Have I mentioned lately that I execrate Cultural Feminists of the FluffyBunny Wicca-y type?

Well, I do.

Sadly, I can't recount the entire story here, as it involves a listserve whose email isn't really for public consumption.

Suffice it to say that I firmly believe that if you anthropomorphize the moon to the point where this story drives you into a state of utter panic and mourning WHAT HAVE WE BECOME, sending out calls for a mass protest and vigil against the "insane" "dudes" of NASA who would DARE to harm our sister-goddess' body like this? to the point where you say you can't "bear" to do the research to confirm the details of the story?

And then, when someone snarks her dissent -very mildly- at you, you are "driven to tears?" and then -separately-, after that, after an (admittedly not very heartfelt) apology from said snarker, said snarker then posts a snark-free link to the story for public interest, and you email back that y'all already KNOW "these facts" but the snarker needs to let it go because you're "grieving" anyway?

This + this = you are driving me to increasing levels of sadism, Fluffy Dianic Too Sensitive To Live Person.

and I mean. a -graduate- student. wtf critical thinking skills...? oh, right, those are from the Patriarchy, never mind.

nyargh.

EDIT In fact, I feel compelled to burst into Song. and so I shall.

No, really, some of -my- best friends...

In which, to begin with, we learn that PUMA solidarity extends even unto poor martyred little Anita Bryant.

At least a few of the commenters get it, but really, Tennessee Tea Party Guerilla Women....

In light of this week's historic decision finding that the 30 year old bigoted Florida law -- barring gays and lesbians from adopting children -- is unconstitutional (duh), it seems like a good time to recall the Florida Sunshine Girl.

Anita Bryant's legendary homophobic campaign ruined her career and inspired gay rights activists across the nation to work that much harder for justice. Unfortunately, Anita Bryant was just a clueless pawn, a young and naive woman who was conned by the Church Fathers to use her celebrity status for their bigoted cause.

The Florida Sunshine Girl lost her popularity, her career, and her marriage. The Church Fathers lost nothing.

As palinpumawatch acidly notes,

Anita Bryant was born in 1940 and started her anti-homosexuality crusade in 1977. I find it hard to buy a 37-year-old woman as a vulnerable girl-child — particularly when said woman was not plucked from obscurity but already had some experience with fame.

On the bright side, she now seems to have her very own ministry, does Bryant. You GO, sisterrrr!! Throw off those shackles of your oppressive Church Fathers! You SEIZE those tools in your very own paws! Grrrr!! Pounce!...

"I can do all things through Him who strengthens me"

Oh lookie here, she has lots of pics of her glory days, past and present, as befits a comeback star. Press clippings, recent ones, too. Here's one by another woman--you see? conservative feminism at its finest! one woman supporting another! One Janet Folger, to be precise, says:

Last weekend I met a true hero. A woman I have long admired for a stand that cost her everything. In fact, I dedicated my book, "The Criminalization of Christianity," to her. The inscription reads:

"To all those with courage to speak the truth in the face of ridicule, blame, assault, censorship, and the threat of being criminalized: Including Anita Bryant …"

At a meeting of national leaders in New Orleans this weekend, Anita Bryant received an award and a standing ovation that lasted nearly 10 minutes. I clapped until my hands hurt.

A friend of mine who heard about the highlight of my weekend asked, "Who is Anita Bryant?" He said he had only heard me talk about Phyllis Schlafly with "such superlatives."

This beauty queen and orange juice spokeswoman was known for saying "a day without orange juice is like a day without sunshine." She had her own television show at the age of 12. She had a successful singing career and entertained the troops with Bob Hope. And when a candidate she had endorsed took a stand for the homosexual agenda in the public schools in Miami-Dade County, Anita Bryant took a stand against it.

Enter the real "hate speech": pies in the face, kidnapping threats, death threats, threats to her children, acts of violence to her home. Like a scene out of Sodom, homosexual activists surrounded her home screaming at the top of their lungs. Her mother was afraid to open the front door. She lost her marriage. She lost her jobs and any means of supporting herself and her four children. She was a sacrificial lamb to wake a sleeping nation. She stood alone. And yet she stood..

It goes on. Oh, it does go on. Hate crime laws for the sodomites and other, even worse travesties of justice followed in the wake of her defeat: terrible, terrible, poor martyred hero-lamb Bryant tried to stop them, but to no avail. And so forth.

Brings a god-dam tear to your eye, I tell you what.

But so yes, here's poor naif Anita Bryant at the peak of her gay-baiting career:

In 1977, Dade County, Florida (now Miami-Dade County) passed an ordinance sponsored by Bryant's former good friend Ruth Shack, that prohibited discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Anita Bryant led a highly publicized campaign to repeal the ordinance as the leader of a coalition named Save Our Children. The campaign was waged based on what was labeled "Christian beliefs regarding the sinfulness of homosexuality and the perceived threat of homosexual recruitment of children and child molestation."

Her view was that "What these people really want, hidden behind obscure legal phrases, is the legal right to propose to our children that theirs is an acceptable alternate way of life. [...] I will lead such a crusade to stop it as this country has not seen before." The campaign was called 'Save Our Children', the start of an organized opposition to gay rights that spread across the nation. Jerry Falwell went to Miami to help her.

Bryant made the following statements during the campaign:

"As a mother, I know that homosexuals cannot biologically reproduce children; therefore, they must recruit our children"

and

"If gays are granted rights, next we'll have to give rights to prostitutes and to people who sleep with St. Bernards and to nail biters."

On June 7, 1977, Bryant's campaign led to a repeal of the anti-discrimination ordinance by a margin of 69 to 31 percent...

More details.

You know, all of this feels -awfully- familiar, but I can't think why.

...It's a familiar pattern: the Christian right often has its greatest triumphs just after it's been pronounced moribund. In 1999, just as the Christian right was about to achieve unprecedented power in the Bush administration, The Economist wrote, "The armies of righteousness, which once threatened to overwhelm the Republican Party, are downcast and despondent."

One could have written the same thing last month. Now, as then, the movement has been resurrected. At the recent Values Voter Summit, a religious-right gathering in Washington, DC, sponsored by the Family Research Council, attendees were ebullient. "The surge of energy is unbelievable," said Emily Buchanan, executive director of the Susan B. Anthony List, a PAC that supports antiabortion candidates and aims to mobilize antiabortion women. "Sarah Palin is going to be our poster woman," she said. "She represents exactly what we've been trying to do since we were founded in 1992."

And you fell for it, PUMAs. Hook, line, and sinker. And, apparently, are still falling for it, and prepared to fall for it again in the next election cycle(s). I can't wait to hear still more about the exciting confluences and new agendas and whatever the fuck else "feminism" it is where powerful rightwing women get to be Queen For A Day (one way or another), along with, vicariously I guess, their adoring fangirls; and this takes priority over...well, everyone and everything else, apparently, including civil rights for the rest of us plebes.

