Sunday, December 28, 2008

The nuclear hetero family=endangered wet trees.

(Hey, baby, wanna plow my huge tracts of land?--shit, I don't know...)

In which the Pope is unclear on multiple concepts:

Since faith in the Creator is an essential part of the Christian Credo, the Church cannot and should not confine itself to passing on the message of salvation alone. It has a responsibility for the created order and ought to make this responsibility prevail, even in public. And in so doing, it ought to safeguard not only the earth, water, and air as gifts of creation, belonging to everyone. It ought also to protect man against the destruction of himself. What is necessary is a kind of ecology of man, understood in the correct sense. When the Church speaks of the nature of the human being as man and woman and asks that this order of creation be respected, it is not the result of an outdated metaphysic. It is a question here of faith in the Creator and of listening to the language of creation, the devaluation of which leads to the self-destruction of man and therefore to the destruction of the same work of God. That which is often expressed and understood by the term “gender”, results finally in the self-emancipation of man from creation and from the Creator. Man wishes to act alone and to dispose ever and exclusively of that alone which concerns him. But in this way he is living contrary to the truth, he is living contrary to the Spirit Creator.

The tropical forests are deserving, yes, of our protection, but man merits no less than the creature, in which there is written a message which does not mean a contradiction of our liberty, but its condition. The great Scholastic theologians have characterised matrimony, the life-long bond between man and woman, as a sacrament of creation, instituted by the Creator himself and which Christ – without modifying the message of creation – has incorporated into the history of his covenant with mankind. This forms part of the message that the Church must recover the witness in favour of the Spirit Creator present in nature in its entirety and in a particular way in the nature of man, created in the image of God. Beginning from this perspective, it would be beneficial to read again the Encyclical Humanae Vitae: the intention of Pope Paul VI was to defend love against sexuality as a consumer entity, the future as opposed to the exclusive pretext of the present, and the nature of man against its manipulation.

I'll be sure and do that, reread the Encyclical Whosit; I missed a few nuances the first few times around, I'm sure, seeing as how I'm not actually Catholic and there's supposed to be this nifty separation between the Church and State around and all; but thanks so much for looking out for us all, really. Because if there's anyone I look to for the definition of "love," it's Pope Palpatine wielding crucifixes against us as though we were vampires.

"Sure, I-- I mean God-- just compared you to pollution, which if unchecked will lead into ecocide/genocide, but you shouldn't take it -personally- or anything."

Does His Holiness have anything to say about this, I wonder:

A woman in the San Francisco Bay area was jumped by four men, taunted for being a lesbian, repeatedly raped and left naked outside an abandoned apartment building, authorities said Monday.

Detectives say the 28-year-old victim was attacked Dec. 13 after she got out of her car, which bore a rainbow gay pride sticker. The men, who ranged from their late teens to their 30s, made comments indicating they knew her sexual orientation, said Richmond police Lt. Mark Gagan.

"It just pushes it beyond fathomable," he said. "The level of trauma _ physical and emotional _ this victim has suffered is extreme."...

Or this:

Here we go again in Memphis, TN. A transwoman was shot in the face and is in critical condition.

Memphis police say the shooting happened sometime around 5:00 a.m. Tuesday, December 23, 2008 in the 3100 block of Boxtown Road in south Memphis near T.O. Fuller State Park. Leeneshia Edwards was last seen about an hour earlier at the “C.K.’s Coffee Shop” on Union Avenue in midtown Memphis.

Edwards' cousin reports that Lenneshia was shot in the jaw, side and back and is undergoing multiple surgeries.

...Oliver A. FP said...
Hmm... let me get this straight.

So, mysteriously, a woman who called out the Memphis police on her ill-treatment is dead.

Mysteriously, the police investigations into her murder and the murder of a physically "similar" woman have been incredibly lacklustre.

And MYSTERIOUSLY, another physically "similar" Memphis woman has now been shot.

Gosh, the world is sometimes full of brain-teasers...

Wait, don't tell me, I know: of -course- the Pope and Rick Warren and all their enablers don't support -violence-. Heavens no. They might vote against laws that recognize us as full human beings, whether it's marriage equality or a trans-inclusive ENDA, even put tons of effort and money into making sure we can't actually any of us take a dump without fighting for years for signed permission from Traditional Values, Inc;

But, you know, they -mean so well-, do these great unctuous "spiritual" leaders of ours. Certainly they never EVER meant to endorse -actual concrete results- of their demonizing and scapegoating and politicization of their -beliefs-, especially when those results are a lot of dead or maimed bodies. It would be wrong to suggest that the young men who violently, often fatally, attack people simply for bearing the "wrong" gender markers or sporting a rainbow sticker on their car, are the shock troop enforcers of these -values.- Punishing uppity women, sluts, sodomists, freaks and deviants for their/our transgressions; after all, we're a-threat-, right? And of course these men wouldn't ever be police or (uh oh) priests or ministers or other fine upstanding members of the community; they're probably just "thugs," most of them, right? Suspicious dark poor people leaping out of alleys; just make sure we concentrate on getting -them- off the streets and into the prisons and workhouses, and we'll all be golden. Oh, and pray, of course, I keep forgetting that one. Piety makes all the difference, really.

In fact, now we learn: apparently, what they are, these various angry violent men, are radical environmentalists.

Perhaps Ben and Jerry's will make a new flavor, now that Rainforest Crunch is long out of vogue. "Heavenly Hetero Hash," perhaps. "Family Values Fudge." "Crusader Crunch."

