From HuffingtonPost.com
"In a move to "promote greater unity" among its body and the Pike County community it serves, a small Kentucky church voted to ban interracial couples from membership and from participating in certain worship activities"
click HERE for the rest of this story..
Oh, good godDAMN, people.. What about interracial worship? Does the church allow anything other than white people? Is it that the pastor is having vision problems and mixing up the colors in the aisles confuses him? This is ridiculous.
Maybe this is a good time for all the Caucasian gay/lesbian pairings to break the news to the church. I mean, this might be their "IN"..
It must be hard to breathe in a place with that much stupid in the air...
The Feminine Context
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Tuesday, November 22, 2011
I got 99 problems but a Lich ain't one.. TFC waxes fangirl on Bethesda Softworks
Where the hell have I been, you ask?
Well, between chasing my young child around and generally having one heck of a busy weekend, I got ahold of Elder Scrolls: Skyrim, the game I've been waiting FIVE FREAKING YEARS FOR after I played Elder Scrolls: Oblivion absolutely to death. Seriously, I've had to replace the damn disk at least once.
I know somewhere waaaaay back in my posts I mentioned that I am a hardcore gamer. This is both true and untrue. I AM a hardcore gamer, but Bethesda Softworks produces games that are so good, so unlike anything else available in gaming, that I've pretty much become a snob about it and I don't play much of anything else. I would rather make new characters and do replays of Bethesda games til they come out with something else, than play most of the formulaic crap that's available and popular.
If Oblivion, Fallout 3, Fallout: New Vegas, or Skyrim were multiplayer games, they'd probably kick me off the server, thinking I'd hacked the thing somehow. I'm honestly that good. My boyfriend got me this game because he knew I was more likely to cry over this than some stupid piece of jewelry or some other girly thing, and when he was at GameStop, the cashier tried to sell him the strategy guide for the game.. to which my (surprisingly insightful) boyfriend replied:
"No way, man. She won't HAVE that in her house. If I bring that home, she'll consider it cheating.. or like, spoiling the end of a movie. She's waited five years for this game. If I bring that home, she'll send me, and the guide, back HERE to live".
heh... too bad he's not kidding, huh?
Posts on the subject to come. I have to go throw a fireball at some giant freaking poisonous spiders right now.
The Feminine Context
Well, between chasing my young child around and generally having one heck of a busy weekend, I got ahold of Elder Scrolls: Skyrim, the game I've been waiting FIVE FREAKING YEARS FOR after I played Elder Scrolls: Oblivion absolutely to death. Seriously, I've had to replace the damn disk at least once.
I know somewhere waaaaay back in my posts I mentioned that I am a hardcore gamer. This is both true and untrue. I AM a hardcore gamer, but Bethesda Softworks produces games that are so good, so unlike anything else available in gaming, that I've pretty much become a snob about it and I don't play much of anything else. I would rather make new characters and do replays of Bethesda games til they come out with something else, than play most of the formulaic crap that's available and popular.
If Oblivion, Fallout 3, Fallout: New Vegas, or Skyrim were multiplayer games, they'd probably kick me off the server, thinking I'd hacked the thing somehow. I'm honestly that good. My boyfriend got me this game because he knew I was more likely to cry over this than some stupid piece of jewelry or some other girly thing, and when he was at GameStop, the cashier tried to sell him the strategy guide for the game.. to which my (surprisingly insightful) boyfriend replied:
"No way, man. She won't HAVE that in her house. If I bring that home, she'll consider it cheating.. or like, spoiling the end of a movie. She's waited five years for this game. If I bring that home, she'll send me, and the guide, back HERE to live".
heh... too bad he's not kidding, huh?
Posts on the subject to come. I have to go throw a fireball at some giant freaking poisonous spiders right now.
The Feminine Context
Monday, November 14, 2011
Sexual, Female, AND Human? Why Sasha Gray Can't Catch A Break
11/11/2011
From HuffingtonPost:
"How would you feel if an adult film star read to your seven year old child? Believe it or not, some parents in California are pretty angry that it happened in their kids' classroom.
Porn legend Sasha Grey was a guest reader at Emerson Elementary School in Compton, California earlier this month, joining first and third grade students in their Read Across America day. Grey certainly enjoyed the experience, tweeting, "Spent the am with Read Across America Compton, reading to the sweetest 1st & 3rd grade students @ Emerson Elementary!"
The problem, TMZ reports, is that parents aren't happy -- and that school officials, instead of addressing the issue, are claiming it never happened. Of course, it'd be silly for Grey to tweet about it if it hadn't happened, and more importantly, TMZ has a photo of the event (as they always seem to do)."
Ms. Gray gave a statement to TMZ regarding her participation in the Read Across America child literacy program, in which she writes:
"Read Across America" is a program that was designed to promote literacy and instill a lifelong love of reading in elementary school students. Promoting education is an effort that is close to my heart. Illiteracy contributes to poverty; encouraging children to pick up a book is fundamental.
I believe education is a universal right. I committed to this program with the understanding that people would have their own opinions about what I have done, who I am and what I represent.
I am an actor. I am an artist. I am a daughter. I am a sister. I am a partner. I have a past that some people may not agree with, but it does not define who I am.
I will not live in fear of it. To challenge non-profit education programs is an exercise in futility, counter-productive and anti-educational.
I cannot thank my fans and 'Read Across America' enough for supporting my decision. Your support and kind words continue to inspire me. I believe in the future of our children, and I will remain an active supporter and participant in education-focused initiatives."
Good for you, Sasha Gray. What a great thing for you to do for a group of kids that certainly enjoyed your reading to them. If only most kids' parents would take that kind of time and read to their children.
I don't have a damn thing against porn, and neither should you. I'm not talking about illegal activities involving non-consenting individuals. No one's backing that up. I'm talking about good ol' American (Japanese? Russian? German? Whatever floats your boat) porn, that almost everyone has looked at at some point or another, if not several times a week... or day.. or in an alternate window while you're reading this very post.
Both hands on the keyboard, buddy. I'm trying to tell you something, here.
Okay. Fine. Finish and come back after you've washed your hands.
Regarding porn..
For starters, you probably watch it. Statistical data is hard to count on because one group or another is constantly tweaking numbers up or down to try and make a point, but let's just say that the majority of reports about adult pornography use on the internet indicate that a whole fuck of a lot of everyone is watching, viewing, or reading some porn at any given time of the day or night. If one were to try and draw some sort of "average score" out of these extremely varied reports on internet pornography usage, it probably boils down to somewhere around 52% of men and 50% of women who at least admitted to it. Obviously, these numbers don't even begin to account for people who look at it and don't want to tell anyone, or who look at "specialty" porn designed to satisfy fetishes that are based on objects or ideas that most people would never identify with the term "sexy". Many people are sexually excited by the damndest, and quite frankly, most harmless things. I for one don't think I have any business whatsoever getting my panties in a wad over whether someone is attracted or excited by things like stuffed animals, trees, or bugs. I am in no way required to participate in anyone else's turn-on, if asked, I can say no.. so how is it any of my concern if my neighbor gets a semi because he thinks the myrtle tree in my yard is hot as hell. Good for him. At least someone is noticing my tree and NOT how long it's been since I cut the grass beneath it. What do I care? If everyone is obeying the law, then he's in his house getting his jollies from that myrtle and its sexy, bark-free body, and he's not on my lawn humping it. Everyone's happy.
If you insist that you don't partake of the massive erotic pornucopia online, well what the hell ever, okay? I'm just going to be nice about it and nod, but don't push it. Porn use is so prevalent among adults that as much as you want to get a bee in your butt (fetish?) about it, probably half of your knitting club does things with their needles that would make you not only cross your legs but strap them together with leather belts. Problem being, this might only turn them on MORE. The real point is that there's NO point getting upset about it. Porn is everywhere and it's been here since our ancestors figured out they could use Saber-Toothed Cat poo like crayons on their cave walls, and that an extra stick limb on a stick figure could represent a penis.
Pornography is no longer the sad business of taking starry-eyed would be actresses and making depraved whores out of them, if it ever really was. Adult film stars see themselves as just that, "stars", not victims or objects of pity. Adult entertainment is big freaking business, and as such, working standards have improved if for no other reason than to keep everyone's asses covered on a legal front. The porn industry creates jobs, and is well-recognized as the primary driving force behind many of the technological developments that have come to benefit both businesses and consumers alike. Internet technology like credit-card processing and verification, website membership security, encryption, video technology, and file-optimization have all been developed more rapidly, competitively, and economically as a means to buy and sell adult content online.
There are a few other things that can be said, specifically about people who actually work in front of the cameras in the adult entertainment industry. The one thing that pornography professionals have done differently than most of us is that they've demonstrated that they've got 'nads enough to work in an industry that, although considered taboo, is actually STILL THRIVING in our otherwise depressed economy. I believe it's also worth mentioning that adult film actresses and models are working in a field that, by the efforts and intentions of society's effort to promote women's sexual liberty, they really ought to be given a bit more respect for. I don't mean that we should be placing banners up everywhere we go, featuring this week's DVDA princess, but considering how many people are actually watching all of this porn, how is it fair to act like these people are doing something subversive and terrible?
Why is it that when sexual acts are filmed, we talk about the individuals engaged in that act as though they should be ashamed of it? How is it any different than what the majority of single adults get drunk and do any given weekend, other than that the adult film industry is more likely to enforce the use of condoms and STD/STI testing before adults engage in sexual intercourse? Sometimes, in an effort to promote feminism, porn actresses will be discussed as though they are brainwashed, patriarchy-indoctrinated "victims" which in itself is degrading, not uplifting, to these women. How is it that violent, gory crime dramas are winning awards, but the act of two (or more?) adults doing something together that makes them feel freaking AWESOME is considered a cause of detriment to society? Sasha Gray, for example, is a beautiful young woman who has recently published a book (adult in nature, but intellectual and artistic) and is proud of her work, as she has every right to be. How is it anyone's place to tell her she shouldn't be? She's achieved a great deal of success in her former career, and is currently expanding into new territory. How is it fair that we shower women like Kim Kardashian with press, attention, and fan-worship for doing, well.. nothing without her mom's direction and her dad's money, yet we take the first opportunity we can to piss on an adult film actress who took an opportunity to do something nice and READ to little kids?
There are certainly many varieties of adult entertainment that are presented with elements of violence, and these cater to specific fetishes. Maybe it's true that much of available pornographic material promotes illusory, airbrushed, unrealistic images of women and men. It's part of the fantasy, and anyone who's had sex more than twice can easily understand that fantasy and reality are two very different things. Any information, be it text or image, that is adult in nature can be confusing to children.. this is very true. The rest of the world is not supposed to raise your children or moderate its existence in case your children see. As a parent, it's your job to explain aspects of life to your kids, often as they come up.
It's also a matter of picking your battles at an age-appropriate time for your own child.
In the case of Sasha Gray, there's no reason that any child she read to needs to know anything about her past, and should it come up, a simple "she made movies that are only for adults" would suffice for a child within that age-range. Making a big huge fucking deal out of it is only going to make the situation utterly fascinating to a child, who will then explore the issue that they thought NOTHING about before it garnered such a reaction out of their parents.
The real "problem" is that Sasha Gray doesn't feel bad about herself, her choices, or what she's done. If she seemed ashamed of her sexuality, or a victim of the porn industry, it might make it easier for people to accept her. When pressed to discuss a hypothetical situation that would be completely identical to hers, a lot of people would disagree with condemning her for reading to those children. Our society, with its seemingly indelible stain of puritanism, still has quite a lot to learn. Maybe even from a porn star.
The Feminine Context
From HuffingtonPost:
"How would you feel if an adult film star read to your seven year old child? Believe it or not, some parents in California are pretty angry that it happened in their kids' classroom.
Porn legend Sasha Grey was a guest reader at Emerson Elementary School in Compton, California earlier this month, joining first and third grade students in their Read Across America day. Grey certainly enjoyed the experience, tweeting, "Spent the am with Read Across America Compton, reading to the sweetest 1st & 3rd grade students @ Emerson Elementary!"
