PoliMicks - Hey, somebody's gotta bitch, right?

CA NOW Posts

Fri, 09 Oct 2009 18:01:56 GMT

I'm still here.

Thu, 08 Oct 2009 23:37:14 GMT

Most of my substantive stuff is over at CA NOW (http://www.canow.org/canoworg for the time being. In fact, just today I wrote about that dumb ass bill in Oklahoma that wants to put all this information about abortions on the web. http://www.canow.org/canoworg/2009/10/oklahoma-wants-to-tell-the-world-about-your-abortion.html

Yeah, it's pretty aneurysm inducing.

I've also talked about the Lolita Narrative, not the narrative of the novel Lolita, but the mythology of the Lolita particularly in American society that says all 13 year old girls are trying to seduce and destroy older men. And then, yes, I also talked about Polanski. Although I have to say that the single dumbest thing I've seen said about the novel Lolita was when I pointed out that you aren't supposed to sympathize with the lead character (Humbert Humbert), you're supposed to find him icky and creepy, and someone announced that "They would interpret it any way they want to." Ok, then.

BUT I am going to try to hit some stuff over here occasionally, and as always, I'm up for suggestions.

Talk at you soon.

"Not Working to Potential" X-posted from my personal LJ

Mon, 03 Aug 2009 21:06:21 GMT

I have fucking hated that phrase my entire life.

All through elementary school that phrase, or one very like it, graced every single report card I ever got, right next to the straight A's. This confused me highly, if I was getting the highest marks possible, how was I not working to potential?

I mean, yeah, I read a lot in class instead of paying attention, but I still got all A's, tutored other students, helped correct their tests and coursework, wrote puppet shows for them, taught my friend Kay-Ho to speak English (probably better than I do most of the time) after she and her family immigrated to the US from Vietnam. In fourth grade my teachers gave up assigning me to reading groups because they didn't have texts that addressed my college reading level. I just did a whole lot of book reports. I think I have probably written more book reports than any other person on this planet.

So, what the fuck was up that whole "Not working to potential?"

Now that I'm an adult, I still get it. I get my work done, often with hinderances greater than anyone here, at least, realizes, and still, I get "Not working to potential."

Well, yeah, they're right. Being an Admin is NOT working to my potential. I know that. But I'm fucking paralyzed by fear and self doubt.

I know now, through years of therapy, that my parents weren't directly trying to squash my dreams, but rather that they wanted me to be realistic about my chances of making money by writing, or anything else that smacked of flights of fancy. But the end results were much the same. I want so desperately to write and be read, and create meaningful discourse to the world at large, and I'm fucking terrified of getting that larger audience. That I'm going to seem small, petty and provincial... midwestern. Milquetoast, mild, boring, ridiculous...

Getting all those hits on the "Slut" piece at CA NOW both elated me, and scared the ever-loving shit right out of me. Half my brain shouted, "See!! We DO have worthwhile things to say!!!" And the other half kept cringing back, waiting for the blows to fall, waiting for someone to dismiss me, tell me dozens of people had said those things first and better and more trenchantly and who was I to pretend to intelligence or legitimacy?

I know that working here, where the Union makes sure I'm not fired on a whim, but isn't good for a whole lot past that, is safe. I also know that it is making me sick, and feel like a whore. And not in a good way. I spend all my time trying to make someone look better than he is, and I'm starting to really, really not care. Hell, I've been not caring for a while, and it's started to show. But it will never be him, it will always be my fault for not carrying on the illusion and letting everyone think the fiction is fact.

I should not cry at my desk as a near daily occurence.

I'm working on building the guts to just say "fuck it" and walk away to spend all my time writing, and courting those 20,000 people who read my piece and took something away from it, even if it was nothing more than, "Wow, I'm not alone." But it's really, really hard. I don't do well with risk... Even in roleplaying games. It drives Ogre nuts, but when faced with a challenge in a game, I will worry at it forever if he lets me. If there's planning, forget it. The only way he can get me out of it is to force me to make snap decisions NOW. NOW. NOW!!!!

I do surprisingly well under crisis, and tend to court that when I'm bored, frustrated or unhappy. And I don't mean courting drama in light of crisis. I mean, letting work shit pile up until the last minute, and blazing through it in a burst of glorious productivity, then going back to slacking.

I'm not living up to my potential, and I need to fix that. I just don't know how.

I'm still here...

Mon, 27 Jul 2009 16:47:19 GMT

Most of the stuff that would ordinarily go here, I'm posting over on the CA NOW site: http://www.canow.org/canoworg

So, if you miss my angrypants dance, go on over to check it out.

Today, I just want to leave a quick message for the "ZOMG! DETHFATZ WILL KILLZ YOU!!!1!! SKINNY IS SOOOOOOO MUCH BETTERZ!!!1!!!" crowd.

This:

Totally looks healthier than this:

You're totally right.

