Monday, May 31, 2010

Gaza Freedom Flotilla Attacked - Unarmed Peace Activists Killed...

from the world can't wait...

We condemn the Israeli military attack on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla in international waters last evening. Al Jazeera's mostly recent report says 19 international solidarity activists were killed, and dozens injured on 6 ships attempting to deliver humanitarian aid, and to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza. There were 700 activists in the six ship flotilla, with many journalists and Arab and European members of parliaments on board. All were unarmed, part of a non-violent effort to awaken world public opinion to the desperate state of the people of Gaza.


Find reports at witnessGaza.com. Adam Shapiro of the Free Gaza Movement, speaking at 3:30 am EST, told Democracy Now from New York what he had learned. The FGM supporters reported live to Adam during the attack that the IDF forces came about the ship firing. CNN and the Israeli government are reporting that activists came after the heavily armed IDF commandos with "axes."

Our friend, and advisor to War Criminals Watch, Ann Wright, had been on the largest ship attacked, but moved to another ship in the flotilla before 1,000 Israeli commandos boarded the ships, and began shooting, according to news sources. The AP reports that 9 were killed in the IDF's "botched raid" and that Israel had taken all 700 activists -- presumbly including the injured -- into custody, jailing some and preparing to deport others from Beersheba.

The attack has already brought protests and condemnation in Turkey and across the globe. The world condemns the killing of unarmed peace activists, and knows that the number one supporter, financially and politically, of Israel, is the United States.

World Can't Wait calls on you to join protests wherever you are!

PROTESTS TODAY MONDAY May 31
New York City AT 3:00 pm
Times Square 47th & 7th Avenue
Meet World Can't Wait contingent behind the bright ORANGE banner

Washington, D.C. at 3:00pm
Israeli Embassy
3514 International Dr. NW
(near Van Ness and Reno Rd.)

Los Angeles at 4:30pm
Israeli Consulate
6380 Wilshire Blvd, Los Angeles
(Between Crescent Heights and San Vicente)

Boston, Mass. at 4pm
Park St. T Station

San Francisco at 12pm:
Israeli Consulate
456 Montgomery St.
San Francisco, CA 94104

and San Francisco at 1pm:
Powell and Market

Miami at 5pm
Israeli Consulate
100 N. Biscayne Blvd.

New Haven, CT at 3pm
Federal Courthouse
141 Church St.

Austin, TX at 3pm
6th St and Lamar near the Whole Foods

TUESDAY June 1 5:00 pm
Israeli MIssion to UN @ 42nd & 2nd Avenue
NYC

TUESDAY June 1 7:00 pm
Revolution Books presents journalist/author Chris Hedges responding to the attack.
146 West 26th Street NYC
212 691 3345

TUESDAY, June 1, at 4:30 p.m.
Israeli Consulate at 111 E. Wacker Drive, Chicago
(just east of Michigan Avenue and Wacker Drive)

TUESDAY, June 1, 2010 at 4pm
Israeli Consulate, 19th & JFK, Philadelphia 19103

TUESDAY June 1 at 8pm
Candle light vigil at the capitol building, Austin

Prisoner's Revolutionary Literature Fund...

Overturn the Unconstitutional and Inhumane Ban on Revolution Newspaper in Pelican Bay State Prison, and Other Prisons! Funds Urgently Needed!

In February, 2010, prison officials at California's Pelican Bay State Prison declared that Revolution newspaper was banned from their institution. It appears that issues of the newspaper dating as far back as October 2009 were confiscated, leading up to the outright ban. The first issues confiscated last fall announced a special issue, Revolution 183 on prisons and prisoners, "From the Hellholes of Incarceration to a Future of Emancipation." (Available at http://revcom.us/a/183/editorial-en.html.)


PRLF has received literally hundreds of letters which convey the tremendously educational value of Revolution newspaper for these prisoners. Their subscriptions and other revolutionary literature has enabled them to hone critical thinking; learn about history and debate current events in the world; understand root causes for why so many are in prison in the U.S.; come to appreciate science and atheism; consider radical, revolutionary and Communist alternatives for how the world could be different; examine lessons from previous socialist revolutions; examine causes of divisions between the people by nationality and gender.


Many people from all sections of society who have listened to these prisoners' voices have been struck by the power of their words and their moral clarity about transforming society. Now it is up to those on the outside to make sure this lifeline is not cut off and these voices are not muffled or worse silenced.


Is BP trying to cap the Gulf oil well, or keep it flowing?

well that seems like a rhetorical question from where i'm standing...

(NaturalNews) Today, I spent my time interviewing people on the Gulf Coast from Mississippi to Louisiana. Several of those interviews were conducted on camera, and you'll be seeing those videos as early as tomorrow here on NaturalNews.

Interestingly, it turns out that a lot of the people living on the Gulf Coast have a history of working with oil companies -- and even on oil rigs. I spoke to several people who have a work history with BP, and two of them told me they are certain that British Petroleum is NOT trying to stop the oil coming out of the well. What they are trying to do, I was told, is SAVE the oil well so that they can capture the oil and sell it.

This claim stands in direct contradiction to what BP says. The company insists it's trying to stop the flow of oil from the well. But if you look at BP's actions, what they're really trying to do is siphon off the gushing oil where it can be pumped to a tanker ship and sold as crude. It is a simple matter, by the way, for oil companies to separate water from oil. They do it all the time in oil fields all across America. So if they can siphon off the oil from the Deepwater Horizon well -- even if it's mixed with water -- they can sell it for potentially billions of dollars.

It raises the question: Is the economic promise of captured oil causing BP to avoid using its best effort to cap the well?
the rest is here...

G8-G20 Anarchist Resistance...passing info along...

I don't go to demos. At first I didn't go because it felt ineffectual. Get a permit from the state to protest the state? Give city officials a map of the route to be taken so they can rubber stamp it? That felt and still feels like people wanted to be doing something so the powers that be let them feel as if they were doing something important.

I went to the demos that happened before troops were sent into Iraq because...well, I did want to be doing something instead of quietly gnashing my teeth at home. sigh...We all know what those demos did to sway the agenda of united government and corporate forces lusting after oil and profits.

I don't go to demos. It's been many, many years since I felt as if I could come out to something that might actually turn the tide, something that might push hard enough (to do what?) Well, to get the organizers or participants charged and jailed while the machinery of oppression continues on unchecked. I don't go because I don't have allies. I don't have people who will help me protect my children if I should decide to bring them with me. I don't have people who will take care of my children if I should be rounded up. I don't have people committed to being with my family if I should be deported as a law breaker who needs to go back to where she comes from.

Nada.

I don't go to demos but I have no difficulty passing on information to people who can go, who have enough privilege to absorb what might befall them, who are single with no dependents...


Late last night, NIO officially established an “In the Streets” network in Toronto… just in time for the G8-G20 Anarchist Resistance in June. We hope to have a presence and stand in solidarity with our comrades engaged in the war against oppression and capitalist exploitation.

Simulposted with G8-G20 Toronto Community Mobilization

A Call to Action

You didn’t think Riot 2010 was over yet, did you?

Day to day, the tentacles of global capitalism threaten to choke the life from us, and opportunities to attack its nucleus rarely present themselves. Rest assured that when the G20 comes within striking distance this June, we won’t miss.

The G20 will be descending upon the part of Turtle Island now known as Toronto. The secretive meetings will be attended by the heads of state and financial ministers of the twenty most powerful economies and the managers of global financial institutions like the IMF, and the World Bank. They seek to resurrect and ensure their own dominance over the failing global capitalist economy, a process which spells oppression and exploitation for us all, along with the continuing wholesale ecological destruction of our planet.