Anyway,

barring gays and lesbians from adopting children -- is unconstitutional (duh)

Yes indeed. NOW it is. Finally. Says Florida. Thirty-one years later. Good thing someone in Florida finally got the memo, because seems like with our current SCOTUS, it wasn't gonna happen on the federal level:

In 2005, the United States Supreme Court refused to hear a challenge to the Florida law.

Also, too, lest we forget,

Some states, like Mississippi and Utah, effectively bar adoptions by same-sex couples through laws that prohibit adoption by unmarried couples. Arkansas voters passed a similar measure this month.

Along with, -snaps fingers,- o, what was that other measure that just passed...

With the passage of Proposition 8 on Nov. 4, the California constitution now defines marriage as “between a man and a woman,” excluding and thereby banning same-sex marriages. The proposition’s victory of 52 percent sparked protests statewide as well as nationwide. Now it seems that protesters have moved off the streets and into the courthouses.

On Nov. 19, the California Supreme Court agreed to listen to lawsuits charging that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional. Six of the seven justices agreed to hear the cases and required the parties involved to answer several questions pertaining to the proposition.

Whether Proposition 8 qualifies as a revision or an amendment to the California constitution, whether it violates the constitution’s separation-of-powers doctrine by confining judges’ authority to protect gay couples, and if constitutional, whether it may nullify the some 18,000 gay marriages that occurred in California between June 16 and Nov. 4, are all questions facing the court.

It is a legal clusterfuck, I'll just sum up the rest of the piece helpfully, and the bottom line is: sooner or later, it's gonna have to go to SCOTUS. Now perhaps sooner rather than later. And while you, O gentle PUMAs, may think it's a "duh" that these laws have been unconstitutional, at -least- four of the sitting judges--the haler and healthier ones by far, on the whole--may not agree with you. And whatever they say, goes. You do understand this, right? I mean, you did? And that there was always more at stake than Roe alone? And that there are probably going to be at least three, maybe four, openings in the Court these next few years? Just checking.

A little background on the federal Defense Of Marriage Act, btw:

The Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA, is the short title of a federal law of the United States passed on September 21, 1996...The law has two effects:

No state (or other political subdivision within the United States) need treat a relationship between persons of the same sex as a marriage, even if the relationship is considered a marriage in another state.

The Federal Government may not treat same-sex relationships as marriages for any purpose, even if concluded or recognized by one of the states.

The bill was passed by Congress by a vote of 85-14 in the Senate[1] and a vote of 342-67 in the House of Representatives[2], and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on September 21, 1996.

At the time of passage, it was expected that at least one state would soon legalize same-sex marriage, whether by legislation or judicial interpretation of either the state or federal constitution. Opponents of such recognition feared (and many proponents hoped) that the other states would then be required to recognize such marriages under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution.

Including the results of the 2008 general elections, two states (Massachusetts and Connecticut) allow same-sex marriage, five states recognize some alternative form of same-sex union, twelve states ban any recognition of any form of same-sex unions including civil union, twenty-eight states have adopted amendments to their state constitution prohibiting same sex marriage, and another twenty states have enacted statutory DOMAs...

...Several challenges to the law's constitutionality have been appealed to the United States Supreme Court since its enactment, but so far the Court has declined to review any such cases. Many states have still not decided whether to recognize other states' same-sex marriages or not, which is unsurprising as only Iowa[8], California, and Massachusetts have issued licenses for same-sex marriages...

As I said: legal clusterfuck. Bob Barr authored DOMA and has since apologized (!); Bill Clinton signed it, was adamant that he's for marriage as "between a man and a woman" (like who isn't, she said wearily). Very few people are happy with this state of affairs; the only exceptions are probably the people making filthy lucre and building their careers off the complex ongoing state-by-state battles. Some people--including, surprise! Obama--are for the repeal of DOMA altogether.

And then there are those--Sarah Palin, for one example--who are in support of this solution: a Federal Marriage Amendment.

The legal consensus is that the 2003 version of the FMA would have barred all governments from recognizing same-sex marriage from, civil union or domestic partnership status. It also might have prohibited the granting of any of the civil rights and responsibilities of marriages to any unmarried couple, including responsibilities regarding joint parenting, adoption, custody and child visitation rights, joint insurance policies, veteran's benefits, and domestic violence relief such as restraining and protection orders.
...

2004 and later versions

The first sentence of the 2004 FMA, and the effectively identical 2005/2006 and 2008 versions, would prevent any state from allowing same-sex marriage, even if the voters of that state amended the state's constitution to require recognition of same-sex marriages. Ratification of the amendment would have caused the dissolution of existing same-sex marriages recognized in Massachusetts.

As you can see by following the timeline, each run-through makes passage look increasingly remote; and this round, of course, between Obama and the heavily Democratic Congress, it seems unlikely anyone will even bother to try, unless as yet another rally-the-troops-for-the-sake-of-it gesture. Still, it really ain't over till it's over, and right now it's far from over.

Oh--also too by the way? That first, 2003 version of the FMA was penned by one Marilyn Musgrave. Thankfully, her defeat this year went to another woman, Betsy Markey, so the 30% solution is still as safe as it was -there-. Phew, right? I mean, what a loss it would've been otherwise, this fine woman who was--milestone! the first Republican woman elected to Congress from Colorado. She was also

an original cosponsor of the Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act. She has received the support of the Susan B. Anthony List, an pro-life PAC.[18]

Musgrave also opposes embryonic stem cell research on abortion-related grounds,[19] and was a vocal proponent of the 2005 congressional intervention into the Terri Schiavo case...

...Musgrave has also weighed in on the Emergency Contraception controversy. On July 25, 2005, Musgrave criticized a witness at a congressional subcommittee hearing who had claimed she was "humiliated and discriminated against" at a pharmacist's refusal to fill prescription of emergency contraception, claiming that it was only an issue of "inconvenience" to be denied emergency contraception.[21]

In 2003, a Musgrave submitted an amendment to the Runaway, Homeless, and Missing Children Protection Act, which would have prevented distribution of contraception to runaway teens. It was defeated. [22][23]

...In June 2005, Musgrave cited Coral Ridge Ministries founder D. James Kennedy, one of the leaders of the Dominionist movement, as one of her inspirations to enter politics:[11]

...Other political groups that Musgrave is allied with include Focus on the Family, Alliance for Marriage, the Family Research Council, the National Taxpayers Union, the Christian Coalition, and the Traditional Values Coalition.

And yet, look at this heartwarming picture of conservative feminism in action, before her sad defeat (I'm sure she's right not to have conceded or said anything to Betsy Markey even to this day):

Musgrave (left) receives a pro-life and pro-woman Susan B. Anthony Award from Jane Abraham.

