The Good
"Remember how you said that the beef stew was a little thin for your taste? Well, I added some stuff to it and cooked it down, and now it's nice and thick. Do you want me to save you some?"

"You know, sometimes I think you have the impression I don't like your cooking. I think you're a good cook."

"I know. But it's not just enough to be good. I'm a perfectionist. It can't just be good, everything has to be faaaaabulous!"

"Well, you already are fabulous."

"Awwww! I'm going to eat the last of the stew for lunch."

The Bad
Transgender Day of Remembrance. My cousin out in California and I had a falling-out because I kept trying to raise his awareness about trans issues. Regardless of what you think about trans genitalia, or whether trans sex is "real sex" (take a wild guess as to where I stand on that issue), I think we can all agree that transfolk have the right to, you know, live. Without being beaten, maimed, or murdered. I think that the ability to walk down the street undisturbed is a basic human right we can all agree on.

More information here: http://gender.org/remember/day/index.html
(and no, visiting the site will not make you queer).


The Roomba
Yet another reason for me to get a Roomba (I need to amass a good amount of them in order to overcome that "but we're in a recession" voice in the back of my head):

Link in case of embed failure

I can't imagine my timid kitty would ever actually ride the thing around the room like that. But still, soooo cuuuuuute! Robot friends!

Link to video

Some very compelling arguments about how "fetal rights" laws have been used to hurt -- and in some cases kill -- both mothers and the babies they want to carry to term.

Did you know that in states with "unborn rights" laws, hospitals can force women to undergo C-section surgery, even if the surgery would be life-threatening? That a woman is facing life in prison after one of her twins was stillborn?

From John Scalzi:

Honestly, I no longer know what to make of John McCain anymore. A man who has readily admitted he doesn’t know much about the economy makes a big show of bringing his presidential campaign to a grinding halt to rush to Washington to fix it, which seems a bit like a NASA auto pool mechanic declaring to all and sundry that he’s going to stopped making oil changes to rush to Florida to consult on the Shuttle.
[...]
he also suggests we cancel (or, “delay”) the presidential debate on Friday, and maybe the VP debate next week. You know, just to be sure we’re all focused on the economy, instead of, frivolous things, such as the fact that John McCain apparently hasn’t had a useful thought about the national economy since he married a heiress, and that Sarah Palin can’t be trusted to extemporize [...] without appearing like she’s [shoving her hockey-mom pumps down her throat].

Link to Scalzi's full post

And via yesthatthom, some Youtube videos of Letterman catching McCain in one WHOPPER of a lie. "Could McCain be so out of touch that he didn't realize that Couric, also on CBS, would be interviewing him in the very same building?"

Short versions, long versions, all funny-as-hell versions (when did Letterman switch over from the nutty younger late-night guy in a sweater to the Johnny Carson of our generation?). Watch them all here: http://yesthattom.livejournal.com/879499.html

On a more religious note, I can't get the Family Research Council (a.k.a. family fearmongers' council) to take me off their damn spam list. What began as keeping track of what the other side was up to has turned into a daily dose of hate in my inbox. Faithful America is a nice antidote -- a PAC that reclaims religious values from the far right.

I got fed up enough to send a strongly worded response to a particularly egregious email full of lies and half-truths. I'm sure it's falling on deaf ears over in Tony's inbox, though. Maybe it will amuse you, dear Intarwebs.

From a personal appeal for dough from Tony Perkins, President of this "Christian" organization:

I want you to hear something a California pastor said to me recently:

"If we lose, we go to jail."

It's just that simple, says Pastor Jim Garlow--if marriage loses in California, religious liberties everywhere will be next. [Funny thing, that: here in Sodom Massachusetts, religious liberties seem to be alive and well for Christians, Muslims, Jews, pagans, and others alike, gays can get married, and marriage as we know it is still intact.]

The fight for marriage in the states is our first priority.

But we can't take our eye off Washington, D.C. politicians. Your support is vital as we stand up to liberals who want to criminalize your religious speech . . . threaten the religious liberties of employers . . . silence conservative and Christian broadcasting . . . raise taxes . . . and impose taxpayer funding of abortion and embryonic stem cell research.

And my response:

Tony, this is an incredibly offensive letter. Christians have never
been sent to jail in this country for practicing the teachings of
Christ. Untold numbers of homosexuals, though, have been rounded up by
police, beaten, raped, and returned to the street without charges ever
being placed. Recognizing a loving, stable union between two people is
not an affront to marriage. Preaching hatred and intolerance is,
however, an affront to Christ's teachings. Shame on you, and shame on
your organization. Turn off your computer and read your bible.

