From the international center for studies

Some enterprising scientists are shocked and getting the vapors due to finding out that fat chicks have sex. No. Way.

And what can we learn from this shocking study? "This study indicates that all women deserve diligence in counseling on unintended pregnancy and sexually transmitted disease prevention, regardless of body mass index."

Thus contradicting the previously-held mantra that fat chicks don't need to learn about birth control, because no one would fuck them anyway.

Also, the study would like you to know that being sexually active with other women doesn't count as sex. Although the study explored "relationship between body mass index and sexual behavior -- including sexual orientation, age at first intercourse, number of partners and frequency of sexual intercourse," they don't seem to have considered sexual orientation in their trumpeting of the study's all-important conclusion that "[n]inety-two percent of overweight women reported having a history of sexual intercourse with a man, as opposed to 87 percent of women with a normal body mass index."

Maybe the real news here is that 5% more skinny chicks are lesbians? Surely that can't be nearly as important as the awful truth that men will courageously stick their penises in fat ladies' vaginas.

A Smart President

Barack Obama has spent so much time talking to journalists that want to elicit newsworthy soundbites on the big political issue of the hour, whether it be Bill Ayers, the bailout bill, or this "spreading the wealth" nonsense. And I must confess that it's gotten really boring. I've wished over and over again that I could just have an off-the-record, over-a-beer chat with Obama, liberal to liberal, and cut through all the message-making for a minute or two. Because as much as I understand how important message-making, and being "on message" has been to the Obama campaign, and I acknowledge it contributes to his success, it gets exhausting after a while. If you obsessively read the news like so many of us do, you can get a little burned out on the message, even though it's a good and solid message.

So it was really thrilling to read the transcript of Rachel Maddow's interview with Obama--one where she actually criticizes him from a position to the left of him. Whoa! Haven't seen that in a while. She's a superb interviewer--probing without being confrontational, and extremely sharp. What I saw is that paired with a worthy interlocutor, Obama comes off even better than I've seen him before: thoughtful, nuanced, and sharp. He manages to take the issue she presents seriously, while being funny in a way that's not canned.

What he demonstrates below is something that, while a lot of liberals will criticize it, is truly great about Obama: he's not dogmatic. I think he's wrong about the Republican party, but I think the argument he makes is a serious and politically useful one. Above all, it's pragmatic and smart--but it's a pragmatism that doesn't seem calculating. And amidst the wave of anti-flip-flopping sentiment that's crashed over our country in the last four years, I see Obama as someone who would be willing to change his mind, who can be convinced by reason and even strong emotional appeals. I like that.

And damn, what a helluva guy. I am looking so forward to waking up in the morning on November 5th knowing that this man who's smart without being a smartass is going to be our next president.

RACHEL MADDOW, HOST: Senator, you criticize the Bush administration frequently. But, you almost never criticize the Republican Party itself. Other Democrats --

SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Much to your chagrin.

MADDOW: Well, yes, actually. I mean, other Democrats, you will hear them talk about the GOP as the party that's been wrong on all the big stuff. Creating Social Security, civil rights, the War in Iraq. But, you don't really do that. Do you think there is a stark difference between the parties?

OBAMA: Well, I do think there's a difference between the parties, but here's my belief. That I'm talking to voters. And I think they're a lot of Republican voters out there, self-identified, who actually think that what the Bush administration has done, has been damaging to the country.

And, what I'm interested in, is how do we build a working majority for change? And if I start off with the premise that it's only self-identified Democrats who I'm speaking to, then I'm not going to get to where we need to go. If I can describe it as not a blanket indictment of the Republican Party, but instead describe it as the Republican Party having been kidnapped by a incompetent, highly ideological subset of the Republican Party, then that means I can still reach out to a whole bunch of Republican moderates who I think are hungry for change, as well.

MADDOW: Now, they do that to you the same way. When they talk -- when John McCain calls you a socialist --

OBAMA: Right.

MADDOW: This redistribute the wealth idea. He goe -- he calls you soft on national security.

OBAMA: Yes.

MADDOW: That's not just an anti-Barack Obama script.

OBAMA: No.

MADDOW: That is -- he's reading from an anti-Democrat, and specifically an anti-liberal stance.

OBAMA: Absolutely.

MADDOW: And so, you have the opportunity to say John McCain, George Bush, you're wrong. You also have the opportunity to say, conservatism has been bad for America. But, you haven't gone there either.

OBAMA: I tell you what though, Rachel. You notice, I think we're winning right now so --

(LAUGHTER)

OBAMA: Maybe I'm doing something right. I know you've been cruising for a bruising for a while here, looking for a fight out there. But, I just think people are tired of that kind of back and forth, tit for tat, ideological approach to the problems.

Now, there is no doubt that there is a set of premises in the reigning Republican ideology that I just think are wrong. This whole notion, and then it's been captured by this back and forth about whether I'm a redistributor, I think is a great example. The notion that the progressive income tax, which was instituted by Teddy Roosevelt, supposedly John McCain's hero, is somehow un-American, I think is an example of how people have gone way off track.

The Republican Party has gone so right when it comes to how we think about our obligations to each other, how we pay for things. And as a consequence, because most people think it's pretty important to pay for roads and bridges, schools. What we've ended up doing is tax cuts, no spending cuts, huge national debt. There's a core hypocrisy to how they have governed over the last several years, that I think has to be reversed.

And so we're going to challenge those things. The important thing though is, I just want to make sure that I'm leaving the door open to people who say to themselves, well, you know, I'm a member of the Republican Party and I remember people like Chuck Percy in Illinois, or Abraham Lincoln, a pretty good Republican. That there's some core values that historically have been important to the Republican Party, but just have not been observed over the last several years.

Guerilla Radio?

Is it still viable to think of teh blogs as a kind of resistance medium? Has Michelle Malkin ruined it for us all, I wonder?

Some professors at Texas Tech are studying the role on internet use in the last four elections. They've asked if we can ask y'all to fill out a survey as they are especially interested in the role of politically-oriented blogs in these election cycles. The note and link are below. Please take a little time and do this, both for the good of this research and because I am interested in what they find out.

We are researchers at the University of Tennessee and Texas Tech. We are interested in hearing how you use the Internet in the 2008 presidential election. We invite you to click on the link below and fill out this survey. Although we recognize that the Internet is a global medium, we asked that only those individuals who are eligible to vote in the U.S. participate in this survey. Click here to start!

I Hope Your Mama Don't Look in Your Room Cause if She does She'll be Here Soon

OK, this is one of those ethical dilemnas where doing the right thing could end up being the wrong thing.

I have a good buddy who's son is a high school senior. He's a good lad, not a great student, not a bad student, not an angel, not a devil, just a good all-American boy.

He likes to spend time at my place and I enjoy having him here. He drops by frequently, on his own or with friends. I let him know he's always welcome here. I always have a bit of work for him to do and a bit of money to pay him to do it.

I flatter myself that he likes being around an adult who treats him like an equal and gives his opinions serious consideration. Not that his mama and papa don't treat him right. Its just that, well, they're his mama and papa.

When they tell him to straighten up and fly right, he naturally bridles. When I tell him the same thing, he accepts it as coming from a man without an ax to grind, a man who is giving him the benefit of his experience, a man who knows what he's talking about. Not like his folks who, in his adolescent estimation, are cruel and ignorant and unfeeling and just want to keep him from having any fun.

As I said, I flatter myself. In the interest of full disclosure, I should mention that I have two nieces living with me. Smart, beautiful, lively, young women after whom he follows like a German Shepherd. So, that could be part of the attraction.

My Auntie dotes on him. She stuffs him with sandwiches and cakes and five dollar bills. They tease each other like a couple of sweethearts and everytime he makes her blush, I think he adds another year to her lifespan, the ancient flirt.

The boy can eat. Earlier today, for example, he and a friend stopped by. Before they left, Auntie pressed upon them and they got outside of the following: two bowls each of Auntie's tortilla soup, a half dozen avocates, a pound of biscuits slathered with blackberry jam, fried chicken, a quart of ice tea, a quart of ice cream topped with chocolate sauce and the best part of a peach pie I'd been eyeing for myself. And I'm not even counting the softball sized pomegranate they polished off for starters. Or the bag of Halloween candy they brought for Poco, my niece's six year old son.

But, like I say, he's a good lad and he works hard at any chores I give him. He's eager to please and very good to my family.

So, what's the dilemna, you're asking?

Well, like, today, he skipped school to come here. And its not like we're just around the corner from school. This is a rural area, thinly settled with scattered towns and hamlets. Its a good forty or fifty miles over rough roads to get here from where his mama and papa expect him to be spending his day.

So, I feel like he's kind of putting me on the spot. He really is welcome here anytime but he needs to be in school.

On the other hand, its not like he would return to school if I turned him away. And if he's going to skip school, better he comes here than drive to some remote spot to idle away the hours smoking dope and lowering 40's. Or worse.

But his daddy is my good friend and I don't like being made part of a deception of him. I know his parents would be unhappy if they knew what he was up to and they'd be disappointed in me for aiding and abetting his deception.

I've raised the issue with him. Because he is a kind and intelligent young man, he understands my position. Its just that, when all is said and done, he really doesn't give a shit. I mean, he's a teenager. You can only expect so much.

And, its not like its a daily occurrence. But its not infrequent, either.

So, this is my dilemna: do I keep faith with my young friend or do I keep faith with his papa, my old friend? Or am I missing something? Is there another way to look at this?

I would be glad of any advice.

Happy anniversary, NOW

And thanks to Ari at EotAW for writing this post. Yay historians!

You want health insurance? You'll get health insurance.

Cecil D. Bykerk, president of the Society of Actuaries . . . [and] former executive vice president of Mutual of Omaha, said, “If maternity care is included as a benefit, it drives up rates for everybody, making the whole policy less affordable.”

In other words, ladies, you pay 30% more than men do for health insurance because of that whole baby thing. Which is also why you make less money to begin with. After all, men don't have anything to do with pregnancy, so it wouldn't be fair to make "everybody" [with a penis] pay more.

Only, guess what? THAT ISN'T TRUE. It turns out that even health insurance that DOESN'T COVER MATERNITY CARE costs more for women. And we sure as shit know it isn't because insurance companies are covering birth control (pdf).

But even without b.c. and maternity coverage, ladies use more health care than men do! You know how ladies just love doctors, after all. Just listen to

Elizabeth J. Leif, a health insurance actuary in Denver who helps calculate rates for Nebraska and other states . . . “Under the age of 55, women tend to be higher utilizers of health care than men. I am more conscious of my health than my husband, who will avoid going to the doctor at all costs.”

See? Mr. Leif goes to the doctor less than Mrs. Leif! That proves that all women use more health care than men! This is science, people. I know it's hard for you to understand if you have a uterus.

And all that ladylike health-consciousness and getting regular checkups ends up costing more in the long run. Oh wait, actually, that's not true either: sometimes it does, like if you get tested for something it turns out you don't have, and sometimes it doesn't, like if the test turns up positive and you manage to prevent bigger problems later on.

Okay, fine. Let's just admit it. Health insurance companies don't actually *care* about your health, so they don't give a shit about preventing problems later on. Later on, you'll be on Medicare, and the health insurance companies won't have to worry about you, and the government will keep costs down by underpaying doctors, and no one will see you. Just think of how much money that'll save!

Excuse me, please. I feel the vapors coming on.

overheard in chicago

A reconstructed conversation from the office yesterday morning:

BA, a young black woman: I'm just saying that this country isn't ready for it. A black family in the White House?? Y'all thought I was joking but the first time Michelle or the girls are in a photo with a 'do rag, or with their hair in twists there's gonna be a whole lotta 'What?!?'

ES, a Boomer white guy: Really? You don't think folks will be ok with them?

BA: I'm just saying that most people in this country have never thought about it and so they're going to experience mild freakage.

Ding: You have a point. It's like bringing your first black friend home. Or you visiting your first black friend's house.

ES: But I think that people are generally ok with it. (he pauses) However, when I was dating an African American woman and brought her home it was a strain for my very Irish mother.

BA: Exactly. How many people really live integrated lives? Like Ding said, it's like a big sleepover with your first black friend - for four years. For the whole country. And you know anything we do with our hair, our bodies - hell, anything - codes political.

JD, another young black woman: It codes angry.

Ding: Yeah, I don't really have a lot of faith in the American people to avoid falling back on the 'wow, black people are so different' discourse.

JD: In college, my white friends were generally very polite about it.

Ding: But you're from Canada. On the other hand, remember when Cherie Blair was photographed answering the door in a nightgown, no makeup, just out of bed? She was totally totally hit. Britain didn't exactly crumble from the realization that the Prime Minister's wife looked like everyone else in the morning.

BA: But that's white privilege.

ES: But we've seen Oprah looking like a disaster. America didn't seem that startled.

BA: But that's class privilege.