The problem, TMZ reports, is that parents aren't happy -- and that school officials, instead of addressing the issue, are claiming it never happened. Of course, it'd be silly for Grey to tweet about it if it hadn't happened, and more importantly, TMZ has a photo of the event (as they always seem to do)."
Ms. Gray gave a statement to TMZ regarding her participation in the Read Across America child literacy program, in which she writes:
"Read Across America" is a program that was designed to promote literacy and instill a lifelong love of reading in elementary school students. Promoting education is an effort that is close to my heart. Illiteracy contributes to poverty; encouraging children to pick up a book is fundamental.
I believe education is a universal right. I committed to this program with the understanding that people would have their own opinions about what I have done, who I am and what I represent.
I am an actor. I am an artist. I am a daughter. I am a sister. I am a partner. I have a past that some people may not agree with, but it does not define who I am.
I will not live in fear of it. To challenge non-profit education programs is an exercise in futility, counter-productive and anti-educational.
I cannot thank my fans and 'Read Across America' enough for supporting my decision. Your support and kind words continue to inspire me. I believe in the future of our children, and I will remain an active supporter and participant in education-focused initiatives."
Good for you, Sasha Gray. What a great thing for you to do for a group of kids that certainly enjoyed your reading to them. If only most kids' parents would take that kind of time and read to their children.
I don't have a damn thing against porn, and neither should you. I'm not talking about illegal activities involving non-consenting individuals. No one's backing that up. I'm talking about good ol' American (Japanese? Russian? German? Whatever floats your boat) porn, that almost everyone has looked at at some point or another, if not several times a week... or day.. or in an alternate window while you're reading this very post.
Both hands on the keyboard, buddy. I'm trying to tell you something, here.
Okay. Fine. Finish and come back after you've washed your hands.
Regarding porn..
For starters, you probably watch it. Statistical data is hard to count on because one group or another is constantly tweaking numbers up or down to try and make a point, but let's just say that the majority of reports about adult pornography use on the internet indicate that a whole fuck of a lot of everyone is watching, viewing, or reading some porn at any given time of the day or night. If one were to try and draw some sort of "average score" out of these extremely varied reports on internet pornography usage, it probably boils down to somewhere around 52% of men and 50% of women who at least admitted to it. Obviously, these numbers don't even begin to account for people who look at it and don't want to tell anyone, or who look at "specialty" porn designed to satisfy fetishes that are based on objects or ideas that most people would never identify with the term "sexy". Many people are sexually excited by the damndest, and quite frankly, most harmless things. I for one don't think I have any business whatsoever getting my panties in a wad over whether someone is attracted or excited by things like stuffed animals, trees, or bugs. I am in no way required to participate in anyone else's turn-on, if asked, I can say no.. so how is it any of my concern if my neighbor gets a semi because he thinks the myrtle tree in my yard is hot as hell. Good for him. At least someone is noticing my tree and NOT how long it's been since I cut the grass beneath it. What do I care? If everyone is obeying the law, then he's in his house getting his jollies from that myrtle and its sexy, bark-free body, and he's not on my lawn humping it. Everyone's happy.
If you insist that you don't partake of the massive erotic pornucopia online, well what the hell ever, okay? I'm just going to be nice about it and nod, but don't push it. Porn use is so prevalent among adults that as much as you want to get a bee in your butt (fetish?) about it, probably half of your knitting club does things with their needles that would make you not only cross your legs but strap them together with leather belts. Problem being, this might only turn them on MORE. The real point is that there's NO point getting upset about it. Porn is everywhere and it's been here since our ancestors figured out they could use Saber-Toothed Cat poo like crayons on their cave walls, and that an extra stick limb on a stick figure could represent a penis.
Pornography is no longer the sad business of taking starry-eyed would be actresses and making depraved whores out of them, if it ever really was. Adult film stars see themselves as just that, "stars", not victims or objects of pity. Adult entertainment is big freaking business, and as such, working standards have improved if for no other reason than to keep everyone's asses covered on a legal front. The porn industry creates jobs, and is well-recognized as the primary driving force behind many of the technological developments that have come to benefit both businesses and consumers alike. Internet technology like credit-card processing and verification, website membership security, encryption, video technology, and file-optimization have all been developed more rapidly, competitively, and economically as a means to buy and sell adult content online.
There are a few other things that can be said, specifically about people who actually work in front of the cameras in the adult entertainment industry. The one thing that pornography professionals have done differently than most of us is that they've demonstrated that they've got 'nads enough to work in an industry that, although considered taboo, is actually STILL THRIVING in our otherwise depressed economy. I believe it's also worth mentioning that adult film actresses and models are working in a field that, by the efforts and intentions of society's effort to promote women's sexual liberty, they really ought to be given a bit more respect for. I don't mean that we should be placing banners up everywhere we go, featuring this week's DVDA princess, but considering how many people are actually watching all of this porn, how is it fair to act like these people are doing something subversive and terrible?
Why is it that when sexual acts are filmed, we talk about the individuals engaged in that act as though they should be ashamed of it? How is it any different than what the majority of single adults get drunk and do any given weekend, other than that the adult film industry is more likely to enforce the use of condoms and STD/STI testing before adults engage in sexual intercourse? Sometimes, in an effort to promote feminism, porn actresses will be discussed as though they are brainwashed, patriarchy-indoctrinated "victims" which in itself is degrading, not uplifting, to these women. How is it that violent, gory crime dramas are winning awards, but the act of two (or more?) adults doing something together that makes them feel freaking AWESOME is considered a cause of detriment to society? Sasha Gray, for example, is a beautiful young woman who has recently published a book (adult in nature, but intellectual and artistic) and is proud of her work, as she has every right to be. How is it anyone's place to tell her she shouldn't be? She's achieved a great deal of success in her former career, and is currently expanding into new territory. How is it fair that we shower women like Kim Kardashian with press, attention, and fan-worship for doing, well.. nothing without her mom's direction and her dad's money, yet we take the first opportunity we can to piss on an adult film actress who took an opportunity to do something nice and READ to little kids?
There are certainly many varieties of adult entertainment that are presented with elements of violence, and these cater to specific fetishes. Maybe it's true that much of available pornographic material promotes illusory, airbrushed, unrealistic images of women and men. It's part of the fantasy, and anyone who's had sex more than twice can easily understand that fantasy and reality are two very different things. Any information, be it text or image, that is adult in nature can be confusing to children.. this is very true. The rest of the world is not supposed to raise your children or moderate its existence in case your children see. As a parent, it's your job to explain aspects of life to your kids, often as they come up.
It's also a matter of picking your battles at an age-appropriate time for your own child.
In the case of Sasha Gray, there's no reason that any child she read to needs to know anything about her past, and should it come up, a simple "she made movies that are only for adults" would suffice for a child within that age-range. Making a big huge fucking deal out of it is only going to make the situation utterly fascinating to a child, who will then explore the issue that they thought NOTHING about before it garnered such a reaction out of their parents.
The real "problem" is that Sasha Gray doesn't feel bad about herself, her choices, or what she's done. If she seemed ashamed of her sexuality, or a victim of the porn industry, it might make it easier for people to accept her. When pressed to discuss a hypothetical situation that would be completely identical to hers, a lot of people would disagree with condemning her for reading to those children. Our society, with its seemingly indelible stain of puritanism, still has quite a lot to learn. Maybe even from a porn star.
The Feminine Context
Saturday, November 12, 2011
By Request Of Readers - The Feminine Context for Kindle!
Yes, I was asked to do this. I figure, what the hell? Might reach some pissy broads like myself who are extra pissy because they're short on time to access the internet.
Enjoy, Kindlers!
Friday, November 11, 2011
"Not Really" Is Still "No". One Man's Introspective Article
Anyone who has read this blog can easily detect my feminism within a few posts. It's not something I hide, I don't consider "feminism" a bad word, and I don't use feminism as a way to assault men. As a feminist, I tend to worry less about what men are doing, and find myself most often taking offense at the behaviors of other women who want to reap the rewards of feminism while abandoning the personal responsibility of earning them.
That being said, I'm not a mysogynist. Sexual politics within any culture are complex by nature, built upon historical, religious, economical, and other factors. To unravel an issue, means that one must take the time to untie all of the good intentions and practical measures that somehow developed into a likely unintentional problem. With the efforts of many individuals on different ends of the discussion, there can be some understanding and resolution.
This is why I ADORE you, Hugo Schwyzer.
His bio, from his website:
"Hugo Schwyzer is an American author, speaker and professor of history and gender studies at Pasadena City College. He presents workshops on body image, sexual harassment, rape prevention, and the “myth of male weakness.” He is also a frequent guest on nationally syndicated radio programs and has appeared on CNN and CTV (Canada) as an expert on body image, sexuality and gender justice."
I came across one of Mr. Schwyzer's articles today, and simply HAD to share it..
From "Accidental rape. I knew I hadn't committed a crime but..."
"Most “good guys” take a woman’s firm “No!” for an answer. (Those who don’t are best left to the ministrations of our criminal justice system.) But lots of men are like the guy I was at 19—assuming that while “no means no” anything short of a firm “no” is either a “yes” or a “keep at it, boy, because you just might get a ‘yes’ soon.” Call it male sexual legalism, the first rule of which is “All that is not expressly prohibited is assumed to be permitted.” That legalism can turn many men into accidental rapists"
We need more of this guy, and less of this guy..
The Feminine Context
That being said, I'm not a mysogynist. Sexual politics within any culture are complex by nature, built upon historical, religious, economical, and other factors. To unravel an issue, means that one must take the time to untie all of the good intentions and practical measures that somehow developed into a likely unintentional problem. With the efforts of many individuals on different ends of the discussion, there can be some understanding and resolution.
This is why I ADORE you, Hugo Schwyzer.
His bio, from his website:
"Hugo Schwyzer is an American author, speaker and professor of history and gender studies at Pasadena City College. He presents workshops on body image, sexual harassment, rape prevention, and the “myth of male weakness.” He is also a frequent guest on nationally syndicated radio programs and has appeared on CNN and CTV (Canada) as an expert on body image, sexuality and gender justice."
I came across one of Mr. Schwyzer's articles today, and simply HAD to share it..
From "Accidental rape. I knew I hadn't committed a crime but..."
"Most “good guys” take a woman’s firm “No!” for an answer. (Those who don’t are best left to the ministrations of our criminal justice system.) But lots of men are like the guy I was at 19—assuming that while “no means no” anything short of a firm “no” is either a “yes” or a “keep at it, boy, because you just might get a ‘yes’ soon.” Call it male sexual legalism, the first rule of which is “All that is not expressly prohibited is assumed to be permitted.” That legalism can turn many men into accidental rapists"
We need more of this guy, and less of this guy..
The Feminine Context
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Rick Perry 's Hilarious Episode Of Cranial Flatulence
Direct link to video HERE
At the start of this clip, Perry drawls on about how "we've got to have a PLAN". Yes! Watch as he asserts himself in "action mode", declaring that there are THREE agencies he would do away with immediately as President.
If only he could remember which three they are..
Ron Paul's actually happy, for once, to be standing next to him. In case voters feared that senility might accompany Paul's age, "HEY, take a look at this guy here!".
BONUS: Herman Cain and Mitt Romney struggling to avoid schoolgirl-style giggle fits
The Feminine Context
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Saga Of The Sodden Stay-At-Home Moms
This is an actual facebook conversation, saved, names and identities removed. These are women whose "job" within the structure of their family is to stay home and care for their children. I seriously doubt their husbands get to drink at THEIR jobs.
I am a stay at home mother with about a billion other irons in the fire from working online, and somehow, it never occurs to me to get trashed while my child is under my care. I posted a bit about this phenomena HERE and HERE, and every time I think I was being unreasonable, I see something else that makes my stomach turn.