/sarcasm

New Post at CA NOW

Thu, 18 Jun 2009 17:24:44 GMT

http://www.canow.org/canoworg/

Girls in Geek Culture, with overviews of a Today Show segment that Garpu sent me about girls and videogames. I talk about IGN's District 9 contest that was initially only open to guys. I talk about the LA Times' "Girls Guide to Comic Con" and how barfalicious that was. And I briefly mention Joe Quesada.

Go! Read!!!

New Post at CA NOW

Wed, 17 Jun 2009 16:32:02 GMT

Go get it!! This one is on framing the conversation about rape.

http://www.canow.org/canoworg

THIS!!!!

Fri, 12 Jun 2009 19:11:40 GMT

THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS!!!!!

http://yeloson.livejournal.com/613032.html

A post by a man about rape and the way silence and renaming it fucking sucks:

"See, this shit happens because fuckfaces, like you, like me, like us, don't step up and stop this shit. To be sure- there's 51% of the population who suffer and have an interest in stopping it, but let's be real, we are the ones with power, and privilege and we're either raping or standing by while rape is happening. Worse yet, we're standing by silently while it's happening. We're even defending it.

Every time you do that, you're saying to your mother, sister, daughter, friends, girlfriends, cousins, teachers, students, coworkers, anyone who happens to have that other chromosome? You're saying "Hey, I'd feel -bad- if you got raped, but I wouldn't do shit about it."

See, it's not just castrating feminazi bitches, you smug fucks.

Woman as Perpetual Child

Fri, 29 May 2009 18:09:28 GMT

This post (http://rm.livejournal.com/1646208.html) by rm does a very good job of deconstructing something that's been chapping my hide for quite a while. And that thing is, that in spite of all our strides towards equality, there are still an awful lot of instances where women are still regarded as "less than" men. If you don't believe me, try to buy a car as a couple. Even after telling the salesman that I'm the one with the final say, they still talk to my husband as if I'm not there. If they do answer any questions I might have, they address the answers to him.

Also, getting sterilized as a woman, particularly a woman under thirty in this country. I've known plenty of guys who opted for the snip in their early 20s, who actually got the procedure done with the first doctor they spoke to. Women on the other hand... One friend with a medical necessity for a hysterectomy had to get two medical opinions and psych eval before they would go ahead with it. Does that sound fair or equal?

RM takes it further, though, and right up to the big brouhaha over gay marriage. If marriage is an institution where men "own" women (and lets face it, a lot of these "protect marriage types pretty obviously see it that way), then what do you make of a man who wants to be owned by another man, or women who see no need for this "ownership?"

My room-mate posits that a lot of homophobia comes from a certain type of man's fear that someone will think of him and treat him as he thinks of and treats women. I think this idea has a lot of merit. Particularly considering the previous paragraph.

And if you can't see how those last two paragraphs are connected, read more carefully and think harder.

As much as I love my family, there are certain parts of it who cannot get over the fact that I did not change my name when I got married. Where they see a radical break with tradition, I see an avoidance of more paperwork and extra fees.

Anyway, I'm going at this a lot more clumsily than RM did. Go read her thing.

Meme Roth, poster child of the ZOMG! UR GOIN TO DIE DEATHFATZ!!!

Wed, 27 May 2009 23:56:02 GMT

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/may/24/meme-roth-obesity-nutrition

The Guardian UK has a profile on Meme Roth, who some of you may know from her appearances on the cable news networks telling us we're all going to die from fat.

The profile brings up two very problematic things:

Thing the first is that she likens eating poorly to rape. Yeah, because some rapists use the defense that their victims gain pleasure from what happens to them, rape is exactly like eating an Oreo.

I'll just let that sink in.

Minimizing the severity of rape, believing that fat people don't deserve to be treated like people? Jesus, all she has to do is state that Feminism is dead and I could hate her more than Bill O'Reilly. Holy fucking shit. Really? Eating junkfood is like being raped? Really? Has it ever occurred to you that words have meanings that we as a society have agreed upon, and nowhere in the definition of rape does it include "pleasurable, enjoyable sensation." Dismissive, uncaring and fucking hateful. Wow.

Thing the second is, when the reporter asks her about her own eating habits, she becomes evasive. When the reporter does goad her into answering, she delivers a litany of food avoidant behaviors that would do any eating disorder sufferer proud. I'll let the interview speak for itself:

"What does Roth do? When I ask her if she's ever been anorexic, she gasps: "No! I've never even been on a diet!" So I ask her what she eats in an average day. On this, Roth is reticent. She now runs a private nutrition counselling business, she says, and because of that, "I don't spend a ton of time telling people what I do personally. What works for me may not work for other people."

That's fine, I say, but just as an example?

"I eat beans like nobody's business," she says hurriedly. "I eat more black beans than anyone else I know."

I try to pin her down to something more specific. Let's just do a sample day, I say. What about breakfast? Roth grimaces. "I hate to say this, because I think it's counter to what most people should do, but I never in my whole life have enjoyed breakfast. For me, it doesn't work as well as other things."

Right, I say. So how about lunch?

She squirms visibly. "You're taking me where I don't want to go ... What works for me doesn't work for a lot of people."