Join us in Toronto for an anti-capitalist, anti-authoritarian, anti-colonial, anti-racist, anti-patriarchy, anti-ableist, and queer positive convergence June 25-27, 2010. Below are the actions we are calling for…
[This call out is one part lefty code words and one party crazy talk. Could someone translate it?]

Get Off the Fence! June 26, 2010
Saturday afternoon, after the permitted march.
Exact time and location TBA

A 3 meter high perimeter fence, with military style checkpoints will be erected in downtown Toronto during the G20 meetings, offering us a hint of the world they seek to impose. It’s time to stop sitting on the fence and start tearing that fucker down. Join us on Saturday afternoon, immediately following the Labour Union rally, for a militant march to the summit!

Saturday Night Fever! June 26, 2010
Late night Saturday
Exact time and location TBA

On Saturday night, before we run them out of town the next day, there will be a radical dance party in the streets. Put on your fiercest clothes and boogie like Emma Goldman. Fuck the clubs; there’s no cover but your mask.

Autonomous Direct Action! June 27, 2010
Location: EVERYWHERE
Time: Sunday

As the G20 delegates wrap things up and prepare to spread like a virus across the globe, our resistance will do the same. This will be a day of diverse, decentralized actions against the corporate and state structures that have dominated our lives far beyond the G20 summit. These coordinated actions will end at a specific (to be announced) time, and will culminate in a…

Victory demo! June 27, 2010
Sunday Afternoon
Exact time and location TBA

Don’t leave town just yet, we’re going to end the convergence with a bang – not a whimper.

We support a diversity of tactics. We encourage everyone to form affinity groups and execute strategic action throughout the summit and beyond. But please remember to respect local communities, develop your knowledge of local background, and remember that, good or bad, the effects of your actions endure long after the convergence has ended.

These are just a few of the actions that will take place during the convergence. We strongly encourage all those who would fight alongside us to also support the other actions called for from the 21st through the 27th, coordinated by the Toronto Community Mobilization Network, and to do so in the spirit that those actions were called by taking direction from communities on the ground. These callouts will be refined and developed over time. This is our first Call to Action. Keep your eyes and ears open for updates that will end up linked at http://attacktheroots.net

To get in touch, email us: shutdowntheG20@resist.ca
See you in June!

Friday, May 28, 2010

So I published that same piece written by the queer children of queers on okc...

This is one particularly sTOOpid segment of the comments that are unfolding in the wake of that posting...

InternetPredater-
I think this is the dumbest, most pretentious and judgemental thing I've ever read on this site. Ignoring institutionalized discrimination makes the gay community stronger? You're too cool to accept the help of middle class gay and straight people unless they accept every other bit of your extremely narrow agenda with its laundry list of grievances? Way to go. If these are your standards for inclusion your coalition will fit neatly inside a phone booth


hellskitten1-
It's an interesting set of arguments and it's refreshing to get a different perspective that is sort of from the gay community, i.e. children of gays and lesbians, who are not necessarily gay themselves.

That said, I can't say that I agree. I see the gay marriage issue as being about basic human freedoms and civil liberties. IMHO, fundamental liberties transcend practical concerns.

Of course, I say this as someone who sees marriage as an outdated and misguided idea.




atropa777 - Someone please reassure me that internetpredater is a sockpuppet for trolling.


Eurrapanzy - Having never been gay, I don't know that I can speak from experience, but having been black for more than two decades, I don't think ignoring discrimination eliminates it, and I don't think there is truly a single cure-all solution to that kind of problem. Every solution that has a positive impact is one worth pursuing, and so long as allowing gay marriage is not mutually exclusive to your solutions, there isn't really a strong reason to oppose it. Attention and political might can be devoted to multiple solutions.



i wrote - Just a few quick comments:

LookoutLoretta, it is.

InternetPredater, I think predatER is actually spelled predatOR.

hellskitten, these are queer children of queers not straight children of queers not straight children of gays and lesbians.

Also, marriage isn't about basic human freedom it's a business contract between two people usually of different genders with the state.

Basic human freedoms are where you get to have whatever kinds of relationship configuration you want, whatever kind of family you want and not have to worry about the state taking away your children, not have to worry about your children being turned away from school or harassed because of who you and your partner(s) are or how you love, not have to worry about whether you'll be imprisoned because of how people are taught to understand the skin you're in, not have to worry about whether you will be able to have wounds or diseases treated or be fed sufficient good quality nutrients because of how much money you have in the bank.

Those are basic human freedoms that these people are attempting to offer as they explore what is problematic about a majority white middle class gentrified conservative gay and lesbian drive to have the privileges associated with marriage in this day and age.

I don't think marriage is outdated. It serves a purpose for those who are allowed to access it - monetary and social protection based in privilege. And it seems that privilege never goes out of style.

atropa777, hey. I suspect he may be.

Eurrapanzy, maybe we're not reading the same piece of writing. These people are trying to incorporate a deeper and broader analysis of privilege into the gay and lesbian marriage debate.

They are questioning how it is that the right to marriage ended up completely overshadowing all other issues effecting queer communities.

This includes communities of colour and Diasporic African communities where queers are present and always have been.

How does the right to wear wedding rings, walk down the aisle, get tax rebates and refer to someone as your husband or wife take precedence over whole communities being targeted as criminal? how does it end up ranking over the issues of whole communities where children have been stolen and given to other people because the stresses, lack of resources, lack of education and lack of understanding associated with poverty and/or race has allowed others to define them as unfit parents whose children need to be taken away?

How does a socially validated attention feed aka wedding in white or pink or rainbow colours or whatever take precedence over pressing issues that are about other forms of oppression facing queer people?

How does the social validation of people who just want to fit in and who, besides not being able to marry, CAN fit into existing power structures quite nicely, as long as they make sure that people understand that they're nice suit wearing, gym membership bearing car pooling expensive wine drinking gays and lesbians, not like THOSE undesireables who are so SCARY, not like those loudly protesting, taking to the streets raucous half naked queers, not like those leather wearing pierced tattooed perverts, not tho unemployed runaway street kid queers, not like those big black dick bangee boys hanging on the corner...

Nope, nice these are white, conservative families headed by people with medical and dental who just want to get along, how do their concerns end up defining a whole community of people even as they do not give a flying fuck about most of their supposed brothers and sisters and would disown them, are disowning them so as to better fit in.

Run on sentence. Majorly.

sigh...In any case, I don't think anyone is saying that the conservative beige gay people who want to live in a house with their one nice smiling quiet well behaved husband or wife, with a garage with their 2.5 straight acting children shouldn't be allowed to.

I think these people are just saying they shouldn't be allowed to lead because their leadership, due to their unearned privilege and power, their tunnel vision and their obsessive, unhealthy need to fit in and be considered just like heterosexual couples with families makes their commitment to any real change completely suspect.

I agree with them, wholeheartedly.

Queer communities and their agendas ARE being hijacked. HAVE been hijacked.

The nice, proper, well behaved, middle management caliber, conservative, hide the toys and deviance under the bed until no one is looking, want to be seen as just like everyone else beige gay people?

I can't stand 'em. I don't feel comfortable around them. I try not to spend time with them or being tiny rooms or meetings with them. I decided a good while back that I didn't want to follow them. They're not trustworthy. They're also not particularly smart. The right to marry will not transform queer communities anymore than the right to marry officially in churches tranformed the nature of racial oppression for the vast majority of Black people.