ES: Well, there I agree with you. But don't you think the Obamas would also be considered privileged by class?

Ding: Not on the same level as Oprah.

ES: I don't know. I give people more credit.

BA, JD and Ding: Hm.

BA: I swear, if people are going to start asking to touch my hair again...

JD and Ding: Girl...

whatever it takes

I just got my dad to agree to vote No on 8 by offering to bake him cookies.

For serious. All the arguments I could marshal, and the best I could get him to do was to waver. Finally he said something about cookies, in an attempt to change the subject, and I said, exasperated, "I'll bake you cookies if you vote No on 8." He wants six peanut-butter cookies with fork hatch marks on them. I promised I would make them with PK's help.

I can't decide whether to be appalled or touched.

I'll be dressing up as the martyr

So, that Halloween costume I couldn't sew last night? It was for my kid (obviously) to take with her on a trip she and her dad are taking this weekend. Mr. Vane has to do a family thing on Friday back in our home state, so he and toddler Vane are getting on a plane, flying up there, doing the family thing, doing trick or treat together, visiting family for a couple days, and coming back home on Sunday.

Leaving Sybil Vane, who is very much in need of yoga and restorative time, with a weekend to herself. And the chance to go to a grown-up Halloween party. And finish job aps. And clean. And sleep -oh god, sleep.

Except toddler Vane has suddenly started vomiting. And running a fever.

So, yea. And while toddler Vane will be *devastated* at missing this trip and the chance to trick or treat with dad, I don't think Mr. Vane can stay home if she does, both because of the family event and because he has a very sick grandma. Meaning I have just very likely traded an adult weekend alone for a solo-parenting of sick kid weekend, which inevitably leads to my own puking.

So, yea. That'll teach me to never ever put in writing something about my kid rarely getting sick.

A golden ticket to the abortion factory!

"Reasonable people can disagree about abortion, but still agree about the unimportance of women's health."

No shit. Today I drove past the local Planned Parenthood and saw the protesters hauling signs out of their truck. I'd thought we didn't get the protesters here, because I'm usually not driving past PP at 8 am. My bad! I'm trying to decide if, when I drive past again going to pick Mr. B. up from the doctor's office in a little bit here, I have enough money in my checking account to get out and tell them that I've just written a check to PP specifically because of them.

Where the girls at?

Melissa McEwan is dead-on right that the coverage of "tear-jerking pictures of Obama with cute kids" genre has been heavily, heavily dominated by little boys. So she rounded up a series of pictures of girls who are mesmerized by Obama, too. Go take a look at it, and your eyes don't at least mist over, you've got a heart o' stone, mate.



More seriously, several series of photos, including the photoessay on Obama by the Time reporter, the website Yes We Can Hold Babies, and McEwan's post make me think that the power of photographs as emotional works of art is really something else. Also, that people of all ages have an incredibly strong emotional reaction to Obama as a person, even a person they don't know and have never seen. Maybe that makes him a celebrity, but I think it also makes him primed to be a great leader in a way our country hasn't seen for a while. See, the United States, with our elaborate system of checks and balances, is the perfect place to have an extremely popular, very charismatic leader, 'cause it's not like they can become a dictator or anything. Unless you're Dick Cheney and you occupy neither the Executive or the Legislative Branch, but also both at the same time.

Please, please let this election be over and let Obama be the winner.

For These Thy Gifts

Before my identity is stuffed entirely into the maw of the BitchPhd bloggeen, I should probably establish my manly bona fides.

And what better way than to lay out the menu for a dinner I recently lavished on a fond friend whose womanly bona fides need no buttressing. Believe me. Boy howdy.

Anyway, she and I had been quite matey for the past year but, over the summer, a series of events we need not go into here caused a certain coolness, a certain estrangement, a certain hep-me-jeezus, to settle over us.

OK, OK, OK. Over her.

Around the end of September, trusted interlocutors arranged a restoration of low-level contacts. After weeks of confidence-building measures, we achieved considerable rapprochement and agreed to full fledged diplomatic relations.

To seal our renewed, uh, um, intercourse, she proposed we get together for dinner. As a gesture of good will I offered to cook dinner at her official residence where we could make it a real State affair, complete with toasts and ceremonial declarations of fraternity and solidarity.

Unexpectedly, she went for it. Which left me at a bit of a loss. But, I huddled with my Auntie, I mean, my Foriegn Minister, and came up with the demarche following:

Aperitif: Black Bush, neat

Starters: Proscuitt, calavacitas with cilantro and lime juice

Soup: Gazpacho

Salad: Nopales and tomatoes drizzled with raspberry vinegarette

Rissotto: Rissotto with pinon nuts

Fish: Smoked Kokanee and iced vodka

Entree: Grilled chicken breast stuffed with herbed riccota

Post-entree: Peaches - canned by my Auntie - nothing like store canned peaches

Afters: Raspberry mousse - also made by my Auntie

Wines: Pinot Noir, Pinot Grigio

Flowers: Autumn bouquet of red chrysanthemums, zinnias, snapdragons

Music: Al Green, Maxwell, Angie Stone, Brothers Johnson - can't go wrong with the Old School

The great feature of this menu is that everything can be prepared in advance, especially if you have an auntie to pitch in. Even the chicken breasts can be pounded flat and stuffed in advance so all you have to do at the go down is light the grill and throw them on for about ten minutes.

And the really great feature is that if things go right, you'll never make it past the rissotto course before retiring to the inner chancellery for close consultations.

Observations

Isn't it funny that the "save" icon in Word still looks like a 3.5 inch hard disk?

Isn't it less funny that B's post below, and the subsequent formatting of the page, made me look like a racist who has no patience for the stories of daughters of slaves?

Did everyone know that a World Series game has never before been called for inclement weather? Persons who have spent time with Wimbledon and/or the U.S. Open will appreciate the staggering quality of this fact.

Did everyone realize that Penn State's victory over OSU this weekend was attained with NO penalties incurred by the winning team, who were on the road in a very hostile environment? Excellent coaching my friends.

Finally, is any one surprised to learn that I cannot sew a child's Halloween costume? No, no one is.

I've been waiting for this story

This is Amanda Jones. She is 109 years old. Her father was born into slavery. He always encouraged her to vote. She's paid poll taxes to do so. She just mailed in her ballot for Barack Obama. For free.

Link from Chris Clarke. Click on the picture for the full story.

Fruit Flies in the Ointment

I am really looking forward to getting over this woman altogether, but in the meantime she continues to find ways to make me cringe.

Stop MOCKING people who THINK! Jesus. You're fucking it all up anyway.

As you were.

I don't like Mondays

I am SO FUCKING SICK of sinus pain. And no, it's not fucking infected yet. I wish it would be, so I could get some goddamn antibiotics and make this shit go away.

Two hours of fucking sleep last night because I COULDN'T BREATHE and I don't sleep well with my goddamn mouth open. Yes, I rinsed my sinuses with salt water this morning. They're STILL STOPPED UP. And in my two hours of pathetic sleep, all I dreamed about was my stupid half-assed adjunct job*: I dreamed I called in sick again, and then went and grovelled because I've used more sick days than I have. Bizarrely, in the dream, I was team-teaching with Sybil and someone else and they kept showing up but I was "supposed" to be there for some stupid ass reason and I was calling in sick even though officially no one would have noticed if I didn't. Gah.

*One of these days I should blog about my new realizations in re. adjuncting, which boil down to: much as I like the students, the fact is that adjuncting is not producing my Best Teaching Evah, because (1) no office; (2) the lack of child-care and fact that I'm wedging this one course in without significantly changing any of my Full Time Mommy rersponsibilities means I'm always rushing at the last minute and flying by the seat of my pants; (3) new to the school and the course, so am learning as I go along. Which would be fine if I were teaching the course again, but I infer that I'm not from the fact that I haven't yet heard anything about next semester and that, when I went and asked the admin asst. person, I was told that "they've already done the schedule" and "there aren't as many classes in the spring as in the fall." Which okay fine, but it would be kind of nice to y'know, get an Official email or something letting me know, y'know? That said, it is also incredibly clear to me that, given the ratio of "part time" boxes to "permanent" boxes in the faculty mailroom, one of the main jobs of the permanent admin folks is basically doing the paperwork and cat-herding required to keep courses staffed from term to term, and fair enough, keeping a jillion adjuncts informed of their various positions is probably a wee bit beyond the capacities of, like, three or four individuals. The staffing situation, from what I can see, seems to be a permanent crisis management situation, which has to suck enormously.

That said, however, it is Very Difficult not to feel a certain amount of frustration, knowing that I'm actually a first-rate teacher and an excellent, responsible, dedicated colleague--with a track record, even-- who Actively Wants to be teaching in the CC system, and yet I don't seem to be able to get past the Here's a Warm Body, Let's Throw Her in Front of a Class role.

And my two-hour dream, of course, is all about feeling like, by being sick more often than I should (and by having missed a week for the DNC, and a day for the Conference I Ended Up Missing), I'm really not helping myself look like anything other than Little Ms. Warm Body.

Grr. Am having massive irritations about Not Taking My Own Career Seriously Enough these days.

In Through the Hawsepipe

Believe me, you could not be more surprised than I to find me on this side of the bar.

I blame the drink.

Shortly after the 06 Democratic victories, flushed with triumph and tumblers of Bushmill's, I made a foolish bet in the very comments of this very blog that dubya would not last out his term, that the righteous anger of the People would drive him from office, that he would quit or be impeached and convicted of high crimes against the Republic.

Dudn't look like that's gonna work out.

So, now, I am indentured to the Hermanas B until my debt is discharged.

Which is not too bad, really. Their yoke is easy and my burden is light.

In the meantime, until my servitude is, uh, served, let the innocent suffer with the guilty!

No, but seriously - this is a wonderful forum. I'm honored and not a little stupefied to invited to contribute. I've learned a lot from this blog. I'll do my best to uphold its traditions of give-and-take, wide-ranging discussion, bitchiness, and commitment to progressive political expression.

The invitation of Hermanas B to join the bloggeen testifies to the sweeping embrace of their feminism. If a mossback like me can make it in through the hawsepipe, any doubts about the democratic nature of feminism must be dismissed.

OK, that's enough for now.

If you need me, I'll be in the bar. The BitchPhD saloon bar.

White on the inside

I'm struggling with being a White Feminist. Almost six months ago, I read Jessica Hoffman's Alternet piece, On Prisons, Borders, Safety, and Privilege: An Open Letter to White Feminists. I couldn't bring myself to write anything about it then, and I'm not sure I can now--my thoughts are extremely jumbled and hard to articulate. I don't have a robust vocabulary, library of concepts, and rhetoric for talking about race the way I do for talking about gender.

In my everyday life, I have the bizarre affliction of considering myself a white person, but not being seen as a white person by anyone I interact with. Most of the people I talk to casually don't have any idea what I "am," and so they make their own assumptions. Most think I am Mexican or, increasingly since I moved to Chicago where there are multiple Spanish-speaking populations, Puerto Rican. Only Arabs ever recognize that I'm Arab without being told, and even some of them think I'm Mexican, too. Lots of people ask me where I'm "from" (code for "what ethnicity are you?") and because I can't truthfully answer that I'm "from" anywhere in the United States, I say I'm from Cairo, Egypt. Which means I have to have a longer conversation that I'd often like to about my background, how long I've lived in the US (as a precursor to the inevitable "why is your English so good, then?" question), my parents, and my schooling. But all these questions are the digging of people who want to figure out what category to put me in--a tall order. When people can't categorize you, they have trouble getting comfortable with you, or, more specifically, deciding whether they can feel comfortable around you or not.

And it all kind of baffles me, because in my mind, I might as well be a white person who grew up overseas, like, say John McCain. I've said before and I'll say again: I'm culturally white. I talk like a White person, I have White friends, I date White guys. I've spent the vast majority of my life around White people. In high school, in college, in law school. The longer people spend around me, the more they forget that I really do have a very unique background and upbringing. I can't even count the times my boyfriend has said to me: "I just always forget that you spent almost your whole life in fucking Egypt, and then I remember, and it shocks me every time."

But this post is not supposed to be about me. I'm trying to explain who I am, culturally, and what it's like to feel like a White person but be seen as a non-White person by everyone around you except those who know you the best. And I feel like that perception of me, as Other, must color how people see me, but I don't really know how, because people don't often make their instinctual reactions to perceptions of race explicit. I do know that the lingering surprise that registers on the faces of clients who have quietly assumed for months that I am Puerto Rican means that it affected their notion of me somehow.

So if I'm White (basically), and I'm a feminist (definitely), then I'm a White Feminist. And the more that I perceive that "feminism" is dominated in its rhetoric and its goals by white feminists, the less I want to be a part of it.