Sleep in heavenly peace to you too, motherfucker.

Sunday, December 21, 2008

Oh, well, here's something: Racism Is Over.

It's true, see?

But what to me is this quintessence of dust? Huh? Well?

Someone, man or woman, I don't care, give me something to delight in, about my fellow critters. Something nice. I'm sick of people right now, and I don't like it, it's maudlin and tacky. Tell me something nice. Thx.

Friday, December 19, 2008

More seriously again for a moment, wrt Warren and so forth:

People For The American Way has a petition going around.

Interesting anecdote at Bilerico wrt how good Warren is at embracing his gay neighbor, with Christian charity, you know.

Also via Bilerico: there are, of course, real and serious new groups/coalitions forming in the wake of Prop 8. Here's one.

ETA: Apparently there's also going to be another reverend at the inauguration. Joseph Lowery, giving the benediction. That's more like it. Too bad he can't be getting the prime spot, attention-wise, but apparently he has the last word.

The New Gay Agenda

So, in the light of the Rick Warren business, here is what I am thinking:

We need a non-partisan group that puts us first, never mind "party unity" or anyone or anything else. We need passion. We need total, unwavering commitment to -our- interests before anyone else's. We need not-gonna-take-it-anymore-can-do-ism. Most of all, we need a catchy acronym and logo. I have it! GOOSE!

Yes, GOOSE. Gays Outraged Over Straight Enablers (*of professional homophobes, so technically, GOOSEoph, but ignore that for now). Catchy, innit? Oh yeah, feel the power, baby. ROAR, I mean HONK.

Also note the clever double-entendre possibilities! We're cheeky! GOOSE me, baby!

Geese are the perfect symbol, because they travel in packs and mate for life (actually I don’t know for sure, but I’m too lazy to look it up:fact-checking is part of the Old Agenda), and they’re beautiful in flight, but they’re also mean as hell when you piss ‘em off. You don’t fuck with geese, man. You just don’t.

We hiss! We spit! We waddle! We, ummm, shit all over everything!…

Oh and above all else, symbolism over policy, and we’ll cheerfully fuck over anyone who’s a rung below us on the ladder because they can get their own goddam interest group/acronym, that’s only fair. Trans people, sex workers, immigrants, poor people. Lesbians and/or people of color, most of the time, really. Anyone who doesn’t put GAY FIRST, and -we- will define what that means exactly, thanks. Intersection? What’s that? Get in line or get wing-slapped. HONK. Hey, it's better than being told to get in line or get slapped by all those -other- organizations that don't really give a damn about you, right? Also totally different, too...

...Oh wait, this is basically Human Rights Campaign already, isn’t it. Shit.

So, in that case the best solution would therefore be to try to reinvent the wheel, repudiating everyone else who's doing anything roughly resembling this kind of work already in the name of "inclusiveness." We can be simultaneously even more reactionary than the current wheel-spinners -and- hilariously, jaw-droppingly ineffective.

You know what we really need? No, not more outreach to other disaffected groups or even other groups who're already fighting for queer rights. More Log Cabin members. So what if we have nothing in common with 95% of their interests and they inevitably fail even when it comes to voting for candidates who're gonna be the slightly less awful on the other 5? We NEED them, man. Cut them some more slack, give them more of a voice in the Big Tent. Because, uhhh, because...

you know, I'd love to answer that, but I really can't get that kind of important hard work done until I get some serious help over here. Please come help with waddles, and send lots of moneyz for BIG SHOUTY ADS that will never materialize and ummm mumblesomething.

Belledame GooseGrrl
c/o The Aviary

HONK! HONK!! Let's give 'em something to squawk about.

***This use of John Barrowman's image was made without his permission and says nothing about his position on GOOSE, although we certainly hope we can get a big name celebrity like him on board. For that matter, neither Eve Myles nor the goose used in the accompanying photos have endorsed our organization. We regret any confusion this may have caused.

Thursday, December 18, 2008

And then, just in case you'd forgotten for -one second- why the outgoing administration sucks beyond black hole levels of sucking:

Look at this fresh pile of steaming shit:

The Bush administration today issued a sweeping new regulation that protects a broad range of health-care workers -- from doctors to janitors -- who refuse to participate in providing services that they believe violate their personal, moral or religious beliefs.

The controversial rule empowers federal health officials to cut off federal funding for any state or local government, hospital, clinic, health plan, doctor's office or other entity if it does not accommodate employees who exercise their "right of conscience." It would apply to more than 584,000 health-care facilities.

"Doctors and other health care providers should not be forced to choose between good professional standing and violating their conscience," Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt said in a statement.

The regulation, which was issued just in time to take effect in the 30 days before the change of administrations, was sought by conservative groups, abortion opponents and others as necessary to safeguard workers from being fired, disciplined or penalized in other ways.

Women's health advocates, family planning proponents, abortion rights activists, members of Congress and others condemned the regulation, saying it would create major obstacles to a variety of health services, including abortion, family planning, end-of-life care and possibly a wide range of scientific research.

Among other things. Hey, this has got to be wonderful news wrt standards of care for trans folk, amirite?

I'm just curious: say my personal, moral beliefs insist that "thou shalt not suffer someone who has cut me off in traffic to live..." no, you know, I can't even do this right now. Not funny. Not amused. Too mad and disgusted.

Oh, look, and that's a shocker, too, isn't it:

The 127-page rule is the latest in a flurry of federal regulations that the administration is implementing before President Bush's term ends, including a number that would weaken government protections for consumers and the environment.