I hate to think of what these women would have to say about babysitters or teachers or childcare workers who drank "socially" or to "relax" while at their jobs. So what makes it different when the drinking is done by mom at home? Why is it "cute" because they're saying "glass of wine"? What if they said "Jack& Coke" or "Jello Shots"? It's the same thing except the public idea is that jello shots are stronger, so more caution might be taken when it came to pounding em down. I sincerely doubt anyone would find it remotely classy that women who don't work and bring in an income for the family are watching their kids hammered on whiskey or vodka, but somehow when it's wine, it's suburban chic?
Are we actually lamenting the fact that no one can get away with popping Valium like its candy? While caring for children?
The Feminine Context
I am a stay at home mother with about a billion other irons in the fire from working online, and somehow, it never occurs to me to get trashed while my child is under my care. I posted a bit about this phenomena HERE and HERE, and every time I think I was being unreasonable, I see something else that makes my stomach turn.
I hate to think of what these women would have to say about babysitters or teachers or childcare workers who drank "socially" or to "relax" while at their jobs. So what makes it different when the drinking is done by mom at home? Why is it "cute" because they're saying "glass of wine"? What if they said "Jack& Coke" or "Jello Shots"? It's the same thing except the public idea is that jello shots are stronger, so more caution might be taken when it came to pounding em down. I sincerely doubt anyone would find it remotely classy that women who don't work and bring in an income for the family are watching their kids hammered on whiskey or vodka, but somehow when it's wine, it's suburban chic?
The Feminine Context
Monday, November 7, 2011
Parents Generation v. Current Generation
Borrowed from the FABULOUS TequilaxMockingbird, the "Will" to my "Grace", who got it from God knows where.. hilarious in how tragically accurate it is..
The Feminine Context
The Feminine Context
Sunday, November 6, 2011
God Save The Teens: An Intervention
This is an actual Facebook-comment conversation I had with my niece the other night. It is at times like this that I'm grateful for the long, lonely, isolated adolescence I experienced as a home-schooled student. At least I never had the opportunity to pick up dumbass habits like this.
Names and identifying information removed. Kids, if no one's slapped you for abusing the English language like this, please do what's right and slap the holy shit out of YOURSELF.
The Feminine Context
Names and identifying information removed. Kids, if no one's slapped you for abusing the English language like this, please do what's right and slap the holy shit out of YOURSELF.
The Feminine Context
More Questionable And Hilarious Products As Reviewed By TFC
For the most part, I really don't like to go shopping. To hell with crowds and overhead lighting. Most of my problem with shopping is that paying a store's label price really eats away at some portion of my penny-pinching, price-comparing soul. Besides, shopping offline limits one to a PG-rated experience, bland and devoid of the rich (and often ridiculous) wide-open internet marketplace. Only that kind of "free market" could allow for products like this..
The Baggy Winecoat
It's Sex and the City, bitches! Now, available everywhere you can take a purse and a morally-casual attitude towards your increasing alcohol dependency, which would be.. well, everywhere with THIS handy and stylish bag. We all know that closet alcoholism is coming back in style (also mirrored here at OpenSalon), especially among the suburban soccer mom set. Go all Martha Stewart on this swag by taking the label off one of your fancy purses and affixing it to this lovely wine-in-a-box tote, adding class and sophistication to your new wine-swilling accessory! For extra points, make sure the purse that you rip the label off of is one of those that costs the equivalent of the average American's monthly housing payment. If it's not EXCESS, it's not SUCCESS! Sure, one of those heifers from the PTA is bound to point out that it's not Prada, but after a refill or two into those seemingly innocuous Dixie-cups, she won't give a damn anymore and neither will you.
PS: Some of my gay male and drag queen friends are looking at this item right now thinking "OMG, this is WONDERFUL" and despite my heavily-laden sarcasm, are ordering one right this very minute. One in particular has probably got three or four variations of something like this bag AND YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE, MISTER. For you, I've found something entirely more fabulous. See below.
PS: Some of my gay male and drag queen friends are looking at this item right now thinking "OMG, this is WONDERFUL" and despite my heavily-laden sarcasm, are ordering one right this very minute. One in particular has probably got three or four variations of something like this bag AND YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE, MISTER. For you, I've found something entirely more fabulous. See below.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arm-Shapers
Okay, so everyone has a few baggy places they'd like to tighten up, after all.. everyone has this idea that they want to be lean and slim and .. what the holy hell ?
Padded Butt Enhancing Panties
... and the winner for best product to ensure lifelong emotional scarring when found in mom's laundry.. ASS-PILLOW PANTIES! Remember all of those helpful, hurtful, degrading dieting and fitness tips, ladies? The ones mom shared out of maternal concern, sharp and cutting, letting you know that the source of life's happiness is found only in the reduction of your derriere? ALL LIES!!! LIES, I TELL YOU! The old broad was coveting your bountifulness the entire time!!! She was trying to bring you down! Down to her assless level! Apparently, curves actually ARE where it's at! Unless you have them in the wrong places, I suppose. Too much curvature in those places requires management and a barrier method, such as..
You know how you avoid unwanted toe? It's not in buying a prosthetic "Barbie Crotch" (as xojane.com so lovingly put it). It's really simple. Quit trying to shove your size 16 ass into those size 6 pants. Remember, your bubble-butt is obviously a desirable physical characteristic if there are actually "shapewear" products ugly as sin that are designed to try and mimic it. I'd say to embrace your big ass, except people's spines don't actually twist in such a way that its physiologically possible. It occurs to me, that the combined effort of all of this "shapewear" (arm shapers, butt/hip pads, and vulva-flattening devices of your choice) could easily result in a new female form that looks something like this:
Sexy, huh?
There are plenty of unnatural and disturbing ways to alter your body, and some of them are pretty interesting..
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Betty Beauty Pubic Hair Dye
Jesus H. Christ... Rome is burning and we're worried about how well the carpet matches the drapes?
The best part is the actual product description:
(I suppose this is the "consumer-friendly" way of telling you that it won't burn your pubes off)
Natural looking.
(Note: This is the product description for a bottle of ULTRA-VIOLET colored pubic hair dye)
Covers gray.
(Just about as well as those other purple and blue shades that Gramma uses on her HEAD)
Lasts about four-five weeks.
(Which is about four to four and a half weeks longer than it takes for the average person to come off of a bender and wonder what the fuck possessed them to dye their pubes freakin' purple)
No drip - no mess formula.
(God, if only vaginas came with that sort of user assurance..)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, for something completely harmless and adorable.. take a look at THIS cute little guy!
But it's not. It's a stuffed toy made in the likeness of a molecular view of HPV. It comes with a tag that bears an actual molecular image of the virus, and a brief description. It's marketed as an educational toy. The one below is a plush-toy representation of chlamydia.
Who knew chlamydia had such cute little buggy eyes?? Immediately following Chlamydia is HIV, a serious looking little microbe who's donning a sporty and socially-conscious red awareness ribbon.
I know I'm a sick bitch and all, but somehow I kind of like the plushie microbes. Huzzah for internet shopping and the assurance that I don't have to stand in line at a register while people judge me by my bizarre purchases. haha.
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Occupy Humanity: Can Empathy Be Saved?
Like most Americans these days, I have worked a variety of jobs over the years. Somehow I have managed to maintain a common thread of occupational skills between jobs, because almost all of the positions I've held have been associated with caregiving. Each new employer could look back on my resume and see that I had been charged with the responsibility of caring for living beings that whose very survival depended on me in one way or another. Whether I cared for children, older adults, disabled persons, or animals, the rules are pretty much the same.
No matter who or what you are responsible for, you must treat them with respect and attempt to maintain the dignity and comfort of that individual. I don't care if you're caring for a sick, aggressive pitbull, or a sick, aggressive older man with dementia; you keep BOTH your prejudice AND "values" the hell out of the room and treat either scenario with the same amount of respect and concern. If you think you can treat either the dog or the man with less respect than the other, then you obviously have no business caring for the one who (due to your bias) receives less of your respect. When it comes to caring for that other living person, their rights are up there nearer to the ceiling, whereas yours are somewhere down below the sewer lines.
That's not an exaggeration or veiled complaint. It has to be that way. Placing the utmost emphasis on the needs of the being who is dependent on you is the only way to ensure that you meet those needs appropriately. Working within this structure of "them before us" prevents neglect, and oddly enough, high turnover of caregiver employees. If you can complete the tasks necessary for your job, do them correctly, and adhere to the standards expected from someone in your particular position, it's a lot easier to "leave it at work" and feel good about what you've done. Those who can achieve some level of "job satisfaction" are a lot more likely to remain in their line of work.
Certain things really came into focus for me when I became certified as a nurse aide. I decided that I eventually wanted to become a registered nurse. Having researched the field of nursing, I became aware that in a hospital or nursing home, nurse aides perform basic nursing tasks under the direction of registered nurses. RNs have more education and authority than nurse aides, and are paid better because of it. It makes no sense from a financial standpoint to pay for a floor's worth of RNs when you can pay a few of them to supervise a team of aides who are trained for basic nursing tasks. I got that part. What I didn't understand is how anyone thought they could be a good supervisor when they'd never done the actual job of the person below them. Thus, I decided to learn the "grunt work" and become a certified aide. I figured if I could get through physically challenging part of nursing, I could get through the academic parts a lot easier, PLUS I'd be a much more effective supervisory nurse than one who'd never had to work as an aide.
I realize now that I had identified a need to develop empathy.
At the time, I just figured it would be in my best interest to be prepared, and that the discipline of learning the job that "real nurses" didn't want to do could only help me in my studies later on. In retrospect, I think there was some part of me that wasn't quite "ripe" yet, and even then, young and stupid, I knew it. I was trying to develop a part of me that could extend the necessity of my career beyond simply meeting my own needs. An ever nagging, "pragmatic" part of me kept whispering in the background, "This is a waste of time. You're practically a straight-a student and you're dicking around with this diploma when you could be putting time into a degree". The "pragmatic" voices outside of my head, namely two friends who were (respectively) a dentist and a doctor, were both pretty busy calling me a fool for not pursuing a degree that would lead me to medical school. They treated my decision to become a nurse like a mental illness, or some sort of self-destructive habit. Upon finding out that I had chosen to first become a nurse aide and not even a full nurse, they began avoiding me whenever possible. My dad, who I'm sure wanted nothing but the best for me, wanted me to do something with my mad computer skills, but the idea of sitting on my ass working in an office (and the few times I had done so) made me sick. Sometimes I wonder if he didn't get some sort of 1980's power-suit idea in his head, and likened that and the presumably accompanying business/marketing/information technology degree to "success". In short, the thought of me changing bedpans seemed to make him feel like I was pursuing a diploma program as a scullery-maid, or worse, scullery-maid trainee. He thought it was "beneath" my capabilities, which didn't exactly make me feel great about my chosen career when things were tough. I took a little bittersweet solace in the fact that almost every one of my friends who had gotten degrees in those aforementioned fields had ended up working jobs in coffee houses or in offices that I, without a degree of that kind, could easily talk my way into. Even though I felt bad for my friends, whose own dads had clearly won the day, at least I knew I'd have a job eventually taking CARE of their dads.
I think it's kind of funny, in a dry sort of way, to recall that all the disapproving people in my life were politically conservative. I'll get back to that in a moment, though.
During the course of my later work in elder care, I realized that by putting my opinions and feelings on hold while I was on duty, I was actually able to not only do my job, but thrive in it. I've met a lot of "retired" CNAs who are working in other fields, usually due to their decision that caregiving work was "too depressing" for them. It's not like these women are making any more money than they were as aides, but the idea of being around people who were either actively dying or just irreversibly on their way to death, was more than they could bear. I had been taught a lot in my courses and a few rules still stick out, even after all the time that's passed between then and now. Notably..
1 - Certain things are never to be brought in to your working hours with someone you are taking care of, specifically your germs and bacteria, your negative emotions, your religion (or lack thereof), your political opinions, and details of your personal life.