More and more I see that White Feminism pays little more than lip service to the idea that feminists have to agitate for racial equality, as well as gender equality. White feminists talk a lot about "women of color," but as I said in a chat with this blog's head proprietress almost six months ago, if you want to care about women of color, you have to care about men of color, too. Ponder the term that's popularly used to describe the principle that feminism should concern itself with racial equality: intersectionality. The mental image that is conjured up for me by the word "intersectionality" is that of a Venn Diagram. Where each circle is the set of systemically oppressive facts commonly true for a given gender-race group. And where the white women's circle overlaps with say, the black women's circle, the black women's circle overlaps even more with the black men's circle.

No where in this grand Venn diagram of oppression is it harder to draw the lines than when we think about the criminal justice system, and that's what is making it harder and harder for me to continue to be a White Feminist. Since reading the alternet piece back in April, these thoughts have been simmering at the lowest possible heat required to maintain a simmer, until they were all blown back up again yesterday on reading this Feministe post. It's about a girl who was sentenced to two years for stabbing (and killing) a man who held her in his house and told her she couldn't leave until she had sex with him. That is, he was in the process of carrying out a rape. And although I disagree with the post, my disagreement with it is causing me discomfort. The posts and comments cause me discomfort as well.

There is some sense there, that it is "good riddance" that the would-be rapist is dead. I can not endorse this sentiment, nor remain silent when it is expressed. I think human life, every human life (no, not zygotes) is valuable, and I abhor killing in all its forms: extrajudicial, state-sponsored, vigilante, defense of the person or of the state. As I said over there, I think the sentence is about right: drastically reduced because of the circumstances, but still an acknowledgment that someone lost their life. The outrage that this girl should have to serve time, given everything she's gone through, throws into sharp relief for me the way that White Feminism has just thrown men of color under the bus.

Never have I seen a true recognition that the criminal justice system, and the attempts to keep white women "safe" that are its stated purpose, have victimized Black and Hispanic men and boys in every town and city in this nation. I have seen them in juvenile detention centers and prisons, on the streets of my neighborhood and in my office, I have read through their painstaking letters and watched them cry over the life and the opportunities they've lost. The outrage over the two and a half years this troubled and abused young woman will have to spend in juvenile prison sickens me, because I know of so many young men with young lives just as tragic who will get no such leniency. They will be detained in prisons much more violent, with scarcer services and worse health care, that are much more crowded, for much longer than this young woman.

These prisons are the same place that we lament that more men are not sent: we as White Feminists want more and more rapists, domestic abusers, and child molesters to go there. But the criminal justice system is just another gladiator-ring for White men to exert their power over others. It is a disgusting spectacle of the triumph of White over Black, the powerful over the powerless, the strong over the weak, the armed over the unarmed, the sane over the mentally ill.

The injustices suffered by men of color in the prison system are inextricably linked to the injustices suffered by free middle-class white women, and this is completely ignored by White Feminism. Because when we incarcerate men, the force-drunk testosterone-fueled power structure there turns them into women. It limits their freedom of movement like the threat of rape does for women, it turns a blind eye to sexual violence in prison as in out, it uses prisoners as an outlet for White male rage just like white women. It binds them, abuses them, and deprives them of their liberties with a smug satisfaction that can not be mistaken for anything else.

In Hoffman's piece, she said:

[A]s white feminists, if we are working toward profound social change, we can choose not to engage in political work that is about assimilation to and achieving "safety" or "empowerment" or "freedom" of movement within existing power structures -- especially when those structures (e.g., militaristically enforced national borders, the prison industrial complex) are designed to make others unsafe, and unfree.

I wonder again: What is your feminism for? If it is for disruption and redistribution of power across society (i.e., not just for women like you), it cannot be so ignorant of, exploitative of, and even counter to the prison-abolition and immigrants' rights movements -- not only because marginalized women are involved in and affected by those struggles, but because they are where some of the most significant challenges to power are being made today.

I am striving, in my daily life, to fight for men of color, fight against the way they are victimized, marginalized, beaten and broken by the power structure that seeks to conquer them. And at the same time try not to get bogged down in the minutiae of being a middle-class White Feminist.

So much of White Feminism, especially the kind I have engaged in for most of my adult life, is excessively personal. In particular, the white feminism that dominates the feminist blogosphere tends to be very inward-directed. As in, how can I make my little world, my home and my workplace and my end of the street, a "feminist" place? How can I negotiate power in my own personal romantic relationships? How can I get my family to stop boxing me into prescribed roles based on my gender? How can I raise my child without enforcing gender norms on him or her?

This work is undeniably important. But I can't help feeling that for a lot of us, it's pretty self-indulgent. Would that women of color whose communities have been ravaged by the flip side of "safety" that White Feminists seek to bring to our own neighborhoods could have the luxury of worrying about whether the guy at the corner store calls me "sweetie." Or that poor women who are paid shit wages to clean up after rich people could have my luxury of obsessing over whether my boyfriend expects me to do the dishes, instead of being expected to, without question, do all the household labor for your own family as well as another's.

So I have to figure out how to be white, and be a feminist, without being a white feminist. Because as long as White Feminism is concerned, on a day-to-day basis, with fighting for the right of middle-class white women to be equal to middle-class white men, leaving women of color and especially men of color behind, I don't want to be a part of it.

UPDATE: As much as it was hard to put this out there, the comments have really helped flesh out this idea. I am promoting cj's comment to my post (which I hope is ok with him/her) because it really gets at what I was trying, and failed, to articulate.

I am not going to say that (white) women should never use the legal system because the legal system in the U.S. disproportionately affects minority men, or because it is used to destroy communities of color. But if the main focuses of the feminist movement center on reforms through legislation, or the court system, or better police protection, etc to reduce sexual assault- if the movement is centered around the authority of a legal system that so often works against people of color and protects white privilege, then not only are we unintentionally supporting a system that is racist, but we are also ignoring the needs of women of color who, for several reasons, may not feel comfortable or safe going to the police if they themselves are raped or living with domestic violence. Would someone in a community that is often terrorized by the police then want to call the police to come settle her domestic problems? Even if she wanted to see the perpetrator punished, would she want to expose her brother/son/friends to police brutality as well? Even without any of these concerns for her community, would she feel as confident as a white woman that a police officer/judge/media would be serious and sensitive about her claims of rape? (And we all know that even white women have good reason to be suspicious of the legal system treating ANY claims of rape seriously and sensitively.)

I think that if feminism, as a movement, is not seeking ways to address sexual violations outside of a racist legal system, it certainly is ignoring the needs many, many women. (Not only women of color, but any women who might be ignored or persecuted by the legal system- including poor women, trans women, queer women, women in the sex industry, and probably others.)

As an alternative to the legal system or vigilante justice (or doing nothing), I've heard some pretty great things about community justice/restorative justice programs. One of the really positive aspects of this, I think, is that the needs of the survivors of the crimes are discussed and hopefully met, as opposed to in a court room where the punishment of the perpetrator is the only thing that matters- the survivor's needs are nonexistent.

Having it

Or, more exactly, having it in bits and pieces and scattered all over the place, never quite recognizable as 'having it all at once.'

We've not yet found a replacement for our nannyshare situation. I expect it will take awhile; not the best time of year for this type of thing. It's taking up a huge amount of my psychic space. We just can't afford to pay our nanny what she needs to gross for any length of time, but we're in the middle of the semester and I can't not have the 20ish hours of care/wk that we've arranged. Stress.

I have said to people that graduate school is a very fine time to have babies. I still believe this is true. But while I feel good about the choices I have made and the reasons I've made them, I will in the future always advise graduate student mamas to get fulltime care if they can afford it.

That's obviously not how I did things, so let me back up a bit. I got pregnant unexpectedly, when I was midway through my PhD program and overseas for a year prepping for exams and doing a Mr. Vane work thing. My department was incredibly accomodating. They let me take exams in the summer (had been scheduled for fall) so I could be done before baby Vane's August birth. I was supposed to teach that fall, but they rescheduled the class for fall of the subsequent year. Still, I needed to be writing.

I was a productive new mama. I worked fast and with real focus when I was away from my baby, I think because the time felt so precious and so crucial to my sense of self. I desperately wanted to feel like I had my brain back and that I hadn't sacrificed my career by deciding to run with this pregnancy. Because I was working with such intensity, it seemed like I could get by on much less than full-time care. Mr. Vane and I didn't feel enthusiastic about institutional daycare at this point, and the few places we did feel good about had years-long waiting lists. So we hired a sitter for about 16 hours a week. Over the next 8 months, I wrote my prospectus and first chapter and taught a class during those 16 hours/wk, supplemented by frequent evening and weekend work. I felt good, like I was managing things.

It got harder. The novelty of time to work wore off and my productivity tapered off. I got more bored with my diss and worked with less gusto. The realities of never sleeping enough start to wear a person down. And so on. Somewhere along the way we shifted to 20 hours of care/wk in this nannyshare plus 2 mornings of preschool a week, and I taught a bunch more classes and finished my diss and graduated and taught even more classes. Which is to say, it all got done. But frequent evenings and weekends working turned into constant evenings and weekends working, supplemented by frequent 5am risings to get a few hours in. As many times as I have felt proud of myself for making things work, I have felt resentful of my sacrifice, of whatever I have internalized that made me prone towards that sacrifice.

Our story is like a million other academic families. Mr. Vane was never going to be the primary caregiver, not in our current living situation. His job pays our mortgage and is not flexible. My job has the illusion of being very flexible. It doesn't seem like we need fulltime care; we are middle-class enough in our essence to think this sounds like a good thing. And that's part of what I hate - in my moments of intense frustration, when I recognize I simply do not have enough time to do all I need to do, the comfort I can find is congratulating myself on keeping my kid out of daycare. And that makes me even more self-loathing; it's a gross thing to congratulate one's self about. It is objectively true that my daughter loves her nanny and that the nanny loves her. It has been a great situation. And there are time saving aspects of it, like the fact that she is almost never sick (in 3.5 years, 1 tummy sickness, 1 ear infection, and about 5 colds, give or take). But she's not that fragile, ultimately, and would've been fine in daycare. And we would've spent less on daycare than we do on the nanny.

Laydeez, here's where I get a little Linda-Hirschman on your asses: your job is not as flexible as you think it is. Not if you want to do it well. Yes, it's true that a lot of the work, the diss writing and article revising and paper grading, can be done late at night. But the lecture-attending can't. The office hours can't. The teaching can't. The conference traveling can't. And so on. An

My life is working fine and I am mostly happy. Its weird to realize, given that, that you wouldn't recommend your own course of action. But I wouldn't. Because it too often leaves me exhausted and resentful, and with faint disdain for the values that I would use to make me feel better. Maybe this is more negative than it should be because my family is out having fun and I am home writing job letters. And I am extra behind this week because I had to volunteer in toddler Vane's preschool class, which means losing a chunk of the week's work time. Maybe I should revisit this one of those crisp fall afternoons when I am walking to the playground with my kid at 3:30 and crunching through leaves. I'll try to remember to do so.

voting rights 101

Know your voting rights. Make sure other people know theirs.

We are an equal-opportunity blog

You guys know Taddyporter, right?

He's gonna start blogging for us. I'm sick of him sending me hilarious emails and awesome links like that mariachi bit down below and having to go through all the work of reposting them myself. Plus, since he's old and self-employed and shit, he doesn't have anything to do, unlike all us bitches, so he can post stuff when the rest of us are busy with our *jobs* or the constant illnesses that come along with having small germ factories children in the house. And as Sybil points out, when we're on our periods, we can send him out for tampons.

Extortion isn't funny, either

I am shocked. Read this letter (.pdf) that was sent by the "Yes on 8" folks to business that had donated to the No on 8 campaign.

Equality California is advertising on its website that it received a contribution of at least $10,000 from you....

We respectfully request that [your firm] withdraw its support of Equality California. Make a Donation of a like amount to ProtectMarriage.com which will help us correct this error....

Were you to elect not to donate comparably, it would be a clear indication that you are in opposition to traditional marriage. You would leave us no other reasonable assumption. The names of any companies and organizations who choose not to donate in like manner to ProtectMarriage.com but have given to Equality to California will be published. It is only fair for Proposition 8 supporters to know which companies and organizations oppose traditional marriage.

That's a shakedown, right? Is that shit even legal?

No on 8 is soliciting donations based on the strength of the email--if you find it appalling enough that you're motivated to contribute b/c of it, that's the link.

On the same topic, however, Apple's front page has this Hot News Headline, which makes me feel betterr.

Not funny any more

I wish they hadn't cut away--I'd like to see what McCain's expression was as she denied that bombing medical clinics is terrorism.

Brit Friend sent me the link, which is from Daily Kos.

pumpkins for obama

Genius!

Am going to a pumpkin carving party tomorrow and I think I found my pumpkin template.
Love love love it!

Su lucha tambien es nuestra lucha

Watch this. So awesome.

