The Writers for a Progressive North Carolina do not, to the best of my knowledge, comment on my blag–but if they did, they’d immediately win the October Snark of the Month:
Against the Grain
How many intersections can you cram in one feminist?
The Writers for a Progressive North Carolina do not, to the best of my knowledge, comment on my blag–but if they did, they’d immediately win the October Snark of the Month:
Content Notice: Victim blaming and trans antagonism.
It wasn’t even half a year ago when we were watching reactionaries come out of the woodwork to defend McCrory’s odious HB2. People who often admitted they had no knowledge or experience with gender variance suddenly felt justified in passing legislation that they deemed was for the “protection of women and girls.” The sentiment has been repeated many times by Republicans since, with no shortage of spewage coming out characterizing trans women as men, as rapists, as privacy violations, as monsters, so on and so forth.
I’m sure you’ll be devastated to learn that the reactionaries have a very odd idea of what constitutes “protection.” Zack Ford compares a number of prominent Conservative responses to Trump’s self-confessed behaviour in serially harassing and sexually assaulting women to their stance on transgender protections. (all emphasis added)
Gov. Mike Pence
On transgender protections: “Policies regarding the security and privacy of students in our schools should be in the hands of Hoosier parents and local schools, not bureaucrats in Washington, DC. The federal government has no business getting involved in issues of this nature. I am confident that parents, teachers and administrators will continue to resolve these matters without federal mandates and in a manner that reflects the common sense and compassion of our state.”
On Trump’s 2005 remarks: “It’s absolutely false to suggest that at any point in time we considered dropping off this ticket… He said last night very clearly that that was talk, not actions. And I believe him and I think the contrast between that and what the Clintons were involved in 20 years ago — the four women that were present last night — was pretty dramatic.”
…
James Dobson
On transgender protections: “If you are a married man with any gumption, surely you will defend your wife’s privacy and security in restroom facilities. Would you remain passive after knowing that a strange-looking man, dressed like a woman, has been peering over toilet cubicles to watch your wife in a private moment? What should be done to the pervert who was using mirrors to watch women and girls in their stalls?”
On Trump’s 2005 remarks: “The comments Mr. Trump made 11 years ago were deplorable and I condemn them entirely. I also find Hillary Clinton’s support of partial birth abortion criminal and her opinion of evangelicals to be bigoted. There really is only one difference between the two. Mr. Trump promises to support religious liberty and the dignity of the unborn. Mrs. Clinton promises she will not.”
…
Gary Bauer, American Values
On transgender protections: “This is yet another example of the Obama administration’s bizarre obsession to force women to be unwilling participants in a radical social experiment… Now Obama’s HUD bureaucrats are putting those women at risk for abuse and worse by men claiming to be women.”
On Trump’s 2005 remarks: “ The comments are obviously disgusting and unfortunate. But Donald Trump did not run as a evangelical or as somebody who ran the kind of campaign that a Pat Robertson would run. We’ll still support him, still work hard for him. His policies are 100% better than Hillary clinton’s for the country. I don’t see how any values voter that is sensible would take a tape from 11 years ago with totally inappropriate language and says somehow that leads me as a voter to stay home or vote for Hillary Clinton or throw your vote away on a third party candidate.”
In other words, Republicans are just fine with endangering women, as long as it’s Republicans who get to do the endangering.
We could check the criminology stats to see how often trans women commit crimes and what kinds of crimes they are… but that would be the rational thing to do, and Republicans are a little too busy moralizing to do any kind of introspection. They don’t see the contradiction between “all women lie about rape” and “all men talk like that.” Obviously, we can trust their judgement.
-Shiv
National Class Act Governor McCrory tells us some personal details concerning the way people reacted to his passing of HB2:
“It’s almost like the George Orwell book ‘1984’,” he said. “If you disagree with Big Brother or you go against the thought police, you will be purged. And you will disappear.”