2 - Certain things are never to be brought out from your working hours with someone you are taking care of, such as their germs and bacteria, their negative emotions, their religion (or lack thereof), their political opinions, and details of their personal life.
3 - Thou shalt never violate, and always remain alert and in timely practice of the laws of the land. It is your place to adhere to them, not bend, alter, or disrespect them. In remaining vigilant in adherence to legal and ethical standards, the client and caregiver shall both be protected.
4 - Lots of things are simply none of your business. No, really, most things are none of your business. That doesn't mean you get to be snippy and make a comment, gesture, or other flippant, passive-aggressive action that indicates your opinion while somewhat satisfying the job requirement that makes this issue none of your business. If you cannot work with someone without making things your business that shouldn't BE your business, you should call your agency, explain YOUR failing, and ask to be assigned elsewhere (if they still want someone like you to work for them).
5 - It IS your business to care enough about the things that are important to your client (religion, politics, family) to listen, learn, and be able to carry on a conversation that addresses THEIR need for camaraderie, NOT YOURS. If it has to be an act, be Oscar-worthy for it.
6 - If you are treated unkindly or with disrespect, you are never to respond in kind. It is your place to avoid those sorts of outbursts. If your client is too hostile and you cannot seem to resolve the issue OR work with it anymore, contact your supervisor for advice or another assignment. Additionally, consider another line of work. Clearly, something about you that you cannot help is too agitating to your client for you to remain caring for them, OR you're not adhering to rule #1, and/or #2.
These rules are probably read as simply "common sense", but when they have to be put into practice, one finds that most people don't have the discipline to follow them. Worse still, most people do not possess the empathy needed to obviate the need for discipline. If you can empathize with others as well as you need to in order to take full care of another living thing, then it shouldn't be so difficult that you NEED strong discipline to adhere to these fairly simple rules. If this empathy is what it takes to look after someone as their caregiver, then it is reasonable to assume that other positions of authority require the same. In fact, these rules could very easily apply to occupations like teacher, policeman, doctor..
.. politician.
It's really starting to concern me as I watch the ability to empathize, a necessary skill for those in a position of authority or as a representative of others, is not only difficult to discover in our "leaders", it is now something that some of us are beginning to treat with derision. The current crop of hopefuls for the GOP nomination are promoting the poorer sides of human nature to such an extent that public displays of it are not only being accepted, they are being celebrated. Public displays like booing our soldiers for asking questions that someone doesn't want to answer, laughing at the idea of someone dying due to lack of medical treatment, and making rape victims legally and permanently responsible for the ramifications of their attackers actions. Since when did our public opinion change from "Oh how awful, we can't let that happen if we can help it" to "serves them right"?
The "53%" rails against those who "don't pay taxes" because they're old and retired or they are literally so poor that they wouldn't survive if they did pay taxes on the mere pittance they make. The "53%" forget sales tax, payroll tax, and property taxes that everyone pays. Tax refunds are NOT "free money". Tax refunds are exactly that, a refund, of money that very poor people had ripped out of their paychecks over the year, causing strain and hardship to the family hanging on tooth and nail for that paycheck. Worse still, the "53%" have been so indoctrinated with hate, fear, and anger directed at their "opposition", they won't even stop and look at the fact that they are essentially fighting for the right to live a way that THEY don't even want to.
Empathy is defined as "the ability to understand and share the feelings of another", which is something that politicians typically make grand attempts to feign, if nothing else. Historically, this has been done because the ability to empathize is typically demonstrated in those people we feel to be the "best" of us. Empathy is the reason your mother knew why you were sad, even when you didn't. It's why she still hugged you and loved you, even when you knowingly broke her rules. Empathy is the reason your friends call, make efforts to comfort, and listen to you cry when they never liked the stupid boyfriend who ended up breaking your heart exactly the way they KNEW he would. Empathy is the reason the best of your friends don't start off with "I told you so".
A massive load of "us against them" is being heaved upon our society, and the core premise is that the dirty, unwashed "them" is stealing undeserved resources from the noble, moral pockets of "us". Through misdirection of fear and anxiety, some (like the" 53%") are blinded to the fact that there's an effort to divide the ACTUAL "us", and apparently it's working. The truth is that there's only about 1% of "them", and they're doing all they can to bleed "us" dry and cast us into a million tiny factions until we don't recognize anyone else as one of "us". Worse still, "they" are claiming to be devout followers of Christianity, which requires empathy and love for others. "They" profess faith in an effort to make themselves appear moral, ethical, and inarguable. Real "faith" dictates that charity, tolerance, love, and concern for others is what makes you a morally upright human in the eyes of your God. Clearly "they" have no faith whatsoever in God, or they would trust that He would do His works and that their micromanagerial efforts here on Earth were not only unnecessary, but possibly an affront to Him.
With a bit of empathy for those that share your humanity, it's not hard to see that most of "us" are all suffering under the same tyranny brought about by just a few of "them".
The Feminine Context
No matter who or what you are responsible for, you must treat them with respect and attempt to maintain the dignity and comfort of that individual. I don't care if you're caring for a sick, aggressive pitbull, or a sick, aggressive older man with dementia; you keep BOTH your prejudice AND "values" the hell out of the room and treat either scenario with the same amount of respect and concern. If you think you can treat either the dog or the man with less respect than the other, then you obviously have no business caring for the one who (due to your bias) receives less of your respect. When it comes to caring for that other living person, their rights are up there nearer to the ceiling, whereas yours are somewhere down below the sewer lines.
That's not an exaggeration or veiled complaint. It has to be that way. Placing the utmost emphasis on the needs of the being who is dependent on you is the only way to ensure that you meet those needs appropriately. Working within this structure of "them before us" prevents neglect, and oddly enough, high turnover of caregiver employees. If you can complete the tasks necessary for your job, do them correctly, and adhere to the standards expected from someone in your particular position, it's a lot easier to "leave it at work" and feel good about what you've done. Those who can achieve some level of "job satisfaction" are a lot more likely to remain in their line of work.
Certain things really came into focus for me when I became certified as a nurse aide. I decided that I eventually wanted to become a registered nurse. Having researched the field of nursing, I became aware that in a hospital or nursing home, nurse aides perform basic nursing tasks under the direction of registered nurses. RNs have more education and authority than nurse aides, and are paid better because of it. It makes no sense from a financial standpoint to pay for a floor's worth of RNs when you can pay a few of them to supervise a team of aides who are trained for basic nursing tasks. I got that part. What I didn't understand is how anyone thought they could be a good supervisor when they'd never done the actual job of the person below them. Thus, I decided to learn the "grunt work" and become a certified aide. I figured if I could get through physically challenging part of nursing, I could get through the academic parts a lot easier, PLUS I'd be a much more effective supervisory nurse than one who'd never had to work as an aide.
I realize now that I had identified a need to develop empathy.
At the time, I just figured it would be in my best interest to be prepared, and that the discipline of learning the job that "real nurses" didn't want to do could only help me in my studies later on. In retrospect, I think there was some part of me that wasn't quite "ripe" yet, and even then, young and stupid, I knew it. I was trying to develop a part of me that could extend the necessity of my career beyond simply meeting my own needs. An ever nagging, "pragmatic" part of me kept whispering in the background, "This is a waste of time. You're practically a straight-a student and you're dicking around with this diploma when you could be putting time into a degree". The "pragmatic" voices outside of my head, namely two friends who were (respectively) a dentist and a doctor, were both pretty busy calling me a fool for not pursuing a degree that would lead me to medical school. They treated my decision to become a nurse like a mental illness, or some sort of self-destructive habit. Upon finding out that I had chosen to first become a nurse aide and not even a full nurse, they began avoiding me whenever possible. My dad, who I'm sure wanted nothing but the best for me, wanted me to do something with my mad computer skills, but the idea of sitting on my ass working in an office (and the few times I had done so) made me sick. Sometimes I wonder if he didn't get some sort of 1980's power-suit idea in his head, and likened that and the presumably accompanying business/marketing/information technology degree to "success". In short, the thought of me changing bedpans seemed to make him feel like I was pursuing a diploma program as a scullery-maid, or worse, scullery-maid trainee. He thought it was "beneath" my capabilities, which didn't exactly make me feel great about my chosen career when things were tough. I took a little bittersweet solace in the fact that almost every one of my friends who had gotten degrees in those aforementioned fields had ended up working jobs in coffee houses or in offices that I, without a degree of that kind, could easily talk my way into. Even though I felt bad for my friends, whose own dads had clearly won the day, at least I knew I'd have a job eventually taking CARE of their dads.
I think it's kind of funny, in a dry sort of way, to recall that all the disapproving people in my life were politically conservative. I'll get back to that in a moment, though.
During the course of my later work in elder care, I realized that by putting my opinions and feelings on hold while I was on duty, I was actually able to not only do my job, but thrive in it. I've met a lot of "retired" CNAs who are working in other fields, usually due to their decision that caregiving work was "too depressing" for them. It's not like these women are making any more money than they were as aides, but the idea of being around people who were either actively dying or just irreversibly on their way to death, was more than they could bear. I had been taught a lot in my courses and a few rules still stick out, even after all the time that's passed between then and now. Notably..
1 - Certain things are never to be brought in to your working hours with someone you are taking care of, specifically your germs and bacteria, your negative emotions, your religion (or lack thereof), your political opinions, and details of your personal life.
2 - Certain things are never to be brought out from your working hours with someone you are taking care of, such as their germs and bacteria, their negative emotions, their religion (or lack thereof), their political opinions, and details of their personal life.
3 - Thou shalt never violate, and always remain alert and in timely practice of the laws of the land. It is your place to adhere to them, not bend, alter, or disrespect them. In remaining vigilant in adherence to legal and ethical standards, the client and caregiver shall both be protected.
4 - Lots of things are simply none of your business. No, really, most things are none of your business. That doesn't mean you get to be snippy and make a comment, gesture, or other flippant, passive-aggressive action that indicates your opinion while somewhat satisfying the job requirement that makes this issue none of your business. If you cannot work with someone without making things your business that shouldn't BE your business, you should call your agency, explain YOUR failing, and ask to be assigned elsewhere (if they still want someone like you to work for them).
5 - It IS your business to care enough about the things that are important to your client (religion, politics, family) to listen, learn, and be able to carry on a conversation that addresses THEIR need for camaraderie, NOT YOURS. If it has to be an act, be Oscar-worthy for it.
6 - If you are treated unkindly or with disrespect, you are never to respond in kind. It is your place to avoid those sorts of outbursts. If your client is too hostile and you cannot seem to resolve the issue OR work with it anymore, contact your supervisor for advice or another assignment. Additionally, consider another line of work. Clearly, something about you that you cannot help is too agitating to your client for you to remain caring for them, OR you're not adhering to rule #1, and/or #2.
These rules are probably read as simply "common sense", but when they have to be put into practice, one finds that most people don't have the discipline to follow them. Worse still, most people do not possess the empathy needed to obviate the need for discipline. If you can empathize with others as well as you need to in order to take full care of another living thing, then it shouldn't be so difficult that you NEED strong discipline to adhere to these fairly simple rules. If this empathy is what it takes to look after someone as their caregiver, then it is reasonable to assume that other positions of authority require the same. In fact, these rules could very easily apply to occupations like teacher, policeman, doctor..
.. politician.
It's really starting to concern me as I watch the ability to empathize, a necessary skill for those in a position of authority or as a representative of others, is not only difficult to discover in our "leaders", it is now something that some of us are beginning to treat with derision. The current crop of hopefuls for the GOP nomination are promoting the poorer sides of human nature to such an extent that public displays of it are not only being accepted, they are being celebrated. Public displays like booing our soldiers for asking questions that someone doesn't want to answer, laughing at the idea of someone dying due to lack of medical treatment, and making rape victims legally and permanently responsible for the ramifications of their attackers actions. Since when did our public opinion change from "Oh how awful, we can't let that happen if we can help it" to "serves them right"?