Shoes are too good for you, you POS.

Although the Obama administration could reverse the rule, it would require a lengthy process. Last month, however, Sens. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Patty Murray (D-Wash.) introduced a bill to repeal the regulation legislatively.

...The rule will go into effect in 30 days and gives entities until Oct. 1, 2009, to provide written certification of their compliance. Those that do not comply face having their funding cut off or being required to return funding they already received.


ETA: Feministe has more.

In one more blow to women’s health and rights, the Bush Administration has issued a sweeping new regulation giving just about anyone the right to refuse to offer basic women’s health services. It’s being framed as about abortion, but here’s the thing: There are existing laws that protect health care workers from performing or assisting with abortion. Under current U.S. law, no one can be forced to partake in an abortion procedure if they have a moral objection.

This is about birth control.


-Groan- FFS, Obama...

Yeah, I get that it's a symbolic sop, but as gestures go it's pretty fucking shitty. Did you really have to pick this guy?

The congressional committee putting together the inauguration earlier this afternoon announced that the program for President-elect Barack Obama's inaugural would include an invocation by Rick Warren, the celebrity preacher at Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif.

People for the American Way, one of the best known liberal advocacy groups in the nation's capital, is letting it be known it's not happy with this choice.

An excerpt of a PFAW statement attributed to Kathryn Kolbert, the group's president:

It is a grave disappointment to learn that pastor Rick Warren will give the invocation at the inauguration of Barack Obama.

Pastor Warren, while enjoying a reputation as a moderate based on his affable personality and his church's engagement on issues like AIDS in Africa, has said that the real difference between James Dobson and himself is one of tone rather than substance. He has recently compared marriage by loving and committed same-sex couples to incest and pedophilia. He has repeated the Religious Right's big lie that supporters of equality for gay Americans are out to silence pastors. He has called Christians who advance a social gospel Marxists. He is adamantly opposed to women having a legal right to choose an abortion...

I tend to agree with these commenters, off the top:

Yeah I get it. But at the same time there are other evangelicals that are less harsh than this guy.
For those of us who already feel kicked in the head by prop 8 and those, like Rick Warren and his ilk who believe in legal discrimination, it really hurts to see this guy share the stage with our new President.
Posted by: todd | December 17, 2008 6:16 PM


Why in the name of, well ... God, would Obama choose someone whose outspoken beliefs are substantively no different from the James Dobson's of the world? There's a thriving progressive religious community in every faith, and many believe the religious left is ascendant...

...Including the evangelical Christian left. I mean, yeah, why not Mel White? Or if that's too outre, what about Jim Wallis?

ETA: So apparently he didn't make the pick, it was the inaugural commission.

ETA again: or, not. well, unsurprisingly,

WASHINGTON – President-elect Barack Obama on Thursday defended his choice of a popular evangelical minister to deliver the invocation at his inauguration, rejecting criticism that it slights gays. The selection of Pastor Rick Warren brought objections from gay rights advocates, who strongly supported Obama during the election campaign. The advocates are angry over Warren's backing of a California ballot initiative banning gay marriage. That measure was approved by voters last month.

But Obama told reporters in Chicago that America needs to "come together," even when there's disagreement on social issues.

"That dialogue is part of what my campaign is all about," he said.

Obama also said he's known to be a "fierce advocate for equality" for gays and lesbians, and will remain so.

Yes, well. Time will tell, won't it. I'm not personally gonna write him off totally over a symbolic gesture that's essentially a quid pro quo* but, you know, money talks, bullshit etc. And yes, need it be said, I'm turned off. Again. Still. Somewhere in between. Whatever.

Clinton was and is no doubt in his heart as fierce an advocate (i.e. he's yer basic social liberal, really believes social discrimination including Teh Gay) as any number of other bleeding hearts; but when push came to shove he fucked us over as well. (Signed DOMA, "Don't Ask Don't Tell"). Could it have been worse? Has it been? Might it be again/still? Sure; and that plus yep there are other issues is why I voted for him i.e. the mainstream Democrat who seems at least halfway competent, and barring extraordinary circumstances (which I reserve the right to redefine at any point) probably would/will do again, despite it all. Shit's too important.

(And yes, that goes for reproductive rights as well; Warren's pro-life, Obama's put his money where his mouth is when it came to policy in the past, which I put before his noises about "safe legal and rare" and lack of insistence on when life begins and so forth. But again: he'll have his chance to prove NARAL's 100% rating on a national level soon enough, policy wise).

But ultimately, you know, he's only gonna stretch as far as he thinks he can reasonably do without fucking over his own career. And yes, before anyone squawks, that went for Hillary too; and it goes for just about every mainstream Democrat with the exception of Frank, who's got his own full baggage of bullshit. Guess why.

So now what? Do we all go, right that's it, I won't be satisfied until we get a queer person in the WH and/or 30% in government, no matter how giant a chode they might be otherwise? Find a suitable mascot/acronym for the disaffected, maybe? Emus are nice, there must be a good acronym that goes with "EMU". No, wait! I have it! GOOSE! Gays Outraged Over Straight Enablers. Catchy, innit? Oh yeah, feel the power, baby. ROAR, I mean HONK.