The right to marry only puts the cherry on the ice cream for people who are already shielded from oppression by class privilege. For everyone else? Nada.

Their agenda. Their ONLY agenda, is a self serving, limited, thoroughly narrow one.

That's my opinion. I stand by it.



freak_flag - Just scanning through this, I had to post something. What about leslie feinberg? She/he has not stopped the fight/revolution and lived through Stonewall. With respect to gays 'selling out' with respect to AIDS and having children- having lived through the AIDS epidemic in the 80's and 90's in the gay community in DC- I saw a lot. Fought a lot and buried a lot. AIDS is very real and with the help of medical break throughs has increased the life span. Those people with AIDS now have treatments and meds to substain their lives a lot longer than the year long death sentence they had before. Generations of people grow and some have families and settle down- passing the torch so to speak to those younger. I have met and talked to a lot of young gays and lesbians who do not know their history- not even stonewall! If you do not know your history, you are damned to repeat it. It is our responsible to keep that torch burning! I have and I do! I will never forget meeting leslie feinberg and being so honored for what she/he fought for and I thanked him! With respect to InternetPredater...the spelling is not wrong- he considers himself 'old' and PREDATING the internet and NO he is not a troll. I know him very well. He is a very opinionated person who sometimes speaks his mind TOO freely. He is also married to a lesbian and knows from her personal experience how hard it was for her. We are making progress...I see that progress and yes more can be done. Please, go out side- educate, speak, teach...No one is stopping you! I support the rights of all people. Regardless of their race, creed, color or sexual orientation. We live in a country that allows that. Do I still take the streets? No, not really- but that does not mean i am sell out. Pass the torch sister- take to the streets. Harvey Milk did, leslie feinberg did and got her ASS beat for it. I did in 89 after being jumped by 3 marines...I started the circulation of the gay paper after a lot of shit and people trying to stop me, at my university. I started organizations that are still run to this day. what have you done? talk is cheap- freedom of speech, is not



atropa777 - Eurra, I don't think this article is advocating ignoring prejudice. Sincerely.

I read it as an objection to the acceptance of marriage as the path to rights. There used to be a strong contingent in the gay & queer communities that wanted to dismantle marriage as an institution that conferred legal rights. There are still radical leftists (myself included) who feel that marriage as a legal institution is inherently discriminatory, and by the mainstream gay community focusing on marriage rights, they're alienating themselves from potential allies who also seek to dismantle marriage - poly & non-monogamous people and single mothers, for example, are two groups that would stand to also benefit from sanctioned non-traditional family structures.



i wrote - freak_flag, you confuse freedom with the marriage agenda. you confuse resistance with fighting for marriage rights. you also make assumptions about what it means to grow old confusing that inevitability with "settling down". again - this piece of writing argues against a gentrified gay and lesbian agenda that excludes the realities of many. it demands that community agendas remain broad and inclusive of the rights and needs of many. your argument is based in reaction and emotion demanding that i back down based on your reading. it seems to say "who the fuck do you think you are to question the gay and lesbian marriage agenda". it seems to ask "what have you done?" answer to the first question? I am a queer who believes that the movement need not be defined or led by those with sufficient privilege that marriage is the biggest thing on their minds. answer to the second question? i dont have to defend my past work or my future agendas to you in order to voice my opinion. but it's very privileged of you to demand and expect that i should. in terms of my response to internetpredater, my response was purposeful. his tone deserved nothing more. him being married to lesbian and approaching me with such ire speaks droves about his (lack) of analysis as your tone does about yours. be well, freak_flag and go with gawd.



i wrote: atropa777, exactly.



InternetPredater - @ DarkDughta - You wrote, "The nice, proper, well behaved, middle management caliber, conservative, hide the toys and deviance under the bed until no one is looking, want to be seen as just like everyone else beige gay people? I can't stand 'em. I don't feel comfortable around them. I try not to spend time with them or being tiny rooms or meetings with them. I decided a good while back that I didn't want to follow them. They're not trustworthy. They're also not particularly smart." I'm a bleeding heart liberal, but this is exactly what's been wrong for liberalism for too long. The self-righteousness, the inflexibility, the haranguing and denigrating of people who don't agree with you on every issue and thus aren't ideologically pure enough to attain the exalted status you reserve for yourself and the tiny fringe of the left of the left who agrees with you. Call me a troll all you want for pointing this out, but I can just imagine your response if I wrote on my blog that I can't stand black people and don't trust them or think that they are particularly smart. Maybe you are comfortable with ranting about how intolerant other people are while writing really judgemental and prejudiced things at the same time, but again, this is the kind of rank hypocrisy that led to the word "liberal" being removed form the language of nearly every political figure in America. Oh, and one last thing. ALL successful political movements require mainstream support. The Civil Rights movement never would have achieved its goals without the support of those very same people you openly despise. If they waited until everyone was ideologically pure enough to meet your ridiculous standards black people would still be sitting on the backs of buses.



i wrote - What I always appreciate about Liberals is their ability to accuse anyone who speaks out against oppression as being the ones who are discriminatory. I especially appreciate white liberals who have the added benefit of feeling perfectly comfortable attacking anyone who does not frame their arguments or opinions in a way that they find familiar and comforting. This sounds like you, internetpredater. And just for future reference? Don't cite the civil rights movement as a way to call me out or hold me to task. When you cite it, it seems as if it's a way of saying I should be grateful for what I have, that I should just shut up or at least be more courteous, that I should definitely go along with what you think because clearly, if you can reference one segment of the fight for Black people's liberation on top of believing that the right to marry is of supreme importance when stacked up against so many other pressing, life threatening concerns in queer community...not only does your relationship to a lesbian seem to give you the inherent right to call me out, but your memory and ability to write re: one leg of Black people's struggles to free themselves also gives you moral authority over me. Wow! You're pretty damned amazing. I yield to your superior analysis.



i wrote - Well, I mean...you can cite queer history until you're blue in the face and you can site the history of a christian based Black civil rights movement until you're purple, if you so choose, but your arguments will just come across as manipulative and based in your reliance on your own privilege as a white liberal. White liberal married to a lesbian.


allgoode - The self-righteousness, the inflexibility, the haranguing and denigrating of people who don't agree with you on every issue and thus aren't ideologically pure enough to attain the exalted status you reserve for yourself and the tiny fringe of the left of the left who agrees with you. Call me a troll all you want for pointing this out, but I can just imagine your response if I wrote on my blog that I can't stand black people and don't trust them or think that they are particularly smart. Maybe you are comfortable with ranting about how intolerant other people are while writing really judgemental and prejudiced things at the same time...


THIS!!! So hard and so much! But, honestly, IP, don't waste your breath; darkdaughta don't do discussion or debate. She preaches the truth according to darkdaughta and there be no disagreein'!



i wrote - I need to go warn bugsimianboy and papi that if they EVER get into an argument about queer agendas with a queer woman and attempt to utilize their location as my partners to bolster their egotistical right to speak disrespectfully from a place of constructed knowing, I will publicly humiliate them and then gut them. Anything less would be embarrassing and directly lead to me not having any cred as a supposed politicized being whatsoever. Yup.



i wrote - Allgoode! You changed the name! The last time I heard from you was during the beginnings of the obamarama fiasco when I was saying he was a lying snake oil salesman and you told me I should just stick to what I know and go breastfeed. Who's laughing now bucky? ;) heeheehee ;)



if you don't mind throwing up occasionally, the rest is here...