The "53%" rails against those who "don't pay taxes" because they're old and retired or they are literally so poor that they wouldn't survive if they did pay taxes on the mere pittance they make. The "53%" forget sales tax, payroll tax, and property taxes that everyone pays. Tax refunds are NOT "free money". Tax refunds are exactly that, a refund, of money that very poor people had ripped out of their paychecks over the year, causing strain and hardship to the family hanging on tooth and nail for that paycheck. Worse still, the "53%" have been so indoctrinated with hate, fear, and anger directed at their "opposition", they won't even stop and look at the fact that they are essentially fighting for the right to live a way that THEY don't even want to.
Empathy is defined as "the ability to understand and share the feelings of another", which is something that politicians typically make grand attempts to feign, if nothing else. Historically, this has been done because the ability to empathize is typically demonstrated in those people we feel to be the "best" of us. Empathy is the reason your mother knew why you were sad, even when you didn't. It's why she still hugged you and loved you, even when you knowingly broke her rules. Empathy is the reason your friends call, make efforts to comfort, and listen to you cry when they never liked the stupid boyfriend who ended up breaking your heart exactly the way they KNEW he would. Empathy is the reason the best of your friends don't start off with "I told you so".
A massive load of "us against them" is being heaved upon our society, and the core premise is that the dirty, unwashed "them" is stealing undeserved resources from the noble, moral pockets of "us". Through misdirection of fear and anxiety, some (like the" 53%") are blinded to the fact that there's an effort to divide the ACTUAL "us", and apparently it's working. The truth is that there's only about 1% of "them", and they're doing all they can to bleed "us" dry and cast us into a million tiny factions until we don't recognize anyone else as one of "us". Worse still, "they" are claiming to be devout followers of Christianity, which requires empathy and love for others. "They" profess faith in an effort to make themselves appear moral, ethical, and inarguable. Real "faith" dictates that charity, tolerance, love, and concern for others is what makes you a morally upright human in the eyes of your God. Clearly "they" have no faith whatsoever in God, or they would trust that He would do His works and that their micromanagerial efforts here on Earth were not only unnecessary, but possibly an affront to Him.
With a bit of empathy for those that share your humanity, it's not hard to see that most of "us" are all suffering under the same tyranny brought about by just a few of "them".
The Feminine Context
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Occupy Together: Sad Paper Airplanes Don't Cost Postage
On October 28th, members of the Occupy Wall Street movement marched through Manhattan to the headquarters of many major banks, including Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, Bank Of America, JP Morgan Chase, and Well Fargo. Assembling outside the entrances to these banks, the OWS protesters threw paper airplanes made of folded up letters from members of the "99 percent". These letters had been written to banking executives and published to the website "OccupyTheBoardroom.com".
Now, personally.. I kinda dig the whole OccupyTheBoardroom thing. Here's a description, in their own words.
"Life gets awfully lonely for those at the top. What can we do to let them know someone's thinking of them? Maybe they need some new friends! We've thought of two ways we can help them with that.
Option 1: Pen Pals
Make your voice heard by the Wall Street elites who wrecked the economy and made the rest of us pay. Click on someone below and tell them a story that you think they should listen to. Just got a college degree and nothing to show for it? Just got evicted while your banker gets bonuses? Share your special story with someone who ought to know.
Option 2: Best Friends Forever
If you're feeling even more generous, why not reach out in a more creative way? Click on a banker below, then read the instructions and examples to get inspired. Maybe your banker needs some kind words, or maybe an intervention. Most importantly, use your imagination! The best, funniest, most revelatory interactions win prizes."
Now that's some old-school-meets-new-tech, good vibes, sarcastic American protesting. That warms me to the cockles of my heart. Maybe the sub-cockular area as well. Either way, I freakin' love it.
When you fold that shit up into a paper airplane, tossing it limp-wristed into the air to watch it nosedive onto the sidewalk... well, shit. How do I put this? This paper airplane gig leaves me cold. It kinda puts the "pussy" in "pusillanimous".
I'm sorry. I'm all for peaceful protesting, but the paper airplane thing looked sad and pitiful. It looked like a bunch of little birds dropping dead at the doorstep. On a purely visual level, to me it made the 99-percent look as weak and fragile as those paper airplanes that no one apparently knew how to fold in such a ways as to make them fly. Don't know what I'm talking about? Watch it for yourself by clicking here. Set it to a string quartet composition in a minor key, and it'll be the most depressing eighteen seconds ever filmed.
In what I can only surmise is a direct response to the sad paper airplane display, YouTube user RansackedRoom gives us THIS.
Our clever friend here has devised a lovely form of protest utilizing the junk mail that people receive every day from banking corporations. His suggestion is to take all of the credit card (and other banking product) offers received in the mail, and simply MAIL THEM BACK, using the postage-paid envelope that the banking corporation has so generously enclosed.
Don't stop there! He also recommends that while you add an insert of your own to indicate your support of the Occupy Movement, that you also enclose ALL your excess junk mail. Why? Well to drive up the postage cost to the bank, of course! For extra points, why not add a small piece of wood or roofing shingle? This will not only make the envelope heavy enough to count for extra postage, it will also make the envelope RIGID, which equals to an ADDITIONAL postage cost.
Sorry, but if I want to make an impact with a peaceful protest involving paper, I'd rather send a roofing shingle, an OWS-themed note, and a firm NO THANK YOU written on the offer sent to me by the bank, than to throw some dumbass paper airplane at a door. Besides, this also makes for a "greener" protest. RansackedRoom's method involves recycling materials that you would have only thrown away, and reusing them for a purpose.
Enjoy! I'm going to go start collecting flat, heavy things. Right after I check my mail.
If anyone's interested, RansackedRoom can be found on Twitter by clicking on this link.
The Feminine Context
Now, personally.. I kinda dig the whole OccupyTheBoardroom thing. Here's a description, in their own words.
"Life gets awfully lonely for those at the top. What can we do to let them know someone's thinking of them? Maybe they need some new friends! We've thought of two ways we can help them with that.
Option 1: Pen Pals
Make your voice heard by the Wall Street elites who wrecked the economy and made the rest of us pay. Click on someone below and tell them a story that you think they should listen to. Just got a college degree and nothing to show for it? Just got evicted while your banker gets bonuses? Share your special story with someone who ought to know.
Option 2: Best Friends Forever
If you're feeling even more generous, why not reach out in a more creative way? Click on a banker below, then read the instructions and examples to get inspired. Maybe your banker needs some kind words, or maybe an intervention. Most importantly, use your imagination! The best, funniest, most revelatory interactions win prizes."
Now that's some old-school-meets-new-tech, good vibes, sarcastic American protesting. That warms me to the cockles of my heart. Maybe the sub-cockular area as well. Either way, I freakin' love it.
When you fold that shit up into a paper airplane, tossing it limp-wristed into the air to watch it nosedive onto the sidewalk... well, shit. How do I put this? This paper airplane gig leaves me cold. It kinda puts the "pussy" in "pusillanimous".
I'm sorry. I'm all for peaceful protesting, but the paper airplane thing looked sad and pitiful. It looked like a bunch of little birds dropping dead at the doorstep. On a purely visual level, to me it made the 99-percent look as weak and fragile as those paper airplanes that no one apparently knew how to fold in such a ways as to make them fly. Don't know what I'm talking about? Watch it for yourself by clicking here. Set it to a string quartet composition in a minor key, and it'll be the most depressing eighteen seconds ever filmed.
In what I can only surmise is a direct response to the sad paper airplane display, YouTube user RansackedRoom gives us THIS.
Our clever friend here has devised a lovely form of protest utilizing the junk mail that people receive every day from banking corporations. His suggestion is to take all of the credit card (and other banking product) offers received in the mail, and simply MAIL THEM BACK, using the postage-paid envelope that the banking corporation has so generously enclosed.
Don't stop there! He also recommends that while you add an insert of your own to indicate your support of the Occupy Movement, that you also enclose ALL your excess junk mail. Why? Well to drive up the postage cost to the bank, of course! For extra points, why not add a small piece of wood or roofing shingle? This will not only make the envelope heavy enough to count for extra postage, it will also make the envelope RIGID, which equals to an ADDITIONAL postage cost.
Sorry, but if I want to make an impact with a peaceful protest involving paper, I'd rather send a roofing shingle, an OWS-themed note, and a firm NO THANK YOU written on the offer sent to me by the bank, than to throw some dumbass paper airplane at a door. Besides, this also makes for a "greener" protest. RansackedRoom's method involves recycling materials that you would have only thrown away, and reusing them for a purpose.
Enjoy! I'm going to go start collecting flat, heavy things. Right after I check my mail.
If anyone's interested, RansackedRoom can be found on Twitter by clicking on this link.
The Feminine Context
Friday, October 28, 2011
Topeka, Kansas. America's #1 Bitch-Slapping City
A budget war in Kansas between the city of Topeka and Shawnee County has resulted in city officials making good on a threat they'd issued in an effort to try and get their way. Because Topeka's leaders don't want to get stuck with the bill for arrests, jailing, and prosecution of misdemeanor cases, a law has been repealed and those suspects previously arrested on misdemeanor charges (over half of whom were suspects in domestic violence cases) are being set free without charges.
Many states are committed to jailing individuals who are arrested for domestic violence, and even when they are released they are often let go under "no contact" orders in the interest of protecting victims. A great number, if not most states, do not allow for victims to drop charges, instead taking the authoritative role and pressing charges against the accused as the state itself. This is ALSO done for the protection of the victim.
Domestic violence is a crime of arranged opportunity, for lack of a better description. Violence in these cases is most often precipitated by long periods of abusing the victim in ways that demoralize, isolate, and demean. By way of methods that slowly alter the perception of reality of both the victim and the abuser, an opportunity to control and perpetrate violence toward the victim is afforded to the abuser. In turn, the codependency of the relationship between the abuser and the victim sends BOTH PARTIES spiralling into a dangerous living situation that can result in long-term damage to their emotional and mental well-being, if not a deadly outcome for one or both of them. The most painful yet helpful method of breaking this cycle is to separate the abuser and the abused for some period of time, if not permanently. Unfortunately, the secrecy due to shame and guilt on the part of both parties makes it often NECESSARY that law enforcement intervene.
Often, the abuser has gone so long unchecked by anyone, that they bear very strong opinions and often feel persecuted themselves due to the power-imbalance that has existed in their homes for far too long. An abuser KNOWS their actions are incorrect, and the guilt often causes their reactions to conflict to become MORE excessively violent and paranoid as they develop exaggerated defense mechanisms. The abuser's guilt mounts, and s/he seeks to justify their actions by seeing a threat or insult in almost everything the victim does. The fear of exposure for their mounting misbehavior grows more intense as time goes on, making them, paranoid, jumpy, hyper-aggressive, and the abuser will sometimes turn to drugs or alcohol to cope, leaving them now mentally imbalanced AND inebriated.
The victim of the abused usually begins accepting and tolerating the abuser's behavior out of a place of love and concern. Excuses are made for their loved one's abuse, such as "He's under stress", or when things begin to escalate further, "He's not well. I can't leave someone who's sick or having a problem. If I stick it out, I can help them". Domestic abuse suffered as children translates into a higher tolerance for it in an adult relationship. For example, if your father was abusive, to condemn or judge your partner unworthy for engaging in the same actions your father did, means to some degree that you are also condemning the father that you know, love, and accept. The abuser will shift blame to the victim when he is wrong, just as most people shift blame (when remotely possible) when they are wrong. Before it becomes a physically or sexually violent relationship, the abused person has most often become conditioned by the hostile environment to the extent that they may feel they deserve the abuse or that it's "not that bad". As the abuse escalates, so increases the victims' likelihood to excuse or rationalize it.