(Actually, that's more or less what MILK is about, but y'know, for reals. Then again, nowadays, well, in many ways things are different; in others...not s'much, but hrrm. Much as I was going "hell yeah!" for historical Milk, I am thinking that a party of Barney Franks, Andrew Sullivans and Bruce Bawers, with inclusiveness even unto the Log Cabiners and rabidly transphobic "lesbian feminists" and the everyone else who enable them, is not what I had in mind either. Not that it matters since, oh wait! Teh Gay doesn't even have enough clout to make that a possibility in the first place!...

And of course loving the drearily predictable squawking from PUMA-land about neener neener, serves us right, should've gone with Hillary or ffs PALIN, because of course they're both -sooo- much better, not exactly the fucking same or much worse when it comes to Teh Gay, respectively. I mean! They're -women-! So what if they're straight! They MUST be more sympathetic to Teh Gay than a (straight) black male! And it's not like you can ever expect a representational Presidential candidate of your very own, or at least any time in the next zillion years even though that's exactly what we're bitching about ourselves being shafted over in the first place. Where's your loyalty? Where's...)


But, yeah, ritual snipe at Those Who Continue To Fail On An Epic Scale aside, there was a reason I sent money to the anti-Prop 8 campaign and none to the Democrats or the Obama campaign this year.

*Going through the google hits, btw, this does shed a bit of light, although I really think courting World Nads Daily types is a fool's errand, you know...

Rick Warren, the best selling author of "The Purpose Driven Life" and senior teaching pastor at Saddleback Church in California, has invited Sen. Barack Obama to speak to the congregation of the faithful on Dec. 1, 2006. In doing so, he has joined himself with one of the smoothest politicians of our times, and also one whose wickedness in worldview contradicts nearly every tenet of the Christian faith that Warren professes.

So the question is "why?"

Why would Warren marry the moral equivalency of his pulpit – a sacred place of honor in evangelical tradition – to the inhumane, sick and sinister evil that Obama has worked for as a legislator?

According to press reports, it is because of a mutual respect that each feels towards the other over the HIV/AIDS pandemic on the African continent. That rationale, however, is not only dishonest, but is not even logical given the two distinct positions that the men come to on the matter. Because of this supposed shared concern, Warren is ready to turn over the spiritual mantle to a man who represents the views of Satan at worst or progressive anti-God liberals at best in most of his public positions on the greatest moral tests of our time.

Warren's stand on the matter in this instance is what is in doubt – not Obama's!

Barack Obama has a long history of defying the intended morality of Scripture. As a state legislator, he actively worked to preserve availability of abortion in all nine months of pregnancy. He opposed parental notification. He opposed any and all bans on partial-birth abortion (an act that includes delivery of the baby up to the head, the crushing of the baby's brain, the suctioning of the brain matter, and then completed delivery of the child's deflated cranium). In his run for the U.S. Senate, Obama even asked his wife to pen a letter to Illinois voters that reassured them of his commitment to fighting for the right to butcher children in the womb.

Barack Obama has long supported the advance of the radical homosexual activist lobby in its pursuit to destroy traditional marriage. He supported the creation of "special rights" for people who engage in homosexuality for the sole purpose of putting them at the front of the line on issues of employment, housing and litigation. He has also solidly backed the advancement of all "hate crimes" legislation, which ultimately may be used to silence clergy who believe according to their own convictions that homosexual behavior is wrong and preach so from biblical texts. Obama has a perfect voting record against the defense of marriage.

-ironic cough-

What's that one ancient wheeze my grandmother used to tell? Marriage broker in Chelm goes to a poor family and says, Listen, I have the perfect girl for your son. She's beautiful, she's intelligent, she's rich, she's cultured and talented, speaks several languages, wonderful personality, everyone who knows her loves her.

So the family is all excited. Who? Who??

The shadchen says, Marie of Romania.

Outrage. Horror. Marie of Romania?! A shiksa! Unthinkable.

No, no, says the broker, just hear me out, hear me out. So it's one tiny flaw. Look at all her other amazing qualities! Besides, I have it on good authority that she's willing to convert.

Doubt. But, isn't she already married? Handwave. Listen, you know how these things are. He's not so healthy. She's not happy. I can't tell you everything I know, but...It shouldn't be a problem.

Hours later, the broker's convinced the family that, alright, Marie of Romania is O.K. by them, they suppose, if that's really the best he can do.

Broker goes outside, takes a deep breath, wipes his forehead. Okay, he says out loud to himself, that's -half- the battle...

This creaky old yarn has been brought to you by Traditional Family Values (tm). I mean, -thank G-d- that the institution of marriage hasn't changed at all over the years and cultures, eh?

ETA again, again: This. The OP, that is, all of it; and also too this, from the comments:

Sigh. If only we’d gone with the spouse of the man who signed DOMA into law. She’s chummy with Billy Graham, who could probably have been wheeled to her inauguration.

Innit though. Yeah, six of one.

Sunday, December 14, 2008

Oh yeah, it fits.

In a fitting salute to the end of Dubya's reign of error, an Iraqi journalist flings shoes at his head.

Wear it well, George. Night night; January 20 can't come too goddam soon.

ETA Wow, color me shocked.

Don’t worry, though; Bush laughed it off. And because U.S.-occupied Iraq is such a free society, the man was beaten, dragged outside, and is currently jailed.

Mr. Maliki’s security agents jumped on the man, wrestled him to the floor and hustled him out of the room. They kicked him and beat him until “he was crying like a woman,” said Mohammed Taher, a reporter for Afaq, a television station owned by the Dawa Party, which is led by Mr. Maliki. Mr. Zaidi was then detained on unspecified charges.