If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have
love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal.
If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all
knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do
not have love, I am nothing.
And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I
surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me
nothing.

1 CORINTHIANS 13:1–3 (NASB)

My reading of this text may be incorrect, since I have not confirmed that Bei Dao is in fact Chinese and not Vietnamese, Korean, or another Asian nationality. It makes me think of the collective responsibility of members of a society that does reprehensible things to people: things like putting them in labor camps, or death camps, or military prisons in foreign countries.

Nor are we free of guilt.
Long since, in history's mirror,
we became accomplices,
awaiting the day we might
seep down through the layers of stone
into subterranean pools
to contemplate darkness again.
- From "Accomplices," by Bei Dao, translated by Donald Finkel, via breathe_poetry

Via Feministing:



See what happens when you cut a liberal politician free of his election-campaign handlers? I can't wait to see what Hilary's saying in 10 years.

This past weekend, I had a conversation with a 12-year-old who thinks that abortion should be illegal. I challenged her gently, but really, she's just 12. And the last thing I wanted was her mother coming down on me for corrupting her daughter. Makeup? Okay. Control over her own reproductive system? Not okay. The most distressing and ironic part of the conversation was when she said, "I think there's a law that says abortion is legal." Actually, honey, there was a law that says abortion was ILLEGAL. And due to clinic firebombings, not-so-random acts of violence, and other forms of covert and overt intimidation, access to abortions continues to decline, especially for low-income women.

God, I just hope she learns how to use contraception before some overeager suitor knocks her up.

Happy Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. I generally like to observe this holiday and not work on it because I value MLK's work far more than I do, say, Columbus's. Overall, I like my job, but the Paid Time Off policy... don't get me started. Read this NY Times Op-Ed piece instead. And then this piece about the new "PTO" trend in staffing. And then consider that when I take off Christmas, New Year's Day, Independence Day, or any other "paid" holiday, that ALSO comes out of the same pot.

Blog for Choice day is tomorrow.

See if you can follow my train of thought here:
* During the abolitionist and suffragist movement of the late 19th century, key leaders (mostly male) decided to focus on abolition before women's suffrage. The slaves were freed 40 years before women got the right to vote.
* We have a white woman and a black man up for the DNC nomination.
* Ever hear of the term "scarcity mentality" when applied to diversity efforts? That's when a bunch of, say, women compete for the same promotion instead of, say, helping each other. Then the men get to get together and joke about how catty women are toward each other.
* My biggest frustration with the progressive movement has been the inability of members of different oppressed classes (people of color, immigrants, women, queers) to join together toward a common good. Probably because there's been no consensus as to what that common good should be. Meanwhile, white, Christian right-wingers whine about being oppressed minorities themselves.

That is all.

Tomorrow is the 9th Annual Transgender Day of Remembrance. There's been a lot of posts about it on the webcomics community. I have nothing eloquent to say about it, except perhaps that I've met some lovely transfolk in my lifetime. It pisses me off that people think it's okay to commit physical violence against them just for existing. More here: http://www.rememberingourdead.org/day/what.html

Via apocalypsos, James Spader (yeah, yeah, I know it's just his character) taking a stab a the ex-gay movement. Hee. Big Religion.



Linky, in case embed fails

Via yesthattom, supplier of all my quality political info.

This 60-second clip from CSPAN busts apart all sorts of stereotypes: about the South, about blacks, about preachers. It also gives me hope for the future of humanity. No word on whether the bill was passed.



Linky in case embed fails

The text below is excerpted from an email I sent to my newly rediscovered cousin in San Diego. He told me he didn't really understand what all the fuss was about gay marriage. Lots of heterosexual people feel this way. But it is important, and it's important that it be called "marriage," not "civil union."

In terms of the whole same-sex marriage debate: well, I could give you the public-policy argument: that there are 1,048 rights legally married couples enjoy; that it costs a shitload to hire a lawyer to prepare the estate planning documents necessary to secure the same rights for your same-sex spouse that are a matter of course for heterosexual married couples (things like: who inherits the house, who will have custody of the kids), and that said documents don't even WORK in some states. But you can read all about that here: http://www.glad.org/rights/OP1-whymarriagematters.shtml, or here: http://www.marriageequality.org/meusa/facts.shtml.