From Pambazuka News - Do we need the state in our bedrooms?

"Malawian gay couple Tiwonge Chimbalanga and Steven Monjeza have been sentenced to 14 years of hard labour, after a court found them guilty of sodomy, under criminal code provisions originating from the UK, writes L. Muthoni Wanyeki. ‘The law as it stands may criminalise sodomy and whatever the powers determine to be indecent’, writes Wanyeki, but ‘it is not the business of any state to determine how consenting adults derive sexual pleasure.’ What’s more, Wanykei notes, sodomy is not ‘a sexual practice unique to gay men’, and the right to privacy that heterosexuals currently enjoy should apply equally to homosexuals."

the rest is here...

Via SecondWaver and facebook...

What Do You Call A Country Willing to Incinerate Innocent People? America.

Thursday, May 27, 2010

I'm late finding this but I had to publish it because it's so astute...

Queer Kids of Queer Parents Against Gay Marriage!
Resist the Gay Marriage Agenda!
October 9, 2009 by queerkidssaynomarriage

It’s hard for us to believe what we’re hearing these days. Thousands are losing their homes, and gays want a day named after Harvey Milk. The U.S. military is continuing its path of destruction, and gays want to be allowed to fight. Cops are still killing unarmed black men and bashing queers, and gays want more policing. More and more Americans are suffering and dying because they can’t get decent health care, and gays want weddings. What happened to us? Where have our communities gone? Did gays really sell out that easily?

As young queer people raised in queer families and communities, we reject the liberal gay agenda that gives top priority to the fight for marriage equality. The queer families and communities we are proud to have been raised in are nothing like the ones transformed by marriage equality. This agenda fractures our communities, pits us against natural allies, supports unequal power structures, obscures urgent queer concerns, abandons struggle for mutual sustainability inside queer communities and disregards our awesomely fabulous queer history.

Children of queers have a serious stake in this. The media sure thinks so, anyway. The photographs circulated after San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom’s 2004 decision to marry gay couples at City Hall show men exchanging rings with young children strapped to their chests and toddlers holding their moms’ hands as city officials lead them through vows. As Newsom runs for governor these images of children and their newly married gay parents travel with him, supposedly expressing how deeply Newsom cares about families: keeping them together, ensuring their safety, meeting their needs. These photos, however, obscure very real aspects of his political record that have torn families apart: his disregard for affordable housing, his attacks on welfare, his support for increased policing and incarceration that separate parents from children and his new practice of deporting minors accused – not convicted – of crimes. As young people with queer parents we are not proud of the “family values” politic put forth by these images and the marriage equality campaign. We don’t want gay marriage activism conducted in our name – we realize that it’s hurting us, not helping us.

We think long-term monogamous partnerships are valid and beautiful ways of structuring and experiencing family, but we don’t see them as any more inherently valuable or legitimate than the many other family structures. We believe in each individual and family’s right to live their queer identity however they find meaningful or necessary, including when that means getting married. However, the consequences of the fight for legal inclusion in the marriage structure are terrifying. We’re seeing queer communities fractured as one model of family is being hailed and accepted as the norm, and we are seeing queer families and communities ignore and effectively work against groups who we see as natural allies, such as immigrant families, poor families, and families suffering from booming incarceration rates. We reject the idea that any relationship based on love should have to register with the state. Marriage is an institution used primarily to consolidate privilege, and we think real change will only come from getting rid of a system that continually doles out privilege to a few more, rather than trying to reform it. We know that most families, straight or gay, don’t fit in with the standards for marriage, and see many straight families being penalized for not conforming to the standard the government has set: single moms trying to get on welfare, extended family members trying to gain custody, friends kept from being each other’s legal representatives. We have far more in common with those straight families than we do with the kinds of gay families that would benefit from marriage. We are seeing a gay political agenda become single-issue to focus on marriage and leave behind many very serious issues such as social, economic, and racial justice.

How the marriage agenda is leaving behind awesome queer history.

We’re seeing the marriage equality agenda turn its back on a tradition of queer activism that began with Stonewall and other fierce queer revolts and that continued through the AIDS crisis. Equality California keeps on sending us videos of big, happy, gay families, and they’re making us sick: gay parents pushing kids on swings, gay parents making their kids’ lunches, the whole gay family safe inside the walls of their own homes. Wait a second, is it true? It’s as if they’ve found some sort of magical formula: once you have children, your life instantly transforms into a scene of domestic bliss, straight out of a 1950’s movie. The message is clear. Instead of dancing, instead of having casual sex, instead of rioting, all of the “responsible” gays have gone and had children. And now that they’ve had children, they won’t be bothering you at all anymore. There’s an implicit promise that once gays get their rights, they’ll disappear again. Once they can be at home with the kids, there’s no reason for them to be political, after all!

Listening to this promise, we’re a bit stunned. Whoever said domesticity wasn’t political? Wasn’t it just a few years ago that the feminists taught us that the personal is political? That cooking, cleaning, raising children and putting in countless hours of physical, emotional, and intellectual labor should not mean withdrawing from the public sphere or surrendering your political voice? After all, we were raised by queers who created domestic lives that were always politically engaged, who raised kids and raised hell at the same time. What makes Equality California think that an official marriage certificate is going to make us any less loud and queer? Oh wait. We remember. It’s that sneaky thing about late liberal capitalism: its promise of formal rights over real restructuring, of citizenship for those who can participate in the state’s economic plan over economic justice for all. Once you have your formal rights (like a marriage license), you can participate in the market economy and no longer need a political voice. Looking around at the world we live in, we’re unconvinced.

We’re also seeing another alarming story surface: If gays are ready to get married and have children, the AIDS crisis must be over! Gay men shaped up after AIDS hit, or at least the smart ones did. Those responsible enough to survive realized that they wanted children, and promptly settled down into relationships that were monogamous and that, presumably, carried no risk of HIV contraction. Come on. We reject all the moralizing about parenthood, responsibility, and sexual practice that goes on in this story. Besides the obvious fact that the AIDS crisis is not over, in the US or abroad, we realize that parenthood and non-monogamy aren’t mutually exclusive. The gay marriage movement wants us to believe that you need a sperm donor or an adoption agency to have children, but we know that there are more ways to make queer families than any of us can imagine. We refuse the packaged and groomed history that writes out the many HIV+ individuals in our lives and communities who are living healthily, loving in monogamous and non-monogamous relationships and raising children. We challenge our queer communities to remember our awesomely radical history of building families and raising children in highly political, inventive, and non-traditional ways.

How marriage equality fractures our community and pits us against our strongest allies.

We believe that the argument for gay marriage obscures the many structural, social, and economic forces that break families apart and take people away from their loved ones. Just for starters, there’s the explosion in incarceration levels, national and international migration for economic survival, deportation, unaffordable housing, and lack of access to drug rehabilitation services. The argument for gay marriage also ignores the economic changes and cuts to social services that make it nearly impossible for families to stay together and survive: welfare cuts, fewer after school programs, less public housing, worse medical care, not enough social workers, failing schools, the economic crisis in general.

We choose solidarity with immigrant families whom the state denies legal recognition and families targeted by prisons, wars, and horrible jobs. We reject the state violence that separates children from parents and decides where families begin and end, drawing lines of illegality through relationships. We see this as part of a larger effort on the part of the state to control our families and relationships in order to preserve a system that relies on creating an underclass deprived of security in order to ensure power for a few. We know that everyone has a complex identity, and that many queer families face separation due to one or more of the causes mentioned here, now or in the future. We would like to see our queer community recognize marriage rights as a short-term solution to the larger problem of the government’s disregard for the many family structures that exist. As queers, we need to take an active role in exposing and fighting the deeper sources of this problem. We won’t let the government decide what does and does not constitute a family.

