I'm moving this blog over to Wordpress.
See me there at mangledgutspretending.wordpress.com/
24 July 2008
03 July 2008
Sometime I feel like I'm the only person pushing for post-identity politics...
Monica's recent post "Dag, Can I Pee in Peace" highlights the discrimination that transpeople face when trying to use public restrooms that match their gender presentation. Right-wingers try the same old scare tactics to whip the public into a frenzy...
But what I find more disturbing is that conservatives simply can't get past equating biology and gender. When couched in biology, "natural" gender presentation seems to stem from someone's genitals. But ask any sociologist and they'll tell you that gender presentation, gender roles, even the way in which we gender people are all social constructions, learned traits and qualities that have close to nothing to do with biology. Just because traditional gender roles are typically associated with having one set of genitalia or the other does not make that association correct. Tradition is not always right.
We need to move past the identity politics that hold gender roles to the rigid lines of biology. For God's sakes, let them pee where they please!
Posted by Drew at 10:23 AM
Racism Review once again points out just how deeply rooted the white racist frame is in rural communities. So much misinformation is floating around about Obama and people simply refuse to hear anything to the contrary. Using the white racist frame allows ignorant people to mark Obama as unfit for office simply because of his skin color. How asinine.
Further, the white racist frame equates Muslims with terrorism. Newsflash: just because Obama has a different name, one that happens to sound similar to that of a well-known terrorist, does not mean that Obama himself is a terrorist. There's simply no connection; a non sequitur. Racism Review clearly points out that the white racist frame equates Islamic beliefs with terrorism, and by extension, Obama with terrorism, making him unfit (once again) for office.
This man’s statements also underscore an additional aspect of the white racial frame, one that has largely been neglected in much mainstream media discussion. In his statement of “the Muslim thing,” he reinforces a seemingly common idea that if Obama was a Muslim, his religious orientation would and should be sufficient to disqualify him from public office.
Posted by Drew at 9:39 AM
25 June 2008
I've been a little upset at "jake" and Pageone over that past few days for the not-so-nice words posted about the Fairness Campaign. While I believe he has every right to do his own investigative reporting, using negative criticism does nothing to solve the problem and does nothing more than add fuel to the drama fire.
That said, his update on the whole matter is a little more even-handed, though personal stabs are still present in the article. According to him (I was not present), Fairness did its part last night to be open and welcoming, and I know the organization will do all it can to support a complaint filed by Herndon with the OAG.
Hopefully this all gets resolved. Hopefully Herndon will file complaints with KREF and the OAG. Hopefully Fairness (Carla?) will throw some money into investigating the mail piece. Hopefully we’ll be able to out whomever is responsible. And hopefully everyone can take off their pissy pants and put on a clean pair so we can move forward.
I agree. Let's work to get this behind us and find some healing for our community.
Full article here.
Posted by Drew at 12:49 PM
Although I'm one of the "gays" who's pretty steamed at Pageonekentucky.com over the bashing of the Fairness Campaign, I still think this article follows well on my recent posts.
An editorial in the Breathitt County Voice once again bashing Obama for supposedly being a "Muslim Trojan horse". I concur, Pageone (link to their post)... this just makes me want to vomit:
On Obama’s family: “Due to his early Muslim background and paternal forbearers some believe that he could be a potential Muslim Trojan Horse, masquerading as a Christian. During these terrorist-threatening times when our future security is at risk, we can ill afford to have as our commander-in-chief someone we are not one hundred percent sure of their patriotism.”
On Obama supporters: “It seems Obama’s support is coming from a monolithic black vote, the college professors, extreme environmentalists, naïve young folks and those inclined to political socialism. Obama is rated as one of the most extreme liberals in the United States Senate. He supports an appeasement policy in our war against the terrorists, cuts in the military budget, secularism, abortion on demand, gay marriage masquerade as unions, gun restrictions, tax increases and broad general redistribution of the nation’s wealth from the haves to have nots.”
Read the full article here.
Posted by Drew at 11:33 AM
23 June 2008
So much so that I'm seriously thinking of moving to a more progressive country. I can't believe that there are still Americans out there who think that skin color has anything to do with whether you're a human or not, whether you deserve rights or not... And then reading comments on op-ed pieces in the CJ (see blockquote below) today piss me off. Alert: there are people out there who actually believe that racism doesn't exist and is just a leftist political ploy! Oh, the audacity!
"Yes, government should do far more to relieve the burdens on those who struggle economically and work hard for little pay. And, yes, racism is a damaging reality that explains many of the problems faced by African-Americans -- including family breakdown itself."