Well, you've said that, I insist, so taking that into account: lunch? Roth hesitates. "I discovered when I was in college that I work best when I get a workout in and eat after that. Sometimes I'll delay when I eat until I get a workout in. But I don't let a whole day go by without running four miles."

OK, I go on, but supposing you couldn't work out until four o'clock in the afternoon - would you not eat until after that?

"I might."

I look at my watch. It's 3.30pm. Alarm bells start to ring in my head. How about today, I ask. Have you eaten at all today?

Roth is a little quiet.

"No," she says.

There is a pause.

"But I feel great!"

Food avoidant behavior, only eating specific foods, and compulsive exercising. Yeah, that doesn't sound like anyone I KNOW, er, was. Not in the least.

While part of me still hates Meme Roth for the bile and evil she is spreading, part of me wants to tell her that it will be ok and her family will still love her if she eats. Granted, given the bile she spews about her own parents, I can totally understand why she'd have trouble believing that.

NEWS!!!

Thu, 21 May 2009 23:42:33 GMT

Yours Truly has been asked to Guest Blog at the California chapter of NOW's blog! I'm very excited!

http://www.canow.org/canoworg/

Some of the stuff I post there will be rehased, expanded entries from here. Some will be new.

I'd like to thank tiggrrl for giving me this opportunity to spread the gospel, as it were.

Good Fats -v- Bad Fats

Tue, 19 May 2009 15:37:31 GMT

Here's the thing. I speak at length about how I eat right, exercise, do active stuff and take care of myself. I go to the doctor regularly, all of my numbers (blood sugar, blood pressure, and cholesterol) are great, if not a bit on the low side. I like to work out. I enjoy being active. I am, what is often referred to in the Fat Acceptance Blogosphere (Fatosphere) as a "Good Fattie." I do everything right, short of starving myself, and still don't lose the weight.

On the other side of the coin are "Bad Fatties" who eat nothing but bon-bons and baby donuts (thanks to Kate Harding and the other ladies on Shapely Prose http://kateharding.net/), who never, ever exercise or do anything. Of course, their numbers (blood sugar, blood pressure and cholesterol) are NOT good, and they are OBVIOUSLY dying from their DeathFat.

But how can you, the casual observer, tell the two apart?

You can't.

This isn't City of Heroes/Villians, or WoW or any other MMORPG where people's stats and life bars float above their heads telling you how healthy you are.

Not to mention, IT'S NONE OF YOUR FUCKING BUSINESS!!!! Seriously. It isn't any of your business. Not even a little bit. And I don't care if you HAVE to sit next to them on the bus, or stand near them in a bus shelter, or look at them in public. It remains none of your fucking business. As I've said before, fat people know they're fat, and if shaming people into losing weight worked, we'd all look like Kate Moss. But it doesn't. So knock it the fuck off, asswipe.

Also, just to throw this in the mix there are *gasp* skinny people out there who eat like shit, whose numbers suck, who have diabetes, heart disease and all that crap that is supposed to zero in on the ZOMG FATTIES! And you can't tell by looking at them either.

So, here's an idea. Instead of your default being "Treat fat people like shit because they are OBVIOUSLY killing themselves with their unnatural appetites and willful destruction of the world," why don't you change your default to, "Treat ALL people like human beings regardless of what they look like." That way you don't have to look like an asshole, and I don't have to raise my blood pressure by restraining the urge to slap some sense into that empty melon you have sitting on your shoulders in lieu of a head.

Something that frosts my cookies about the way people frame talking about fat.

Mon, 18 May 2009 23:13:44 GMT

Whenever I talk about being anti-dieting, or about Health At Every Size or about just in general not spending your life punishing yourself for your genetic predisposition to body shape/style/weight... I generally get a flood of comments about how they're just concerned about health, blah blah blah... but if the back and forth keeps going, invariably this little gem will pop up:

"You can't help who you're attracted to."

Ok, to a point you, you can't. However, that isn't at all what we're talking about. Or at least not what I'm talking about. No one said you had to be attracted to fat people. We said you had to treat us like human beings. And if you only behave well towards people you want to fuck, then shame on you. A lot of shame on you. Because that, my friend, is the mark of the asshole.

When I talk about Body Acceptance, or even, Heaven Forfend, Fat Acceptance, the conversation always comes around to people assuming I want them to find me fuckable.

I don't CARE if you find me fuckable. I have people who already find me fuckable, and quite a few more of them than I will probably ever get around to actually fucking, thanks. Some of them find me fuckable because I am fat, some of them find me fuckable in spite of my fat, some of them just don't even care about the fat because they're more interested in the person inside of it than the wrapping.

Is it flattering when the hot 21 year old clerk at Les Schwab flirts with my fat ass just days shy of my 38th birthday? Hells yes! Do I require it? No. It's nice, but if I suddenly became sexually invisible to everyone except the Boy tomorrow, I'd deal with it. While I like being thought "hot," I don't like it enough to go back to the eager arms of my old beau Eating Disorders.