This is why law enforcement is SUPPOSED to step in and separate the victim from the abuser. The two parties have become so adept at and codependent in rationalizing horrendous behaviors and a lifestyle that emotionally healthy people would find abnormal and alarming, that they literally need to be forced apart before death or major physical injury occurs (or occurs AGAIN). Both the victim and the abuser are so isolated from healthy relationships, that they will seek to cling to each other AND their unhealthy lifestyle because everything outside of it has become foreign and terrifying.
That's why states and cities have to protect the victim long enough that some mental and emotional clarity can be found, and a healthy decision about the relationship can be reached. This protects not only the victim, but the ABUSER. If the abuser is not stopped, held, and given adequate time to collect him/herself, the anger at being exposed and challenged may often be enough to result in a murder, suicide, or both. Its not uncommon for abused persons to feel wracked with guilt over asking for help and getting their abusers into trouble. Remember, over time, the victim comes to see the abuser as the central figure in their whole world, and maybe the only person they have had to even talk to in a long time. Remove that from someone's life abruptly, and it's going to be like losing a limb.
This might not be a popular opinion, but there is something to be said for protecting the abuser as well as the victim. The person who abuses another is still someone's child, brother, relative, or most likely the much-loved partner of the very person that domestic violence laws are enforced to protect; the victim. There's no EXCUSE for abusing another person, but there should be an expectation that the abuser is not playing with a full deck if they've managed to convince themselves that what they are doing is justifiable. That in mind, this isn't someone you can turn loose, expecting them to make appropriate decisions without any chance to get their heads straight.
Someone who gets caught committing an act of physical injury to someone they live and share a life with needs to be punished for it, certainly. What's the purpose of punishment, though? Are we, as a society, about causing harm for harm, or are our punishments going to be enacted in a more thoughtful way as to try and rectify the problem that eventually warranted punishment? Forcing an accused abuser to spend a night in jail and calm down doesn't hurt them. Sure, it's embarrassing and it can probably make them more angry, but that's what that whole aforementioned "no contact" order is for.. so that the angry person cannot go an exact revenge upon someone who they blame for their embarrassment and anger. It's also to allow that person a chance AWAY from the individual who, in their altered viewpoint, they see as responsible for causing them so much anguish.
It's a win-win to enforce these laws for both parties, abused and abuser, even though at the time that the situation comes to a head and law enforcement has to become involved, everyone (victim included) is going to feel violated, exposed, hurt, and desperate. Sometimes you just have to rip off the bandage if you want a wound to heal, rather than leaving it covered and festering. In most (if not all) states that STATE charges are brought against an accused abuser, pre-trial intervention (PTI) programs are offered for first time offenders. This program requires offenders to plead "no-contest" and agree to random drug screenings, counseling and anger management classes, and some amount of community service. This is offered as an alternative to trial, jail time, and fines. PTI programs, when completed successfully, also allow most offenders an opportunity to get their offense eventually expunged from public record.
But if the state, city, or county can't be bothered to maintain enforcement of laws to properly handle domestic abusers and their victims, who is anyone supposed to call for help? I sincerely doubt that police would let a relative off the hook for enforcing "vigilante justice" (potentially at the barrel-end of a shotgun) to protect a loved one. So where are abused persons in Topeka going to go for help?
PSA:
If you believe that you or a loved one may be suffering in an abusive relationship, take a look at this site for a start.
LoveIsRespect.Org
Many states are committed to jailing individuals who are arrested for domestic violence, and even when they are released they are often let go under "no contact" orders in the interest of protecting victims. A great number, if not most states, do not allow for victims to drop charges, instead taking the authoritative role and pressing charges against the accused as the state itself. This is ALSO done for the protection of the victim.
Domestic violence is a crime of arranged opportunity, for lack of a better description. Violence in these cases is most often precipitated by long periods of abusing the victim in ways that demoralize, isolate, and demean. By way of methods that slowly alter the perception of reality of both the victim and the abuser, an opportunity to control and perpetrate violence toward the victim is afforded to the abuser. In turn, the codependency of the relationship between the abuser and the victim sends BOTH PARTIES spiralling into a dangerous living situation that can result in long-term damage to their emotional and mental well-being, if not a deadly outcome for one or both of them. The most painful yet helpful method of breaking this cycle is to separate the abuser and the abused for some period of time, if not permanently. Unfortunately, the secrecy due to shame and guilt on the part of both parties makes it often NECESSARY that law enforcement intervene.
Often, the abuser has gone so long unchecked by anyone, that they bear very strong opinions and often feel persecuted themselves due to the power-imbalance that has existed in their homes for far too long. An abuser KNOWS their actions are incorrect, and the guilt often causes their reactions to conflict to become MORE excessively violent and paranoid as they develop exaggerated defense mechanisms. The abuser's guilt mounts, and s/he seeks to justify their actions by seeing a threat or insult in almost everything the victim does. The fear of exposure for their mounting misbehavior grows more intense as time goes on, making them, paranoid, jumpy, hyper-aggressive, and the abuser will sometimes turn to drugs or alcohol to cope, leaving them now mentally imbalanced AND inebriated.
The victim of the abused usually begins accepting and tolerating the abuser's behavior out of a place of love and concern. Excuses are made for their loved one's abuse, such as "He's under stress", or when things begin to escalate further, "He's not well. I can't leave someone who's sick or having a problem. If I stick it out, I can help them". Domestic abuse suffered as children translates into a higher tolerance for it in an adult relationship. For example, if your father was abusive, to condemn or judge your partner unworthy for engaging in the same actions your father did, means to some degree that you are also condemning the father that you know, love, and accept. The abuser will shift blame to the victim when he is wrong, just as most people shift blame (when remotely possible) when they are wrong. Before it becomes a physically or sexually violent relationship, the abused person has most often become conditioned by the hostile environment to the extent that they may feel they deserve the abuse or that it's "not that bad". As the abuse escalates, so increases the victims' likelihood to excuse or rationalize it.
This is why law enforcement is SUPPOSED to step in and separate the victim from the abuser. The two parties have become so adept at and codependent in rationalizing horrendous behaviors and a lifestyle that emotionally healthy people would find abnormal and alarming, that they literally need to be forced apart before death or major physical injury occurs (or occurs AGAIN). Both the victim and the abuser are so isolated from healthy relationships, that they will seek to cling to each other AND their unhealthy lifestyle because everything outside of it has become foreign and terrifying.
That's why states and cities have to protect the victim long enough that some mental and emotional clarity can be found, and a healthy decision about the relationship can be reached. This protects not only the victim, but the ABUSER. If the abuser is not stopped, held, and given adequate time to collect him/herself, the anger at being exposed and challenged may often be enough to result in a murder, suicide, or both. Its not uncommon for abused persons to feel wracked with guilt over asking for help and getting their abusers into trouble. Remember, over time, the victim comes to see the abuser as the central figure in their whole world, and maybe the only person they have had to even talk to in a long time. Remove that from someone's life abruptly, and it's going to be like losing a limb.
This might not be a popular opinion, but there is something to be said for protecting the abuser as well as the victim. The person who abuses another is still someone's child, brother, relative, or most likely the much-loved partner of the very person that domestic violence laws are enforced to protect; the victim. There's no EXCUSE for abusing another person, but there should be an expectation that the abuser is not playing with a full deck if they've managed to convince themselves that what they are doing is justifiable. That in mind, this isn't someone you can turn loose, expecting them to make appropriate decisions without any chance to get their heads straight.
Someone who gets caught committing an act of physical injury to someone they live and share a life with needs to be punished for it, certainly. What's the purpose of punishment, though? Are we, as a society, about causing harm for harm, or are our punishments going to be enacted in a more thoughtful way as to try and rectify the problem that eventually warranted punishment? Forcing an accused abuser to spend a night in jail and calm down doesn't hurt them. Sure, it's embarrassing and it can probably make them more angry, but that's what that whole aforementioned "no contact" order is for.. so that the angry person cannot go an exact revenge upon someone who they blame for their embarrassment and anger. It's also to allow that person a chance AWAY from the individual who, in their altered viewpoint, they see as responsible for causing them so much anguish.
It's a win-win to enforce these laws for both parties, abused and abuser, even though at the time that the situation comes to a head and law enforcement has to become involved, everyone (victim included) is going to feel violated, exposed, hurt, and desperate. Sometimes you just have to rip off the bandage if you want a wound to heal, rather than leaving it covered and festering. In most (if not all) states that STATE charges are brought against an accused abuser, pre-trial intervention (PTI) programs are offered for first time offenders. This program requires offenders to plead "no-contest" and agree to random drug screenings, counseling and anger management classes, and some amount of community service. This is offered as an alternative to trial, jail time, and fines. PTI programs, when completed successfully, also allow most offenders an opportunity to get their offense eventually expunged from public record.
But if the state, city, or county can't be bothered to maintain enforcement of laws to properly handle domestic abusers and their victims, who is anyone supposed to call for help? I sincerely doubt that police would let a relative off the hook for enforcing "vigilante justice" (potentially at the barrel-end of a shotgun) to protect a loved one. So where are abused persons in Topeka going to go for help?
PSA:
If you believe that you or a loved one may be suffering in an abusive relationship, take a look at this site for a start.
LoveIsRespect.Org
Thursday, October 27, 2011
According to Seattle Pastor, 100% Of Men Are Gay.
According to Mark Driscoll, a popular Seattle pastor and head of the Mars Hill Ministry, masturbation is an act of homosexuality.
You heard him, guys. You're all totally fucking gay. Every last pud-pulling one of you.
Appletinis and Cosmos for all!!! It's rainin' men! Hallelujah!
Driscoll has apparently decided to kick his anti-porn campaign into high gear with his free new e-book, "Porn-Again Christian: A Frank Discussion on Pornography & Masturbation". While I have to hand it to the guy for being able to come up with a catchy title, he's clearly trying to take advantage of heterosexual men and their "OMFG I'M NOT GAY" knee-jerk reaction in an effort to scare people into supporting his own biblical interpretations. Within this e-book, Driscoll writes:
"...Masturbation can be a form of homosexuality because it is a sexual act that does not involve a woman. If a man were to masturbate while engaged in other forms of sexual intimacy with his wife then he would not be doing so in a homosexual way. However, any man who does so without his wife in the room is bordering on homosexuality activity, particularly if he's watching himself in a mirror and being turned on by his own male body."
According to Driscoll, the only way to whack it straight is in the physical company of your own wife, or by looking at her pictures. He really doesn't touch (ha!) on the idea of women masturbating, so I guess he thinks it doesn't really happen enough to condemn it.
Yeah. This is clearly a worldly and educated man. He'll write a book about the spiritual pitfalls of internet porn, but he's somehow managed to miss all the vibrator ads that come side by side WITH the porn.
Driscoll's known as being hardcore in his old school interpretation of scripture, actively fighting against feminism, premarital sex, and modern-style interpretations of the Bible such as his assertion that in his church Jesus will NOT be viewed as ""a Richard Simmons, hippie, queer Christ... a neutered and limp-wristed popular Sky Fairy of pop culture that . . . would never talk about sin or send anyone to hell."
..but seriously, how effective are your auto-eroticisms going to get with a limp wrist?
You heard him, guys. You're all totally fucking gay. Every last pud-pulling one of you.
Appletinis and Cosmos for all!!! It's rainin' men! Hallelujah!
Driscoll has apparently decided to kick his anti-porn campaign into high gear with his free new e-book, "Porn-Again Christian: A Frank Discussion on Pornography & Masturbation". While I have to hand it to the guy for being able to come up with a catchy title, he's clearly trying to take advantage of heterosexual men and their "OMFG I'M NOT GAY" knee-jerk reaction in an effort to scare people into supporting his own biblical interpretations. Within this e-book, Driscoll writes:
"...Masturbation can be a form of homosexuality because it is a sexual act that does not involve a woman. If a man were to masturbate while engaged in other forms of sexual intimacy with his wife then he would not be doing so in a homosexual way. However, any man who does so without his wife in the room is bordering on homosexuality activity, particularly if he's watching himself in a mirror and being turned on by his own male body."