Other Iraqi journalists in the front row apologized to Mr. Bush, who was uninjured and tried to brush off the incident by making a joke. “All I can report is it is a size 10,” he said, continuing to take questions and noting the apologies. He also called the incident a sign of democracy, saying, “That’s what people do in a free society, draw attention to themselves,” as the man’s screaming could be heard outside.

p.s. and PSA: for the love of God and little plastic baubles, Hugo, shut. the fuck. UP.

Saturday, December 13, 2008

But their acronym wasn't very catchy

80 years ago or so:

Ms. Blee, 48, first became interested in hate groups nearly 20 years ago, when she discovered a Klan pamphlet from the 1920's advocating women's suffrage. She also found pamphlets advocating eight-hour days for mothers and the use of maiden names by married women. "I thought, This violates all my sense of historical categories," Ms. Blee said. "The role of women in the Klan has been overlooked. They were not incidental, but the glue that held it together."

So she decided to write a book focusing on Indiana, where she grew up and where nearly a quarter-million Klan women lived during the 1920's. In old age homes, she found survivors. They hadn't changed their views. Interviewing them was "hateful," she said, adding, "They assumed because I was white I would agree."

Some Klan women were suffragettes, Ms. Blee discovered, because they believed that the women's vote would counteract votes of African-American men. Some joined because of the temperance movement. "They would say: 'Drink is ruining the family. Who is to blame for that? Catholics,' " said Ms. Blee, who was raised in a Roman Catholic family in Fort Wayne. Catholics as well as blacks, she noted, were targets of the early Klan. (Ms. Blee asked that no other details of her personal life be published because of the dangers of her work.)

Although women did not participate in lynchings, they spread rumors against Jewish store owners and Catholic teachers to drive them from communities. Women also sustained the rituals necessary to cement membership, Klan weddings, christenings, cookbooks, parallel Little Leagues...


"Thanks to Kathleen M. Blee's superb scholarship in Women of the Klan I must now live with the fact that the Klan contained 'all the better people': businessmen, physicians, judges, social workers—even Quakers, political reformers and (this is the truly discomforting part) feminists. . . . Women of the Klan stands before us as carefully garnered, irrefutable evidence that women are capable of asserting their gender rights in the most noisome settings."—Barbara Ehrenreich, Los Angeles Times

Ignorant. Brutal. Male. One of these stereotypes of the Ku Klux Klan offer a misleading picture. In Women of the Klan, sociologist Kathleen Blee unveils an accurate portrait of a racist movement that appealed to ordinary people throughout the country. In so doing, she dismantles the popular notion that politically involved women are always inspired by pacifism, equality, and justice.

"All the better people," a former Klanswoman assures us, were in the Klan. During the 1920s, perhaps half a million white native-born Protestant women joined the Women's Ku Klux Klan (WKKK). Like their male counterparts, Klanswomen held reactionary views on race, nationality, and religion. But their perspectives on gender roles were often progressive. The Klan publicly asserted that a women's order could safeguard women's suffrage and expand their other legal rights. Privately the WKKK was working to preserve white Protestant supremacy.

Blee draws from extensive archival research and interviews with former Klan members and victims to underscore the complexity of extremist right-wing political movements. Issues of women's rights, she argues, do not fit comfortably into the standard dichotomies of "progressive" and "reactionary." These need to be replaced by a more complete understanding of how gender politics are related to the politics of race, religion, and class.


In the 1920s, as many as half a million women joined the ladies' auxiliary of the KKK (the WKKK). Were they just aping their husbands or were there specific motivations that brought women to an organization notorious for rough-neck violence? Well, sexual fears may indeed have played a role. The fraudulent portrayal of ex-slaves assaulting white women in the vile racist movie, Birth of a Nation, is credited with stimulating the resurgence of the Klan. Women had received the vote nationally only in 1918, on a wave of optimism that their votes would naturally fall on the side of justice, decency, and pacifism. ..

Of course, also too, there are always those who are deeply, hilariously unclear on the concept:

In the [Men's Nads Daily] article, [“Feminism, the WKKK, and the Gender-Lynching of Michael Jackson”], David Usher claims that “Feminism as we know it is the direct ideological and political descendant of the Women’s Ku Klux Klan (WKKK).” When I read this, I didn’t know whether I should burst out in laughter or throw my laptop across the room. He continues with a long list of “connections” between the WKKK and the feminist movement, and claims that feminists left the KKK, simply omitted the word “black” from its ideology and replaced it with “men.”

Usher also manages to insist that, “The greatest problem faced by blacks is not racism itself. Sexism and discrimination against the black male, both in family and society, is the greatest single factor keeping blacks a desperate underclass.” Wow.

To back this up, he then throws Michael Jackson’s trial into the mix, and how the feminist “lynch mob” is actually responsible for the charges against him:

“So the new WKKK set out to perform a lawyerly lynching of Michael Jackson. Every mob motive is present. He is a male. He is very rich, eccentric, and black too. It was an irresistible invitation to misuse false allegations of sexual improprieties, for profit and political gain.”...

Seriously, though, Martian Rights Advocates aside, it's not that surprising. Ever read "Gone With the Wind?" I mean the movie's a subject in itself, but the book is...interesting. On the one hand, Margaret Mitchell writes about Scarlett O'Hara in this way...I don't have the book in front of me, but it's full of authorial asides like, "No one was there to tell her that her own personality, frighteningly vital as it was, was more attractive than the artifice..." something like that. You know, she was a strong woman chafing under the hidebound rules of an extremely sexist and rigid society who didn't let (white, duh) women be full humans; this is actually the point of the whole damn book, or one of them.