I do weigh substantially more than I did when Ogre and I were dating. And he's ok with that because he loves ME. And because now that I'm no longer starving myself and completely batshit insane from malnutrition, I'm a lot easier to live with.*

*There is a direct correlation between the amount I'm not eating that I should, and the number of completely debilitating crying jags I suffer in a given day.

This Bears Repeating

Wed, 22 Apr 2009 18:56:02 GMT

http://polimicks.livejournal.com/8367.html

Lately, I've been dealing with a bit of a resurgence in classism on several of the elitest liberal blogs I frequent, and I'm getting a little sick and tired of the ignorant po' white trash meme that's been rearing it's ugly head again.

Look, I've said it all before, so I'm not going to write it all out again, but there are a surprising amount of liberal po' white trash in the world, and I'll thank you remember that. If you don't know what I'm talking about, click the link and read the original post.

I say to you, good day.

DNA Exoneration: Sometimes they really are guilty

Mon, 20 Apr 2009 17:53:26 GMT

http://www.kansascity.com/105/story/1128012.html

This article examines the statistical success of The Innocence Project's DNA testing program. 43% of the inmates who request the DNA testing are exonerated by it. However, the figure many people don't talk about is the 42% who have their guilt verified by the testing they demand, which they say will prove their innocence. Also, in 15% of requests the DNA testing is inconclusive, or testable samples have not survived.

Now I've heard people talking about the "successes" of the Innocence Project, people (mostly men) exonerated and released from prison or granted new trials because of their work. But people forget that the other 42% are successes as well. They are proof that in these cases the system DID work. The cops DID put away the right guy.

No one is exactly sure why guys who must know they are guilty request the testing. Perhaps they convince themselves of their innocence so they can sleep at night. Maybe they really just don't see anything wrong with what they did. I'm sure there will be some really interesting Psychology theses coming out of these cases in the near future. Let alone concerning these idealistic young law students and their instructors and mentors who believe these guys when they protest their innocence.

But this is just a heads up, even when the DNA doesn't exonerate the guy, it's still a success.

The Hard Price of Bullying

Thu, 16 Apr 2009 17:34:44 GMT

http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail_ektid78827.asp

The link is to an interview with the mother eleven year old Carl Joseph Walker-Hoover who committed suicide after a protracted campaign of bullying and harassment committed against him by other students at his school. The harassment included anti-gay taunts, although Carl did not identify as gay. His mother called the school repeatedly asking them to do something about it. Their efforts were ineffectual at best, negligent at worst.

As someone who suffered bullying in the form of name-calling, physical abuse, rape and even once being hit by a car, and who is married to someone who got into fights with his bullies every day he went to high school, this story hits me hard.

His mom, unlike mine, actually tried to address the bullying. She called the school repeatedly. And Carl did something in the days just prior to his suicide that many victims of bullies are encouraged to do: He confronted one of his bullies. And then killed himself less than a week later.

This year's Day of Silence (http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail_ektid78827.asp) falls on what would have been Carl's 12th birthday. As such, many people are dedicating the Day of Silence to Carl. The Day of Silence site talks about the whys of it and gives ideas for following it, including a Twitter feed.

Maybe there will be a more substantive post on bullying later, but this is a little too close to home for right now.

Crime Dramas: The new fairy tales

Tue, 24 Mar 2009 01:53:21 GMT

Much to Ogre's annoyance, I love crime dramas: Law & Order (all incarnations), CSI, NCIS, Without a Trace. I've even started watching CSI: NY and CSI: Miami.

There's something very reassuring about these shows, where nine times out of ten, the good guys (with the exception of the occasional corrupt cop storyline, the cops ARE the good guys) catch the bad guys and put them away. The formula is pretty simple: Something awful happens, usually murder, frequently rape and murder, occasionally rape and attempted murder, a team of highly trained investigators move in, find and process evidence with varying degrees of realism, there's a "twist" and then the bad guys are apprehended. Periodically, instances of power and privilege buying someone out of their just desserts happen, but soon thereafter they will either commit another crime, resulting in an ironclad conviction, or someone kills them, jusitifiably, and the audience sighs with relief and vindication.

There are a score of problems with these shows. I won't get into the procedural errors even I can spot. Or the improbable technology. Ok, maybe I'll talk about that in a minute.

What I really want to talk about is the mythologizing of crime that is harmful to the perception of people toward crimes and the victims.

The majority of rapes, murders , assaults and kidnappings are committed by people who know the victim. By far the majority of rapes are committed by someone the victim knew, and knew well. However on these shows the majority of rapes depicted are stranger rapes. Most actual kidnappings are committed by a non-custodial parent or other relative. However, on these shows, the majority of kidnappings are committed by strangers for ransom. And, once again, most people are assaulted or murdered by someone they knew... Granted, about half of the murders in these shows are by co-conspirators, but there is a marked lack of spousal or familial murder, or other acquaintance killings.

These shows also show detectives as automatically believing rape victims and investigating as eagerly as they would a murder or any other crime. As the stories of most rape victims will tell you, this is usually not the case. Rape victims are frequently disbelieved by police, if not actively discouraged from pressing charges. Rape kits, if they are collected, are frequently unprocessed, as in several counties in California.*

Also, there's always at least one character who is more than willing to trot out the victim-blaming, and while their partner or other ancillary character will call them out on it, you will note that they are rarely convinced.