The way that the marriage agenda phrases its argument about healthcare shows just how blind it is to the needs of the queer community. It has adopted marriage as a single-issue agenda, making it seem like the queer community’s only interest in healthcare is in the inclusion of some members of two person partnerships in the already exclusive healthcare system. Health care is a basic human right to which everyone is entitled, not one that should be extended through certain kinds of individual partnerships. We know this from queer history, and if we forget it, we will continue to let our community live in danger. The question of universal healthcare is urgent to queers because large groups of people inside our communities face incredible difficulty and violence receiving medical care, such as trans people who seek hormone treatment or surgery, people who are HIV positive, and queer and trans youth who are forced to live on the street. Instead of equalizing access to health care, marriage rights would allow a small group of people who have partnered themselves in monogamous configurations to receive care. If we accept the marriage agenda’s so-called solution, we’ll leave out most of our community.

Perhaps because the gay marriage movement has forgotten about the plurality and diversity of queer communities and queer activism, it has tried to gloss over its shortcomings by appropriating the struggles of other communities. We reject the notion that “gay is the new black,” that the fight for marriage equality is parallel to the fight for civil rights, that queer rights and rights for people of color are mutually exclusive. We don’t believe that fighting for inclusion in marriage is the same as fighting to end segregation. Drawing that parallel erases queer people of color and makes light of the structural racism that the civil rights movement fought against. The comparison is made as if communities of color, and black communities in particular, now enjoy structural equality. We know that’s not true. We would like to see a queer community that, rather than appropriating the narrative of the civil rights movement for its marriage equality campaign, takes an active role in exposing and protesting structural inequality and structural racism.

Rather than choosing to fight the things that keep structural racism intact, the liberal gay agenda has chosen to promote them. The gay agenda continually fights for increased hate crimes legislation that would incarcerate and execute perpetrators of hate crimes. We believe that incarceration destroys communities and families, and does not address why queer bashings happen. Increased hate crimes legislation would only lock more people up. In a country where entire communities are ravaged by how many of their members get sent to jail, where prisons are profit-driven institutions, where incarceration only creates more violence, we won’t accept anything that promotes prison as a solution. Our communities are already preyed upon by prisons – trans people, sex workers, and street kids live with the constant threat of incarceration. We believe that real, long-term solutions are found in models of restorative and transformative justice, and in building communities that can positively and profoundly deal with violence. We challenge our queer communities to confront what we are afraid of rather than locking it up, and to join members of our community and natural allies in opposing anything that would expand prisons.

The gay marriage agenda also supports the expansion of the army, seemingly forgetting about all of the ways that the army creates and maintains violence and power. The gay marriage agenda fights to abolish the “don’t ask don’t tell” policy, promoting the military’s policy and seeking inclusion. We’ve thought long and hard about this, and we can’t remember liking anything that the US military has done in a really long time. What we do remember is how the military mines places where poor people and people of color live, taking advantage of the lack of opportunities that exist for kids in those communities and convincing them to join the army. We think it’s time that queers fight the army and the wars it is engaged in instead of asking for permission to enter.

Marriage doesn’t promise real security.

As the economy collapses, as the number of Americans without a job, without healthcare, without savings, without any kind of social security net increases, it’s easy to understand how marriage has become an instant cure-all for some. Recognizing that many in our community have lived through strained or broken relationships with their biological families, through the darkest days of the AIDS epidemic in the United States, through self-doubt about and stigmatization of their relationships, we understand where the desire for the security promised by marriage comes from. However, we see the promotion of gay marriage as something that tries to put a band-aid over deeper sources of insecurity, both social and economic. With marriage, the state is able to absolve itself of responsibility for the well-being of its citizens, as evidenced by the HRC’s argument that with gay marriage, the state could kick more people off of welfare. If the HRC got its way, the queers who do not want, or are not eligible for, marriage would be even less secure than before. We’re frightened by the way the marriage agenda wants to break up our community in this way, and we’re committed to fighting any kind of politics that demonizes poor people and welfare recipients. We challenge our queer communities to build a politics that promotes wealth redistribution. What if, rather than donating to the HRC campaign, we pooled our wealth to create a community emergency fund for members of our community who face foreclosure, need expensive medical care or find themselves in any other economic emergency? As queers, we need to take our anger, our fear, and our hope and recognize the wealth of resources that we already have, in order to build alternative structures. We don’t need to assimilate when we have each other.

We’re not like everyone else.

Everywhere we turn, it seems like someone wants us to support gay marriage. From enthusiastic canvassers on the street to liberal professors in the academy, from gay lawyers to straight soccer moms, there’s someone smiling at us, eager to let us know how strongly they support our “right to marry,” waiting for what should be our easy affirmation. And there seems to be no space for us to resist the agenda that has been imposed upon us. We’re fed up with the way that the gay marriage movement has tried to assimilate us, to swallow up our families, our lives, and our lovers into its clean-cut standards for what queer love, responsibility, and commitment should look like. We reject the idea that we should strive to see straight family configurations reflected in our families. We’re offended by the idea that white, middle-class gays – rather than genderqueers, poor people, single moms, prisoners, people of color, immigrants without papers, or anyone whose life falls outside of the norm that the state has set – should be our “natural” allies. We refuse to feel indebted or grateful to those who have decided it’s time for us to be pulled out from the fringe and into the status quo. We know that there are more of us on the outside than on the inside, and we realize our power.

We write this feeling as if we have to grab our community back from the clutches of the gay marriage movement. We’re frightened by its path and its incessant desire to assimilate. Believe it or not, we felt incredibly safe, happy, taken care of, and fulfilled with the many queer biological and chosen parents who raised us without the right to marry. Having grown up in queer families and communities we strongly believe that queers are not like everyone else. Queers are sexy, resourceful, creative, and brave enough to challenge an oppressive system with their lifestyle. In the ways that our families might resemble nuclear, straight families, it is accidental and coincidental, something that lies at the surface. We do not believe that queer relationships are the mere derivatives of straight relationships. We can play house without wanting to be straight. Our families are tangled, messy and beautiful – just like so many straight families who don’t fit into the official version of family. We want to build communities of all kinds of families, families that can exist – that do exist – without the recognition of the state. We don’t believe that parenting is cause for an end to political participation. We believe that nurturing the growth, voice and imagination of children as a parent, a family and a community is a profoundly radical act. We want to build networks of accountability and dependence that lie outside the bounds of the government, the kinds of networks that we grew up in, the kinds of networks that we know support single-parent families, immigrant families, families who have members in the military or in prison, and all kinds of chosen families. These families, our families, work through our collective resources, strengths, commitments, and desires, and we wouldn’t change them for anything.

Human behaviour...

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Not normally a fan of good ole southern boys, still...these two are onto something...

also courtesy of Second Waver...

I thought this was gonna be a take on the "Helpless Woman As Prey" prevent rape PSA but...

this put the blame and the responsibility where it actually lies. Thanks for directing my gaze here, Second Waver.

Friday, May 21, 2010

Looking forward to the day when...

...videos like this are things we all show our daughters to offer insight as they travel on their journeys into puberty and beyond rather than things some of the wimmin I've encountered end up using to help themselves love themselves and their Black bodies as they struggle to embrace their own sexualities.