See that? Once more, with feeling: it's a woman in politics, giving an award--named after a famous feminist, yet!-- to another woman in politics!! Look at that great big tent! Sisters, it just doesn't get any better than this.

And now, your moment of zen:

jenniforhillary 11.07.08 at 9:10 pm

...as a WHITE woman who as worked her entire life in social service mostly with people of color I am FUCKING offended by BO and his fucking ‘community organizer’ bs since I have done more in my life for blacks than he ever will.

Sixth, Blacks voted AGAINST gays and I laughed all the way home…you both deserve each other as voting blocks. Most of my friends of gay and NONE of them supported BO....The fact that blacks showed their hypocrisy and gays got hurt is KARMA since MOST local and the NATIONAL GLBT supported BO. I say you deserve each other.

Duh.

And while we're on the subject of racism:

Yes, I know, "racist" is the worst thing one could ever, ever, ever accuse anyone of being and one must therefore reserve such speculations for, like, actual lynchings, if that ("he's a nice boy! he doesn't have a racist bone in his body! he didn't mean it PERSONALLY. he just got...upset"). Nonetheless. It is hard to know what (else) to make of, well, pretty much anything that comes out of Reclusive Leftist these days, but specifically, now (once again via Palin Puma Watch):

Warning: post contains a quotation with racial epithets.

Apostate, bless her, is still trying:

I agree with you that the sexist stuff is inexcusable. However, please believe me to be sincere in saying that it does seem as if there is simple *adoration* of Palin in the PUMA camp. This adoration is not in keeping with your stated disagreement with most of Palin’s platform.

Plus, at least half of your commenting community sound like Republican women to me. I may be wrong about this, but such is my impression. After a certain point, your commenting community begins to define the tone of your blog.

To which Violet replies:

Apostate, your comment 136 about people “adoring” Palin reminds me of an old and horrible phrase: “nigger-lover.” That used to be what racists called white people who committed the sin of not sharing in the racism of the day. If you refused to join in the slurs, if you stood up for the simple humanity of a black person, if you tried pointing out his or her qualities and abilities, you weren’t seen as being just or decent; you were a “nigger-lover.”

It is a sad commentary on the zeitgeist that by simply refusing to engage in the bashing of Palin, by standing up for her as a person, for trying to see the real woman, for treating her with basic dignity and honesty, I’m “adoring” Palin.

As for the “everyone” you refer to who interprets this as adoration, that is an artifact of your circumstances. From what I know of you, the only feminists you come into contact with (online and in real life) are exactly the same lemmings who have engaged in the kind of sexist Palin-bashing I’m describing. The mostly young feminists online have devolved into a caricature; I’m embarrassed by them. Planned Parenthood allowed the Obama campaign to use its mailing list to send out a smear email about Palin.

The women in my circle, in real life and online, are long-time feminists who are deeply disturbed by what has happened.

By the way: I usually like Shakesville, but the last time I was there they were uncritically repeating the rape kit smear. I haven’t been back since.


What. In. The. FUCK.

Aside from the gratuitous use of racial slurs, the inherent WTFery of a white woman lecturing a woman of colour about racism, and the disingenuous bullshit about how she's just been defending Palin's humanity instead of actively encouraging people to vote for her, read these comments and tell me with a straight face there's no adoration going on. Read Violet's repeated assertions that she recognizes Palin as "kin" to her and tell me she's just objectively defending a woman against sexism...*

So, first of all, seconding the rest of PPW's commentary there (which you should go read), and this and also this, insightful analyses of what else might actually be going on with the Palin fanbase.

I'll just add this, because now I'm good and pissed:

You know. Given just how much projection is going on there ("lemmings" "devolved into a caricature" "embarrassed by them" "smear," and that's just in that one post). And given that there is otherwise very little Earth explanation as to how exactly someone gets from "likes Palin, an unpopular view in the larger feminist community" to...that;

I'm gonna go out on a limb and suggest that maybe, just maybe, -that- was what VS (along with some others) was really wanting to call the "O-bots" all along.

I mean. -Such- betrayal. -Such- outrage. Is it -really- all because gosh darn it we should have just supported the woman, -any- woman, over the man, -any- man? Really. And yet, at that same place: the campaign to throw the vote, however "unwillingly" to McCain; and even now, a number of snarks at Michelle Obama (ain't she a woman?)

So, say the nomination had ultimately come down to Edwards versus Clinton, and had narrowly gone to Edwards (assuming of course he hadn't fucked up with the stupid sex scandal, which of course besides being the political suicide that it was would be duly and correctly excoriated by most feminists: everyone loves Elizabeth, he was another arrogant shit, but anyway moving on). Would the PUMA's have existed at all? In this form? And still be going, and going, and going, and fucking going? With freepers all over the fucking place now, yet? Really.

I mean, anything's possible; we can all speculate a thousand "what if" scenarios, right, and the goddam election, I keep having to remind myself, is -over-. Mostly because, well, now the -hard part-, and the adrenaline is hard to let go of.

But also, yeah, crap like this.

This post-PUMA thing, as I'm looking at it, insofar as it may be relevant at all, is shaping up as an unholy "confluence" between the dregs of what was already a noxious form of "cultural" feminism, which already had more than its share of thinly-if-at-all-veiled racism, creepy calls for "purity" and crypto-fascist nostalgia for mythical times, among other reactionary markers; and actual full-on right wing reactionaries. Now with more xenophobia and nativist bunker mentality!

Which is, of course, -exactly what the world fucking needs-. FEMINISM, especially, we -need- this, fuck knows. I mean the real problem with mainstream feminism, it turns out, is that it's -not focused on white and/or straight women enough.

Oh, yeah: it's hard out there for a white, straight woman.

[from someone called "Cindy"]

The following I’ve written as an open “letter” to Americans (from my perspective as a straight, white woman):

We are American women.
We have done eveything society asked of us.
We behaved in school.
We looked as pretty as possible at all times.
We learned to cook.
We learned to sew.
We went to church.
We dated nice boys.
We got married.
We took our husbands’ names.
We gave up our identities.
We took jobs for less pay.
We bore you children.
We lovlingly taught, nursed, guided, and nurtured these children.
We volunteered at our children’s schools.
We baked cookies for community fundraisers.
We volunteered at political campaigns.
We volunteered at nursing homes.
We took care of our elderly parents.
We have been loyal American patriots.
What have we done wrong? Why do you hate us?
Were we not pretty enough for you?
Did we not scream loud enough during childbirth?
Are we not dying at the hands of intimate partners fast enough for you?
Why do you hate us?

Poignant, innit?