According to Driscoll, the only way to whack it straight is in the physical company of your own wife, or by looking at her pictures. He really doesn't touch (ha!) on the idea of women masturbating, so I guess he thinks it doesn't really happen enough to condemn it.
Yeah. This is clearly a worldly and educated man. He'll write a book about the spiritual pitfalls of internet porn, but he's somehow managed to miss all the vibrator ads that come side by side WITH the porn.
Driscoll's known as being hardcore in his old school interpretation of scripture, actively fighting against feminism, premarital sex, and modern-style interpretations of the Bible such as his assertion that in his church Jesus will NOT be viewed as ""a Richard Simmons, hippie, queer Christ... a neutered and limp-wristed popular Sky Fairy of pop culture that . . . would never talk about sin or send anyone to hell."
..but seriously, how effective are your auto-eroticisms going to get with a limp wrist?
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Rick Santorum Works His Ass Off To Prove Continuing Obsession With Gay Sex
I don't think there's anyone on Earth more obsessed with gay sex than Rick Santorum.
Every time I think this guy's stopped worrying himself into a tizzy about male homosexual practices, he puckers up over something else. Here he goes again...
From HuffingtonPost.com
"Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum touted his support for anti-sodomy laws and said gay marriage supporters wanted to "drive faith out of the public square" in an interview with controversial preacher Bradlee Dean, founder of You Can Run But You Cannot Hide International, a Christian punk-rock youth ministry based in Minnesota.
Every time I think this guy's stopped worrying himself into a tizzy about male homosexual practices, he puckers up over something else. Here he goes again...
From HuffingtonPost.com
"Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum touted his support for anti-sodomy laws and said gay marriage supporters wanted to "drive faith out of the public square" in an interview with controversial preacher Bradlee Dean, founder of You Can Run But You Cannot Hide International, a Christian punk-rock youth ministry based in Minnesota.
"And I stood up from the very beginning back in 2003 when the Supreme Court was going create a constitutional right to sodomy and said this is wrong we can't do this," said Santorum, according to the Minnesota Independent. "And so I stood up when no one else did and got hammered for it. I stood up and I continue to stand up."
Yes, that's right. He said "hammered". It's pretty scary that Santorum is allying himself with folks like Bradlee Dean. The "You Can Run But You Can't Hide" ministry is known for some pretty fucked up shit..
"Dean himself has made numerous controversial comments about homosexuality, including saying executing homosexuals is moral and alleging that Thomas Jefferson and George Washington wanted to make homosexuality illegal."
... and by the way, I've never met a heterosexual man that I could see being okay with his name being published as effeminately as "Bradlee". Just something to think about..
Sunday, October 23, 2011
Update on Chaz Bono. One Hot Samba!
I think Chaz really came into his own here, and I'm so proud of this guy it made me cry..
Direct link to this video can be found HERE.
This footwork is awesome, the attitude is awesome, and for someone who describes themselves as as a writer and activist, I don't think that any better favor could have been done for transgendered people than to see a healthy minded transgendered man like Chaz go out, have a great time, and do as well as he has.
The secret? Transgendered people are no LONGER a secret. It's common discussion, no great mysteries, and thus.. no big deal.
Kudos, Chaz. Wish I could cut a rug with ya!
Direct link to this video can be found HERE.
This footwork is awesome, the attitude is awesome, and for someone who describes themselves as as a writer and activist, I don't think that any better favor could have been done for transgendered people than to see a healthy minded transgendered man like Chaz go out, have a great time, and do as well as he has.
The secret? Transgendered people are no LONGER a secret. It's common discussion, no great mysteries, and thus.. no big deal.
Kudos, Chaz. Wish I could cut a rug with ya!
Surrounded by Total Weaners And Staying A-Breast Of Research
No, I didn't misspell anything. I am surrounded by weaners. Big, obnoxious weaners who are constantly trying to pummel me with their weaniness.
I don't go all breastfeeding-nazi on here, and that's for a reason. As strongly as I feel about the subject, and I DO feel strongly about it, there are PLENTY of websites and blogs available for for breastfeeding mothers and bottle-feeding mothers to duke it out and sound like bitches together. I'm not going to participate, thanks. This bitch has nothing to prove to the rest of you bitches, and that's half the point of this post.
There are so many blogs and websites devoted to the daily minutia of motherhood, that it leaves me certain of a future field of psychotherapy that will deal exclusively with the tortured offspring of the web's former UberMommies, who have all been busy fighting for Alpha-Bitch rank while their kids sat in playpens and watched them type... WITH INDIGNATION. If possible, I'd like to avoid doing any more emotional damage to my daughter than the standard amount that she's sure to accuse me of by the time she hits sixteen and obnoxious. She's already slated to hit me with a full onslaught of teen angst when my powers of reason and self-composure will be weakened by menopause. Why should I leave my future opponent a time-capsule cache of surplus ammunition? That's like leaving the Terminator a "hope chest" full of weapons and emergency contact numbers for Sarah Conner. It's just asking for fucking problems..
This is probably not going to be the only post that I ever make on the subject of breastfeeding. I don't think it's wise of me to say "only once, and never again", because that's a rule I'm sure to break at some point. Be assured though, this isn't going to be a major trend on this blog.
So.. why does everyone seem to think they have a right to an opinion when it comes to me breastfeeding my child?
When my daughter was born and I committed to breastfeeding her, women I knew who didn't breastfeed their own children became noticeably uncomfortable. I started getting these bits of advice and "support" from other stay-at-home mothers like ..
"Well, even if you can only do it for (two weeks/a month/three months) that's good. That's enough"
"I guess it helps. They always say breast is best. It's just impractical."
"Oh dear, that's going to be exhausting"
"Don't force yourself to do it, if you can't, it's fine"
"If you're going to breastfeed, start pumping NOW. When you get tired of it, you can put her on a bottle and she can have breast milk longer."
and my favorite..
"Why are you letting her father be so LAZY? Pump that milk and make him feed her when he's home. Feeding just from the breast is too hard on anyone, and you might be risking her dad's ability to bond with her."
So by naturally feeding my child, without artificial food or implements (like bottles), I was apparently running headlong into a situation that undoubtedly wouldn't work out on a long-term basis, and I was denying her father some important bonding experience with his child. What a silly, impractical, selfish bitch I am!
What a load of bullshit.
These were stay-at-home mothers. The title alone can only suggest that the woman's primary function is to care for her child, herself, at home. I had determined that I, too, would stay home and thus, have the time and availability to my child so that I could feed her exclusively from the breast.
So what's the problem? Why is there an assumption that it's only human to want to pack it in on the nursing and toss the kid a bottle? With breastfeeding, I don't have to clean bottles, worry about the formula being warm, or if she's allergic to it. Not to mention the fact that there isn't a credible doctor ANYWHERE that's going to tell you that bottle-feeding is best or ideal. I'm willing to do it, so where is the problem?
Once that group realized that their lukewarm support (or negative opinion) of my breastfeeding wasn't affecting me in any way, the same crowd pretty much shut the hell up. Friends of mine who had primarily or wholly breastfed their children patted me on the back with a "good for you for sticking with it". However, without fail at every three month mark in my child's first year, someone invariably asked "oh my, are you still breastfeeding her?", as though they were surprised that I hadn't given up all that idealistic nonsense by now.
So here we are and my daughter is one year old, just popped out her first tooth (working on five more), no allergies, ear infections, etc, and her doctor says she is "perfect". Suddenly, even some of those who supported my breastfeeding are starting to assume I'm weaning her off the breast, some a little taken aback when I tell them I plan to nurse her for another year unless she gives it up herself before then.
It's really simple. I don't do things for her based on what's "comfortable" for me. I make decisions on how I care for her based on my research and careful consideration of all variables involved. I do things for my child based on what's best for her.
That's called being a parent. It's not about me. It's about her. I'm a mother, and my baby is helpless and incapable of making any decisions or interventions regarding her own care. If I'm not her advocate and I don't put her first, no one else is going to do it.
Sure, breastfeeding can be really difficult, especially at first. Right after delivery, the entire lower half of your body (and I do mean the ENTIRE lower half) feels like someone dragged it behind a truck for about five miles. That's enough. When you breastfeed, the upper half starts to experience pain that really doesn't seem to make any sense. Before you have the baby, its easy enough to imagine that your nipples are going to be sore, but it's more than that. I remember hurting in places around the back of my rib cage, thinking, "what the FUCK? why would it hurt back THERE of all places?". Then, I did the damn research.
There's really no excuse to not know how your body works, considering that the internet makes it possible for you to learn these things without even getting out of your pajamas. Mammary glands and associated/connected glands were being used for the first time ever, at high volume and QUICKLY. You're damn right that shit is going to hurt. Why didn't the nurse tell me THAT at the hospital? Why did I hear "if it hurts, you're doing it wrong" instead of "hey, just a heads up, your armpits, breasts, rib cage, and shoulders are probably going to be pretty sore for the first month, but it goes away if you stick with it"?
It is a big commitment, as well. Solely breastfeeding means that no one can feed the baby but you, AND that the baby will eat about twice as often as a formula-fed baby, so that means you ain't goin' NOWHERE without her. It also meant that my girl never went to the pediatrician for anything but routine checkups and shots. As far as my physical discomfort was concerned, It DID get better and in the long run, breastfeeding my child cost less money, time, and effort than bottle feeding would have.
So why, when the World Health Organization recommends that babies breastfeed for two years, are my previously supportive peers getting weirded out that I choose to keep feeding my baby in the most medically-sound way possible? I'm the one with the chubby little darling using my breasts as a jungle gym, how is it anyone ELSE'S business to make my commitment to my child's health and well-being any more of a challenge than it already is?
My partner said, "Oh, don't worry about them..". I really don't WORRY about what people say and think when I make parenting decisions. I tend not to worry much about what people think or if they like me, but I do get irritated at the selfishness of insensitivity and by people's negative intentions. In short, if you see someone breaking their ass to be a good parent, what with all the people out there who pop out kids like their candy and don't even seem to LIKE their children (let alone concern themselves with their development), what in the hell would possess you to make a negative comment on someones parenting of a well-developed, healthy child who (under this same parents' care) is doing JUST GREAT?
I think the short answer is that sometimes, people need to shut the fuck up and mind their own business and their own kids. Here's a wild idea.. maybe bother to educate yourself so that you can make independent decisions for yourself and your own children, based on facts and data and not on what your mom (who you've been pissed off at since you were sixteen years old an obnoxious) said you should do. It's not that you can't take advice from people, but make sure it's good advice, especially before you go cramming it down everyone else's throat.
Yeah. This was a rant. Deal with it.
I need to go nurse my baby now, so before I go.. here are words and links from the World Health Organization that provide information about the benefits of breastfeeding. It IS the best for babies.
------------------------------------------------------------
Acceptable medical reasons for use of breast-milk substitutes
Authors:
World Health Organization
I don't go all breastfeeding-nazi on here, and that's for a reason. As strongly as I feel about the subject, and I DO feel strongly about it, there are PLENTY of websites and blogs available for for breastfeeding mothers and bottle-feeding mothers to duke it out and sound like bitches together. I'm not going to participate, thanks. This bitch has nothing to prove to the rest of you bitches, and that's half the point of this post.
There are so many blogs and websites devoted to the daily minutia of motherhood, that it leaves me certain of a future field of psychotherapy that will deal exclusively with the tortured offspring of the web's former UberMommies, who have all been busy fighting for Alpha-Bitch rank while their kids sat in playpens and watched them type... WITH INDIGNATION. If possible, I'd like to avoid doing any more emotional damage to my daughter than the standard amount that she's sure to accuse me of by the time she hits sixteen and obnoxious. She's already slated to hit me with a full onslaught of teen angst when my powers of reason and self-composure will be weakened by menopause. Why should I leave my future opponent a time-capsule cache of surplus ammunition? That's like leaving the Terminator a "hope chest" full of weapons and emergency contact numbers for Sarah Conner. It's just asking for fucking problems..