SO, according to EJ, it's the white man's fault that the out-of-wedlock birth rate approaches 90% in the black community. And it's government's responsiblity to bail people out (read: more welfare).
EJ, can't you see that it's government who, through the liberal great society programs, has incentivized this behavior, and more intrusion will only make it worse? Why do you and your liberal minions (including Obama) always think government is the solution?
I had to look again at the author of this piece to make sure it wasn't written by Bette Baye. "It's not really their fault...it's racism.....government needs to fix it".....same old leftist manta.
Posted by Drew at 10:36 AM
18 June 2008
The recent Supreme Court Decision to lift the ban on gay marriage in California has caused little uproar. Yet one county clerk has taken it upon herself to refuse the sale of all marriage licenses in her county. In this NPR.org report, the clerk cites financial reasons for her decision, yet I believe her decision aligns too conveniently with the court's overturning of the same-sex marriage ban. While her office did not sell licenses on the first evening of the ban's lift, her office was forced to sell licenses to about forty same-sex couples today.
While the ban has been lifted for now, there has been a call for its reinstatement. The same-sex marriage ban will once again appear on the California ballot in November.
Posted by Drew at 10:11 AM
16 June 2008
Racism Review did a nice critique of Obama's Father's Day speech. While his speech was well written and has some good points, I agree that the framing should have been different. Black families are not the only families that experience the lack of fatherly direction. Moreover, should we not be examining the causes of absent fathers, rather than blaming a racial group for their "self-created" family problems? How about social factors? Economic factors? Job availability? Education?
Obama does not deal with the racism these Black men face in his speech. What is always striking about such one-sided critiques, no matter who makes them, is that this problem is not a “Black fathers” problem. In the first place, this is a white-American and general American problem. He could have raised it in a much more balanced way. Why did he not address his sermon to all young men, including the large numbers of the “irresponsible” young fathers who are white? And, perhaps more importantly, where is the strong critique of a racist society that cannot provide decent educations and decent-paying jobs for young black men, indeed for every person who wants to work. Good fathers need decent jobs.
Go here for the article.
Posted by Drew at 11:21 AM
15 June 2008
14 June 2008
It's been about a year now since I've realized that I'm polyamourous. *You can pick you jaw up off the floor now* And several people have asked me what I think about love in light of my polyamourous views.
I've been wanting to post my thoughts on this subject, but have neglected to do so because 1) I really haven't had the time to mess with my thoughts, and 2) I wanted to be sure to have something semi-sensical to present. I know you may be thinking, "he's been through a bad break up, he's bitter, he's hurt and he's full of hot air!" Perhaps you're right. I'll leave that possibility open for the time being. I'll let you decide once you make it to the end of this.
So let me lay some foundations for my argument.
1. I believe that love does not exist. At least not in the way most people view love. Our (society's) notions of love are constructed and are heavily linked to sexism, racism, homophobia, etc. From early on, we are taught as children that we are to fall in love with one person, of the opposite sex (I won't go into the assumptions here), and that we are to marry and remain faithful to our "true love". While the narrative may be very romantic, it does nothing more than perpetuate heteronormativity and is anything (fasten your pew belts) but the "norm". Nowhere will you find a day care that actively educates children that there are many different kinds of families, save for perhaps in the Castro district. But then again, the gays aren't supposed to be having kids, right?
2. The construction of love has a history. But I won't bore you with the biblical implications of love, nor with those nasty Greeks and Eros... We'll just do a small bit of time travel. Alert: If you are like more than half of this country, you don't have a normal family (but that might be news to you). That's right folks, the nuclear family of the 1950s is still the standard. Husband, wife, two kids - oh, and did I forget to mention that the hierarchy of power follows that order? Everyone, please welcome Sexism to the stage! Granted many heterosexual relationships are becoming more egalitarian, but husband-over-wife domination is still very prevalent. Men are by and large considered the head of the household, and this image as man-as-leader is perpetuated by the media and by religious groups - but let's not open up that can of worms.
3. Love is a commodity. We are sold love in every aspect of our lives. Love comes pre-packaged in the form of flowers, silicone implants, and Barbie... AND with Love Spell from Victoria's Secret, love is quite literally in the air. Do you realize that the majority of the items you buy are to please the people around you or to make you're partner happy? And let's just bypass the whole issue of anniversaries, Valentine's day, Christmas, etc... Moreover, is it not painfully obvious how much money is spent in marketing "love" to consumers through the modeling industry - billboards, television commercials, radio spots, spam mailings, newsletters, newspaper ads, pop-ups (need I go on)?
I'll stop before you think I'm a delusional freak. ;-)
So, what is love, you ask? I'll save that one for part two.
Posted by Drew at 9:50 PM