For me, this was useful as a teaching tool as I continue to educate my daughter.

I've already been doing the work figuring this stuff out for myself for most of the last twenty years. By the time I saw this video this afternoon, I just felt sad about the level of ignorance I encountered in this city as I attempted to openly ask questions about what it means to be Black, decolonizing, female, sexual, queer and historically and socially constructed as "deviant" on a few different levels.

I remember...

I don't forget any of what has transpired as I walked conscientizing among the backward, stunted, arrogant, self important, fearful, shame-filled, oppressive children of christian west indians who immigrated here to kkkanada mostly during the seventies.

When I saw this video I thought of my own work and wondered if it would have made a difference among this city's Diasporic African artsy "intelligencia" who are so elitist when it comes to education, if I'd have been a pHd instead of a homeschooling rogue explorer. heh. Pathetic.

Hats off to Goddess Glory
the bombiiciously intense and man destroying who is a middle passage sib finding answers that work for her based on what she's experienced. Her blog is where I found this short film earlier today.

What is a student?

Also from el kilombo intergalactico...

“Most people guard and keep; they suppose that it is they themselves and what they identify with themselves that they are guarding and keeping, whereas in reality what they are actually guarding and keeping is their system of reality and what they assume themselves to be. One can give nothing whatever without giving oneself–that is to say, risking oneself. If one cannot risk oneself then one is simply incapable of giving.”

- James Baldwin, The Fire Next Time

“The university stands for the institutional apparatus through which society ensures its uneventful reproduction at the least cost to itself.”

- Michel Foucault

Links

Intersection of social media, feminism and sexuality...

Sex 2.0

A Black Panther in Beirut...


I found this website and the article below while seeking.




It was perfect.
Perfect.
It's the kind of writing I love to read and hear spoken in defiantly intelligent tones.
It pulls no punches.
It does not lie.
It does not rationalize.
It does not dance and sing for our amusement.
It does not invite the reader to clap approvingly.
It does not invite us to join hands and give thanks to gawd before it begins.
It does not do shout outs.
It does not need to be hyped or defined as revolutionary.
It needs no curriculum vitae to validate its existence.
It will not be premiered to much hullabaloo at a spoken word event in a room filled with idiots on a stage near you.
It resonates like a bell demanding to be read, heard and understood.
It tells it as it is and leaves no room for denial.
It...is beautiful...

Emory Douglas Goes in Lebanon

by Daniel Drennan

January 26, 2010

In Oakland, California in the late 1960s, Emory Douglas, minister of culture for the Black Panther Party, was responsible for the manifestation of Voice in his community, and represented the hope for revolution among the marginalized and Voiceless.

In Lebanon, some 40 years later, he is to pay a visit.

In America, a Black minister agitates in a New Orleans City Council meeting and demands entrance for residents who have come to protest the demolition of their homes to make way for luxury apartments. The protesters are met with Tazer guns and mace.

In Beirut, this response might include snipers and bullets. A non-violent tent occupation of Martyr’s Square is criticized for the economic damage inflicted on the downtown business district, itself occupied by foreign Capital.

In Detroit, residents destroy their valueless homes with gasoline and fire in order to recoup insurance money that will allow them to move out to the suburbs.

In Beirut, real estate barons offer a pittance to anyone willing to raze the city’s heritage to make way for hermetically sealed buildings closed off from the doomed street life below.

In Louisiana, six Black teenagers face emprisonment for assault in reaction to the hanging of nooses from a tree deemed “reserved” for white students.

In Beirut’s airport there is a waiting room clearly marked for arriving laborers. In Lebanon, the marginalized are stabbed in their sleep; thrown from their balconies; killed on construction sites. No one is prosecuted for these crimes.

In America, logos and signs maintain the country’s racist roots: Uncle Ben, Aunt Jemima, the Native American as symbol for sports teams. Consumers eating their rice or pancakes, patrons of baseball games wearing face paint and waving tomahawks, do not challenge this.

In Beirut, diners are entertained in sushi restaurants by Filipina women dolled up as Japanese geishas; in Indian restaurants by Syrian men sporting salwar kameez. No one protests.

In Philadelphia, white parents pull their children out of a private swimming pool when Black children from a summer camp show up for some relief from the summer heat. There are few if any public spaces for swimming.

In Beirut, scandals erupt due to the presence of foreign servants in private beach resorts. Similarly, the “public beach” is but a tiny strip of trash-littered sand along water polluted by untreated sewage. No one cares.

In Los Angeles, the architect who planned out a bunker-like U.S. chancellery in Damascus builds a library, the symbol of democratic access to information. Its design reflects the security needs of a prison complex. Its location is a low-income immigrant community seen as undesirable.

In Beirut, an Art Center rises in an industrial neighborhood, and touts its communal use. It welcomes a small subset of the population, none of whom is from the neighborhood.

On American theater screens, the movie “Driving Miss Daisy” portrays a fictitious scene in which a Black man chauffeurs a Southern doyenne to a speech by Dr. Martin Luther King. The chauffeur waits outside, far removed from the man who speaks of his liberation.

In Lebanon, nannies and domestic servants take care of households while their owners listen to Black artists who speak of their exclusion from American society.

In America, in one of his more famous works, Emory Douglas collages the controlling hand of Capital decorated with logos of corporations and other Voice destroyers.

In Beirut, the sponsors list of any given cultural event proudly lists the banks, foreign NGOs, and other corporations that make such importation and implantation of outside culture possible. No one seems to mind.

In Denver, at the mayoral state-of-the-city address, a Black woman is excoriated for singing “Lift Every Voice and Sing”–referred to as the Black National Anthem–instead of “The Star-Spangled Banner”. She replies to the harsh criticism: “Art is supposed to make you think.”

In Lebanon, a craftsman sings silently to himself and creates his artworks which, when copied by thieving “local artists”, will sell for more than he can ever imagine.

In American museums and gallery spaces, almost fifty years after his group arose from an oppressed community, the work of Emory Douglas is literally given currency by the very media that helped destroy the Panthers in the first place.

In Lebanon, former signs and symbols of resistance find themselves equally evaluated by a similar over-mediation. They are thus rendered void of actionable meaning.

In America, millions of voters walked into polling stations and cast a ballot for a Black man thinking they would bring change to the country. In fact, they didn’t.

In Beirut, a dozen or so art mavens walk into a lecture and listen to a Black man speaking of his activism yesteryear, thinking they are part of some minor revolution. In fact, they aren’t.

In America, any local cultural manifestation, any expression of history and context, any resistant voice that dares speak out is suppressed; co-opted; destroyed.

In Beirut, a Voiceless man far from his hometown works in a corner shop of a neighborhood he can’t afford and writes his poetry in a beautiful calligraphic hand. Then, he throws the pages away. He explains: “No one will ever read them; I write for no one.”

From an America that doesn’t deserve him, Emory Douglas is coming to Beirut. For fifty dollars, one can enter an Art Center’s hallowed halls and benefit from a workshop with the artist.

Meanwhile, in a Lebanon that deserves him less, the Voices most in need of him remain outside, ever marginalized; waiting to be lifted, their song never heard.



Daniel Drennan is the founder of Jamaa al-yad, a Beirut-based artists' collective.

Someone should update this with the image of obamarama...

I, Barack Obama, 44th puppet of these United Corporations...


















by Emory Douglas

Thursday, May 20, 2010

This was an absolute joy to read...