And, above all, they show us that cops can be trusted if you're innocent. Ok, maybe it's because I grew up not rich, but I find trusting the police to do the right thing instead of the easy thing in most cases to be incredibly naive. Seriously. They're people, and like most people, they want to get their shit done, clear cases and not have to deal with your whiny civilian ass. As such, mistakes will be made. Probably not with any great animosity in many cases, which may or may not be worse, honestly. I think it's easier to combat directed animosity as opposed to indifferent, aimless incompetence.

These shows provide a very comforting version of the legal system in this country. However, it is also a very misleading vision of the legal system in this country. Mistakes are made, justice is not colorblind, and cops are just people, sometimes corrupt and powerhungry people with a score of prejudices, and sometimes just people looking for the easy way through their job.

Now, about that technology. Most of the Law & Order franchises, and two of the three CSI shows have fairly realistic technology, with only occasional bursts of science fiction. Granted, every time they get a DNA match within an hour, it makes me snort. And the nearly instantaneous fingerprint recognition is pretty funny. Now, CSI: Miami, however... I don't care how frequently they do crossover shows with the other CSI's, I am convinced that CSI: Miami is actually a science fiction show, and I base this on their technology. Technology, which at this time does not exist. In addition to super fast DNA tests, they also have the amazing huge clear, glass, touch screen displays, and why the hell is everyone so fucking pretty?

If you watch these shows, all CSI's work in large airy facilities and are all incredibly hot, instead of working in rooms painted hospital green and about 40lbs overweight from living out of vending machines.

Yet, I still watch them.

Yeah, I still like fairy tales.

*http://www.msmagazine.com/winter2009/RapeBacklog.asp

On Dworkin and all heterosexual sex as rape.

Fri, 20 Mar 2009 18:22:37 GMT

First, I would like to say that the quote about heterosexual sex being rape is ALWAYS taken out of context, and cited wrongly. She did not call it rape, she said it was coercive in nature. I understand what Dworkin was trying to say, however, I feel that she is A. wrong and B. saying it badly.

The problem with the idea of the inequalities between the genders leading to a power imbalance that means that women can never fully freely consent is that it denies women the agency of their own sexuality.

Ok, that's a little "academic speaky" even for me.

Dworkin, in her book Intercourse, posited that because men hold the bulk of power in our society as it currently stands, that women, as an underclass, could not fully be said to consent because so much of our identity/survival is dependent on some man somewhere, and that traditional heterosexual sex roles were an extension of this inequality. Or at least this is what I take away from it.

Yes, I totally think this is bullshit.

Having been raped, and having consented freely and enthusiastically to sex, I can tell you that I am WELL aware of the difference.

Not to mention, that to believe this is to deny women their own sexual agency.

And as I've said before, I no more need idealogical young prunes telling me how to express my sexuality than I need conservative old prunes telling me how to express my sexuality. Slut-shaming women in the name of liberating women is still slut-shaming them. And I don't care if you "have my best interests at heart" I don't need your patronizing bullshit, and neither does anyone else.

If...

Wed, 18 Mar 2009 05:03:30 GMT

If you have ever said, in response to the abortion debate, "She could just give up the baby," READ THIS NOW: http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/03/breaking-silence-on-living-pro-lifers.html#disqus_thread

This is the story of a birth mother. No she doesn't speak for all birth mothers, but judging by the comments by other birth mothers in the comments, she speaks for an awful lot of them.

I long maintained that if I got pregnant, I would abort. I meant it. I never understood how anyone thought I, who sobbed uncontrollably when giving away kittens I'd bottle-raised, could possibly carry a life inside me for nine months and then just give it away. I was also smart enough to know that I am unsuited to parenthood. I can barely deal with disciplining my cats, kids...? No.

If you have ever believed that pro-life bullshit about how damaging abortion is to a woman, without ever thinking about how terrible adoption might be for the birth mother, READ IT NOW.

I'm just going to shut up now, I can't really do it justice. Just, go read it.

X-posted at Sirriamnis.

I know that not all Catholics are inflexible douchebags, but this...

Thu, 05 Mar 2009 18:45:50 GMT

http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/03/quote-of-day_05.html#disqus_thread
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29515505/ *

A lawyer for an Archiocese in Brazil said they consider it murder, that a judge granted a NINE YEAR OLD GIRL an abortion because she was raped by her stepfather and her uterus is too small to contain one fetus. She is pregnant with twins. Attempting to carry those babies to term would kill her.

So let me hit the highlights here:
NINE YEARS OLD
RAPE VICTIM
BIOLOGICALLY UNABLE TO SAFELY BEAR TO TERM

What part of HAVING THOSE BABIES WILL KILL HER DO YOU DOUCHEFUCKING ASSBAGS NOT GET?!?!?!?!?!