Almost as poignant as the plight of Joe the Plumber (whom?): you bought a dream which was never even -meant- to be applicable to 80% of the population in the first place (and unwanted by another good 15% or so I'd say); and now that the dream is clearly being revealed as a bill of goods, you:

a) cling frantically to the politician who promises to keep the increasingly threadbare, -even to you-, fantasy going, no matter what the cost to you, let alone anybody else in the entire world (whom?)

b) incredibly, are now whining, to the 95% of the population to whom this means exactly jack and shit, for -sympathy-, even as you continue to do everything in your passive-aggressive power to fuck them over. All while denying strenuously that you're doing any such thing.

Ummm...sorry, what was the question? Right, right. "We" hate "you, plural," because, um.

a) You're beautiful, like a Prell commerical (or whatever the fuck that was. Also, popular and shiny, and we covet your red scrunchie.

b For your freedoms, unless it's for your not-freedoms.

c) Because "we're" "the" "axis" "of" "evil." Thugs, 'bots of various sorts, etc. etc. etc.

d) Because we, the WINO's aka "Women In Name Only," forgot the "feminist" rule that you're not supposed to attack a woman (i.e. a "real" woman, whom I guess at this point the only one would be...you), no matter what she does to you first.

Certainly not because "you" are a whiny, plaster-of-Paris, self-absorbed, genteely bigoted, rightwing -git- who's becoming everything you claim you're afraid of and (collectively) would be dangerous if you gave any signs of being able to find your way out of a grease-proof paper bag unassisted.

I'm sorry; was that sexist of me? Too -mean-? -Unfair-? Unladylike unfeminist?

Because, you know, I feel just awful about it.

Damn.

ETA Then again, with endorsements like these, how could you possibly go wrong, am I right?

http://www.greenconsciousness.org/weblog/2008/01/reclusive-leftist....

I, who am a dried up angry embittered angry cynical paranoid angry hag, burst out laughing out loud, over and over and over as I read the Reclusive Leftist. She is anti war and I am not, which is usually the Great Divide but not here. She cares about women even if she doesn't get what it will take to create room for women under Sharia to breath. (it will take a lot of killing).

elsewhere, from the same charming commenter ("Green Consciousness;" she's some sort of eco-feminist too, see, Animal Liberation Front and so forth):

http://www.greenconsciousness.org/weblog/2008/06/another-so-called-...

Muslims are a threat in every country they immigrate to and from -they bring their anti-semitic hatreds, their misogyny, their separatism, their gender apartheid and their dhimmi tactics against the infidels which include a moral threatening outrage over imaginary and legitimate criticism. They cry victim to shame and guilt trip the people they victimize. We must defend our democracy from these Muslim war tactics or we will be their victims.

Obama used these tactics successfully against the Clintons by calling them racists every time they made any factual statement the BO campaign could twist to their advantage. People had to know what they were doing when they jumped on that race baiting band wagon but they wanted BO to win more than they cared about fairness...His backers proudly wear teeshirts with the name Hussein to proclaim their solidarity with his Muslim heritage.

If legitimate fear and loathing of fascist Muslim culture and religious practices can be made to seem racist, soon the hate laws will cover Muslims. Then Muslims will use these laws the way abusers use injunctions against their victims. The way that group of Muslims baited authorities on that airplane where they prayed in the aisles, asked for seat belt extenders, went to the bathroom in groups and generally tried to provoke a lawsuit.

I struggle --- constantly struggle with a hatred that is growing in my own heart, not toward Muslims who I coldly recognize as my enemy, but at those who pretend to stand for women while protecting slave masters who seek to dominate us by overwhelming numbers or by force. Muslims as individuals are both good and bad but it is the women I am concerned with and about - those who feel a desire to be their own boss and oppressed by their religion, practices and culture. The correct thing to do is to help the decent people leave the Muslim faith and find a way to live free. Very hard but battered women do it, all abuse survivors do it. You cannot live free and stay Muslim. This attitude must become part of our foreign policy in that we insist on secular political systems in countries we support. Because the Muslim religion does not tolerate nonbelievers, we nonbelievers must not tolerate the Muslim religion to gain power in our democracy which is vulnerable to it...

PSA: Free Esha Momeni

via matttbastard:

Change for Equality:

Esha Momeni, women’s rights advocate and a member of the Campaign from California was arrested on Wednesday October 15, 2008, while on a visit to Tehran. Momeni who is a photographer and graduate student was arrested in an unusual and illegal manner after being pulled over on Moddaress highway, by individuals who identified themselves as under cover traffic police on the pretense that she had unlawfully passed another vehicle while driving. Esha was arrested and taken to Section 209 of Evin Prison, managed by the Intelligence and Security Ministry.

Prior to her transfer to Evin, security officials searched her home and seized property, including her computer and films which were part of her thesis project. The security officials had an arrest warrant and court permission to search the home and seize property.

While Esha’s friends and colleagues were insistent about announcing the news of her arrest immediately, based on requests from her family this news was announced with delay. Security forces had promised Esha’s family that she would be released quickly if news of her arrest was not published.

Esha’s parents went to the Revolutionary Courts today, on the fifth day of her arrest, to follow up on the case of their daughter. Court officials told the Momeni family that they should not come to the courts again, and that their questions will not be answered until the investigation of Esha’s case comes to a close.

Esha Momeni is a graduate student at the School of Communications, Media and Arts at California State University, Northridge. Esha had come to Iran two months ago to visit with her family and to work on her Masters thesis project, focused on the Iranian women’s movement. To this end, she had conducted video interviews with members of the One Million Signatures Campaign in Tehran.

Women’s rights activists object to the unusual manner in which Esha was arrested, as well as the irresponsible treatment of her family members by security forces. Further they strongly object to the unjustified and unwarranted arrest of this women’s rights defender.

A weblog in support of Esha pressing for her release has been established, which includes interviews with her professors. The weblog as well as the site of the Campaign, Change for Equality, will continue to provide news on developments about Esha’s case.

More details on the case, who to write to, and how, here at Amnesty International.

The Campaign for Equality, launched in 2006, is an Iranian women’s rights initiative composed of a network of women and men committed to ending discrimination against women in Iranian law. The Campaign gives volunteers basic legal training, and these volunteers travel around the country promoting the Campaign, talking with women in their homes, as well as in public places, telling them about their rights and the need for legal reform. The volunteers are also collecting one million signatures of Iranian nationals for a petition demanding an end to legal discrimination against women in Iran.

Dozens of activists and supporters have been arrested in connection with their activities for the Campaign for Equality, some while collecting signatures for the petition demanding an end to legal discrimination against women in Iran. As of October 2008, the Campaign’s website had been blocked by the authorities at least 16 times. Official permission to hold public meetings has frequently been denied, and Campaign activists usually hold their workshops in the homes of sympathizers, some of whom have then received threatening phone calls apparently from security officials or been summoned by them for interrogation. At least one such workshop was forcibly broken up by police, who arrested those present, beating some.