The other of course, being, goddam Yankees fucking up a perfectly good system, sending good families to ruin and privation and giving THEM ideas. And yes, there's a bit where one of the husbands rides out with the Klan; this is considered a good thing; because, see, while Scarlett was just mostly going along to get along, black people acted the way they did because, well, that was just TRUE about their inherent nature, see...

"They were like children," I believe O'Hara muses in a fury at the ignorant Yankee woman who was mean about one of her beloved former (and of course loyal) servants, and would prefer a "good Irish girl" to nanny her children because, you know, she doesn't KNOW -them- like Scarlett (and Mitchell, obviously) does...

Tuesday, December 09, 2008

And now for something completely depressing.

"Freeper Madness," going boldly into the depths where even dedicated rubberneckers like myself (usually) dare not go. hint: do not read during lunch. -runs off-

Saturday, December 06, 2008

Uh, yes, hello, that would be gross sexism right there.

Jon Favreau, luddites and germs.

Yes, sorry, I don't care how talented he is: this is nasty shit, and fucking -stupid- also; and a good case for sexual harassment. It's up to HRC if she wants to include this in the hatchet-burying, of course, but personally, I don't think keeping this jerk as director of speechwriting for the White House is a really terrific idea, Dear Obama. As in, I think firing his ass would be a better one, myself.

I mean, I think there are probably other good speechwriters out there, you know?

ETA: evil fizz points out:

Actually, from the WaPo piece, it sounds like he’s actually in the process of applying for other jobs, specifically with the Secretary’s of State office. A stellar way to make a first impression on your future boss if there ever was one.

And I can say with considerable certainty (although with no small amount of bitterness) that one photo like that is never going to constitute actionable sexual harassment. Not saying it’s not harassing, just that it’s short of the legal definition.

It takes a certain amount of chutzpah to apply to work for the very woman you’ve been groping-by-proxy, I gotta say. If she really she wants to take him on for whatever reason it’s her own lookout I guess; but at minimum I don’t think he should be Obama’s director of speechwriting, for o just a whole -bunch- of reasons.

ETA, again: I had to go and look.

jenniforhillary 12.06.08 at 10:06 pm
Some of you get my take, and some don’t. I am saying–and it is my
opinion and just that–that I DON”T WANT TO TALK ABOUT HILLARY ANY
MORE. This may or may not be ‘throwing her under the bus’ (in my

LEAVE HILLARY ALONE is not exactly a condemnation people, but rather a

What if, like Dances suggests, we have stop having sex with men AND we
stop discussing Hillary Clinton. Let’s deal with issues, and assholes,
and forget about her for a while. And I agree with Trish, what men do
or don’t do is has fucking little to do with Hillary–so leave her outa

I like Sandi’s idea a lot. Let’s make an image of His Lowness and have
some women (how about Oppie and Brazilla) molesting his lower
half….and send it on….let’s fight the boys with bullets they
understand… ...

jenniforhillary 12.05.08 at 11:35 pm
And, for the record, if I don’t hear the word RACIST for 100 years, I
will be happy.

THAT BEING SAID, I accept and apologize that I said something that was
perceived as racist, because that was NOT my intention.

THAT BEING SAID, I think that VAGINA trumps COLOR and always has AND
MUST if women are ever to stop being treated like shit.

THAT BEING SAID, I like mean women a lot, unless they are being mean
to me…..(thought a lil’ humor might be a good thing)

...I can't stop reading that thread; it's a magnificent clusterfuck of fail.

OP: blah blah something or other the usual womanhood is a universal experience if you've got a vagina, BUT WE NEED TO STOP TALKING ABOUT OUR BITS, here is a lovely illustration from "The Yellow Wallpaper" to demo just how universal my call to all wimminz everywherez is. Can't we all just get along?? (except for Obots, obviously)

Commenter: That's lovely, even though I don't really understand what you're trying to say. But it's lovely anyway.

Other commenters: rhubarb rhubarb agreed rhubarb rhubarb, something vaguely approaching what looks like feminist and/or the existence of teh gay CR 101

A commenter: I think I don't like this bit of what I thought you were trying to say, so I'm going to assume you really weren't. You really meant the bit about we should put aside our difference and get along. Right?

Murphy: Wrong. I MEANT, STOP TALKING ABOUT YOUR BITS fulminate fume rant

A commenter:...'k then.

Others: ...So! How 'bout that weather or cupcakes or something, then! (We love you, Murphy!)

Murphy: and while we're at it, SCREW THE LESBIANS!! you self-absorbed LESBIANS with your clitoris gazing and so on! what've YOU ever done for anyone, HANH??

A lesbian commenter: Among other things, set up your entire website and do all the work around here. p.s. fuck you too then.

Murphy: Don't LEAVE, lesbian commenter, you've done all the work around here!! Whatever will I do without you? please o please o please don't go



It's like an enigma inside a trainwreck, wrapped in bacon. Or something.

ETA, encore une fois: Best. exchange. EVAR.

sandipuma 12.06.08 at 2:25 am
That picture with Hillary is disgusting and i am sure she could have
pushed them away.Anyone of her stature would never have to except that
without doing something about it.