I don't often wish harm on other people, seriously, I don't. But in this case, I hope their penises fall off so they don't impregnate anyone else with their EPIC LEVELS OF CRUEL STUPIDITY AND SHEER LACK OF HUMANITY!

*I also love how she's an "alleged rape victim" in the MSNBC article. Sorry, last I checked children couldn't legally consent, and SHE'S NINE FUCKING YEARS OLD YOU MISOGYNIST ASSHATS!!!!!!!!!

Faith in humanity, falling.

ETA: And I'm assured that this article (which is in Portuguese I believe) http://g1.globo.com/Noticias/Brasil/0,,MUL1028529-5598,00-ARCEBISPO+EXCOMUNGA+MEDICOS+E+PARENTES+DE+MENINA+QUE+FEZ+ABORTO.html states that the Archbishop then excommunicated the parents of the child and the doctor who performed the abortion.

Something I've been meaning to talk about for awhile.

Wed, 04 Mar 2009 20:42:40 GMT

http://angeratthestupid.wordpress.com/2009/03/04/misogynist-nerds/

Anger at the Stupid, a new blog I just found, names the problem pretty well.

Basically the sloppy, disheveled, misogynist douchebag nerd, who will whine and whine and whine about how the girls he's attracted to are shallow, materialistic whores because they want nothing to do with him because he hasn't got money or isn't good looking, or whatever...

HOWEVER, when someone points out that there are girls who do find him attractive and share his hobbies, he will scornfully dismiss them as "Fat and Ugly" or otherwise "not his type." And if confronted on this will then expound on how you can't help who you're attracted to.

So, when hot girls aren't attracted to him they're shallow, materialistic whores who don't know what they're missing.

But when he isn't attracted to girls who are available and possibly interested in him, it's because "you can't help who you're attracted to."

Yeah, fuck you, Captain Double Standard.

Seriously.

And every time I talk about a "hot" nerd guy (say, Vin Diesel) in the GGR colulmns I catch a ration of shit for making real geek guys feel bad, because I'm all about the pretty. But really, if you've met the Husband and I, you know that he doesn't look anything like Vin Diesel, and to me he is the most beautiful man in the world, because he's smart, funny and just all around awesome. Would I like to fuck Vin Diesel? Yes. Duh. Would I trade him for the Husband? Not in a million years.

I'll probably post more on this later, but I wanted to get this out before I exploded.

Relapsing

Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:35:49 GMT

It's not drugs, or alcohol.

It's disordered eating.

Whenever I get stressed, I stop eating. A lot of eating disorder biographies will tell you that it's about control, about being able to control one thing in a world that is completely outside your control. But really, it's about punishment. Things aren't going so well, you can't be as perfect as you think you should be, so you punish yourself. My therapist helped me see past the "control" lie. Because that's what it is. It's a lie people with disordered eating tell themselves so they don't have to admit that what they are really doing is punishing themselves.

It's an illusion of control that does double-duty by punishing you for your evil, unnatural appetites.

And I've had my problems with other things like drugs and alcohol. But when I'm stressed, I can avoid those things. I haven't done drugs in so long, I think I've forgotten how. And as for alcohol, I know that when I'm like this, I don't go near it. I don't even look at it.

But not eating, as a woman, is an activity that is praised in this society. People reward you when you're punishing yourself. They tell you how much strength and will-power you have, pretty much right up to the point your hair starts falling out, and for some people, they'll keep on with it even then. Or, even better, tell you that you still have a ways to go.

Honestly, giving up dieting and starving myself is still harder than any other addiction I've ever given up. Because there is so much positive feedback involved. And there is so much condemnation for not doing it. And because women who do not meet our impossible beauty standards are looked down on, particularly if they've decided not to play that game anymore.

I just remember being the smallest I had ever been. Eating next to nothing, working out compulsively 4-6 days a week, living on yogurt and white rice with the occasional bit of chicken or broccoli, and still feeling like a huge fat cow because I still couldn't wear smaller than a 10. And having other people reinforce this, constantly. I swear, the sentence, "You'd be so pretty if you lost some weight" still makes me want to stab people in the face, repeatedly.

And these ideas are so ingrained in our culture, that I can show someone an article about a study that finds, "Yes, indeed, when you diet and then start to eat like a normal person, not only do you gain back the weight you lost, but you gain more because you have borked your metabolism" they will point at the article and say, "But it says you can lose weight."

Head, meet desk. Repeat.

"Well, I just have to try harder." Why? Why do you have to be in a constant state of battle with your own body? Just so strangers can feel better about how you look? Fuck them.

"I'll feel better."

I don't know about you, but when I was starving myself to meet the ideal (and failing) I didn't feel better. I felt like hell. I was always tired, constantly sick, suffering from malnutrition, had recurrent cases of bronchitis. I was cranky, irritable, weepy (ok, weepier than normal).

It's taken me years to be able to eat in a fashion even remotely resembling intuitive, and to learn how to eat "forbidden" things in moderation. Once I gave myself permission to have chocolate whenever I want it, I find that a Chocolate XOXOX bar will last me about two weeks, if Ogre doesn't eat it first. When I allow myself to have chips if I feel like it, a bag of Lays will last weeks. And I'm healthier. Last year's little escapade with Whooping Cough following 5+ months of prescribed laxative use not withstanding. I haven't had bronchitis in YEARS.