And I still love that picture of Obama in the black hat.

oh, *that's* what i forgot to do

Take the goddamn car in to be serviced. So it wouldn't die on me shortly after setting off to drive to Irvine. Thus putting me in the mortifying position of sending an email at, like, midnight to say that I wasn't going to show up the next morning.

Excuse me while I absolutely die of shame.

In order to form a more perfect union...

The folks over at PostBourgie have written some beautiful, beautiful posts today. Probably a theme wasn't intended, but it seems that their posts about conservatives ignorant and thoughtful, elitism, The Wire, and Obama's shoesare all about, well, hope. Hope and optimism that we can move beyond demonizing people we disagree with, that we can be (and expect, and appreciate, and affirm) thoughtful *and* patriotic.

Do check out the photos Shani-O linked in that last PB post. They made me cry. As I looked at them I was thinking of the phonebanking I did yesterday, to voters in Las Vegas. I do not know if they were registered democrats or what, the people I was calling. About half the names on the list were Spanish, and virtually everyone I actually talked to "sounded black," and about half of those sounded elderly. And every. single. one. was a firm Obama supporter, most of them adamently intended to vote early, most of them knew exactly where their early voting location was and what day it opened, and most of them said things that made it clear that their early voting plans would be a family affair. "Oh yes, I'm going tomorrow and my wife and I are taking her parents." "No, she isn't home, and no, I don't know when you can call back because I don't know where the hell she is and I'm her husband! (laughter) Oh yes, we're both supporting Obama. Do you even have to ask? We're going down to the Albertson's on Friday, my nephew is going to take us, and we're voting first thing that morning." "I voted yesterday with my daughter, honey, thank you so much for asking."

I don't know about you, but I have not, in my lifetime, felt *moved* by a politician or a political campaign. But this campaign I do. I am moved by the faces of those boys in that picture above, by the voices of old black people on the phone for whom voting is a family affair, by the thought of this white woman appealing to Obama parent-to-parent about her lost son, by the thoughtful white conservatives in the video up at that second link. By the feeling that, for the first time since I was nine and went to the fireworks in the bicentennial year, there's such a thing as "we the people," for real.

What's a petard?

In this thread I scold someone for using the word "sprog" and call Palin a hypocrite, and in this one I take glee in a child's having the flu.

Vanity, thy name is blogger.

dear election '08: kill me now

Good lord.

If the mind was able, it would be boggled.

Like the other Bitches, I've been buried in work and a hellacious pre-veto session schedule so feel free to share your most absurd Election '08 moment here.

Must. Excavate. Head. From. Ass.

Get this, people. I've had the most nagging feeling that I have something to do on Friday all week.

I've also known all week that a conference I'm presenting at at UC Irvine is coming up on the 24th. Seriously. Like, "write Irvine talk" is on the to-do list I wrote THIS WEEKEND.

I didn't put those two things together until, like . . . half an hour ago.

So basically, here it is 11:30 pm on Wednesday. Between now and tomorrow afternoon I have to:

-Grade midterms (I was thinking I'd just tell the students tomorrow that they won't be done 'til Friday, since I spent today teaching/taking PK and his friend to the zoo/phonebanking for Obama) (and boy was PK a sport about spending 3 hours in the evening sitting on the floor reading Mad Kids magazine--thank you again, J, for sending that--while I called people in Nevada)

- Run off a SECOND revised schedule for the rest of the semester to replace the one I handed out on MONDAY. This one will change "presentations" to "conferences" (per student request) and note that I'm cancelling class basically TOMORROW (from the pov of the students, who won't get the new schedule until tomorrow, obvs.) and jiggle around due dates accordingly.

- Pack, obviously.

- Probably cancel the playdate I arranged for tomorrow afternoon with a couple of Pk's friends, since we should be DRIVING TO IRVINE tomorrow afternoon. Though I suppose we can do that tomorrow evening, too.

- Cancel the fencing lesson for Friday.

- Email Mr. B. about the house I saw today, which is a li'l small, but Spanishy and cute and under $400k.

- Email the realtor and tell her I *can't* look at houses on Friday after all. DUH.

- Probably about THREE OTHER THINGS that I can't remember. Like oh, say, figure out what I'm going to talk about on Friday.

I Write Letters

Y'all, I've been so busy I can't see straight. I was out of town for a week at a hotel with no internet access, and now I'm back and a little swamped. But here's a little content for ya, until I have a chance to write something more substantive than my thoughts on chubby British soul singers.

Dear Broadsheet Editors:
This is a small complaint. In Lynn Harris' post "Barely Legal Castle", she characterized the blogs Feministing and Jezebel as having "taken up pitchforks" against the named toy, and she provided that she was a "tad less enraged" about it.

This is hardly the case. The post at Jezebel was less than twenty words and basically consisted of two links. The post at Feministing was two very short paragraphs describing the ad and ending with "sigh." Not quite the moral outrage indicated by Lynn Harris. I realize this seems petty, but it is symptomatic, I think, of the way Broadsheet tries to characterize itself as a "centrist" feminist blog by posturing as though those other feminists are so prone to overreacting. In fact, Lynn Harris spent several times as many words discussing the ad as did either of the bloggers she linked to, and good on her for it--her analysis is excellent.

I read Broadsheet every day, and I see frequent rhetorical nods such as this that Broadsheet doesn't want to be too feminist, pandering to its mainstream readers (or at least commenters) who think any feminist issue is one so minor as to only merit silence. I commend the work you do, but I urge you to consider whether you are, in some small way, undermining your own purposes by parroting the same rhetoric that is used to dismiss feminist concerns everywhere.

Sincerely,

M. LeBlanc

Tips

I forgot to offer this pearl of wisdom gleaned from my student conferences this week: When complaining about your grade, refrain from offering this as evidence in your favor: "I asked my upper-classmen friends to read this paper and they were all TOTALLY sure I proved my point."

dear childcare universe

Stop fucking with me.

Internet, will you nanny-share with me? I have a wonderful caretaker - warm, experienced, and thoughtful. 3 days a week, could the Internet find something or someone for her to take care of? Also, Internet, could you realize going in that 1) you might have to share your olive oil and 2) 3 days a week are not now and will likely not ever be the same as 5 days a week? Above all, Internet, could you just not flake?

I hereby promise a longer post at some point about the difficulties of childcare and academic working mommyhood when I am less irritated.

Seriously though, if you think you live near me and you need some nanny-share type situation, email me.

Is the semester over yet?

Things that have happened in the last few days:

1. The dead cat house is officially no longer an option--realtor went over w/ a contractor friend, who confirmed that yes, we're looking at 10k+ in repairs, easy. New listings up and running.
2. I got sick.
3. PK's bday party on Saturday.
4. Mr. B. left for Reno--he gets back on Saturday. I think.

Things that I fucked up or forgot or blew off:

1. My IHE article for today.
2. My grading (I am so woefully behind).
3. Called in sick today, even though I don't think I have sick leave and even though I am cancelling class for Friday. But I really am sick!! Also I don't think I'm rehired for next semester. Still, though. Guilt.
4. Kitchen still needs cleaning from party. It's about half done, and I straightened up the living room. But.
5. Didn't take garbage cans out last night.

Things that I must/will/want to do this week:

1. Take PK to Magic Mountain for his bday (which is today, but we're not doing it today b/c, sick). He and I love roller coasters. Mr. B. does not. Perfect mama/son activity. If I can stop being sick.
2. Tomorrow 8 am: dentist. Ugh.
3. Wednesday: Take PK and his friend R. to the zoo (this week is the kids' fall break).
4. Wednesday pm: Volunteered to phone bank at Obama hq. PK will bring a book or my iphone or something. Obama hq says there will be Chinese food.
5. Promised to arrange playdates with PK's friend C., and with his other friends, the sisters L. and H.
6. Today: Grade at least the overdue set of papers. And hopefully the midterms, which I know the students are anxious about.
7. All week: Promised to go in and feed classroom menagerie (mouse, lizards, preying mantis, crickets) while teacher is in La Paz.
8: Pay bills, call AT&T re. rebate, call payroll re. their overpaying me and needing to take overpayment out of subsequent checks (thank god I have been banking, rather than spending, my paychecks), balance checkbook.
9: Make PK's halloween costume. Fuck.

Things I am grateful for:

After much polite pleading from PK--with much keeping of his room clean and being genuinely helpful in order to demonstrate that he's "old enough to postpone short-term gratification for long-term results," i.e., show that he is capable of doing as he's supposed to do (stop playing video games) even when he wants to be doing something else (playing video games)-- along with weakening on the Mama front and "ooh, goody" on the Papa front, PK got a Wii for his bday. I'd done a very good job of explaining to him that I would *consider* it but that that was *not* a promise and that all things equal I'd just as soon wait for Xmas, he was genuinely surprised and nearly speechless. The only other time I've seen that look on his face was when Santa brought the mice.

I am grateful for this because, despite all my emphasis on how getting a game system would mean that he *couldn't* just play video games all day, well, sick Mama is letting PK play video games all day. Because FUCK IT I am sick and I have to grade.

Sigh.

Monday Morning Reminders

If you want to volunteer your efforts to voter protection, you can sign up on the Obama website here.

The Obama campaign is running a smart, strategic race and they have more than a few paths forged to win on Nov 4th. But their victory depends on folks (in urban areas, in communities of color and in poorer communities) being able to vote without interference.

Do your bit.

(And have you voted, yet? You really should. Like. Really. Early voting will end by Oct. 30 in most states.

I voted on Saturday morning down the street from my place and it was great. While the poll workers were a little disorganized, they were also helpful, patient and walked us through how to use the new touchscreen voting machines. These new machines had two methods of verifying your vote AND there was a paper receipt of your ballot that you could see. I'm now a convert. Best of all - NO lines. No challenges and only one transplanted suburban McCain voter asshole in line grumbling to his Obama-voting wife about political hacks working the polling place.)

[via Feministe]

Monday Morning Contradictions

I woke up from a dream about having a niece in South Dakota (which I don't) who couldn't get an abortion. Over coffee, I studied the map of South Dakota and considered just how far one could have to drive to get an abortion. It's a big state. Am feeling paralyzed about not knowing what to do to oppose that initiative, which seems likely to pass. Consider this a reminder to make a Planned Parenthood donation this week and to do some calling for the Obama campaign re: women's issues. I did this a few weeks ago and didn't often stay on the women's issues script, but I think I will try harder to this weekend.

I recommend these two posts about McCain's apparent contempt for women's decision-making and the imperative of access to late-term abortion.

While I almost can't bear to write this in the same post as the above material, I thought Sarah Palin was fine on SNL. Pretty near likable in fact. She wasn't like, integral, and certainly Amy Poehler was the star of that Weekend Update segment. But I didn't hate looking at her; I even caught myself giving her credit for doing it.

But why? I mean, who gives a shit if she seems likable on SNL? It makes no sense, but it does seem to matter. I also watched Obama and McCain doing their comedy routines at the Al Smith Memorial Dinner this weekend. Both funny and sort of heartwarming to watch because, well, because I am sort of like my mom in my distaste for rancor over all. I like it when we all get along.

But a couple days from having watched the routines I find myself more depressed by them. I am reminded of the first time I went to a professional football game and was completely shocked to discover that during the TV commercial breaks the players just chilled out on the field, chatting with each other, possibly about good dinner spots, giving hugs and laughing. And then when the game started again, it was smash 'em up football like nothing ever happened. And it's not like I ever thought that NFL games were a matter of life or death (except where the Ravens are concerned; then maybe) but man I didn't need to see that it was such theater. That's how the Al Smith comedy routines and the Palin SNL appearance made me feel ultimately. Yea, I'm glad we're all regular people with a sense of humor and the ability to laugh at ourselves, let our guards down, blah blah. But there are some seriously higher stakes in this election than in the average AFC North game, and I just am not ready to be reminded how much of what goes on is transparently political theater.

Times when I'm sad to be right

Scene: Tonight, watching SNL with my dude, drinking gin gimlets.

[Coming back from commercial break, a woman's face appears above the SNL logo]
Me: Who's that?
B: I think we're about to find out.
Josh Brolin [on tv]: Ladies and Gentlemen, Adele!
B: Who?
Me: I think he said "Adele."
B: Do you have any idea who that is?
Me: No.
[Song begins; she starts singing]
Me: She's gotta be British. Fat chicks don't make it in the US.
B: You think?
Me: I'll bet you $10.



And sure enough, "born 5 May 1988 in Enfield, North London." It really chaps my fucking hide that you can not be a mainstream music success in this country, especially as a young woman, if you don't conform to a very rigid set of standards. Anyway, she's fabulous and gorgeous.

See and hear her big hit here (embedding is disabled, otherwise I'd do it).

Maybe this will change my dad's mind

So, Proposition 8. Long chat with my dad the other day when he allowed as to his intending to vote for it. Which on the one hand, doesn't surprise me--I mean, I know he's homophobic--but on the other hand, well, it does. He may be uncomfortable with teh gays, but he *does* know and like some gay people and, more to the point, he has always been pretty reliable about social justice and civil rights issues. He's a Catholic, but one of those 60s and 70s style Vatican II Catholics who, you know, care about the poor and shit.