DancesWithPumas 12.06.08 at 3:21 am
sandipuma 12.06.08 at 2:25 am
That picture with Hillary is disgusting and i am sure she could have
pushed them away.
That picture of Senator Hilalry Rodham Clinton is a cardboard cutout.

sandipuma 12.06.08 at 3:32 am
Dances i noticed that afterward and i still think it’s disgusting and
degrading to all women and their families. After i read then looked
back at the picture, anyway thats Obamas close freinds for ya. I will
never have a good word to say about Obama and if it be for the next 4
years i will never look at him on TV.I will never listen to his voice
and i do not believe Hillary found this humorous.

Tuesday, December 02, 2008

Awesome names for MRA fuckwit blogs, part the Twoth

Inspired as by a burst of manly fertility, the hits keep coming:

"Other People” Are Secondary Values No Matter What
2&1/2 Inches of Swinging Male Fury
A Goldmine Of Man-Stupid
A Witch! Burn Her!...Burn Her Anyway!...
Al O'Moany
Are You On Your Period Or Something?
Boner Wars
Born-Again Egoist
Breastfed Through Adulthood
But I Could Get Drafted!
By The Power of Grayskull, I am Cocklord!
Carving Her Heart Out With A Spoon
Cold Shower Power Hour
Combover Central
'Course I Can Fucking Handle It
Denied My Rightful Fruit-Cup
Descent of the Undervalued Testicle
Dicking Around
Drill, Baby, Drill
Feminism Turned Me Into A Newt (I Didn't Get Better)
G-Spot, Schmee Spot, You're Lucky I'm In Roughly The Right Zipcode
Gorillas On The Piss
Greedy Whores Stole My Flat-Screen
Have Yet To Find A Girl Deserving Of My Falling In Love With Her
High Marks For Skid Marks
I Finished Last So I Must Be Nice
I'd Fuck Myself If It Weren't Gay
It Ain't Gonna Suck Itself (I Tried)
It Is Just As Big As My Truck
It's Dull, You Idiot, It'll Hurt More
I've Got Needs
Jealous of the Average Salt Shaker
Legend In My Own Mind
Lesbians Ate My Baby
Male-Order Pride
My Girlfriend Who Lives In Blowhardistan
My Hammer Is My Penis
My Rod and My Staff, They Comfort Me
Nurse Ratched's Ward
Oresteia For Dummies
Penile Infallibility
Peter Pan Without The Charm
Pissing Where I Want To
Proudly Adjusting Myself In Public
Real Men Don't Eat Quiche Pussy Cock (Goes Without Saying) Anything That Isn't Spoon Fed To Them
Real Women Don't Fart
Reproductive Freedom, and Other Attacks on My Balls
Shocked by Your Unladylike Behaviour
Short, Stark, and Mansome
Sir Lordling The Petulant
Solitary, Poor, Nasty, Brutish and Short
Supar Mann 4 Evolooshun Sikeologee
Swagger Til I Stagger
Ted Bundy Wuz FRAMED
The Daily Male
The Flatulent Philospher
The Gods Smile Upon My Fuckstick
The Lace Curtain Conspiracy
The Stripper Likes Me, She REALLY -Likes- Me!!...
Tim "The Tool Man" Taylor: A Blog
'Tis Pity She's a Whore
Tom Twenty-four Pack
Tripping the Light Faptastic
Tyler Durden Is My Hero
Vagina Dentata Ate My Paycheck
Viagra For My Rage-On
Wankers Of The World, Unite!
What Do You Mean, "No"?
Wife-Beater: Not Just a Fashion Term! Haw haw!
Woe is Me, For My Mail-Order Bride Hath Taken Half
Woe, For I Hath Fathered a Girl-Child, and She Readeth the Hellcat Dworkin
Women Can Be Feminists, As Long As They Submit Fully to Me
Women Lie, Nice Guys (TM) Die
Worshipping At Ayn Rand's Temple
You Can Never Be Too Ripped Or Too Privileged
You May HAVE Penis Envy, But A MAN Invented It!
You'd Look Good if You'd Put Some Make-up On and Smiled
Zen And The Art Of Wankery

Thanks again to all who contributed!

A bit more on Bryant

Stonewall Library has a nicely laid-out series on the history of her antigay career.

If you're still wondering why/how a woman becomes frontsipiece for an anti-gay rights crusade, the key is here:

In 1977, Anita Bryant was perhaps best known as the spokeswoman for the Florida Citrus Commission as well as First Federal Savings and Loan Association, Singer Sewing Machines, Coca-Cola, Kraft Foods, Holiday Inn and Tupperware. She was 37, married to Miami DJ Bob Green, mother of four, a former beauty queen and singer, known in the 1960s for her wholesome image. For three consecutive years she won the “Most Admired Woman in America” poll in Good Housekeeping magazine.

She appeared with evangelist Billy Graham in 1963 to call college students back to God, and organized a “Youth for Decency” rally at the Orange Bowl to protest sexual explicitness in entertainment. In her campaign against the gay rights amendment, Bryant told audiences that her twins, who had been born prematurely and almost died “were saved by the grace of God” and that she would not let them be exposed, as a result of the Metro Commission’s antidiscrimination law, to homosexuals.


Bryant wrote to the Dade County Commission that passing the ordinance would mean “infringing upon my rights as a citizen and mother to teach my children and set examples of God’s moral code as stated in the Holy Scriptures.”

Eventually, inevitably,

Anita Bryant’s antigay crusade, as the name of the organization she headed indicated, focused on children. She presented herself to voters as a concerned mother.

Seizing on the fact that Miami’s antidiscrimination ordinance would affect hiring in the schools, her rhetoric revolved around the argument that gay people habitually prey on young children and endeavor to convert them to homosexuality.