Take action now–please write to the following contacts:

* Leader of the Islamic Republic, His Excellency Ayatollah Sayed Ali Khamenei, The Office of the Supreme Leader, Shoahada Street, Qom, Islamic Republic of Iran, Faxes: + 98.21.649.5880 / 21.774.2228, Email: info@leader.ir / istiftaa@wilayah.org / webmaster@wilayah.org;

* President, His Excellency Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Presidency, Palestine Avenue, Azerbaijan Intersection, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran, Fax: + 98.21.649.5880, E-mail: dr-ahmadinejad@president.ir;

* Head of the Judiciary, His Excellency Mr. Mahmoud Hashemi Shahrudi, Ministry of Justice, Park-e Shahr, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran, Fax: +98.21.879.6671 / +98 21 3 311 6567 / +98 21 3 390 4986, Email: Irjpr@iranjudiciary.com / info@dadgostary-tehran.ir;

* Minister of Foreign Affairs, His Excellency Mr. Manuchehr Motaki, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Sheikh Abdolmajid Keshk-e Mesri Av, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran, Fax: + 98.21.390.1999, Email: matbuat@mfa.gov;

* Director, Human Rights Headquarters of Iran, His Excellency Mohammad Javad Larijani, C/o Office of the Deputy for International Affairs, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Justice Building, Panzdah-Khordad (Ark) Square, Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran, Fax: + 98 21 5 537 8827

* Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Chemin du Petit-Saconnex 28, 1209 Geneva, Switzerland, Fax: +41 22 7330203, Email: mission.iran@ties.itu.int;

* Ambassador Mr. Ahani, Embassy of Iran in Brussels, avenue Franklin Roosevelt, 15 A. 1050 Bruxelles, Belgium, Fax: + 32 2 762 39 15. Email: iran-embassy@yahoo.com.

Amnesty International recommends that all appeals:

- [express] concern at the arrest of Esha Momeni, and [urge] on the authorities to treat her humanely in detention, and protect her from torture or other ill-treatment;

- [ask] the authorities to ensure that while in detention she is granted immediate and regular access to her family, a lawyer of her choice, and any medical treatment she may require;

- [express] concern that her arrest was apparently in connection with her peaceful activities in support of equal rights for women in Iran and in the context of her graduate research;

- [urge] the authorities to release her immediately and unconditionally if she is not to be charged with a recognizably criminal offence and brought to trial promptly and fairly

Also see this article written by Momeni in 2007 on the 0ne Million Signatures Campaign.

Mind you, we -could- just slink back into the comforting miasma of xenophobic hate.

It's not that I don't -get- feelings of pessismism and loathing of one's fellow humans, you understand. Witness for instance this charming and under-reported story of children being gassed at a mosque in Dayton, Ohio., bizarrely entitled "No evidence of hate crime"

A 10-year-old girl sprayed in the face with a chemical Friday, Sept. 26, while at a local Islamic mosque was not the victim of a hate crime, police Chief Richard Biehl said.

The girl was watching children whose parents and relatives had gathered at the Islamic Society of Greater Dayton, 26 Josie St., to celebrate Ramadan when she noticed two men standing outside a basement window about 9:40 p.m., according to police.

One of the men then sprayed something through the open window and into the girl's face from a white can with a red top, according to a police report. The girl said she immediately felt burning on her face and felt "sick to her stomach," the report stated.

Other children and a woman in the room felt affects from the chemical and the mosque was evacuated.

"The men didn't say anything to her (before she was sprayed)," Biehl said. "There was nothing left at the scene or anything that makes us believe this is a biased crime."

...Mosque board member Tarek Sabagh said many people within the mosque speculated that the incident was the result of a DVD about Islamic radicalism titled "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West" that was mailed to area homes by its producers and circulated as a paid advertisement with more than 70 newspapers, including the Dayton Daily News.

"We are not linking the two at all," Sabagh said.

Oh, yes, "Obsession."

http://www.obsessionthemovie.com/about_synopsis.php

(not hyperlinking)

Obsession - Radical Islam's War Against the West is a new film that will challenge the way you look at the world.

Almost 70 years ago, Europe found itself at war with one of the most sinister figures in modern history: Adolf Hitler. When the last bullet of World War II was fired, over 50 million people were dead, and countless countries were both physically and economically devastated. Hitler’s bloody struggle sought to forge the world anew, in the crucible of Nazi values. How could such a disaster occur? How could the West have overlooked the evil staring it in the face, for so long, before standing forcefully against it?

Today, we find ourselves confronted by a new enemy, also engaged in a violent struggle to transform our world. As we sleep in the comfort of our homes, a new evil rises against us. A new menace is threatening, with all the means at its disposal, to bow Western Civilization under the yoke of its values. That enemy is Radical Islam.

Using images from Arab TV, rarely seen in the West, Obsession reveals an ‘insider's view' of the hatred the Radicals are teaching, their incitement of global jihad, and their goal of world domination. With the help of experts, including first-hand accounts from a former PLO terrorist, a Nazi youth commander, and the daughter of a martyred guerilla leader, the film shows, clearly, that the threat is real.

A peaceful religion is being hijacked by a dangerous foe, who seeks to destroy the shared values we stand for. The world should be very concerned.

Yeah, probably. Probably so, at that. Although maybe not for exactly the reasons the authors of this...project think. Oh, they've been mailing it to peoples' homes, unsolicited. 28 million copies so far, apparently. (Oh, and only in the "swing states," curiously enough.) Thousands of which landed in Ohio residents' mailboxes the week before the gassing of the Dayton mosque.

I read the story as reported by the Dayton Daily News, but this was after I had received an email written by a friend of some of the victims of these American terrorists. The matter of fact news report in the Dayton paper didn't come close to conveying the horrific impact of this unthinkable act like the email I had just read, so I asked the email's author for permission to share what they had written. The author was with one of the families from the mosque -- a mother and two of the small children who were in the room that was gassed -- the day after the attack occurred.

"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...

The presidential campaign edition of the Obsession DVD, produced and currently being distributed by the Clarion Fund, carries the endorsement of the chair of the counter-terrorism department of the U.S. Naval War College, using the name and authority of an official U.S. military institution not only to validate an attack the religion of Islam, but to influence a political campaign. For these reasons, this endorsement has been included in MRFF's second lawsuit against the Department of Defense, which was filed on September 25 in the Federal District Court in Kansas.

My opinion as an individual and thoroughly appalled human being:

John McCain has a moral obligation to publicly censure the Clarion Fund; to denounce the inflammatory, anti-Muslim message of Obsession; and to do everything in his power to stop any further campaign activities by his supporters that have the potential to incite violence.

Which I'm sure he will, any day now, 'coz, you know, we're all about taking the elevated, bipartisan, non-hatin' tone these next few weeks.