Anyhoo. So blah blah have I read the Bishops' statement, which no, I hadn't, but I went and read it and big surprise: teh gays can't *really* have children in the Natural Way that God Intended, at least not within gay marriage, and It's Traditional, Darn It, to think of marriage as heterosexual!!! I point out to dad (who had a vasectomy after my sister was born, ahem) that his second marriage is considered perfectly valid to the Church even though he and his wife can't have children. He dodges with some trumped-up nonsense (and I think he really is worried about this, but still) about "what if a priest refuses to marry a gay couple and then the state takes away the priest's license to perform weddings??!?" I point out that that's never happened, that gay marriage is legal in places like Ontario and Spain and the Netherlands, all of which have Catholic priests, and that worrying about "what if" scenarios when it's a simple question of equal rights is very unlike him. He argues that some clerk in Fresno (I think it was) got in trouble for refusing to do a gay marriage the first time they were legal here, and I point out that said clerk is a representative of the state of California, which a priest is not. Plus I remind him about the concept of freedom of religion and mention, in passing, the phrase "separate but equal" (which gets to him, what with caring about civil rights and all).

No real movement, though. I might sic Pseudonymous Kid, who feels pretty strongly about gay marriage*, on his grandpa when grandpa comes up this weekend for PK's birthday. Or I might not, on the grounds that that's pretty dirty pool and might be kind of unkind to PK, who adores his grandpa, and I do kind of think it's important to let kids and their grandparents find their own relationships together, sans parental influence peddling.

Before I set PK against my dad, maybe I'll point out that the California Teacher's Association--which my dad, being a retired teacher and good solid liberal pro-union type always supports--is against Prop 8.*** We'll see if that works.

*Pseudonymous Kid in the car today, passing a house with a "Yes on 8" sign**: "Mama, I'm really disappointed that neither of the presidential candidates support gay marriage." He watched the second debate and was bugged by that. I'm pretty pleased with his independent thinking on the issue; he's a big fan of Obama, but clearly gets that supporting someone doesn't mean that person is right about everything.

** And wtf is up with those signs, anyway? "Protect marriage," okay, right, I get that that means "protect my idea of what a marriage is supposed to look like," but "Protect kids"? I seriously do not understand what the supposed danger to children is here.

***Also there's a donation challenge ongoing for the No on 8 folks through Sunday--feel free to drop them some money. I wasn't going to, figuring it wouldn't pass and I wanted to put my money behind Obama, but Obama's looking pretty secure now and, well, Prop 8 isn't. So I'm going to drop them $50 or so when we get paid tomorrow.

Out of the frying pan, into the furnace

Remember how Citigroup and Wells Fargo were fighting over who was gonna buy part of Wachovia's corpse? And how initially it was supposed to be Citigroup that was the rescuer, before Wells outbid them?

Citigroup themselves just reported a $2.8 billion loss. For the quarter. They lost 2.8 billion in three months. That would be their fourth straight quarter of losses, which add up to more than $64 billion.

That's one of the healthy banks, there, folks. Don't you feel much better, knowing that?

this debate: an open thread

this debate is giving me a headache. wasn't this supposed to be about domestic issues?

so far, apparently, economic issues trump every other domestic policy that matters to a significant portion of this population? 45 minutes of taxes, negative campaigning nonsense (where McCain thinks criticism of policy = personal attacks), vice presidential suitability and nothing about reproductive justice, women's particular vulnerability in this economic time, equal pay or the right to privacy; also nothing (so far) on their differing views on the SCOTUS and what their legacy would be.

how's the debate treating you?

(Filthy Rich) Blog Action Day

I cant think of a better time to ask you to help …

Actually, before I tell you about them, have a look at this page …

…. and then guess the number that would take you below 50% ….

…. and enter it …..

…..and keep guessing …..

and now, I cant think of a better time to ask you to help these people
(who are probably in the same half as you).

Thanks.

Britfriend

via this site and that one (and Alethea, who reminded me of this stuff the last time I was here)

Easiest Q&A ever

A reader writes:

Can you or one of your co-bloggers please explain the McCain health care plan? Specifically how his numbers work out, because I don't get it. And I also don't get why a single gets $2500 but a family "only" gets $5000. If one person is worth $2500, then how does my family of 5 work with $5000 effectively?

As it is right now I have a high deductible HSA. How we're doing it now is paying in from husband's salary (I'm at home - thus unpaid) an amount equivalent to the deductible, over the course of the year, which is $4300. My husband's employer also kicks in about $1800. Our HSA can gain interest and whatever we don't spend rolls over into the next year. It took me a while to get used to it, but I can deal with it now. I love that I can go pretty much anywhere I want with it (so McCain can stick it when he talks about crossing state lines).

But I truly do NOT understand how his plan is better. Help?

My answer:

You got it

better living through recipes

Man have I had a shit day.

Fitful sleep with dreams about a great aunt who died yesterday (I didn't really know her), followed by a slew of mediocre papers to grade in the morning. Meh, average. Realized I sent out two job applications with several typos apiece. Eh, slightly below average. Received a nasty, condescending reader's report on an article I've had out for 7 months and of which I am very proud. The reader said nothing positive about the piece. I'm not going to lie, that really effed up my afternoon; there were tears.

I recovered though, and walked with my kid to our local pub for dinner, where, upon arriving, I quickly opened a door into her sandaled foot, taking a giant chunk of skin off her big toe. Many towels, band aids, painful applications of peroxide and Neosporins later, she is asleep. But that whole episode really put the nail in the coffin on this day for me. Tuesday, you are dead to me.

So, I don't know about y'all, but when my day sucks I bake. I made peanut butter cookies during the kid's nap after I got the readers report. After the toe incident, I decided I definitely needed to bake more. Here's what I've thrown together after a few glances at established recipes, modified pretty drastically for what I have in the house:

Pear Muffins

3 over-ripe bartlett pears, diced
1/2 cup wheat flour
1/2 cup all purpose flour
1 egg
1/3 cup vegetable oil
1/4 cup honey
1/4 cup applesauce
1/2 cup strawberry yogurt
1 1/2 tsp baking powder
1 1/2 tsp baking soda (I don't really know how the powder/soda thing should work so when making up a recipe I use equal parts each. I am a maverick.)
some cinnamon
some salt
some ginger

Mix. I never could deal with the thing where you mix the dry stuff and the wet stuff separately. I'm trying baking at 350 for what I'm guessing to be 15 minutes, based on my eyeballing at 5 minutes. Will update with results.

UPDATE: It was more like 20 minutes. Muffins are good in the sense that they are very muffin-y - texture and consistency are just right - but they aren't as sweet as I wanted them to be. Maybe a bit more honey and some straight up sugar would make them taste less appropriate for my daughter's annoying preschool. Which is to say better.

Thank you, blogosphere

So my poor students have to do a "timed writing test" as part of the course requirements (not my idea). Which we've been working on for about a week. It's the weirdest thing--their practice exams are *so short* that they can't even count as essays--like three, four sentences. But their actual essay essays--the ones that aren't written in class--are pretty good, content-wise. I can't figure it out. Yesterday I had them do a five minute freewrite, the "don't lift your pencil from the paper" kind and they all wrote at least half a page, so I think they're all getting hung up on the THIS IS A TEST thing. I have actually started making them mediate for a minute or two before starting their practice exams.

Or maybe it's that they hate my prompts. The first one was a Sarah Vowell essay about Pell Grants, but who doesn't like Sarah Vowell? Over the weekend I put up a couple of optional practices about the economy and okay, fine: no one likes the economy (or extra work). Yesterday it was some boring crap about transit spending that I snagged off CUNY's website (and changed "subway" to "bus system").

But today, gold mine. If they don't get a bit of a kick out of their "I'm-going-to-be-gone-next-week-at-the-DNC," Obama-buttons-all-over-my-bag, make-sure-you-register-to-vote! professor giving them this as a prompt, I'll have to tear my hair out.

Hey ladies

If you read this blog, you care about reproductive rights.

Pick up your phones.

According to 538, Indiana's the state you want to pick. It's 50/50 there right now.

As the great John McEnroe would say .....

At a Johnston, PA rally, Sarah Palin speaks about Obama and abortion rights: "In short, Sen. Obama is a politician who has long since left behind even the middle ground on the issue of life."

Source: AP

Weekend Family Blogging: Tim Burton edition

Someone's Halloween costume has arrived.

WLF, Saturday: is it over yet?

No. It isn't.

I've snuck out of a foreign policy session to run over to my office and change clothes before heading back while the Secret Service sweeps the ballroom. (The Service forced the waiters to completely clear our lunch tables; glasses were snatched mid-gulp from women! Who knew napkins and glassware were such a threat?)

Baby needs a nap! I am totally policied out.

Since waking at 5.30 am, I've been stuffed with coffee, economic policy (courtesy of fmr. Secretary Robert Rudin and Laura Tyson), energy policy (wow, Van Jones is hot), a briefing on the SCOTUS (we're screwed if the Obama-Biden team doesn't win) and sat through a weird strategy lunch briefing led by Axelrod. I'm nearly delirious with information overload. And wouldn't you know that nearly all of these women are fully decked out in suits? On a Saturday! The day began at 7 am!

Brief impressions: Rubin and Tyson rocked - the economy is still frakked but they are confident it can be fixed over time; Suzie Orman either didn't prepare remarks or just decided to perform our national anxiety in front of us; Podhertz bogarted the mic too much; Jones was great on the green economy (get his book!); Lily Ledbetter needs to stump in every small town across America; apparently, the Roberts court is trending toward hearing fewer and fewer cases and the federal bench needs more diversity; and folks who think a Q&A should be used to ask the campaign for yard signs need to sit down.

Big take away so far: to avoid long lines and challenges, if your state's early voting has opened, VOTE EARLY. The campaign is laying a huge foundation to address voter suppression issues and need Nov 4 to go as smoothly as possible, as well as allow the campaign to open enough of a numbers lead that it helps builds momentun for Election Day. (Did that make sense?) They announced for the first time a big aggressive media push to publicize efforts by the GOP to suppress votes and are calling for lawyers to volunteer with the campaign to help with voter protection.

Ok. Now I have to go back to network and then Obama speaks at 4 pm.

Then maybe I can go home and sleep.

This post is for *Certain Readers*

Yeah, you know who you are. Check it out. I talked to those guys at the DNC and never got around to blogging about it, but basically, I took pics of them with the sign and then later I was having a late-night breakfast with Lindsay Beyerstein and one of them (at the time I didn't realize it was one of the same people with the sign, I just figured there were a few people like that around the convention) walked by with a hat that said "Rednecks for Obama," this old guy like my grandpa, and I was so charmed and I shouted "I love your hat!" and he smiled and we talked about the importance of a good restaurant that serves late-night breakfast and aren't we all having a good time here at the convention and go Obama!

I took a couple of really bad cellphone pictures, but I don't seem to be able to find them now. :(

WLIF, Friday, pt 2: massage, engagement, potato...

5.38 - Gayle King is going to introduce Michelle Obama; aww, not as big a standing ovation as Oprah's. What do we learn from Gayle? Maria Pinto dresses Michelle Obama, she's never been disappointed by Barack and that Gayle's ex cheated on her! Thanks, Gayle.

5.50-Michelle Obama walks onstage; wow, her suit rocks. It's lean, black, velvety and very urban chic. She looks so good! Meanwhile, I'm a little bloated.

For an event that's meant to massage the big donors, this whole day is working for me; it's personal, personable, intimate. It really feels like a tent revival meeting. She gives a version of her convention speech but I don't think anyone minds. What I like about her is her no nonsense, smart, straight up, a little stern but also funny manner - she's the cool mom, the cool older sister who will tell you the hard stuff, shrug and then say 'You know what you have to do.' I totally respect her!

And just like that, the first day's session is over! I can't believe I have to be here tomorrow morning at 7. Dude.

Final thoughts: took a while to get to the mixer but I've sucked down several gin/tonics 95 stories above the city. I'm excited about tomorrow: the policy workshops! Especially excited about the SCOTUS and economy sessions.

Some folks might look at this like an event for privileged, rich donors. Well, yeah. It is (though it's certainly not a pleasure junket.) Fundraising 101: big donors like to be massaged. To be clear, though, these women aren't merely donors. These women spend a lot of time volunteering for the campaign, so it's not just about money.