When you are desperately craving something, that's your body's way of telling you that something is missing from your diet, something your body needs/wants. I'm still not sure what the every three to six month Pepsi craving is answering, but it's obviously answering something. And I don't have intense cravings near as often as I used to. It used to be that every PMS week, I would crave potato chips and chocolate like a crazy person. Now, I don't. I just don't, because my body already gets those things if and when it feels like it, so there's no need to kick my brain into overdrive looking for it. And I haven't gotten any of those formless, nameless cravings for a while, either. You know the ones, the ones where everything and nothing sounds good. I hate those.

Yeah, right now I could stand a little more exercise, and I'm working on getting back into the swing of that, with everything else that's going on in my life. Good Lord, am I busy. I'm starting back up with the bellydancing. I'm trying to walk more. I need better shoes.

But right now, what I really wanted to talk about was the relapsing into disordered eating. Ogre's good about poking me to eat occasionally, and making sure I eat with him when I get like this. I've had to learn to ask him to help me with it, to remind me that hunger isn't a booby-trap, it's a biological imperative telling you to take care of yourself.

Sometimes I forget that.

I Loathe Ani DeFranco

Tue, 24 Feb 2009 00:18:29 GMT

I really do.

I don't find her music to be especially inspired or innovative, but more derivative of other musicians I like or have liked in the past.

I just don't like her.

I realize that for some people, this makes me a "Bad Feminist" (tm). But I'm ok with that, because apparently liking to suck cock makes me a "Bad Feminist" (tm) as well.

Wow, I'm grumpier than I thought today.

Anyway, the nail in the coffin for me concerning Ms. DeFranco was an interview with her on Air America some time ago, where she was asked about her website and internet presence and her response was the equivalent of "Computers are HARD, I have boys to do that for me. Tee hee."

Um, yeah, who's a "Bad Feminist" (tm)?

Granted, that may have changed since then. This was three or four years ago, but I really haven't been moved to explore her personal development since then, seeing as her music does nothing for me.

What brings this up, you may ask? Well, you probably wouldn't, but I'm going to tell you anyway.

My new issue of Ms. magazine, wherein Ms. DeFranco is quoted about President Obama.

It just made my former dissatisfaction rise to the surface. I mean, 95% of the time unless someone brings her up, I am perfectly content to forget that Ms. DeFranco exists. I guess "loathe" is an awfully strong word. I just have no use for her. I don't care for her music, I don't think her opinions deserve any more weight than any other person's opinions. I just don't care.

I generally hate Reality TV

Fri, 20 Feb 2009 20:51:59 GMT

And there isn't a chance in HELL I'd ever have watched any of the shows Jade Goody was on in Britian, Big Brother, Celebrity Big Brother, etc... But you know what? I'm ok with her decision to remain in the spotlight while she dies of cancer.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090219/ap_on_re_eu/eu_britain_reality_death

This is not to say that she needs my permission, or the permission of anyone but the people controlling the cameras, but I'm ok with it. Because if it gives lie to the belief that ovarian, cervical, uterine or breast cancer only happens to older women, I'd be willing to sit through a season or two of Big Brother in support of her.

The problem with the assumption that cancer only happens to older women is that doctors buy into it, too. And as with Jade, frequently the cancer will not be diagnosed in time, because "that doesn't happen to young women." Not that this is what happened with her, it may well be that she wasn't getting pap smears before this. But often, particularly with breast cancer, younger women will present with a lump or cancer symptoms, and they will be brushed off by their doctor, because of this belief that age somehow protects them.

Sometimes if the young women are lucky, or determined, enough, they will seek a second or third opinion from someone willing to actually diagnose them, not their age, and it will be caught in time to save their lives or their breasts or fertility.

If they aren't, they'll lose one or both breasts, or their reproductive organs, or their lives.

The mistaken belief that cancer is an old person's disease kills people.

Granted, in your 20s it is LESS likely that you'll have cancer, however, this does not give doctors leave to look at a lump in the breast of a 22 year old woman and say, "Well, I don't know what it is, but it's probably nothing." If you don't know what it is FIND OUT. And yes, I know that can be expensive. But not as expensive as invasive surgery and rounds of chemo.

Seriously, cancer happens to everyone, young and old, fit and unhealthy, all ethnicities, all classes. It doesn't care. And everyone needs to know that.

If there is one question I, as a rape survivor hate:

Wed, 18 Feb 2009 03:53:29 GMT

"How do you survive that?"

Honestly, as rapes go, the betrayal was epic, but physically I got off light. The penetration itself, some bruises, minor vaginal tearing. It didn't make it any less devastating. I mean, someone still forced themselves inside me against my will, because they didn't think I deserved to say "no." I still had PTSD symptoms, panic attacks, nightmares and all the rest of the fun stuff that comes with a sexual assault.