I think I'd rather share with you what it was like to attend my brother's wedding on May 17, 1997. I was happy for him, but was also recovering from a particularly difficult breakup from my girlfriend. The wedding was held in a Catholic church. Jean had the traditional white dress, and her bridesmaids wore matching dresses. Both John's and Jean's family attended, as well as a number of their friends. Everyone dressed up.

Because I loved them and wanted to participate in the celebration that they had chosen, I read from the Song of Songs and even said "The Lord" three times (my feelings of resentment toward the Catholic church have diminished considerably since then, but it was kind of a big deal for me to be reading from the Bible in public, even if it was the Song of Songs). Then afterward, we all took fancy cars over to the Italian Gardens and had a banquet and a party. There was a big table piled high with presents -- presents that they had requested.

At some point during the reception, I had to retire to the patio and cry my eyes out. Because I realized something that day: no matter how many years I spent with a partner, I would NEVER have a wedding like John and Jean's. This is, of course, assuming that I could FIND someone to spend the rest of my life with. And the thing that few people talk about is that having social structures and traditions in place to support a couple makes it easier for said couple to stay together. Even today, in this age of civil unions, domestic partnerships, and same-sex marriage in Massachusetts, I still wouldn't be able to marry my girlfriend in a Catholic, Presbyterian, or Baptist Church.

Weirdly enough, the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) ruling in Massachusetts was enacted on John & Jean's sixth wedding anniversary. I still haven't found a girl I want to marry. But I never thought that I would see IN MY LIFETIME gay couples marrying, enjoying the same legal and societal rights that heterosexual couples have enjoyed since the United States first came into being. Immediately after the ruling, there was a tremendous backlash, both inside and outside Massachusetts. DOMA ("Defense" of Marriage Acts) passed by the bushel in other states. People on Boston.com comparing gay marriage to incest and bestiality. Folks are STILL trying to amend the Mass constitution to rescind the SJC ruling. "Let the people vote!" is their rallying cry. But the pastor of our (Unitarian Universalist) church made a very good point in her sermon yesterday: basic human rights should never be voted on. We wouldn't vote to decide whether or not black people should be able to have the same jobs as white people. So why is it okay to let the majority decide whether gay couples should enjoy the same basic human rights as straight couples?

Catholic Charities is asking for special permission to discriminate against same-sex couples who want to adopt through their organization, even though it receives public funding. Ironically, the Board of Directors of the organization voted unanimously to DISallow the no-faggots law.

http://www.wbur.org/news/2006/55874_20060215.asp

There was one spokesman in particular whom I just wanted to throttle. Talking about "moral violence" against children who have been born into the world already addicted to crack, already exposed to AIDS, already impoverished. I'll give him some moral violence.

It reminds me of Bro. Gus trying to show me how much he cared in his roundabout way at the end of our visit, talking about how horrible the "affliction" of homosexuality must be. I think that the connection of me being one of those horribly afflicted homosexuals will be a long time coming for him. And frankly I'm in no hurry to cause him such cognitive dissonance. I'm happy to go on being the sweet little girl I was when I attended the monastery. Because I am still that girl. I am a nice girl. Who likes other nice girls.

Speaking of nice girls... I'd wanted to write all about my lovely Valentine's Day date with technogoddesss from last night. But I ended up working all day long a site that needs to be released by... oh... right about now. It's a quick job worthy of fatfeistyfemme.

Sister Rosa Parks Stood Up for All
By Louise Bernikow
WeNews historian


(WOMENSENEWS)-- When Rosa Parks died Oct. 24, the news spread quickly. Although the myth persisted in some quarters that Parks' famous refusal to move to the back of the bus in segregated Montgomery, Ala., in December 1955 happened because she was just a tired old Negro lady, most people understood that hers was an act of civil disobedience.

What they did not say, however, was that such an act had a long tradition preceding it and that Rosa Parks was surrounded by a community of people who not only supported but encouraged what she did.

Read the entire article here: http://womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/2511/context/ourstory

Today is National Coming Out Day. Again.

I am, in fact, a lesbian-identified bisexual. More on that here. The bit on marital/relationship status might be fairly out of date. I'm happily partnered/joined at the hip. To technogoddesss, for the new viewers.

Just had to say that, since it's the national day and all. Now, should studentwillow come out too? I think she might be a little too shy, or confused, to make an announcement. Maybe she'll just come out to the Scooby Gang.

Back to work, me.