I liked seeing the energy of the campaign from the other side. I was saying to my roommate that the Obama campaign has been faulted for being aloof, cool, slow to react, whatever. But listening to Ploufe I saw his intensity and I can only assume that everyone involved in this campaign is just as intense. This campaign is anything but aloof. They are angry at the latest smears, they're indignant at our political landscape, they are hungry to win, they believe in their ideas and they truly believe that you change things by leading by example. (So, no. Don't expect the Obama campaign to whip the gloves off and call McCain a Race Baiting Geezer. Ain't gonna happen.) The volunteers are fired up; every woman who stood up there to speak about why they joined this campaign was almost vibrating with their burning desire to win this election for Obama. This kind of engagement was amazing to see and feel.

(Or creepy. Whichever.)

More importantly: What the hell am I going to wear tomorrow?

Credit where due

Good for McCain.

WLIF conference, Friday: where Ding experiences giddiness and lust

2.30- checked in with a great deal of ease; yes, I forgot my feminaries so now I have whole box of tampons hanging out of my purse from hotel shop - tampons and mints, niice; women of all ages are here (kids, teenagers, college and the rest of us) and just got invited to a mixer at the Hancock tonight by the Black Women for Obama folks; she laughed when I asked if it was ok to bring my white roommate- I didn't know! It could be a militant thing!

2.37-the music is very 'praise'-like. (Folks who've grown up in church will know what I'm talking about.) I wonder if slightly vanilla gospel translates into 'hope.' I could really do with a water...

2-something: it's more crowded now and I'm apparently sitting with the tony women from California. Lots of Bulgari. I really want water. Or a drink. Like a gin/tonic. Mmmm.

3.02 - it's not Bulgari; it's like Anais or Tresor. Hm, definitely Tresor. And the praise/hope music really needs to stop. Are women supposed to respond to sappy slow music? It's so bad I want to kill my ears.

3.11 - Sigh. Program running late. Session begins in 20 min. I bet it's Oprah making everything late. Diva!

The women who've come here have brought their mothers, daughters and gay male friends. Very next gen. Very supportive sisterhood, like a movie montage. Hm. That's exactly what the music sounds like: a Lifetime tv show for women.

3.43 - opens with great video narrated by Obamas with images of female volunteers. I'm actually choking up. Pledge of allegiance led by adorable little African American girl. I actually remembered it! You can tell we're all panicking that we'll blank out.

Valeri Jarrett- very cute in a very cute suit (in fact, there are tons of chic women here in very very chic suits. Thank GOD I brought my cute suit to the office); brief roll call - a lot of women here from battleground states and even Alaska! (big laugh) There are Republican and independent women here, too!

Oprah- every cell phone has just gone ballistic. Flashes everywhere! She looks really great. She says: 'That's what women do: we know things and we do things' Big theme is how women have mothered this country. Shout out to Hilary Clinton - very messianic speech about obama being the One. I get it but it's a little creepy. What about managing expectations?

Huge standing ovation when she said we are here to help him cross the finish line. Very intense, the way she repeated it.

Great line: 'We are not in the mood to be fooled again!' Oprah is giving a really great speech. Kinda weird, the messianic overtones. Just slammed on the McCain 'that one' dig. Huge applause. She asked what were going to do now and, very slowly and intensely, she says 'Oh, yes. We are going to elect Barack Obama' She says this is 'An amazing hour' where we can make things right. 'Yes we will.'

4.05 - Howard Dean is next; the WLIF is the hugest fundraising body in the party. Wow, they've been doing this for 15 yrs; a video greeting from HRC who has a great line about this election being a corrective, bringing America back 'from the ashes of the Bushes.' It's a funny line.

Ok, Dean is pretty cute, in a very vintage, clean cut, log cabin way. I am so hormonal and need to get laid after this conference. So weird to see him like this! He was a candidate! He plays up the 50 state strategy, talking about the new battleground states as a product of it; says we're set to make gains in crucial senate races, including the K. Hagan race which gained momentum in September. Brief rundown: 229K new registered voters in NC, OH seat is going to be in play with female candidates and Dean goes down the roll, listing female candidates who are positioned to run very competitively in states that the party hadn't thought about before; a crucial point about how Obama has transformed the race and is energizing other candidates, while the new crop of candidates are also lending support to the Obama campaign - it makes total sense from a communications POV. At last, synergy!!

Very very important: Dean stresses that we need to VOTE EARLY!! Their strategy depends on strong showing in all our crucial states.

Private moments from the convention video: totally sweet; yes, I am tearing up. How hormonal am I? Apparently the Obama girls love the Jonas bros. Who are they?

4.38 - David Ploufe is next; Obama campaign has registered over 1.5 million new voters-ooh! A map! Be prepared. The notes are going to get a little choppy about progress on the ground:

MI firmly on obama map- giving strong electoral base-'lean Obama' states include NM, VA(leans obama and campaign fighting hard for it), IA, MN, NH, WI(comfortable lead here and critical of McCain for campaigning badly which is ultimately turning folks off); PA is a tough state and the campaign needs ads there; PA is ground zero for nasty smears; electorally, the 207 from strong Obama states and 70 from the 'leans Obama' states gives electoral lead firmly to Obama. But now he stuns me: they're going after leaning mccain states! It's so aggressive, I love it.

Battleground states: 101 electoral votes up for grabs; NV is favorable but a scrappy fight anticipated; MT is still a dead heat; CO is like VA; MO and IN also in play with dead heats giving Obama a chance to drain McCain campaign's resources; OH is a surprise with a close lead for Obama. Ploufe estimates that McCain needs to turnout vote at Bush levels and surpass it by 10 pts, which he won't be able to do; NC very close and now leans Obama; FL is troublesome for McCain and will be close, with a slim Obama lead perhaps; Ploufe emphasizes that without FL McCain can't win presidency! We need to keep it from him!

The many paths strategy to Nov 4 is working! Mccain has just one path. Boots on the ground are absolutely crucial. Encourages aggressive pushback for McCain and keep attention on the economy! McCain negatives are rising! Pleased at how aggressive Ploufe sounds about the campaign's progress and attitude: they want to 'lay the wood' to McCain. He says, based on their behavior over the last two weeks, McCain and Palin don't deserve the presidency. Love. It. God, I love smart guys!

5.04 - jill biden is very sweet but not very dynamic. Then again, it's been a loong afternoon. My hormones are making me googly eyed for Joe Biden. Huge standing ovatn for his role in creating VAWA. Jeez, he's telling a dating story!! My lord, he is really chatty and goes from a mom story to how great the Obama family is and the SCOTUS and now to Palin and the 'debate.' All in one sentence.

Re: Palin, Biden says 'being a woman is not the same as being there for women.' Huge applause. Great line but I'm thinking about how a line like that would play in the media. Generally, good stump speech stuff. The crowd is like putty. It's hushed in here; he goes after the Values crap and posits progressive policies are our expression of values. Hey, hello, hot secret service guys. Very tall, very still, very 'I will tackle your ass.'

5.32 - so need a drink. Parched! Sen Amy Klobuchar from MN does the rah rah rah for getting a filibuster proof Senate. Big picture, folks - it's not just the White House we need to fight for!

More in part 2.

I gotta say this

You know, these videos of McCain supporters that have been making the rounds, and the latest McCain ads, and this "pals around with terrorists" crap: that shit is despicable.

I mean, really. McCain and Palin? You people have no honor. You have no integrity. You should be too fucking ashamed to leave the house.

You do not call someone a terrorist to win an election. You do not pander to ignorant, hate-filled racists. You don't do that shit under the banner of "putting the country first." You don't do that shit and smile. You don't do that shit and talk about your own honor. You don't do that shit and get to remain a respectable human being.

And no, I'm not linking to any of that crap. Because it's beneath notice. I'm sorry to be mentioning it at all.

Here, instead, enjoy Sarah Palin's greatest hits, which is making me feel more amused and less hateful. Plus her bouffant is SO TERRIBLE. It's like when you're in high school and you're trying on new hair styles in the mirror trying to look like a grown-up lady or something. But you wouldn't wear that out of the house.

See? *That's* the kind of mean petty bullshit you can say about your political opponents: shallow meaningless sniping.

Ding's all a-twitter

Okay, I'm twittering for her over there in the twitter column, but one of my other bitches better take over in about ten minutes because PK and I off for our fencing lesson. Yes, that's right: after 6 weeks of taking him and watching, I've decided to join the kid. First one of us to impale the other, wins.

is it bad i want a photo with Obama?

Sometimes, unexpected opportunities just fall into your lap.

It's been a stressful week at Large Metropolitan Non Profit, as well as with my other non profit board obligation, but all of that will have been worth it because of what's going to happen in a few hours. My CEO (a very generous woman) is giving me her credentials for the National Women's Leadership Issues conference, being held in Chicago today and tomorrow.

Barack & Michelle Obama, high-level policy makers, and campaign advisors will all be there and I, little ol' me, will be soaking it all in. To hear about issues directly from policy wonks I've only read about - for two days! This kind of access is unbelievable. I'm giddy! Thank goodness I brought a cute suit and shoes to work and have an eyebrow appt at lunch. Yes, I am a sucker for political celebrity.

(I'd Twitter it for y'all but, alas, my Twitter is under my real name and I'm not for blowing my cover right now. I'll do my best to post something about it, though!)

house hunt update!

Check it, folks! Nearly one in six American homeowners is now under water! Especially people who bought in the last couple years! THANK FUCKING GOD that we couldn't afford to buy when we first moved here.

That said, look at this fascinating little graphical accompaniment .

In other news, unsurprisingly, the sellers of "our" house haven't yet responded to our most recent unreasonable request, that they pay all closing costs. Nor has the bank person told us whether Mr. B.'s disabled veteran status will let us get out of the VA's 10k whatever-it-is one-time fee. Nor has the VA assessment been scheduled, presumably because our realtor is waiting to find out if one of those two things is going to happen before she puts us on the hook for the $375 that the inspection will cost. At this point I really just want this sale to either fucking close already, or fall apart so that we can MOVE THE FUCK ON.*

What *has* happened, though, is that our mortgage provider--who by the way, have I told you that it's Wachovia?--had someone from an office in freaking Texas call us and ask us to provide, yet again, copies of all the same paperwork we provided in June.

Why?

Well, one, the person we were working with in June doesn't work for them any more. She left just before they went under, hopefully (since I liked her) because she knew it was happening and found a better job just in time. So anyhoo, my understanding is something along the lines of "oh, all the stuff she was handling is in her account, and since it's all very Sensitive Information, of course, no one else can access it and she's not here any more."

And two, "that was back in June! Your assets may have changed since then!"

Yeah, well, look who's talking.



*By the way, I talked to my insurance company today. Which is *not* AIG, amazingly. And they say that the replacement cost on the house as described would be about $302k. The difference between that and what we're paying is about $100k, i.e., that's the cost, to us, of the land the house is sitting on. I assume that the insurance company's figures are impeccably up-to-date since, hello, insurance company.

So aside from the fact that the place is a massive fixer, I'm feeling like we've done pretty well at getting a good price point.

-----

P.S. I just heard on the news that in Cook County, IL, the sheriff has announced that his department will no longer serve people with eviction notices. Because too many evictions are served on tenants because their *landlords* are being foreclosed on.

On the walk home today

"PK, what I want is for you to let me have my own thoughts for the next block. Okay?"
"Okay, Mama. Then can we play twenty questions?"
"Let me have my own thoughts for now!"
"Okay. Then can we play twenty questions?"
"PK, you are not letting me have my own thoughts."

Remedial

For the record, when you or a loved one gets banned from commenting on a blog, that's not censorship. You're not John fucking Steinbeck, nor are you in some shitty dystopian science fiction movie, ok?

You just got un-invited to a dinner party. Because you are annoying and ruin the conversation.

Edited by bitchphd to add that comment moderation has now been turned on. Comments by trolls or troll apologists will be deleted without remorse. Suck it.

Debate III

Here’s what I took from the debate: McCain looked low energy and surprisingly calm; I expected more nastiness from him, more fight. But the much more surprising thing was the roll-out of the gov’t-buy-up-bad-mortgages plan. This was, by all accounts, to be his big reveal for the night. In theory it’s not a terrible idea, though I would want to hear the specifics. But there’s the problem: I think it’s not a terrible idea. The smaller-gov’t, no handouts portion of the Republican base can’t stand this idea. It’s anathema.

McCain has effectively abandoned campaigning for their votes, from what I can tell. Palin is doing all of that lifting. And she’s doing it with some rhetoric about gov’t getting out of the way, but no real specifics about what that might mean, and invocations of American exceptionalism and fear-mongering mudslinging. Which does not speak very highly of the ticket’s opinion of their base.

Further, it makes for a completely incoherent ticket. McCain opposes drilling in ANWR, while Palin gleefully encourages supporters to chant “drill, baby, drill.” Palin packages everything that has to do with Washington as out of touch, corrupt, and wishy-washy, while McCain distinguishes himself from Obama by referring over and over to his long years in the Senate. McCain has long been a media darling, but Palin suggests that everything coming through the “filter” of mainstream media is biased and flawed. McCain wants to gov’t to buy up bad mortgages and engineer new price negotiations, Palin wants gov’t to get out of the way and stop creatin’ problems when you mean to solve ‘em. McCain says you need a record of foreign policy experience to handle the position, but Palin says her trade meetings with Russia should do the trick.