A poll conducted early in the campaign by Mike Thompson, an advertising executive and Save Our Children leader, showed that female voters in Dade County overwhelmingly supported the gay rights ordinance. Thompson thought this support was based on women’s experience with their “hairdressers, dress designers and dog groomers.” To change mothers’ minds, Save our Children presented gays as a danger to children.

Whenever she spoke, Bryant warned audience, “Homosexuals cannot reproduce, so they must recruit.

...Bryant’s Christian emphasis did not stop her from aggressively pursuing Miami’s substantial and generally liberal Jewish vote. A preliminary poll showed Jews favoring the ordinance by a large margin, so a coalition of antigay Orthodox rabbis was assembled. They condemned the measure: “Jewish law prohibits parents from allowing their children to be taught by people who are sexually perverted… What right is there to corrupt our children...”

The children, the children, the children. Plus ça change.

California's Prop 8 Push: "Save Our Children!"

...They were yelling, all of them, even the little kiddies, "Save Our Children! Save Our Children!" It's a curious slogan. How, exactly, is banning same-sex marriage "restoring marriage and protecting California children?" It isn't like Measure OO, a city initiative that would boost funding for youth development, dedicating a chunk of the city's budget to after-school and other programs for kids. In fact there's no money at all in the initiative that would save our children, the gay or the straight ones. And it does nothing to restore anything, or protect anything, it's not really "pro" anything.

And how, exactly, is banning people of the same sex from the benefits of marriage keeping government out? Is the government demanding women marry women or men marry men? According to one TV ad it sorta is. In the spot, a young girl comes home from school and tells her mom proudly, "I can marry a princess!" Have mercy, what parent doesn't want their kid to marry into royalty?...

But you see, in the Kinder Küche Kirche worldview, the real horror here is that the hand that was supposed to rock the cradle has been slapped down. Power, you see. Even under the Rule Of The Fathers: -Mom-, while not at the top of the heap, can actually have a fair chunk, or at least the fascimile thereof, if she's correctly situated, of course. Bryant's appeal, like Palin's after her, taps into classic fascist rhetoric: Mama Bear, finally stirred to action by the evil of the world, rises in righteous rage to protect her home and hearth. And, of course, The Children. Not just her -own- children, mind you, but -yours- (assuming you are one of the Ones That Matter).

And, well, if you don't want to call it "power," your guaranteed material well-being as well as a -lot- of ego-stroking -and- oversight of the little darlings all day, particularly if you're homeschooling, well--shit, who wouldn't defend that? Not to mention you can now go all the way to the White House, with the Fathers' blessings, assuming you play by all the rest of the rules. What's -not- to like?

Help out an activist: Winona LaDuke

Very belatedly--Plains Feminist had asked me to circulate this. I don't know what the latest update is, but I expect help is still needed. Copying and pasting in full:

I am posting the following message, from a friend/colleague of Winona LaDuke, with permission. Please help to get the word out and do what you can to help. Winona LaDuke's life and work have, for many of us in Women's Studies, Native Studies, and Environmental Studies, been foundational. Her work with Indigenous communities and on renewable energies and food systems has been revolutionary. She is one of many women of color whose work has been absolutely central to feminist scholarship, yet she does her work from outside the academic system. Feminists and radicals within and without the academy, let's help her out!


This past weekend, Winona's house had an electrical fire and the house burnt to the ground. No one was hurt. While the house and its contents are gone, the blessing is that all five kids and three grandchildren are safe.

I'm writing to you because I know Winona won't ask for help, and I also know she really needs our support. Winona bought her house about 20 years ago and it was filled with art, books, music, photos and other collectibles that reflected her story and the story of her family. What will be most missed are these memories, and we can recreate some of them.

Photos: One positive thing about being a public figure is that lots of folks have photos of you and your children. We have a good collection at Honor the Earth but I'm asking if you could go through your pictures and send photos you have of the family, especially the kids. Wasey and Ajuwak were born before the digital age so a lot of the photos of them growing up are gone.
Photos would mean a lot.

Movement T-shirts and Art: The kids all had an amazing collection of movement t-shirts that comprised the bulk of their wardrobe. Winona basically shopped for her kids at the events she attended around the world. If you have any political message shirts or shirts from historic activist
events in sizes Small, Large or X-Large, I know the kids would cherish them. Zapatista shirts are a favorite. Also gone is Winona's amazing collection of posters and art from decades past. I know she would appreciate any no-nukes, safe energy, anti-colonial, no-gmo and Native activist art.

Books: Winona had a library that fed her mind and soul, and that she often turned to for research material. If you can send books, fiction and non-fiction, she can begin her collection again.

Lastly, Winona has a newborn grandson, Little Crow, who along with her two toddler grandchildren lost all of their clothes and blankets. Winter is coming and the family could really use any warm baby clothes along with clothes and outerwear for a two year old girl and a large two year old boy (Giwaadan is a size 4 toddler!).

These are the things -- photos, t-shirts and art, books and baby/toddler clothing that I think would be most helpful right now, and would touch the family most.

Winona and the kids are renting an apartment in Detroit Lakes and will be staying there over the winter while envisioning building a new home. Right now, the best shipping address is White Earth Land Recovery/Honor the Earth office up in Calloway:

Winona LaDuke
White Earth Land Recovery Project
607 Main Avenue
Callaway, MN 56521

Monday, December 01, 2008

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"


"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.


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 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.