“Some of the Worst-Paid High-School Graduates in the Country”

Posted by Marc Bousquet on 05/19/10 at 12:36 PM

Over at the Atlantic, business editor Megan McCardle lit up the Beltway blab-o-sphere by posing an interesting question: If “almost every” tenured professor she knows has a “left-wing vision” of workplace issues, why do they accept the “shockingly brutal” treatment of faculty with contingent appointments?

Her perception of leftism among the faculty leads her to think that our values “should result in something much more egalitarian.” So, she asks, how is it that higher ed sustains “one of the most abusive labor markets in the world”?

Good question. One answer, of course, is that the faculty aren’t “leftists” at all, but American liberals, whose commitments to equality are relatively clear in matters of ethnicity and gender, but hopelessly confused when it comes to class and workplace issues generally.

Arguably most of the policy failures by contemporary liberals in matters of ethnicity and gender can be traced back to their blind spot regarding issues of class, labor, and the workplace.

As I’ve noted before, to produce crashing silence in a lecture hall packed with doctorates, all you have to do is ask, “Why are police departments more diverse than English departments?"

continued here :)

Pretty sure he would not have called me "Sister" but...


Happy 84th belated birthday Brother Malcolm. You were peerless and I appreciate the historical, revolutionary, verbal, courageous, consciously intelligent example you set.

Did Mrs. Obamarama prefer the kids ask her about whether she'd be wearing her hair long or short this season...?

So fiercely glad that little school girl hit the mark with her question about her mother's immigration status. Sweet.

But of course, THESE are much more important questions...
Gorgeous in gunmetal! 69%
Heaven in a blue dress! 31%
Yes, she looks great 62%
No, the sleeveless dresses look horrible 38%
Do you like Michelle Obama's fashion sense?
1171 votes so far
Leader:
Yes, she looks great



Yes. Her arms look great. 76%
No. It's tacky and tasteless 24%
Does Michelle Obama have the right to bare arms?
921 votes so far
Leader:
Yes. Her arms look great.



Michelle Obama of the USA 47%
Svetlana Medvedeva of Russia 24%
Which first lady has the better style and fashion sense?
251 votes so far
Leader:
Michelle Obama of the USA

Blog against theocracy...missed it...

I found this while checking out one of my lists of referrers in the sidebar. Hopped from one blog (zen comix) to another and found myself t/here. Looking forward to reading all of these...

2010 Participants

Bloggers are also invited to participate via the #blogagainsttheocracy hashtag on twitter. Please be aware that the links below were submitted via a blog carnival form and I have not had a chance to read all of them yet. One great thing about blogswarms is the opportunity it affords to visit new blogs and engage in discussion with new voices. If you wish to engage in a discussion regarding a specific post, please do it at the blog indicated. Enjoy!

Beth Corbin presents Debate: Tax-Exempt Churches Can't Endorse Candidates - AOL News posted at Yikes!.

TomCat presents On Easter, Faith vs Theocracy posted at Politics Plus.

Tengrain presents Kicking off the MPS Blog Against Theocracy posted at Mock, Paper, Scissors.

darkblack presents On Religion posted at darkblack.

Batocchio presents Theocracy is Authoritarian posted at Vagabond Scholar.

Farnsworth68 presents More Moronic Teabaggery - 'This is Chilling' and other BAT posts (see blog) posted at One Pissed Off Veteran.

Dugan presents President Pope Benny Dick posted at Zen Comix.

mark hoback presents Steele to Vatican? posted at Fried Green al-Qaedas.

DistributorCapNY presents Blog Against Theocracy: A guide for the unmarried man at DistributorCapNY.

Utah Savage presents I live in a theocracy; It's called Utah at Utah Savage.

JAMES SCAMINACI III presents Origins of the Tea Party Movement: Part IV-J – The Christian Nationalists’ Agenda and the Tea Party Movement, and Origins of the Tea Party Movement: Part IV-E – Ron Paul’s Christian Nationalist Agenda, posted at Political Chili.

Ashley F. Miller presents Blog Against Theocracy: How religion controls America posted at Ashley F. Miller.

Cujo359 presents Trying To Blog Against Theocracy posted at Slobber And Spittle.

Perry B. Goodfriend presents Bullets, Bibles and Brains - The Insanity at Sedition's Door posted at Prose and Thorn.

Robert M. Tilendis presents Julian Comstock: The World As It Almost Is posted at Hunter At Random.

William K. Wolfrum presents Pope Benedict shoot & kills God - claims self-defense posted at William K. Wolfrum Chronicles.

Omnipotent Poobah presents The Place Where Your Rights End is Where My Rights Begin posted at The Omnipotent Poobah Speaks!.

JurassicPork presents Blog against theocracy Pottersville style at Welcome Back To Pottersville.

Airon Later presents From The Book Of Beck posted at 43-Ideas-Per-Minute.

David 2 presents The Religion Cheat Code posted at David 2's Brutally Honest Random Thoughts.

Liz Ditz presents Blog For the Separation of Church and State, Blog for Protecting Religous Liberty posted at I Speak of Dreams.

Oraia Sphinx presents In Praise of Heresy posted at Sphinx Words.

David Bomse presents Blog Against Theocracy 2010 posted at Emotional Beings.

Cheyanne presents The Tea Party..... Texas Tea..... Texas Textbook Writers & All Their Texas Connections: How They Plan To Exclude Certain Individuals From American History !!! posted at Cheyanne's Campsite ...Where The Money Meets The Rubber of The Spirited Road in America Today !!.

ShortWoman presents Low Hanging Fruit on the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil posted at ShortWoman.

Chris Rodda presents David Barton Keeps Up His Lies At Glenn Beck Event posted at The Huffington Post.

Meg presents Freedom of Religion posted at Get In, Hang On - Take 2.

Religious Right Watch presents 2010 Blog Against Theocracy: revisiting Wills' review of "Moral Minority" posted at Religious Right Watch.

NelsonG presents Blog Against Theocracy 2010 posted at NGblog.

Tom presents Theocracy and the Rape of Children posted at Godless Liberal Homo.

Spadoman presents Blog Against Theocracy, April 2-4, 2010 posted at Round Circle.

Jolly Roger presents Enjoy Poverty? Vote For the Religious Candidate posted at Reconstitution 2.0.

Graham Firchlis presents Winter Solstice is Yule, so keep your Christian dogma off my holiday and Creationism and Evolution Reconciled, posted at Whenceforth Progress.

Mark Prime (thepoetryman) presents AND WE STAND BETWEEN (Blog Against Theocracy 2010) posted at CONFESSION ZERO.

Jennifer Paviglianiti presents Strangely Blogged: "Under God" invokes patriotism, not faith? and Fear of an Educational Theocracy, posted at Strangely Blogged.

C Keeler presents Church v. State posted at Peerless Cynic.

hart williams presents Into the Gibbering Maw of the Id posted at his vorpal sword.

Bob Broughton presents Put Joseph Ratzinger on Trial at Bob Broughton.

kathequa presents Blog For Theocracy posted at gratuitousprattle.

Tengrain presents Faith posted at Mock, Paper, Scissors.

John Pieret presents Theocratic "Freedom" posted at Thoughts in a Haystack.

CrackerLilo presents Happy (not to have to celebrate) Easter! posted at Cracker Lilo's Front Porch.

deletedSoul presents Secular Government = Neutral Government posted at deletedSoul.

Douglas Gogerty presents "The Tale of the Puritan" posted at Around the Campfire.

