Get into the groove, yeah, you got to prove
Your love for meeeeeeee, yeah
Ahem.
Egypt: Down with Morsi! Down with the Army! Workers to Power!
And some labor shiznit:
I've heard nonstop b$@++ing about the BART strike from my clients in Cali.
Tell 'em to shut their filthy scab mouths.
After plowing through Nickel and Dimed and Bait and Switch, I think I am in love with Barbara Ehrenreich and volunteer to provide her with stud service, even if she is 40 years older than me.
Happy 4th of July, everybody!!
Well, it's that time of day, again, to go peddle socialist newspapers.
See ya later, comrades!
|
Ten Graphics on the Bechdel Test.
(Some more comments from the creator on the reddit thread here.)
Statistics are fun!
"It seems that the test is a good way to measure if female characters are having the same voice as the male character, but not so much to measure what this voice is saying."
There seems to be a trend of it being from a smaller range of geographical locations though. Or is it just that some areas take their religion so serious it borders on a bloodsport?
Sorry for the time it took to reply to this, busy week.
If you're saying what I think you're saying, then this is a very astute observation.Yes, these fights are being fought on a smaller and smaller scale. It's all a matter of game theory and strategy. See, the radical conservatives have learned that their ideas don't play very well on a national stage. Americans tend to be fairly tolerant and socially liberal, which is why a presidential nominee won't succeed if they're not seen as at least being a "compassionate conservative".
But there are pockets, especially in the south, of extremely religious, extremely vocal, low-information voters. Or just far-right conservatives in general. You may find it difficult to elect one of them even to congress or senate for less than the 10 million or so it takes to polish that turd.
However, that same 10 million can get you 20 guaranteed state legislature seats, or just about every school board position in the state. The state legislatures are who set the rules for how voting works in an individual state (that list of people, incidentally, likely won't include blacks for longer in Mississippi or Alabama) and draws up the districts for national congressional seats. We call this gerrymandering, which is a polite euphamism for ratf&@*ing.
So we have seen this flood of money, since the supreme court says you can't stop someone from spending money to propagandize the voting populace, let alone build a dam to stop the deluge of corporate cash FLOODING into smaller and smaller races, we get local electorates that are absolutely GONZO and do not answer to the people at large.
I mean, bypassing congress and implementing new, draconian laws against abortion or teaching evolution in schools in 50 individual states may SEEM like it's the hard way...at first. See, you would need someone or something to coordinate all these different state houses.
It's called the American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC. They create bill "templates" for conservative politicians who don't really speak legalese (let alone have an education above the 8th grade) and a lot of the politicians who introduce this legislation don't read or know many of the provisions in it. But this explains how we get nearly identical anti-abortion bills introduced in Wisconsin and Texas, like, weeks apart.
I don't often go to Infowars, but my hetero life partner does and sometimes he finds some stuff that I like.
Hee hee!
I don't often go to Infowars, but my hetero life partner does and sometimes he finds some stuff that I like.
Hee hee!
Don't read InfoWars, it rots your brain!
Also, the comments on that page are high-larious.
Believe me, if I could have found footage of inebriated LGBT people/allies assaulting anti-gay provocateurs on some other site, I would have linked that.
As far as I understand it, intersectionality is very much a third-wave feminism thing, although for people like me who pretty much know nothing but third-wave feminism it seems incredibly obvious. I believe bell hooks is one of those authors who hit the topic early (and hence continues to be incredibly relevant today). Wikipedia suggests it was " highlighted by Kimberlé Crenshaw in 1989" so that is comparatively recent, I suppose.
Kimberle Crenshaw, of Wikipedia intersectional fame, is even less thrilled about the DOMA ruling than Comrade Jeff:
And, for a little off-topicness, my fave anti-imperialist Britishiznoid journalist on Egypt:
What's Plan C for Egypt? The Fall of Morsi and the Neocolonial Project by DAN GLAZEBROOK
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ehh. Isn't it possible to celebrate one (rather important!) step forward while still being mindful of what we have left to do?
No freedom till we're equal to be sure. But I can be happy for the progress in LGBT rights without losing sight of the fact that African-Americans get the short stick as well.