This is probably not going to be the only post that I ever make on the subject of breastfeeding. I don't think it's wise of me to say "only once, and never again", because that's a rule I'm sure to break at some point. Be assured though, this isn't going to be a major trend on this blog.
So.. why does everyone seem to think they have a right to an opinion when it comes to me breastfeeding my child?
When my daughter was born and I committed to breastfeeding her, women I knew who didn't breastfeed their own children became noticeably uncomfortable. I started getting these bits of advice and "support" from other stay-at-home mothers like ..
"Well, even if you can only do it for (two weeks/a month/three months) that's good. That's enough"
"I guess it helps. They always say breast is best. It's just impractical."
"Oh dear, that's going to be exhausting"
"Don't force yourself to do it, if you can't, it's fine"
"If you're going to breastfeed, start pumping NOW. When you get tired of it, you can put her on a bottle and she can have breast milk longer."
and my favorite..
"Why are you letting her father be so LAZY? Pump that milk and make him feed her when he's home. Feeding just from the breast is too hard on anyone, and you might be risking her dad's ability to bond with her."
So by naturally feeding my child, without artificial food or implements (like bottles), I was apparently running headlong into a situation that undoubtedly wouldn't work out on a long-term basis, and I was denying her father some important bonding experience with his child. What a silly, impractical, selfish bitch I am!
What a load of bullshit.
These were stay-at-home mothers. The title alone can only suggest that the woman's primary function is to care for her child, herself, at home. I had determined that I, too, would stay home and thus, have the time and availability to my child so that I could feed her exclusively from the breast.
So what's the problem? Why is there an assumption that it's only human to want to pack it in on the nursing and toss the kid a bottle? With breastfeeding, I don't have to clean bottles, worry about the formula being warm, or if she's allergic to it. Not to mention the fact that there isn't a credible doctor ANYWHERE that's going to tell you that bottle-feeding is best or ideal. I'm willing to do it, so where is the problem?
Once that group realized that their lukewarm support (or negative opinion) of my breastfeeding wasn't affecting me in any way, the same crowd pretty much shut the hell up. Friends of mine who had primarily or wholly breastfed their children patted me on the back with a "good for you for sticking with it". However, without fail at every three month mark in my child's first year, someone invariably asked "oh my, are you still breastfeeding her?", as though they were surprised that I hadn't given up all that idealistic nonsense by now.
So here we are and my daughter is one year old, just popped out her first tooth (working on five more), no allergies, ear infections, etc, and her doctor says she is "perfect". Suddenly, even some of those who supported my breastfeeding are starting to assume I'm weaning her off the breast, some a little taken aback when I tell them I plan to nurse her for another year unless she gives it up herself before then.
It's really simple. I don't do things for her based on what's "comfortable" for me. I make decisions on how I care for her based on my research and careful consideration of all variables involved. I do things for my child based on what's best for her.
That's called being a parent. It's not about me. It's about her. I'm a mother, and my baby is helpless and incapable of making any decisions or interventions regarding her own care. If I'm not her advocate and I don't put her first, no one else is going to do it.
Sure, breastfeeding can be really difficult, especially at first. Right after delivery, the entire lower half of your body (and I do mean the ENTIRE lower half) feels like someone dragged it behind a truck for about five miles. That's enough. When you breastfeed, the upper half starts to experience pain that really doesn't seem to make any sense. Before you have the baby, its easy enough to imagine that your nipples are going to be sore, but it's more than that. I remember hurting in places around the back of my rib cage, thinking, "what the FUCK? why would it hurt back THERE of all places?". Then, I did the damn research.
There's really no excuse to not know how your body works, considering that the internet makes it possible for you to learn these things without even getting out of your pajamas. Mammary glands and associated/connected glands were being used for the first time ever, at high volume and QUICKLY. You're damn right that shit is going to hurt. Why didn't the nurse tell me THAT at the hospital? Why did I hear "if it hurts, you're doing it wrong" instead of "hey, just a heads up, your armpits, breasts, rib cage, and shoulders are probably going to be pretty sore for the first month, but it goes away if you stick with it"?
It is a big commitment, as well. Solely breastfeeding means that no one can feed the baby but you, AND that the baby will eat about twice as often as a formula-fed baby, so that means you ain't goin' NOWHERE without her. It also meant that my girl never went to the pediatrician for anything but routine checkups and shots. As far as my physical discomfort was concerned, It DID get better and in the long run, breastfeeding my child cost less money, time, and effort than bottle feeding would have.
So why, when the World Health Organization recommends that babies breastfeed for two years, are my previously supportive peers getting weirded out that I choose to keep feeding my baby in the most medically-sound way possible? I'm the one with the chubby little darling using my breasts as a jungle gym, how is it anyone ELSE'S business to make my commitment to my child's health and well-being any more of a challenge than it already is?
My partner said, "Oh, don't worry about them..". I really don't WORRY about what people say and think when I make parenting decisions. I tend not to worry much about what people think or if they like me, but I do get irritated at the selfishness of insensitivity and by people's negative intentions. In short, if you see someone breaking their ass to be a good parent, what with all the people out there who pop out kids like their candy and don't even seem to LIKE their children (let alone concern themselves with their development), what in the hell would possess you to make a negative comment on someones parenting of a well-developed, healthy child who (under this same parents' care) is doing JUST GREAT?
I think the short answer is that sometimes, people need to shut the fuck up and mind their own business and their own kids. Here's a wild idea.. maybe bother to educate yourself so that you can make independent decisions for yourself and your own children, based on facts and data and not on what your mom (who you've been pissed off at since you were sixteen years old an obnoxious) said you should do. It's not that you can't take advice from people, but make sure it's good advice, especially before you go cramming it down everyone else's throat.
Yeah. This was a rant. Deal with it.
I need to go nurse my baby now, so before I go.. here are words and links from the World Health Organization that provide information about the benefits of breastfeeding. It IS the best for babies.
------------------------------------------------------------
WHO recommends
WHO strongly recommends exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of life. At six months, other foods should complement breastfeeding for up to two years or more. In addition:- breastfeeding should begin within an hour of birth;
- breastfeeding should be "on demand", as often as the child wants day and night; and
- bottles or pacifiers should be avoided.
Health benefits for infants
Breast milk is the ideal food for newborns and infants. It gives infants all the nutrients they need for healthy development. It is safe and contains antibodies that help protect infants from common childhood illnesses - such as diarrhoea and pneumonia, the two primary causes of child mortality worldwide. Breast milk is readily available and affordable, which helps to ensure that infants get adequate sustenance.Benefits for mothers
Breastfeeding also benefits mothers. The practice when done exclusively often induces a lack of menstruation, which is a natural (though not fail-safe) method of birth control. It reduces risks of breast and ovarian cancer later in life, helps women return to their pre-pregnancy weight faster, and lowers rates of obesityLong-term benefits for children
Beyond the immediate benefits for children, breastfeeding contributes to a lifetime of good health. Adults who were breastfed as babies often have lower blood pressure and lower cholesterol, as well as lower rates of overweight, obesity and type-2 diabetes. There is evidence that people who were breastfed perform better in intelligence tests.Why not infant formula?
Infant formula does not contain the antibodies found in breast milk and is linked to some risks, such as water-borne diseases that arise from mixing powdered formula with unsafe water (many families lack access to clean water). Malnutrition can result from over-diluting formula to "stretch" supplies. Further, frequent feedings maintain the breast milk supply. If formula is used but becomes unavailable, a return to breastfeeding may not be an option due to diminished breast milk production.HIV and breastfeeding
For HIV-positive mothers, WHO recommends exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months unless replacement feeding is:- acceptable (socially welcome)
- feasible (facilities and help are available to prepare formula)
- affordable (formula can be purchased for six months)
- sustainable (feeding can be sustained for six months)
- safe (formula is prepared with safe water and in hygienic conditions).
Regulating breast-milk substitutes
An international code to regulate the marketing of breast-milk substitutes was adopted in 1981. It calls for:- all formula labels and information to state the benefits of breastfeeding and the health risks of substitutes;
- no promotion of breast-milk substitutes;
- no free samples of substitutes to be given to pregnant women, mothers or their families; and
- no distribution of free or subsidized substitutes to health workers or facilities.
Support for mothers is essential
Breastfeeding has to be learned and many women encounter difficulties at the beginning. Nipple pain, and fear that there is not enough milk to sustain the baby are common. Health facilities that support breastfeeding - by making trained breastfeeding counsellors available to new mothers - encourage higher rates of the practice. To provide this support and improve care for mothers and newborns, there are now more than 20 000 "baby-friendly" facilities in 152 countries thanks to a WHO-UNICEF initiative.Work and breastfeeding
WHO recommends that a new mother should have at least 16 weeks of absence from work after delivery, to be able to rest and breastfeed her child. Many mothers who go back to work abandon exclusive breastfeeding before the recommended six months because they do not have sufficient time, or an adequate place to breastfeed or express and store their milk at work. Mothers need access to a safe, clean and private place in or near their workplaces to continue the practice.The next step: phasing in new foods
To meet the growing needs of babies at six months of age, complementary foods should be introduced as they continue to breastfeed. Foods for the baby can be specially prepared or modified from family meals. WHO notes that:- breastfeeding should not be decreased when starting complementary feeding;
- complementary foods should be given with a spoon or cup, not in a bottle;
- foods should be clean, safe and locally available; and
- ample time is needed for young children to learn to eat solid foods.
Acceptable medical reasons for use of breast-milk substitutes
Authors:
World Health Organization
Infants who should not receive breast milk or any other milk
except specialized formula
Infants with classic galactosemia: a special galactose-free formula is needed.
Infants with maple syrup urine disease: a special formula free of leucine,
isoleucine and valine is needed.
Infants with phenylketonuria: a special phenylalanine-free formula is
needed (some breastfeeding is possible, under careful monitoring).Infants for whom breast milk remains the best feeding option
but who may need other food in addition to breast milk for a limited period
Infants born weighing less than 1500 g (very low birth weight).
Infants born at less than 32 weeks of gestational age (very pre-term).
Newborn infants who are at risk of hypoglycaemia by virtue of impaired metabolic adaptation or increased
glucose demand (such as those who are preterm, small for gestational age or who have experienced significant
intrapartum hypoxic/ischaemic stress, those who are ill and those whose mothers are diabetic) (5) if their
blood sugar fails to respond to optimal breastfeeding or breast-milk feeding.Maternal conditions that may justify permanent avoidance of breastfeeding
HIV infection1: if replacement feeding is acceptable, feasible, affordable, sustainable and safe (AFASS)
Maternal conditions that may justify temporary avoidance of breastfeeding
Severe illness that prevents a mother from caring for her infant, for example sepsis.
Herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1): direct contact between lesions on the mother’s breasts and the infant’s mouth
should be avoided until all active lesions have resolved.
Maternal medication:
- sedating psychotherapeutic drugs, anti-epileptic drugs and opioids and their combinations may cause side effects
such as drowsiness and respiratory depression and are better avoided if a safer alternative is available (7);
- radioactive iodine-131 is better avoided given that safer alternatives are available - a mother can resume
breastfeeding about two months after receiving this substance;
- excessive use of topical iodine or iodophors (e.g., povidone-iodine), especially on open wounds or mucous
membranes, can result in thyroid suppression or electrolyte abnormalities in the breastfed infant and should be
avoided;
- cytotoxic chemotherapy requires that a mother stops breastfeeding during therapy.Maternal conditions during which breastfeeding can still continue, although health problems may be of concern
Breast abscess: breastfeeding should continue on the unaffected breast; feeding from the affected breast can
resume once treatment has started (8).
Hepatitis B: infants should be given hepatitis B vaccine, within the first 48 hours or as soon as possible
thereafter (9).
Hepatitis C.
Mastitis: if breastfeeding is very painful, milk must be removed by expression to prevent progression of the
condition(8).
Tuberculosis: mother and baby should be managed according to national tuberculosis guidelines
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)