It can’t work. Being maverick-y is not in itself glue that can hold the ticket together; it is, in fact, literally the opposite (and I think a “team of mavericks” is at least paradoxical if not flatly oxymoronic). It’s curious that the side which so angrily characterized Obama as empty rhetoric, style over substance, has produced a ticket of inconsistent and incoherent rhetoric, one where one actually can’t buy into the rhetoric, but the rhetoric deconstructs itself.

Debate II

Who says Dungeons-and-Dragons-playing, cheetohs-eating liberal bloggers can't be funny? Yglesias, in his brief debate wrap-up is both witty and absolutely correct:

McCain took the same talking points (earmarks bad, tax cuts good, earmarks very bad) that have seen him fall behind and decided to repeat them with less energy.

Noticing

CNN has an apparently endless supply of photos like this one, which they are using to convey the stress of a tanking stock market. It works, obviously, since this guy does look miserable. But he also looks sort of loathesome - pasty and zombie-ish and like the guy you root against in the movie about Wall Street greed. The incessant choice of this kind of imagery makes me given to reductive, almost cartoonish reactions to the crisis, and I'm not even anti-bailout. Just an observation.

debate reaction

Am I the only one who finds McCain's sort of carefully polite constant repetition that "he's been there, he knows what it's like" etc. etc. really irritating? I don't care about your personal history, dude: I want to hear what you're going to do about the problems we have now. From what I saw (the last hour of the debate), it's as if McCain's approach boils down to "trust me," while Obama's is more like "here is what I plan to do and why." I'd much rather know what I'm getting into as the economy tanks and reflecting on the last eight years than just be told, yet again, to trust someone because he means well.

Also, did you guys know that Jane Hamsher and Matt Lewis are doing the debate commentary on cnn.com?

Fraud

No wonder she's getting such snark mileage out of Biden's suggestion that doing one's duty re: paying taxes is a part of patriotism: the Palins don't seem to be paying all of theirs.

Femininity--Hide it under a bushel basket

Jill at Feministe makes a good catch: when Megan Carpentier (of Jezebel) and Rebecca Traister (of Salon) did a Bloggingheads segment, the NYT posted it with the caption "Megan Carpentier of the blog Jezebel, left, and Rebecca Traister of Salon discuss female politicians, such as Sarah Palin, who refuse to hide their femininity."

Huh? What is it to "refuse to hide" one's femininity? First of all, it's incorrect to say that Megan and Rebecca were talking about Palin "refusing to hide" her femininity. What they were talking about was Palin's playing up her folksy, just-a-hockey-mom brand of femininity as much as possible.

But beside the inaccuracy, I'm trying to think about how The Times came to the conclusion about the caption. I'm imagining the thought process. Well, first you might want to say "playing up their femininity." But you wouldn't want to say that, right? Because "playing up" one's femininity sounds like you're accusing someone of using feminine "wiles" (whatever the hell those are) to gain some kind of unearned advantage. It sounds like a slur. Rejected. Well, next you might want to consider "are very feminine." But that's not right either, because "feminine" has basically become the equivalent of "female" in the writing of every person who thinks "woman" is a dirty word (see, e.g., widely used phrases like "of the feminine persuasion"--what the hell does that even mean?). So saying Palin is feminine is like saying she's a woman. Which, duh. Plus, she's not really very different from other female politicians, who also don't try to hide the fact that they're women by dressing in drag. So, "feminine"? Rejected.

That doesn't leave us with very many good choices. But saying that Palin is "refusing to hide" her femininity has two implicit premises that need to be examined. The first implicit premise is that femininity is something pre-existing, i.e. natural or innate. The second premise is that there are pressure to hide this innate "femininity," which women often succumb to, while Palin does not.

Femininity is a construct, and it's one most women participate in to some degree. It's always fascinating to me to see which parts of the construct women I know choose to perform. For example, I wear makeup and (usually) pluck my eyebrows. But I don't paint my nails or wear heels. When it comes to "feminine" non-appearance-related behaviors, I honestly don't know what behaviors I'm supposed to categorize as feminine. I do know there are things which I see a lot of women do, such as put themselves down, or be timid about taking food when food is shared among an unfamiliar group of people (no one wants to be the one who eats too much!). But are those "feminine" behaviors? No, they're things women do because of the social and emotional pressures put on them by the patriarchy to subdue their needs and desires in favor of others. What are some "feminine" behaviors that you can think of that aren't obviously negative or self-effacing or diminishing?

I dunno. Cooing over babies? Men do that stuff all the time. Fawning over cute animals, shopping, caring about having a clean or beautiful home? Ditto. I'm having a hard time thinking about some positive aspect of my personality that I could categorize as "feminine." It's deeply insulting to the men I know and love to say that my compassion and my empathy are somehow connected to the fact that I'm a woman, and so too with all the other qualities I can think of.

So what would it be to "hide your femininity"? Besides changing your grooming habits and apparel, I really can't understand what it would be. Help me out, people.

Buck Up

I was going to embed a video of the President of the L.A. chapter of N.O.W. introducing and personally endorsing Sarah Palin at a CA rally, having the audacity to end her introduction with the phrase "This is what a feminist looks like."; but then the the DJI tanked (again) and now I have a headache and my gorgeous shoes are pinching my toes, and it's just too depressing. So I'm going with this instead:

Weekend Scenes from the Ranch

At the conclusion of a quick cuddle before heading out to see The Hypocrites' phenomenal production of Our Town.

The Bear: I'm getting up. It's time to go.
Me: What, do you have to void?
B: Do I have to what?
Me: Void.
B: What?
Me: It means piss. You know, urinate.
B: It does?
Me: You see it in medical usage. like, "The patient voided into the cup," or "The patient complained of inability to void."
B: That's strangely existential.
Me: Isn't it?
B: If I feel a void, it's not in my bladder.

Oh no she didn't

Look at Palin, all gleeful and smug as she dives into the mud and drags the bottom-feeder attempt to smear Obama as a "friend of terrorists" right up to the top of the ticket:

Meanwhile, McCain's calling Obama a "bald-faced liar" for explaining what McCain's asinine health care policy would actually do.

Desperate, cornered, mean as fuck. And lacking any kind of principles whatsoever. Underneath the anger that makes me want to claw their eyes out, I'm actually proud, knowing that Obama's campaign isn't going to wade into the gutter with these pathetic and shameless liars. Cheesy as it may sound, there are American values that are more important than contempt.


Edited to note, at some length, that the New Yorker agrees.

The longer the campaign goes on, the more the issues of personality and character have reflected badly on McCain. Unless appearances are very deceiving, he is impulsive, impatient, self-dramatizing, erratic, and a compulsive risk-taker. These qualities may have contributed to his usefulness as a “maverick” senator. But in a President they would be a menace.
By contrast, Obama’s transformative message is accompanied by a sense of pragmatic calm. A tropism for unity is an essential part of his character and of his campaign. It is part of what allowed him to overcome a Democratic opponent who entered the race with tremendous advantages. It is what helped him forge a political career relying both on the liberals of Hyde Park and on the political regulars of downtown Chicago. His policy preferences are distinctly liberal, but he is determined to speak to a broad range of Americans who do not necessarily share his every value or opinion. For some who oppose him, his equanimity even under the ugliest attack seems like hauteur; for some who support him, his reluctance to counterattack in the same vein seems like self-defeating detachment. Yet it is Obama’s temperament—and not McCain’s—that seems appropriate for the office both men seek and for the volatile and dangerous era in which we live. Those who dismiss his centeredness as self-centeredness or his composure as indifference are as wrong as those who mistook Eisenhower’s stolidity for denseness or Lincoln’s humor for lack of seriousness.

Via PostBourgie, who apparently get their New Yorkers before I do.

Bailing

So there's a bailout. Good. I haven't yet familiarized myself with what all's in it, what with it being Friday and my brain being dead.

But, we never really got into the "how'd it happen?" question. The Giant Pool of Money episode of TAL is required listening, of course, and now there's a follow up that explains the bailout stuff. Yay TAL!

And. Because there's an awful lot of bullshit going around about how, ultimately, "people need to be responsible" and how we should somehow blame individuals who took out more mortgage than they could afford but not the banks and mortgage providers who lent money to people who couldn't afford to pay it back, go read Boiler Room, CJR's piece about the massive fraud and lying that mortgage providers like Countrywide (the biggest mortgage provider in America for a while there) used against their "customers." It really is a fascinating (and upsetting) read.

And it helps me a little, too. Because I found out this morning, at a meeting with our realtor and our bank guy about $10k in closing costs that no one had told us about (before y'all get outraged on our behalf, I strongly suspect that the reason for this is that VA loans in this part of the country just haven't been *done* for several years, because they max out at $417k and no one could buy anything for $417k). In any case, so we were meeting to look over costs and sign paperwork, blah blah, and the realtor's moving to ask the sellers to pay closing costs.

But it turns out! That in addition to the $300k that we already knew was still outstanding on their mortgage, and the house they currently (or rather, formerly) owned in another state that apparently just got foreclosed on, they had *another* mortgage on this place. And so the reason they've been inexplicably stalling and quibbling over how much they'll pay to do the repairs that are doubtless going to be required by the VA assessor is because, after dropping their price by $168k already, they are in serious danger of actually losing money on this house at this point.

Which of course isn't *our* problem, and if the place isn't worth what they need to get to cover their outstanding debt, well, that sucks for them. But I admit I had a moment of "what the fuck were they thinking taking out a second loan on this house?" Which really isn't in good shape and couldn't have been in good shape when they moved away less than a year ago. Did they take out that loan to come up with a down payment on their new place, or did they take it out ages ago and just spend it all?

No idea, really. (And to boot, their realtor says there are health problems in the family.) But regardless, the facts are that if they ought not to have been fucking around with second and third mortgages, their lender sure as shit ought not to have been approving them.

In any case. I feel sorry for them. But if this house, in the condition it's in, isn't worth their minimum price (which I suspect we're getting very close to finding out), well. My pity isn't going to save them.

Credit where due

It was smart as hell of the McCain people to specify that this debate was to allow no cross-talk and no follow-ups. Result: Palin was able to plug in prepared talking points on predictable issues. She managed to sound coherent, even though if you actually listened to what she was saying, you realized she wasn't answering the specific questions she was being asked.

That said, Biden sure as shit sounded light-years smarter than she did. And I think it was smart for him to go after McCain and ignore her, basically, as the non-entity she is.

I look forward to finding out what the media narrative's going to be tomorrow.

More unseemly pre-debate blogging

Heebie nails it.

What is the one thing you can conclude about Sara Palin having attended thirty colleges in ten years? She is a BAD TEST-TAKER. Nobody who is a great test-taker has any problem in college. Of course test-taking is a stupid skill. In real life, take all the time you want. Stay late, rearrange your schedule, be an adult. We don't care how many math problems you can correctly compute in fifty minutes.

It's very, very rare that you'd have to cram, as an adult, a bunch of academic information into your brain, and then perform without anxiety in a high stakes situation. GEE, WHO SHOULD BE SWEATING RIGHT NOW? Poor Palin. Maybe she'll regain her balance, but I know I'm rooting against her.

In other news, I am really upset to have realized that PK's fucking TaeKwonDo class starts at 5:30, so I'm basically going to miss all but the first 15 minutes of the debate. Yes I can watch it later on YouTube or whatever, but STILL. WAAAAAH.

I'd make him skip his class, but we skipped on Tuesday already. Fuck.

It's VP Debate Day!

I feel like a kid on Christmas morning: today promises entertainment untold.

Here's a slideshow of Joe Biden's debate prep. (Not really.) Go watch it, you'll giggle.

And here, god help us, is Sarah Palin's.

Yes! I know that's heinous! I'm a BITCH, remember?

hello, chickens. like your roost?

Speak correctly, or build a big bunker -- chicagotribune.com

Poor conservative Kathleen Parker. She's shocked - absolutely shocked - that today's political discourse has devolved so much. Oh, the invective hurled at her for suggesting Palin isn't fit for the Republican ticket. Goodness! The insults. The ire! The death threats!

Such extreme partisanship has a crippling effect on government, which may be desirable at times, but not now. More important in the long term is the less-tangible effect of stifling free speech. My mail paints an ugly picture and a bleak future if we do not soon correct ourselves.

The picture is this: Anyone who dares express an opinion that runs counter to the party line will be silenced. That doesn't sound American to me, but Stalin would approve. Readers have every right to reject my opinion. But when we decide that a person is a traitor and should die for having an opinion different than one's own, then we cross into territory that puts all freedoms at risk. (I hear you, Dixie Chicks.)