KnowThyNeighbor.org has published a list of the original signers of the petition to amend the constitution to repeal the right of same-sex couples to marry in Massachusetts -- a right that was hard-won through a very expensive lawsuit, not to mention years and years of activism, consciousness-raising, and getting beat up by cops and forced to perform oral sex in dirty precinct bathrooms.

If the ConCon next week passes the ballot initiative, they propose to print the names of any Mass citizens who sign it. Is it intimidation? Or a matter of public record?

Actually, Lynn is the new black.

I mean, Lynn is the new South End.

I mean, lots of gay boys and dykely types are moving to Lynn. And you know what happens when those people move in. Property values rise! Whole Foods opens a store! Before you know it, women with toned triceps are running around with their babies in those canvas running strollers. So there goes the neighborhood.

Here's an editorial about Cheryl Jacques, one of the candidates whom Mitler (aka Willard Mitt Romney) beat out for the Gubernatorial seat a few years back. It's mostly about the struggle for gay rights in this country. I don't think it's going to change the mind of any followers of Pat Robertson, but it's well-written nonetheless.

The article is in PDF format. If you don't have Acrobat Reader installed on your computer, join the 21st century, already!

Civil rights in the new millenium

Today is the first anniversary of the legalization of gay marriage in the state of Massachusetts - the only state in this fair country of ours that recognizes the right of muff-divers and fudge-packers to settle down into a sexless suburban lifestyle fraught with mortgages, SUVs, sticky cheerio-covered couches, and the smell of dirty diapers.

Oh, and then there's that whole tax planning thing, the being able to visit your spouse in the hospital, and the other 1,048 rights associated with being married. Not the least of which is being able to refer to "her wife" without a barrage of questions being raised.

Last year at this time, I was slumbering on my bed with the Red Sox Fan. I wish I'd gone down to Cambridge City Hall to see the fun at midnight. Two women in my church were actually the very first gay couple to ever get married anywhere in the United States. I heard them on The Connection last night while I was in the parking lot of the Whole Foods -- during my maiden voyage with Zipcar! I had to turn off the program because I was already late for a meeting and still needed to get dinner.

Tonight I will be going to a yoga class while the celebrations ramble on. Is this a deficit to my lesbian cred?

A new acquaintance of mine recently asked me what lesbian cred might be. Actually, first I had to explain to him what "cred" might be. I guess he never read that review of The Matrix that described Joe Pantoliano's character (Cypher) as a DJ desperately tying to hang onto this street cred.

So what makes lesbian cred? Here are a few criteria. Please feel free to add your own. Although, as far as I can tell, no one on my friends list would in fact be able to claim a 100% lesbian cred rating:

The following factors win you positive points toward your lesbian cred:

1. Short hair
   
2. Owning a collection of flannel shirts (for urban dykes, this may be replaced by at least three items of clothing purchased from REI, EMS, or a similar store)
   
3. Working in one of the Approved Lesbian Professions(TM):
   
   
   
   • Social worker
     
   • PE teacher
     
   • Mechanic (double points apply for this and related fields)
     
   • The trades (e.g. carpentry, plumbing, etc)
     
   • Nonprofit sector
     
   
   
4. Owning at least one item purchased at Good Vibrations, Grand Opening, or Eve's Garden. Sleazy sex shops in the East Village don't count. Product must be purchased at Approved Lesbian Retail Outlets
   
5. Residence in one of the following neighborhoods: Brooklyn's Park Slope (Dyke Slope); Boston's Jamaica Plain; Oakland, CA. Half-points will be rendered for residence in more chic neighborhoods such as West Hollywood, Boston's South End, San Francisco proper, the East Village, and Washington, D.C.'s Adams Morgan.
   
6. Ownership of a Subaru Forrester
   
7. Ownership of a large-breed dog (for sporty dykes) or a cat (for arty dykes)
   
8. Membership in a local softball league
   
9. An undergraduate degree from UC Berkeley or any of the Seven Sisters colleges.
   

The following factors will win you negative points toward your lesbian cred:

1. Long hair
   
2. Ownership and/or familiarity with the use of any of the following: facial cosmetics, perfume, strappy sandals, miscellaneous hair accessories, more than three dresses
   
3. Sexual experience with members of the opposite sex (please note that self-identification as bisexual at any level louder than a whisper will be grounds for an immediate zeroing of any lesbian cred points earned)
   
4. Previous experience as a cheerleader or homecoming queen.
   
   

Okay, that's enough of that. I've got to go and bill some actual client time!