And, it's perfectly understandable that people are reluctant to classify the mosque attack as a hate crime, or connect it in any way to a boogity-boogity-THE ISLAMOFASCIST HORDES ARE COMING FOR YA movie sent to a tenth of the U.S. population, including right there in the town where it happened. Or that the Islam-baiting is anything other than a perfectly rational response to extremist zealots who've already targeted us once, after all (which, we have none of our own, extremist zealots that is, or anyway those are worser, always), and has nothing to do with good ol'fashioned Fear And Hatred Of The Other, Especially When The Other Is "Swarthy" And Have Funny Names And Are Supposed To Be Doing Menial Tasks For Us Instead Of Being All Uppity And Shit.

Of course.

The 16th Street Baptist Church bombing was a racially motivated terrorist attack on September 15, 1963 by members of a Ku Klux Klan group in Birmingham, Alabama in the United States. The bombing of the African-American church resulted in the deaths of four girls.

- Wikipedia

I can’t remember a time when I really didn’t know about this story. About four girls whose lives were taken from them because of the color of their skin at a place of community, a place where above all they should have been safe. In short they lost their lives because of hatred a hate so strong that no where and no one is safe.

...Last night as I read the accounts of the gassing at the mosque in Dayton Ohio, last Friday, my mind continued to flash on the pictures of the 16th Street Baptist Church bombing.

It is disturbing to read how Dayton Police could not think this was a hate crime. As if the perpetrators walked up to any random building, lighted, filled with people, with cars in the parking lot, then sprayed something in the windows was a normal occurrence. No, not targeted at a group for their beliefs, they merely mistook the irritant gas sprayed for a can of Glade Air Freshener...

Why? Why? Why? -Why- do I do this to myself?

I mean, it's not like there isn't -enough- stupid and hateful in the world that I need to go seeking out even -more- of it, right? There is absolutely no reason on Maud's green earth why I -need- to be reading fundamentalists of any sort, let alone a rare conglomeration of fundies of both the right-wing Christian type AND (a few of) the purportedly radical feminist type, all united and dovetailing in the hatred of teh Ultimate Ev0l, teh pr0n; and -beyond- that, there is -certainly- no reason to click on what I know will be a small tetchy clump of the Lyndon LaRouchites of the feminist-or-whatever-everyone's-calling-themselves-this-week...clump...but...um...

Listen, can someone help wean me off onto a healthier habit, like, I don't know, slamming my fingers in car doors, or huffing nail polish remover?

Meanwhile, I -am- sorry, but MISERY LOVES COMPANY, DAMMIT:

exhibit #1:

I used to think men cared about women, and they would protect us if
necc. All that went right out the window, breaking me at my very core/
soul. If a man can use any woman he can use all women. There's no good
and bad uses of women. I don't want to be used in the so called good
way - as wife and fako partner, any more than I want to be used in the
bad way of p wh. It's ALL BAD!!! Using anyone is BAD!!!! There's no
good way to use someone. Yet there men are, celebrating the abuse of
women. I used to think the USA had a strong military full of strong
manly men dedicated to protecting us from external forces...

We're left feeling sooo alone in the world when we discover those who
vowed to love and honor us, have only been using us, while they also
contribute to destroying us. There's no connection between how they
treat other women, and how their fellow men treat us. They like to see
men sexualizing their OBJECTS.

...And I don't buy the BS about women do it because they like it and
they want too. If a woman likes it and wants to then she is mentally,
emotionally, and spiritually retarded, just like I was when I was also
under the influence of these man-made lies. To me it's like taking
advantage of the handicapped in our society, in soul torturous ways,
and calling that ENTERTAINMENT for MEN. That's soo messed up, in soo
many ways, it's no wonder we can't wrap our hearts and souls around
it. It's insanity, and sane people don't do it.

[another poster]
The other night there was an episode of 'Intervention' on,which I made my h watch. It was a lady who was addicted to heroin and she prostituted to get the money.

At 1st my h was angry,"I never saw a prostitute what does this have to do with me?"
I told him that that's what these womyn in p*rn movies are,they are prostituted once in the movie,and then over and over visually for sick men.

My h admitted to me that he separated these womyn in the movies from womyn in real life,because they were "sluts and they wanted to be there" :-X (I still can't believe my h said this..How can he be this man..and the one I thought I knew?)
Maybe some do think they want to be there,but if so,it's that they have been brain washed into thinking that's all their is for them.

I have seen interviews with these womyn,I have read books..I have seen these shows/documentaries,and I even knew a lady from my childhood who out of drug addiction finally resorted to prostitution,They didn't want to be there. They had no choice,or thought they had none. They had no voice and knew that that was the one thing they could always sell.

These womyn are addicts,they would do anything for their drugs. These womyn are womyn who have been abused all their life and feel as though they have nothing else to offer but their sexuality,as they've seen it's all anyone wants from them. They continue to be abused each time they do these acts.
These womyn are real ppl,they are not some mere object to be used,abused,and then used again.

I am so angry and resentful,that I am with someone who is a secret abuser of womyn,. It doesn't matter if it was visually...
That he lied,that he had everyone fooled...I could rant on this forever.

It makes me sad,angry and sick to think this is all the progress that has been made throughout human history? They went from walking hunched over,pulling us by the hair into a cave,to walking upright..only to be hunched over the computer victimizing us again,only visually.

At 1st..I was angry at God..I thought why did God let this happen to me? I am a good person,I try to live a respectable moral life.

Then a calm came over me,and I realized it wasn't Gods doing. God gave us free will so we can make the right choices,and find our way back to him. P*rn imo is truly evil,it is truly the work of "the devil" and of mans weakness for lust.

I think some of these men can save themselves,if they really see the problem as a whole. It's not just p*rn,it's not just mb. It's how womyn are seen and valued in their minds,how our role in society is placed. They have to place value on every womyn,no mater how "lowly" she might be...or they might not ever win this.

Two books I thought I might mention,if you're feeling mad as hell and don't mind getting madder:

'Against our will' -by Susan Brownmiller
and
'Who Cooked the Last Supper: The Women's History of the World'-by Rosalind Miles

on another thread:

I'm not coming at you with a machete nor am I trying to drive you off
the boards in any way. I am simply pointing out the error in your ways
when you encourage porn addicts to look up to someone for recovery
when that same person would tell the PA's on here they don't have a
porn addiction, and the SO's that they are insecure and porning for
men is a normal and healthy activity..

[sig quote]

..."Feminism is the radical notion that women are people"

and then, from the main pages of that same site:

Overcoming temptation is easier with an Accountability Partner.
That's why Covenant Eyes is effective. It is NOT a filter -- but it
does restore your freedom to choose.

Fully endorsed by: "Promise Keepers Men of Integrity"; Steve Hewitt,
editor and President, "Christian Computing Magazine"; by "Focus on the
Family"; and by No-porn.com.