I'm sorry folks said her parents should have aborted her, but the disingenuity here is a little hard to swallow.

Where has Ms. Parker been for the past 8 years? Where was she last month, during the GOP convention, and Amy Goodman was pitched in jail for covering it? Where was she to decry the national trashing of our political discourse when non-Republicans were called appeasers, traitors, terrorist collaborators and folks on the Hill were forced to eat those silly Freedom Fries; where was she when folks who objected to the unconstitutional reach of the Patriot Act, who correctly thought the run up to the Iraq war was full of bullshit, who said Guantanamo was a blight to our democratic legacy were called un-American; where has she been as American Muslims continute to suffer racial profiling, terrorist attacks on U.S. soil and have had their loyalties called into question because of their religion or heritage; where was she for the last two elections when two pretty smart presidential candidates lost their races because her party accused them of being soft on defense while backing a mediocre guy whose sole act of mental agility was cooking up ways to get out of military service; where has she been for the last 18 months as her party, and its lapdog punditocracy, made a point of racially Othering the Obamas and saying some pretty racist shit in the process?

And, yes, where has Kathleen Parker been for the last 20 years as her party got all comfy in its bed next to the Christian Right, who have no problem wearing the robes of a Pharisee?

Spare me the concern, Ms. Parker. Spare me your disappointment at how the nation's political discourse has become vile, limited, intellectually bankrupt and savage. Your party built this roost and I'd say it's about time you see exactly what your chickens look like.

[cross-posted at Screed and ChurchGal]

Eid Saeed

It's Eid-al-Fitr, the several-day feast/holiday that celebrates the end of Ramadan. Whenever this time of year comes around I get a little weepy and homesick. I've discussed my religious upbringing on this blog at length, but for those just tuning in, I was raised Mormon by my Catholic father in Cairo, Egypt. Because of my dad's enlightened views on religious tolerance, my childhood home, and my many Muslim friends, I have a deep respect for Islam, and Ramadan is the most glorious time of year. It's hard to think about the incredible goodness that would penetrate every corner of society during the holy month and not get emotional. As an outsider, I remember having so many questions about a religion I didn't understand. Why were there tables set up on the street? (So well-off people could set out food for poor people to break the fast.) Why does the man with the drum come around singing at 3:00 a.m.? (To wake everyone up so they can eat before the sun comes up.) Why is there a sheep in the backyard? (They will slaughter it when the Eid comes.)

When I was 5, my family lived in a little town in Utah. I remember one afternoon, a friend of mine and I got into a spat in my bedroom, and I came out crying and curled up next to my dad on the couch. He asked me why I was crying, and I told him that my friend had called me a Muslim. "Why does that make you upset?" "Because I'm not a Muslim!" "No, you're not, but there wouldn't be anything to be ashamed of if you were."

He said "Do you know that Muslims love God so much that they all pray five times a day?" "They do?" "Yeah, five times a day, someone calls out from the Mosque for everyone to come pray, and people stop what they are doing and go pray." "Wow." "It's a beautiful faith," he told me.

I remember this conversation like it was yesterday. My dad then went in and had a little talk with my friend, and told her that insults based on religion, however inaccurate, would not be allowed in our house.

Every time my dad visits the U.S., he goes around spending time with our many relatives and family friends that live here. Invariably, he complains about how one or another of his relatives has become very anti-Muslim since living in the US. I suspect that something like what happened to my childhood self is going on: that when people call you Muslim as an insult, then you come to believe there must be something very bad about it.

On Friday, September 26, someone sprayed a chemical irritant through the window of the nursery at a mosque in Dayton, the Islamic Society of Greater Dayton. From a second-hand account:

She told me that the gas was sprayed into the room where the babies and children were being kept while their mothers prayed together their Ramadan prayers. Panicked mothers ran for their babies, crying for their children so they could flee from the gas that was burning their eyes and throats and lungs. She grabbed her youngest in her arms and grabbed the hand of her other daughter, moving with the others to exit the building and the irritating substance there.

"The paramedic said the young one was in shock, and gave her oxygen to help her breathe. The child couldn't stop sobbing.

"This didn't happen in some far away place -- but right here in Dayton, and to my friends. Many of the Iraqi refugees were praying together at the Mosque Friday evening. People that I know and love."

Just that week, thousands of copies of the movie Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West, a horrific film that I, unfortunately, have seen, were mailed out across the country, including in Ohio. One person who got it mailed to them in NC, retired fourth-grade teacher Mary Gilbert of Raleigh, quoted here, got it right when she said, "Gee, if I was still teaching, this video could be a classroom aid to show how some use hate and religious intolerance to scare people...However, I would not want to poison young minds by having them watch it."

I don't know if we can make any kind of convincing case for the link between the mailing of the DVD and the gassing of the mosque, which is why I've delayed posting on this for a couple of days. But this evening, I decided that it didn't matter. It all came together for me when I read this post (via Pandagon) about how John McCain plagiarized a 2005 e-mail message "celebrating" the Eid, from George W. Bush, almost word-for-word for his 2008 Eid message. Not only is it plagiarized, it doesn't even actually wish the reader a happy Eid, instead explaining what the Eid is (which is odd, considering the poster received it after registering as a Muslim on McCain's website).

And it clicked for me. John McCain, George W. Bush, the Republican party, and the producers of Obsession don't understand that Muslims are just other people. No, in the post-9/11 fear-mongering hate-blowout-sale, Muslims are a group, they are a race, they are out to get us, they pose an "existential threat" to America, but they are not individual people. And so John McCain wouldn't dream of writing a letter that said "I wish you and your family a happy Eid, and hope that God blesses you with joy," because he can't even fathom an actual Muslim reader sitting out there reading his message. Further, he gives so little of a shit about his Muslim supporters that he couldn't even come up with an original message. Doesn't he have a staffer who could work something up in a half-hour, for Christ's sake?

Just like the news media can't really understand that Muslims are people. And when people are attacked at their place of worship, for no apparent reason other than to instill fear, that's terrorism. Yes, terrorism can be perpetrated against Muslims, in the United States. It happened last Friday. Instead of acknowledging this awful truth, the story has been basically ignored.

A Google News Search-culled sample of some of the news outlets that have covered the story: BeliefNet, Huffington Post, Israeli News, Wisconsin Progressive.org, MidEastYouth.org, DemocracyNow, and a handful of local Ohio outlets. Notice anything? Not a single major outlet. Not the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, or even the Trib.

It's disgusting. I'd wager a week's pay with you that if someone sprayed an irritant gas into a church or a synagogue or a goddamn Girl Scouts meeting, where children were hurt, it would be a "story" for at least one day. But here, the story is inconvenient. Hell, all those Muslims just go around killing each other anyway, right? Isn't that what they're doing in Iraq?

So if you want to know what this is all about, you can just travel back in time to 1987, and ask my little friend why it is an insult to call someone a Muslim. And then you can fast forward to today, where Barack Obama is left fending off charges that he's a Muslim, despite the fact that Islam is about as mainstream a religion as you can get, and that there's nothing wrong with being one. And you can explain to John McCain that a plagiarized holiday greeting that doesn't actually offer any holiday wishes means that you're a huge asshole. And explain that terrorism is not something perpetrated by people who are brown and say "Allah" against nice white Christians, but the tactic of using fear to make a political point.

Or...maybe it's a strategy. I dunno, maybe John McCain can explain it to me.

(Thanks to reader David Clark for sending the e-mail that forced me to think about this in more than the "God, that's horrifying" way.)

More Econ for Idiots (like me)

If Sarah Palin read the damn papers, she might understand the financial crisis a bit better. Which is to say that the NYT--which for all its faults is still a pretty good paper--has a decent explanation of what's going on, along with an explanation of what people should really be looking at to gauge how things are going.

The news folks are spending a lot of time talking about the Dow Jones, but stock prices are really just a reflection of how nervous investors are (or how much they're hoping to grab a bargain just before a bailout plan gets passed). What you really want to be looking at is the interest rates. That chart there is what's called the "Ted Spread" (don't ask me why), that is, the "spread" between interest rates offered by the Libor (London Interbank Offer Rate) and U.S. T-bills. Basically, the Libor is the rate at which banks lend money to other banks, while T-bills are secured by the U.S. government and are basically considered the safest investment going. Therefore, the wider the spread, the more nervous banks are about lending: higher Libor rates mean less trust between banks, and lower T-bill rates mean everyone's buying T-bills, but basically the gap means "the difference between a sure thing and interbank trust"-so a bigger gap is a sign of less trust.

There's also a nice NYT chart comparing various bond prices: again, lower T-bill yields means more people are buying T-bills i.e., looking for safety. Also check out what's happening with mortgage rates; it's helpful to compare these to the prime rate, which is given on that chart. If the prime rate isn't changing--and you can see what it's been doing over time on the "key rates" tab of the bond link--but mortgage rates are going up, that, too, tells you that banks are getting tighter with the lending. As the NYT says, "Mortgage rates should probably be a lot lower given the Federal Reserve’s recent actions and other interventions in the market. (Of course, rates might be even higher if the Fed and Treasury had done nothing.)"

Meanwhile, I'll tell you for sure that housing prices in my area, which had kind of evened out, are dropping like stones again; Mr. B. and I are seriously thinking of trying to get out of this house purchase since--finally!--buying a 2000 s.f. fixer at just over $400k no longer looks like a bargain, with 1200-1500 s.f. houses *finally* coming in at the $350k range. OTOH, if mortgage rates keep climbing, well, there's that. OTOH yet again, since we're talking a government-backed VA loan (and even six months ago, it was laughable to think we could buy anything with a VA loan here in So. Cali.), it's quite possible that even with no down payment, we'll look pretty safe to a jittery bank. Bailing on the current offer would be kind of shitty, since it's been in the works for a month at least, but I'm giving myself the excuse that the owners have been dicking around quibbling over details and repairs, so if the market's fallen in while they've been stalling, well, too bad.

That and the perpetual educator's silver lining: at least we're all learning something about economics.

Si se Puede

This speech might make you tear up; it did me. It's certainly timely as hell.

"The labor movement was the principal force that transformed misery and despair into hope and progress. Out of its bold struggles, economic and social reform gave birth to unemployment insurance, old-age pensions, government relief for the destitute and, above all, new wage levels that meant not mere survival but a tolerable life. The captains of industry did not lead this transformation; they resisted it until they were overcome. When in the thirties the wave of union organization crested over the nation, it carried to secure shores not only itself but the whole society."
Martin Luther King Jr.
Speech to the state convention of the Illinois AFL-CIO, Oct. 7, 1965

via EotAW

teaching and preaching

I am slow on the uptake with this, and eric at EoTAW has already covered it, but reader Leslie emailed last week to draw our attention to the new rules at the U of Illinois prohibiting faculty from wearing political buttons, expressing political positions, preparing for political events while on campus and so on. Bumper stickers on one's car even.

Chronicle article here.

Not to put too fine a point on it, this is bullshit. Yes, I understand that professors have what amounts to a bully pulpit, yes, I understand there is a power imbalance between students and teacher. No, teachers should not be coercive. But give me some credit already.

One, Horowitz is wrong, as the vast majority of educators tend to agree. Campuses are not, in fact, gulags of left-wing indoctrinization. Policies like the U of I's presume that the default condition of college instructors to to inject political activism into their classrooms (and I find it perversely fitting that I have reason to mention Horowitz the week one of his most dangerous targets returns to blogging).

Two, while campuses are by no means liberal training camps, they also aren't hermetic bubbles. Students have no reason to expect that their experiences on campus will not reflect all the diversity and ranges of perspective that they might encounter in the Real World. And while I understand that students ought not feel pressured to espousing any particular view, they also ought not expect to never confront ideology. Just because it isn't all telegraphed on bumper stickers doesn't mean cultural and political ideologies don't inform nearly everything that goes on around them. In class discussion this semester, I have learned that 70% of my freshmen students think they have a civil right not to be offended. Muse on that for a bit; it's goddamned depressing. Policies like this one don't to anything to disabuse them of this kind of insularity.

Three, I AM A PERSON! I am NOT a floating disembodied brain. To my mind, this policy is an extension of the institutional pressure on academics to have no personal lives, to be brains on sticks, absorbed at all times in the life of the mind. I am a three dimensional woman. I do not just sit around reading poetry. I like sports (suck it, B) and ice cream and have political opinions. My students and my colleagues do not need me to be a teaching robot in order to take me seriously. I have been told on several occasions that I shouldn't share personal information with students. That especially as a woman if I intend to be taken seriously, I should not mention my family or hobbies or anything. I should be a teaching zombie. I refuse. The Obama bumper sticker on my car and the button on my bag may tell students something about me, sure. But why shouldn't they know something about me? It's up to me to decide whether that has any effect on my authority or efficacy.

Finally, do give me some credit, really. Not every opinion I hold becomes a lens through which I teach. I know the difference between teaching and preaching.