no terrorist attacks on American soil.
3)Therefore, passenger nervousness has prevented terrorist attacks.
Oooh! What else can we dredge up:
2)Since September 11th, 2001, there have been no Twin Towers in New York City.
3)Therefore, the destruction of the Twin Towers have prevented terrorist attacks.
Or:
2)Since September 11th, 2001, I have aged five years.
3) Therefore, aging prevents terrorist attacks.
But wait! Why stop at violating human rights when you can use a false causality to claim responsiblity for any event and thereby justify any action, as outlandish, unreasonable or asinine as it may sound?
1)Last night, my friend gave me $20.
2)My friend was not attacked by a polar bear last night.
3)Therefore, giving me $20 prevents polar bear attacks.
4)No, I'm serious, send me money right now, or you'll be sorry. Polar bears are really vicious.
5)For $50 I'll throw in comprehensive dragon coverage as well.
6)Look, I've been doing this gratis for years, okay? I mean, come on, you've never been attacked by a polar bear or a dragon, have you? So obviously it's because of me.
7)I accept personal cheques.
8)Or doughnuts.
Death by toothpaste!
So - three flights in two weeks and my brain is about to explode. I can only take so many arbitrary, unfounded and asinine "security measures" before the part of my brain that processes logic and reason (a small node, nestled between the part that produces sarcasm and the part the contains my undying love for Skittles) overheats and shuts down.
So - a bunch of dudes were allegedly going to blow up a bunch of planes using liquid explosives. Now, apparently airline security measures are put in place by people whose scientific knowledge of explosives comes primarily from watching Die Hard: With a Vengeance, and films of that ilk with their totally-stable-separate-but-mix-any-small-amount-together-and-BOOOOOMMM variety of binary-liquid explosives.
But here's the rub - THEY DO NOT EXIST IN REAL LIFE. So what the hell was going in the heads of the people who came up with this "security restrictions"? I imagine it's something like this:
"So, this plot was "near impossible"? Says who? Us administrators of transport security can't listen to a buncha scientists, for goodness sakes! Evolutionary, revolutionary, Big-Banging, godless scientists! What could those four-eyed geeks possibly know about The War on Terror, stuck in their little labs with their little white coats and their little nerdy glasses, just waiting to be wedgied....no, it's far better to just ban all liquids than to have to listen to a bunch of geeks lecture us important people on the actual real threats to planes! We'll just ban all liquids from planes! Oh wait...I think I remember from some high school science class...biometry or something...that people have to drink...okay, we'll ban all liquids except beverages. But those will only be served in cups, not bottles! Because bottles are dangerous. I mean, look at cousin Jimmy - lost two fingers to a bottle rocket!"
I mean - HOLY FUCK. After 9/11, if you wanted to bring an unsealed, unlabelled container of liquid on the plane (like, say, a FREAKIN' water bottle) - they made you take a sip. Ta da! No mysterious liquid here! But now - not only can you not bring ANY liquid of ANY sort into secuirty - you can't even buy a bottle of water at the gate or on the plane. Because, secretly, terrorists have also discovered the secrets of alchemy - sure, Starbucks can sell the contents of a bottle of water - but if they allowed people to take the actual bottle, terrorists could use their evil powers to turn it into - um...that mysterious explosive that only terrorists know about. But fortunately, some quick-thinking security experts foiled that plot by making sure the contents of the bottle are poured into a cup! HA! Take THAT, terrorists! Because even the stupidest morons to ever crawl out of a dog's anus know that you can't perform alchemy in a plastic cup!
Anyway - two last thoughts to wrap this up.
First of all - check out the fabulous piece at McSweeney's, which sums this whole issue up much better than my Skittle-infused brain can (especially the one called Your Flight Three Years From Now - scroll down).
Second of all - I found it very fitting that the hand-drawn signs posted up on the now-dangerous vending machines in the airport read:
Do Not Use
Due Security
We can too handle the truth!
So there!
Let me start at the beginning - or, at least, this morning when I started watching the three-hour black and white epic that is D.W. Griffith's The Birth of a Nation.
I missed the day in third-year film class where we watched this one, but did the readings on it which basically state that everyone, including the director himself, were of the opinion that this film is waaaay too offensive to be considered for public viewing, and really should only ever be shown to film students and academics (not because they are smarter or anything, but because they will likely be interested enough in the technical aspects of the film to tolerate the mind-blowing repulsiveness of white actors in blackface portraying "renegade negroes" (not my term! From the film!)).
So anyway, this film made it to my Ziplist almost a year ago, and arrived in the mailbox last month, and I just didn't have the heart, stomach or patience to watch a 80-year-old racist civil war epic (call me crazy!) until this morning.
Having already seen Griffith's Intolerance (widely considered the greatest black and white film ever made) (yes, I lead an exciting life) I was semi-prepared for this film. Intolerance lacks the blatant racial discrimination, but does get in a couple of good jabs at the suffragettes (notably the title card that reads "When women cease to attract men, they often turn to sufferage as a second choice" which is, I guess, the 1916 version of "Feminists are just ugly jealous hags! They wouldn't want rights and equality and shit if random men shouted obscene "compliments" about their bodies at them!").
So, just how bad is Birth of a Nation? [Spoiler alert - like anybody is going to watch this movie anyway]. Well, let me put it this way - I'm currently at the scene where the good-hearted Southern girl is being chased by said "white actor in blackface portraying a renegade negro" who wants to marry her. But don't worry! She'll soon jump to her death rather than risk bring dishonour to herself and her family by being contaminated by a filthy coloured man! I only wish I was kidding - I also only wish that I didn't know that the KKK will soon make an appearance as the noble protectors of the "civilized white culture of the South".
Watching this film reminds me of watching Leni Riefenstahl's Triump of the Will (yes, same film class). Strip them both of their political, social and historical context, and they are technically masterful - flawless, innovative examples of filmmaking. But you can't really do that - strip them of all context, that is. Riefenstahl's gorgeous cloud montage set against Wagner's The Ride of the Valkyries is breathtaking - but not enough to make you forget that that is fuckin' HITLER'S plane.
So it's an odd feeling watching these films, because academically, it's like "ooh, check out that cut - wow, the lighting is incredible - omg, that wide angle shot!" but intellectually and emotionally it's like, "WTF, the blacks are evil because they want to be equal?" or "Those thousands of people are cheering for fuckin' HITLER!"
And that, my friends, is why these films, and other works like them, cannot be censored. Do they glorify tyranny, racism, xenophobia? Yes. (Am I currently watching a crowd of men in white robes dispense "justice" to that same white actor in blackface? Yes. Is it disturbing beyond words? Yes.)
These types of works are important not for the messages they seek to transmit, but for the message their mere existence denotes: that there were times and places where the notion of human rights was unheard of, where ignorance and hatred formed the root cause of most opinions, where blatant discrimination was not only tolerated, but openly celebrated.
And that is why censorship is more dangerous than lack thereof - because it is too easy to forget these lessons. When you take books off of library shelves, films out of public display, ideas of of public discourse, you hide a very real, very troubling part of humanity's history. Are there people out there who would watch one fo these films and suddenly be filled with a desire to make their own white robes, or don the backwards swastika? Maybe. But there are far more who will learn the very valuable lesson: "Never again."
Let's all give ourselves a little credit - it might not be pretty, it might be unpleasant, and it might be downright disgusting at times - but we can too handle the truth.
Recent Comments