Benefits and Features:

* Tracks every web visit and sends an e-mailed report to the
accountability partner(s) of your choice.
* Removes the secrecy of using the Internet. Reports can be sent
every seven, 14 or 28 days.

"I'm not religious, so I was pleased to find out that using this
doesn't require religion. It is just common sense."

o noez, doesn't require religion, it's only endorsed by FOCUS ON THE
FAMILY and PROMISE KEEPERS. i can totally understand why some "radical feminists" (hi, one angry girl! you've been cited in there!) would be sympatico here! I mean, they're only using software that's a-ok with frigging FOCUS ON THE FAMILY and PROMISE KEEPERS. Absolutely! Certainly much better allies than, o I don't know, female sex workers who don't happen to agree with you about whether their job is so terrible that they need to stop and repent forthwith, but DO agree with you wrt reproductive rights, gay rights, whether or not it really -is- a woman's -only- rightful place to sit at home by her husband's side and raise kids...

you stupid, stupid fucks.

and yeah, -nice- with the eye and the whole thing, not at all
Handmaid's Tale.***

Please, do tell me another one about how the ONLY reason I could -possibly- be more concerned about rabid anti-porn/kink/etc/etc/etc "feminists" than, I don't know, Playboy, or "raunch culture," or the harm my queer pro-domme friends who make indie pr0n are causing to anxious straight womyn who can't keep their husbands at home, is because I luuuuuurrrves the porn so very, very much.

NOT because o i don't know not only does it SOUND like right wing fundamentalism a lot of the time, not only is it -possible- that right-wing fundamentalists use this shit to further their own agenda (that no-porn board has literally hundreds of thousands of postings, apparently tens of thousands of regulars if you buy their "survey" numbers, or did), but in -some- cases we are in fact talking about -the very same people.- That's a lie! That never happens! And, y'all (y'all know who you are) are SO RIGHT to be so much more willing to work/engage with these people than someone like this.

I'll skip the bit with the terribly earnest young man who's convinced he must be entirely chaste because he has a homosexual orientation -and- is a Christian, but -for some reason- just can't stop looking at Those Pictures or thinking Those Thoughts, can anyone help? or indeed the guy who's convinced he's an "addict" because he still jerks off once a week, and the very helpful woman who may or may not be a "feminist," it's a bit ambiguous from her login and other posts, who suggests imagining his dead grandmother looking on every time he starts to lapse, hey, whatever works, right?

just, by way of transition to the next Place What Makes My Brain Hurt, one last, thiswas also rather choice, I thought:

Even if they are looking at straight men having sex, they are mb to
other men having sex. And whether they are consciously aware of it or
not, it's a perversion, and their subconcious is soaking it all up no
matter what they think. I often wonder if my h is gay, even when it's
not shemales, because I can't tell what he's looking at the girls or
the guys. And often the so called girls, are really men, made up to
look like women, so often times they are wanking to men while thinking
they are women, but their soul sees them as the me they are regardless
imo. It's only a small step from there to shemales imo. It really
doesn't matter what kind of p it is though, because it is all messed
up, and they get messed up no matter what kind they are using from the
tamer type to the grosser type. Using p makes them pornosexuals, and
totally ruins their natural hetrosexuality no matter what the images.

Had enough of that? Okay! Moving on. And in fact, this has gotten SO long and unwieldy that it's now TWO posts o'rantiness, continue here.

***

Sometimes the movie she showed would be an old porno film, from the seventies or eighties. Women kneeling, sucking penises or guns, women tied up or chained or with dog collars around their necks, women hanging from trees, or upside-down, naked, with their legs held apart, women being raped, beaten up, killed...

Consider the alternatives, said Aunt Lydia. You see what things used to be like? That was what they thought of women, then. Her voice trembled with indignation.

Moira said later that it wasn't real, it was done with models, but it was hard to tell.

Sometimes, though, the movie would be what Aunt Lydia called an Unwoman documentary. Imagine, said Aunt Lydia, wasting their time like that, when they should have been doing something useful. Back then, the Unwomen were always wasting time. They were encouraged to do it. The government gave them money to do that very thing. Mind you, some of their ideas were sound enough, she went on, with the smug authority of one who is in a safe position to judge. We would have to condone some of their ideas, even today. Only some, mind you, she said, coyly, raising her index finger, waggling it at us. But they were Godless, and that can make all the difference, don't you agree?

and

Lilies used to be a movie theater, before. Students went there a lot: every spring they had a Humphrey Bogart festival, with Lauren Bacall or Katherine Hepburn, women on their own, making up their minds. They worse blouses with buttons down the front that suggested the possibilities of the word undone. These women could be undone; or not. They seemed to be able to choose. We seemed to be able to choose, then. We were a society dying, said Aunt Lydia, of too much choice.

...Women were not protected then.

I remember the rules, rules that were not spelled out but that every woman knew: Don't open your door to a stranger, even if he says he is the police. Make him slide his ID under the door. Don't stop on the road to help a motorist pretending to be in trouble...

Now we walk along the same street, in red pairs, and no man shouts obscenities at us, speaks to us, touches us. No one whistles.

There is more than one kind of freedom, said Aunt Lydia. Freedom to and freedom from. In the days of anarchy, you had freedom to. Now you have freedom from. Don't underrate it.

--Margaret Atwood, The Handmaid's Tale

The path of the righteous is beset on all sides

The path of the frootbat is much the same, but with the addition of banana peels.

Take this winner, for instance ("take him, please"). "Saint," I believe is his moniker. He's payin' my friend Rebecca a visit.

In many ways just your average troglodyte--he is very concerned about the "pussification of Oz," apparently. But, amid his dronings, what caught my bloodshot eye was what's beginning to sound like an awfully familiar theme, to wit, "I'm only being a noxious shithead toward you, complete stranger, because I care." Viddy:

Don’t put yourself into the prison of identity politics. Don’t surround yourself with people who do not have your good, your best interests at heart, who don’t love you. Don’t ruin your life, don’t condemn yourself to life-long misery and self-hate, egged on by a cheering squad of three self-absorbed individuals who care more about their cause du jour then you as a person.

There is much much more to life than your narrow prison cell, and there is much more life, hope, joy and love outside of that toxic web of friends of yours.

Right Christian of him, isn't it? Mighty white of him, even. And he's right, you know, because nothing says "I see you as a real person rather than as my own personal Righteous Cause" better than, f'r instance:

Screwed is an understatement for [Rebecca], if you are talking screwed up. She’s got issues. Trans issues. Needless to say, a perusal of her blog tells you she is not the cheerful one of ___'s two friends.

...[Pussification/Teh Gay Agenda/Teh Trans Agenda/Feminazis/evil leprechauns and pixies/the little dogs Trey, Blanche, Sue, they bark at me] [is] a prison which has sucked in __ and __ - both barely adults, what a tragedy - and is leading them down a path of self-destruction egged on by their idiot friends like ___. You don’t know whether you should commit them all or take them in and protect them from themselves. Or both.