Billie Greenwood presents An alternative (?) blog against theocracy posted at Border Explorer.

frank fuller presents Are You Smarter Than A Texas 5th Grader? posted at The Last Laugh.

Nigel Patel presents Blog Against Theocracy andBlog Against Theocracy 2 posted at Hand Made Luck.

Shira presents Real America posted at Shira bat Sarah.

Jennifer Jones presents Return to Reason posted at Return to Reason.

Ashley Merusi presents Who’s That Deity? posted at here.

Beth Katz presents Introducing Interfaith posted at Omaha.net - Local Writing from the Heartland.

Aaron Powell presents Why Religious Arguments Don't Have a Place in Politics posted at Aaron Ross Powell.

Rehctaw presents Deja Nu? -OR- So Long And Thanks For Playing Their Game posted at Rawrahs... Shouting into the Abyss.

Jolly Roger presents The Insanity of Theocracy and Fascism IS Theocracy posted at Reconstitution 2.0.

RobertM presents The problem with Religion posted at BetrayedByBoyd.

Buffy presents Church and State; A Dangerous Combination. posted at The Gaytheist Agenda.

Zhu presents It's Okay Not To Believe posted at Correr Es Mi Destino.

steven germain presents Religion and Violence posted at Rough Fractals.

Sarah Stewart's fairly kewl and radical idea...


I always appreciate people who try to not hoard knowledge and who actually work to find ways to share their access to information. I think that's why in an increasingly gentrified field like midwifery where midwives are increasingly being trained to work in close partnership with hospitals and doctors, handing over births that are being defined as "high risk" meaning they will now fall under the aegis of surgeons with knives and drugs and invasive equipment, where some people have been referring to midwives as medwives citing their increasingly intricate linkage, bondage to a medical "health" establishment bent on obliterating wimmin's open source knowledge of birthing passed down from generation to generation from time immemorial...the idea of putting knowledge out there where it can be reviewed and discussed and critiqued and challenged and shared and admired makes a lot of fucking beautiful sense as far as I'm concerned. :)

Talking about an open access midwifery journal



I want to take a closer look at this blog...

Virtual Canuck - Teaching and Learning in a Net-centric World

Better late than never...



I came across this on my okc journal today...

I don't need it here since most people don't comment and those who do are mostly politically aligned with me. Nonetheless, there are bits here that are of use or might be to other people, especially wimmin or Black wimmin (often constructed as angry and threatening, if they should stand up for themselves) who are habitually forced to comply when it comes to their roles in heated online debates...

hmmm...

Aug. 19, 2009

I realize part of what pisses me off about places where humans gather is the high premium placed on following The Rules.

Whose rules?

I don't know.

But I realize people attempt to bind me to them fairly regularly, here on okc.

I realize following The Rules is much more important to people than say...not being oppressive or tracking thoughts and behaviours that are part of the dominant society.

For someone like me the reverse is true. I don't mind people who habitually break rules governing propriety.

I really cannot stand people who either subtly or not so subtly bring me oppressive beliefs. I have no space for them. I have no interest in them. I certainly have no reason to sit down and spend time at my computer debating with them.

I know that for amerikkkans who are fed a fairly consistent diet of televised debates between the two "sides" of their political system, this kind of polarized interaction is money in the bank.

It's food.

It's stimulation.

It makes them feel as if they're doing something useful. Changing the world. Channeling the democrats and the republicans (who by the way excluded so many parties from their debates, including the Green Party under the leadership of Cynthia McKinney, who is three times the leader obamarama will ever be...)

But that's another post. I just fucking love her to death, though. She's so brave.

I realize that when you live off of politics where the untrustworthy, dressed up as right and good, debates with the untrustworthy, dressed up as right and good, with both "sides" functioning as part of a diseased whole bent on manipulating and fooling the voting public...

And when you and your family and your coworkers and your town and your state all watch these "sides" do an emptied ritualized dance known as debate, which is designed to occupy your mind, but to also "teach" you what it means to deal with those you disagree with....

Where you are taught to maintain a pleasantly passive aggressive tone...

Where you are taught to slip in passive aggressive jabs, punches and knifings, while saying the most courteous things...

Where you are taught to never ever directly call a moron a moron...

Where you are taught to never ever directly call an evil bastard an evil bastard...

Where you are taught that the form, the ritual, the rules of the dance are actually much more important than whether bad behaviour is called out and dealt with in the open...

Well...

Let's just say...I don't see it that way. I think of debate with a person who is clearly lost, stupid, vicious or perhaps touched in the head, as a massive time waster.

I don't value it. I don't believe it changes anything...unh...it changes the level of energy I have for use with people I actually want to talk to. So, I guess it changes something after all. :)

In any case, I won't do it. I won't follow the rules of engagement being offered to me. I don't value them.

If I was a fighter, a warrior, a soldier, I'd be a street fighter, a guerilla, probably defined as a "terrorist" for being bent on not following rules of engagement and "civilized" combat.

So now that you know that...

Hopefully it's clear that when people who come with fairly unoriginal if not downright oppressive ideas about issues I may write about comment here on this journal, they should count themselves lucky that I don't firebomb their pathetic asses.

I don't think they realize that they should count themselves lucky that all they walk away with is being ignored or told they're morons.

But yeah...sigh...

I notice that when they don't get the attention and interaction they expect, they get nasty, ill tempered, indignant, bratty.

Now, that's not very debaterly...is that a word? :)

This shows in the comments they leave, so effectively shitting and pissing on this journal space.

It's beastial, really. giggles...

Unattractive.

I can't stop them from commenting, it seems. Not without blocking all comment. But deleting them is something I don't mind doing right now. Maybe at another point, after I've spent more time around their filth and bile, I'll learn to just co-exist...

But I hope they don't hold their breaths waiting. I'm not good at co-existing with rotting tripe. :)

So yeah...deleting comments.

I prefer that to thinking that I'm helping spread their abusive aggressions, thereby giving them a forum for what was already lying there, underneath their initial comments, so clearly dimwitted and enraged that I would even have anything to write when my thoughts should have already been determined for me by those who craft popular views for the majority of serfs in our society.

When I read their comments, their attempts to silence, when I see people attempt to engage with them in ways that are respectful, I realize that I don't have either the energy or the inclination to do the same. I prefer to just...press...delete...

...And to realize that they can't delete my journals. They can just attempt to make it really uncomfortable for me to post here.

Fatal error. :)

I actually thrive in uncomfortable environments. I dunno. It's just something about me. I think there was an okc question related to this. Oh wait! Did I write the question? Or did I just answer it? :)

So, fine. Little ones, I don't want you here. But if you choose to keep coming, I will choose to keep deleting your asses.

heh...Maybe you've got Black wimmin bosses who crush you under their boots everyday and force you to scurry around like so many little rodents.

Or maybe...you've tried to cruise some Black girls real time or on okc and they shot you down in FLAMES explaining in excruciating detail how completely revolted they were by you and then maybe they laughed long and hard and threw garbage at you.

Yeah. I could see either of those scenarios happening, if this disease you came with and brought to share with me is what attempts to seep through from underneath every single time you...encounter someone who's way of being or whose beliefs differ radically from yours, who does not give you the attention you believe you deserve.

And people want to take me to task for not engaging with your bile? :)

You want to come and shit on my journal? :)

You want to come and attempt to socially mount me and dominate me as a way to show me that domination does not exist? :)

You want to use unspoken rules of okc journal conduct to hold me to task and bring me to your diseased little table to parlay?

:)

Fat chance, morons.