No, McCrory, being fired by your boss–the electorate–is not the same thing as being disappeared by secret police.
“My wife, for example, in Charlotte – she primarily stays in Charlotte,” he said. “She’s been disinvited to charity events. Basically, they call her up and say, ‘You better not come. You better not come.…
Ohhhh, mon petit chou-fleur. Want me to kiss it better?
“My wife and I … we’re being shunned for a political disagreement, a values disagreement.”
Wow, McCrory, that sounds so difficult! I mean it’s not like your law strips trans people of human rights or anything.
“I listen to the other side … And I say, ‘I respectfully disagree with you’,” he said. “They do not say that to me, I wave to them with five fingers. They wave back with one.
I can’t ever imagine why.
And it’s personal. It’s death threats. Last week, I was verbally assaulted by a 21-year-old drunk student. She was arrested.”
[serious mode] Death threats are not okay. I will grant you that. Anger, yes, spite, absolutely, but I draw the line at advocating for violence.
As with respects to the student, that is actually quite chilling. What happened to freeze peach? My Google-fu could not confirm this incident occurred but if anyone can find word of whether this actually happened and who it happened to, please let me know. I want to contribute to their defence fund. [/serious mode]
“It was the liberals that became the bathroom police, not conservatives,” he said. “They passed an ordinance on private sector employers that said, if you don’t recognize gender identity and gender expression – two issues which I had never heard of – we will fine you.”
I’d ask what kind of fucking duncecap thinks they should legislate on issues they’ve never heard of, but we already have the answer.
McCrory said he’s been called a bigot. “I’m the farthest thing from a bigot,” he said. “I love everyone and I’m going to treat everyone equally. I want to treat people who are transgender – I want to hug ’em and say I love ’em. But I don’t agree with the concept of redefining gender. That is a major societal change.”
I have a rape whistle for those kinds of hugs. No thanks.
Please see below for my extensive tears:
-Shiv
I figure my American readers need someone to laugh at given the nauseating campaign they’re enduring right now. So, here, laugh at some Canadian political theatre. At least this clown isn’t calling for the extermination of Mexicans.
Or, at least, that’s my best attempt to describe this surreal chain of events, which David Climenhaga describes as “political performance art.” And honestly, it’s kind of difficult to disentangle the timeline here, because Conservative lobbies–ranging from the Wildrose Party to various far right-wing media outlets–all uncritically dove in face first to a character that represented the anxieties of Alberta’s shiny new progressive government. The corresponding mess ought to leave any reasonable person with at least a mild headache, and no janitor is paid enough to clean it up.
What is this political performance Climenhaga refers to? Why, it is none other than the lovechild of confirmation bias and political opportunism: Bernard the Roughneck.
They also doxxed the lesbian couple lodging the complaint:
But that was not all the couple suffered.
Laurel Bowman-Cryer filed a complaint in January 2013, but because she filed it online on her smartphone she was not shown the disclaimer informing her that the complaint, including her name and address, would be sent to the individual against whom it was being made. When Aaron Klein received the complaint, he immediately published it on his Facebook page in full, with Laurel’s name and address included.
That’s right, the Kleins doxxed the Bowman-Cryers.
In testimony Tuesday, Rachel Bowman-Cryer said she and her wife received death threats as media attention and criticism from strangers escalated in the months after the story went national in January 2013.
She said the threats were part of a stream of “hateful, hurtful things” that came after the couple’s contact information (home address, phone and email) was posted on Aaron Klein’s personal Facebook page. She said she feared for her life and her wife’s life.
And it’s worse even than that, because the couple had foster children.
Also on Tuesday, Rachel Bowman-Cryer disclosed that she and Laurel felt an even greater level of stress because they were foster parents for two young girls and feared they might lose the children.
She said they spoke to state adoption officials who told them it was the couple’s responsibility to protect the children and keep privileged information confidential, even as their own privacy was threatened by news coverage of the case.