Ehh. Isn't it possible to celebrate one (rather important!) step forward while still being mindful of what we have left to do?
Not according to Ms. Crenshaw and friends.
Yeah, the "All of Us or None" type of rhetoric is why some activists lose the interest of larger segments of the population. While they make valid points about setbacks in civil rights, they are inadvertently presenting the issue as a monolithic, unsolvable problem, which fundamentally turns people off from talking/caring/acting.
"If we can't celebrate success, why try at all?" is the unintended message they plant in people's brains.
"If we can't celebrate success, why try at all?" is the unintended message they plant in people's brains.
Maybe in yours.
"If we can't celebrate success, why try at all?" is the unintended message they plant in people's brains.Maybe in yours.
Actually, in most people.
A short talk about myths of change.The rhetoric used in that CP article is the least effective type you can use to get people to alter their behavior.
"If we can't celebrate success, why try at all?" is the unintended message they plant in people's brains.Maybe in yours.Actually, in most people.
A short talk about myths of change.The rhetoric used in that CP article is the least effective type you can use to get people to alter their behavior.
I already celebrated a couple days ago. I think I even said "Huzzah!"
Now I'm reading all the shiznit they pulled against black rights and I'm wondering why it's only the crazy leftists on CounterPunch who seem to be saying anything about it.
But keep partyin', dude. Gay marriage and marijuana laws: Bread and circus for the new millennium.
I'm not disagreeing with the facts of the piece.
I'm disagreeing with the tone and tenor of the piece.
I'm disagreeing with the "all of us or none of us" philosophy. Because it tells me that we shouldn't try to achieve anything, unless we're also going to achieve everything else.
Partially it's a fundamental difference in strategy. At my heart, I'm an incrementalist. Take success where you can get it, even while you keep fighting for the bigger picture. Instead of saying "this isn't enough", I'd rather hear "let's snowball this success into the next challenge".
Smoke less.
It's been talked about plenty by various radio programs. Thom Hartman, Ed Schultz, Stephanie Miller, Mark Thompson, and Media Matters have all talked about it.
Well, there you go. I don't listen to the radio.
And...California is in the lead once again.
|
I get all of my American news from the Daily Show and Colbert Report.In that case, you ARE better informed than most Americans, and certainly moreso than any regular Fox News viewer.
In your mind at least
I find it better to get american news from another country so much less political bias makes it in. and if you think your news source is not bias it is only because it shares yours.|
|
I get some American news from my Canadian news source, but the Daily Show and Colbert Report often looks at the meta, they show not only the news but how the news is reported. They're mostly reporting on how the news is presented.I get all of my American news from the Daily Show and Colbert Report.In that case, you ARE better informed than most Americans, and certainly moreso than any regular Fox News viewer.
In your mind at least
I find it better to get american news from another country so much less political bias makes it in. and if you think your news source is not bias it is only because it shares yours.
with their own bias
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Reality is biased.
Just as equally Insane Leftist, but, hopefully, Comrade Irontruth will like the tone better: The work yet to be done
And another Supreme Court decision that I must've been [bubble bubble bubbling] when Thom Hartmann covered it: A new blow to Native sovereignty
(And, yes, Grammie is wearing a t-shirt reading WTF Wells Fargo!)
I thought this article was pretty stupid, but, then again, I'm a pretty committed Marxist Anti-Feminist.
And, as much as I don't care for Tony Cliff (expelled from international Trotskyism all the way back in the early fifties for refusing to defend North Korea), if the worst example of "sexism" you can pull out is:
"He could sometimes make sexist remarks, reflecting the male-dominated culture of the traditional labor movement. For example, Cliff would explain the need for realistic expectations by saying, 'I'd like to sleep with Gina Lolabrigida (sic), but I have to put up with what I've got'"
then maybe you should shut up.
OHWFA!
Well, after Texas and North Carolina and Wisconisn and wherever else the f&@!, I am feeling pretty cynical and fatalistic.
Let's see if these borderline conspiracy theory laden journalists can cheer me up.
Hmm. Not really. Liked that hawt chick they dragged away, though.
Right on, sister!
[Raises fist]