See? Just like Jesus. Going after the lost sheep, as it were. Before they can pussify the entire country, which was Jesus' main concern, and rightfully so.



This is the key point, though. Quoth the Saint:

I am glad, having now read your next post, that you do agree with me on one thing: your little “community” is toxic. And who knows how toxic you are to others around you. (It is however, always ironic that the people who talk about community the most, usually don’t know what it means, and think you can manufacture it by forming an activist group and a social club.) Next time you think of “community”, ask yourself what it is you are really seeking.

Well, as to "what it is you are really seeking," duh, THAT's obvious, isn't it?



As do we all, really, deep down. Way, way, way deep down.

In lieu of that wistful fantasy, though, I'm afraid the Unwashed among us will simply have to comfort each other as best we can, toxic though our company, our -communities- may be. Someday we may indeed be worthy of the healthier attentions of Mssr. Saint, there, and indeed all the Saints out there, tirelessly plowing away on all our behalf. We can but pray, brethren and sistren. We can but pray.

"Women suck. Call your mother."

Natalia has a post up fisking some Russian Orthodox Christian writer/misogynist ass-stain. Thanks for sharing, Natalia.

I was just saying: it is true that we don't grow 'em quite like that over here; or at least such voices don't take quite that tone on the public stage.

The 8th of March is, in these present times, referred to as a “women’s day…”

So, we celebrate the woman, because she is woman. This has nothing to do with some sort of feminine goodness, which is, in any case, impossible, since there is no such thing. If a woman is capable of having any good qualities they are the same as the good qualities of a man, but weaker and less developed, because a woman’s nature is more severely compromised by sin.

Generally, these days, ime, even our most noisome fundamentalist fuckwits don't take quite this line, at least on that public a platform; it tends to be more, "nonono, the difference between the sexes as well as between masculinity and femininity (which is totally the same thing) is beautiful and natural, no one is saying women are INFERIOR, woman was made to be man's helpmeet but also vice versa, it's totally romantic to be half a person so that your 'other half' can complement you in such profound ways as wearing a different hairstyle, doing the laundry or fixing the engine, going to work or staying home, penetrating or receiving, etc. Oh, and those roles can never, ever change, even when they do."

For one thing, they can't really afford to go on too much about the inferiority of womens' nature; besides the fact that a lot of their (female) base would eat them alive, it tends to sort of put a crimp in the whole "gay marriage is the biggest threat to our civilization ev0r." Why? Well, you take that attitude too far and the next thing you know, some men might start to get ideas. Who wants to remain joined in matrimony to an inferior being when he could be with his fellow man? --ooh, unless the U.S. Religious Right decides that Teh Gay is the lesser of two ev0ls and starts encouraging gay marriage as a way to crush feminism! Totally possible! Likely, even. Maybe some putative leftist and/or feminist should make a timely, satiric movie about it, that'll help matters.

actually, I've no idea, but I was delighted to stumble across this evidence that I was correct: teh Gay Marriage IS directly threatening to straight marriage precisely because people who otherwise would have stayed in their hetero partnerships might, without the threat of stigmatization and loss of legal rights and privileges, actually leave to go be with a member of the same sex:

It may come as a surprise to many people, but homosexual unions often have a more direct impact on heterosexual marriages than one would think. For example, the Boston Globe reported June 29, 2003, that "nearly 40 percent" of the 5,700 homosexual couples who have entered into "civil unions" in Vermont "have had a previous heterosexual marriage."

Of course, it could be argued that many of those marriages may have ended long before a spouse found their current homosexual partner. And some may assume that no opposite-sex spouse would want to remain married to someone with same-sex attractions. Nevertheless, the popular myth that a homosexual orientation is fixed at birth and unchangeable may have blinded us to the fact that many supposed "homosexuals" have, in fact, had perfectly functional heterosexual marriages. And as Globe columnist Jeff Jacoby points out, "In another time or another state, some of those marriages might have worked out. The old stigmas, the universal standards that were so important to family stability, might have given them a fighting chance. Without them, they were left exposed and vulnerable."

...you see.

But, anyway. So meanwhile, over in what remains of the Ev0l Empire, I guess, there's this other doofus who's spouting delightful insights like this:

I have to admit: the natural qualities of woman - for example, the ability to give birth, or, even more so, the ability to be a mother, raise children, and so on - may, perhaps, deserve respect and even admiration, though not in the form of a holiday. But this isn’t what we are talking about anyway; we would then celebrate Mother’s Day, or something along the same lines. Oh no, we are talking about the feminine in its most basic form. We are, factually, admiring the qualities of the feminine soul and body of the lowest, most sinful caliber. Female breasts, genitals, the womb - this is what we worship when we worship “woman.”

...and we certainly can't have THAT.

and then:

Women are given flowers, and the givers know well that a flower is a plant’s genital organ, opening up to be fertilized. A flower is a symbol of tempting lust. This is actually why having little flowers on your balconies is a sin, an innocent-seeming bouquet is an honest symbol of orgiastic sin, of group sex, and any interest or delight one might take in flowers is therefore sinful.

...If you can smell a rose, this means you won’t be too disgusted to smell the unmentionable body parts of a woman - because this, at its essence, is the same thing.

*

My African violets keep dying on me. I thought all this meant was that they're kind of not the hardiest of flowers, and/or that I don't have much of a green thumb. It would now appear, however, that I am in deep shit. (makes mental note to call ob/gyn and/or botanist at earliest convenience)

It also rather delicious that this...person, who is virulently opposed to the former Soviet regime under which he grew up, understandably, no doubt, has the same morbid suspicion of roses as did the militant CP hardliners who told Orwell that growing roses was 'bourgeois' and thus suspect.

...oh, please read Natalia's fisk of the whole thing, I can't possibly do it justice. Hell, I can't even read the original (alas).

Just, one more bit, possibly my favorite:

If you want to spend this day as a human being, and not as a lustful animal, call your elderly mother, or, better yet, grandmother. If you believe, if only a little bit, remind them of how short life is and of that eternity that awaits for us beyond the threshold, of the terrible God’s Judgment, and of how what we must do and how we should live, to have hope in His mercy to us.

I have to confess, I was relieved at the follow-up part about how the reason you're calling is to remind Mom/Grandma that she's probably going to hell, and this is why you didn't buy her any flowers, so as to avoid leading her into further perdition.

Because, this sentence, by itself alone?

If you want to spend this day as a human being, and not as a lustful animal, call your elderly mother, or, better yet, grandmother.

...you know, there are some places you just don't even want to go.

"Sweetie. Your Freudian slip is showing. Actually, it's puddled around your ankles. Bless."

"Iran's Multi-Purpose Transsexuals"

Excellent post by piny up at feministe; go read.