…
The next time you see someone upset about that nice baker couple Oregon ordered to pay $135,000 to that spiteful thin-skinned lesbian couple, let them know that that nice baker couple doxxed the lesbian couple and very nearly cost them custody of their two children as a result. And then send them a copy of the court’s final ruling.
I signal boost this reminder from Libby over on Patheos because Sweet Cakes by Melissa returned to the news when they announced their closure, blaming the “gay mafia” for their loss of business–despite the fact that bigots raised an extra $300,000 over the damages they lost–all of which they pocketed. It seems that the coverage doesn’t adequately remind its readers that the plaintiffs were doxxed for having the audacity to challenge Christian entitlement.
Regardless, losing all your business sounds like a response from the Free Market. Here I thought Conservatives trusted the Invisible Hand. Or is that only when the Invisible Hand is directed by Invisible Backers?
Hmm.
-Shiv
Content Notice: Victim blaming, slut shaming, misogyny.
In 2014, a study came out of Drexel University that found around 50% of college students admitted that they had sexted prior to the age of 18. Now, as a person who is sex-positive, I see selfies–and sexy selfies in particular–as affirmations of healthy self image, and sharing them with a person who consents to receive them can be fun and exciting. Where the conversation is typically derailed is framing sexting between minors, who are peers, texting images of their own bodies, as child pornography. But the original intent of child pornography laws was to take into account that children can’t give informed consent to adults, because of the implied power differential regarding influence and manipulation. Sexting ones own body to consenting peers lack this differential, and shouldn’t qualify as child pornography, or even more generally a sex crime unless coercion or force could be demonstrated.
Ed Bull, an Iowa county prosecutor, disagrees. He has threatened a 14 year-old with a lifelong sex offender charge because she texted a suggestive image of herself that someone else picked up and distributed.
I wanted to elaborate on my Best Friend Jason Kenney’s “poor counsel,” in which he advised the Albertan government to reach a “compromise” with the two Baptist schools that refuse to adhere to Bill 10, a law signed in by the previous conservative administration that obligated all schools to form a Gay-Straight Alliance or Queer-Straight Alliance should the students request one.
Shortly after these comments made the news, David Climenhaga of Alberta Politics pointed out that as a human rights issue, there is no reasonable way to compromise between Queer lobby groups who largely wish to enjoy the same privileges as anyone else and religious lobby groups who want to continue bludgeoning us out of existence.
Just to elaborate: the “Gay Agenda” has largely been about accessing the same civil sectors as anyone else, and enjoying the privileges that we are supposedly afforded by virtue of being a Western democracy. But religious reactionaries campaign from legal exemptions to treat Queer folks equitably in the name of their faith, thereby re-ifying the nature of cishetero privileges by making them, well, privileges rather than rights.
So I would like to see Climenhaga’s question repeated until it’s mainstream: “Where, exactly, do you plan to compromise?”
All I want for xmas is for privileged politicians to stop shitting on people.
The British Colombian Liberal government rolled back two programs for disabled BC residents, resulting in their bus passes going from $45/year to $625/year.
Clark’s BC Liberal government just made it harder for 55,000 British Columbians living with disabilities to get around – despite facing a greater likelihood of unemployment and poverty.
That’s because Clark’s government cut two programs helping disabled British Columbians cover transportation costs, presenting the changes as a net-increase in benefits even though they’re likely seeing a net-decrease in benefits.
The changes, which have led to 3,500 disabled British Columbians giving up their bus passes, is being described as “cold hearted.”
No shit it’s cold hearted. Public transportation is critical for the empowerment of disabled folks, as transportation barriers bleeds into so many other civil sectors like employment or recreational opportunities.
Why on fucking Earth to these program cuts keep happening to put budgets in the black? Start taxing your absurdly wealthy instead of kicking the people who are already struggling!
Enough with austerity.
Jesus christ. Fuck you, Clark.