What I also had was not a chance in hell of anyone taking me seriously. Hell, the people in the next room who heard me shout "No!" didn't take me seriously.

But back to the question: How do you survive that?

The true and trite answer is "One day at a time." You go through each panic attack, each nightmare, each flashback, and then you dust yourself off and go on living.

And yeah, it sucks a lot. It took years and years for the PTSD symptoms to fade to the point where I didn't feel the need to warn potential sexual partners about the possibility of freakouts. To fade to the point where I didn't expect to wake up with a nightmare or suffer an anxiety attack on a daily basis.

I mean, there is a choice of sorts. You can live or you can die. Some people choose to die. It's certainly quicker. But far fewer of them choose to die than choose to live, however painful it may be, for how long. Largely, because the human animal has a driving will to survive.

For some of us, that choice is no choice at all, and living is the only option. For that, the only way to manage it is to just keep on keeping on. Get counseling, journal about it, talk about, don't talk about it, whatever you need to do to preserve your life and your sanity.

It's both harder and easier than it looks sometimes. Sometimes you'll feel like you'll never be safe, never be able to trust anyone, never be ok. But in time, those feelings will come less and less frequently until you're able to feel safe, trust and feel ok. It takes baby steps over years, sometimes micro steps, sometimes it'll feel like all your progress has disappeared in a puff of panic. Sometimes you'll feel like you can conquer the world. None of that is abnormal. Everyone's reaction and healing time and process is different.

There is no normal where recovery is concerned.

Something that makes me a little grumpy.

Thu, 12 Feb 2009 19:41:25 GMT

Ok, I'm definitely not in the Naturopath/Homeopath camp. I like my medicine tested and proven, and hopefully safe.

That said, every time I hear anyone going on about how no traditional or herbal medicines have ever worked, ever, ever, ever, I just want to laugh.

Have we never heard of aspirin (derived from willow bark, initially dispensed in tea form, horrid, nasty, bitter, evil tea form, but as an herbal tea all the same) and morphine (taken from the sap of poppies, and used long before modern medicine)?

Other modern medicines derive from "traditional" and herbal sources as well. Digitalis, which is used to treat heart patients, using mentholated anything to open sinus and lung passages... There are a ton of things that we take for granted as "proven modern medicine" that have their roots in traditional medicine.

Does this mean I think that we should take all herbal or natural remedies at face value? No, I believe they should be tested for efficacy and lack of harm, just as other medicines are. Alas, our country doesn't have the best track record on this even with medicines established in labs by big pharma companies: i.e. my dad's cholesterol medication nearly killed him a few years ago. At least most herbal remedies aren't going to kill you, even if they aren't going to help you.

Most, I said. There are some that will.

Pennyroyal oil, which is often used to induce abortion in women who can't or won't get a medical abortion, does work with many of same side effects as an accepted drug like RU-486 (like massive cramps, vomitting, pain). However, Pennyroyal stands a FAR GREATER chance of seriously harming or KILLING you if you fuck up the dosage. This is one of the issues I have with Inga Muscio's book "Cunt." She talks about using Pennyroyal to induce abortion, but neither discusses how to achieve the right dose, nor does she emphasize the very real risks that can occur with a very small miscalculation in dose.

Another problem with herbal treatments and remedies is that herbs are not uniform in their potency. A really great growing season may result in plants with higher concentrations of what makes them effective, and a bad growing season may lessen the effectiveness. Also, not all the plants that people use are the correct plants. Just because we have something over here that we call chamomile, it doesn't mean it is actually the right kind of chamomile for someone's great-grandmother's cold remedy, to use a really basic example.

BUT the fact remains that you should not attempt to treat massive injuries, illness or infection this way. Modern medicine is really your best bet for anything life threatening. There's a reason people are living longer these days, it's because we don't have to rely on herbal remedies of dubious help or efficacy. As awful and catostrophic as some medical mistakes can be, and common, the majority of people are still living far longer and healthier than before the advent of modern medicine. So, yes, deciding you're going to let your naturopath treat your cancer is just as stupid as stating "All herbal/folk remedies are bullshit."

I understand that for many folks they feel it is simpler to say, "None of them work" than explaining that well, yes, some of them do, and pharmaceutical companies are indeed researching and using them, but you need to be careful." I for one, having drunk willow bark tea once at the insistence of an uber hippy friend, am grateful that we can have it in a standardized dose, in a small easy to swallow pill I don't have to taste.

However, much as when kids find out that the "Just say NO!" lectures about how pot will turn you into a raving junkie and have all these horrible effects on you are bullshit, and why should they believe anything you say... When you tell people that all herbal remedies are nonsense, and then they find out that the lastest cancer medication in clinical trials is based on extracts of four very common spices with a 60% success rate in animal trials... Well, you figure out what their response is going to be. They're going to assume you're completely blowing smoke up their ass, are a stooge of big pharma, and why shouldn't they try the Cherokee Hair Tampons?

Seriously, don't lie to people because you assume they're too stupid to understand either the truth or that you're lying. Because they will figure it out eventually, and then you've lost all credibility.