-Shiv
Favourite irony meter-breaker Pope Francis opened his mouth again, and this time I think I fainted.
Then in the plane ride back to Rome, the pope told reporters that he had intended only to be critical of teaching children in school about what it means to be transgender. He reportedly used the word “transgender,” and he compared it to being gay. The church acknowledges people are gay but claims it’s a sin to act on same-sex attraction.
“It is one thing for a person to have this tendency, this option and even to have a sex change, but it is another thing to teach this in schools in order to change mentalities,” said the pope on the plane, according to Catholic News. “This I call ideological colonization.”
Catholics. Lecturing on colonization. I just
Wat.
-Shiv, Annihilator of Man, Fashionable Communist, who can’t even right now
I’ll start by saying I am sympathetic in the vaguest sense of what the so-called Freemen stand for. My anti-authoritarian streak has definitely been inflamed by a new wave of fascism that makes me superbly suspicious of political structures, and the Freemen on the Land, defined loosely by a desire to reject those structures, attempts to live my suspicions out.
Where we diverge is rather simple: I still believe, perhaps naively, that between transparency and making sure to chop up as much government authority across differently appointed sectors as you can, whilst restricting the capacity of money in politics, should be able to create a functional socialist society that mitigates the impact of the entitled and aggrieved who always fuck everything up. The Freemen, on the other hand, like to claim that laws don’t apply to them because they never agreed to them, so they do things like refuse to pay taxes or follow speed limits.
Thing is, I like taxes–as long as they’re being spent on infrastructure, humanitarian aid, education, healthcare, that sort of thing. More importantly, the speeding Freemen do happens on roads that everybody else is paying for… meaning if you want to be logically consistent in properly rejecting the government’s taxation, then you should also reject the government’s services and stop using roads and sidewalks as your personal fender. Freemen will refuse to pay taxes but rarely, if ever, actually reject government services.
Such was the case of the first Freeman, at least in Alberta, to be charged with a terrorism act by trying to place a lien on a police officer’s personal property–because the cop gave him a speeding ticket.
Allen Boisjoli, 45, of Vegreville is charged with intimidation of a justice system participant.
Boisjoli is accused of attempting to place a $225,000 lien on a police officer’s personal property after the police officer gave him a speeding ticket. While others have been charged with intimidation before, Edmonton Police believe it’s the first time where an incident has involved simply filing paperwork.
Det. Rae Gerrard said the documents Freemen present have no legal force, but are meant to make people in the system want to drop the case. Freemen or Sovereign citizens reject the notion that current laws have any force over them.
“The Freemen, and Mr. Boisjoli in particular in this case, they use a plethora of documents that mean absolutely nothing. They’re just cutting and pasting from all over the internet,” he said.
The investigation took eight months to complete, but Gerrard said it was worth pursuing.
“When we look at people who are attempting to subvert our entire criminal justice system for their own ends, than we have to see that as very serious,” he said.
…Thing is, if a justice system is broken–which is increasingly becoming apparent–defying that system is a worthwhile goal. But, as I’ve come to learn, you really have to set your rhetorical sights for the leaders and institutions, not the little guys. Shooting individual cops does fuck all for you except get you into deeper shit, you gotta aim higher–and ideally not with actual guns or weapons, because all that does is piss everyone off.
I don’t like the Freemen. They’re hypocritical, and also fucking idiots if they don’t understand that some laws are good. Like speed limits. Those are kinda important. It is true that laws can be bad, as can systems that maintain them, but that doesn’t excuse ripping 200 km/h through a school zone. Unfortunately that means you have to do the smart thing and assess given laws for their merit, which takes more effort than saying “I DON’T WANNA PAY TAXES!!” and trying to game the system with made up documents to antagonize a cop who fined you for doing a stupid fucking thing.
But that suspicion of authority… we share that, at least. Little else, apparently, like a shred of reason.
-Shiv