#metoo Solidarity

There was a tweet going around - how do women not die of rage aneurysms every day. Seems especially apt today.

Since we voted (or not voted, in most cases) a serial sexual assaulter to the office of president to now when an apathetic to enthusiastic GOP is trying to cram Kavanaugh down our throats, the political is personal.

I haven't suffered monumental sexual trauma but only the run of the mill sexual harassment, sexism and rape culture. What a phrase that is, run of the mill sexual harassment. I am absolutely in solidarity with survivors whenever, wherever and however they report. I can't imagine what this is putting them through. Every single time.

I've walked with my keys between my fingers, I worry about dark parking lots, I worry about places with few people, I worry about places with too many people. I thought I wasn't good at math. I worry about running alone. I cross the street to avoid squeezing by men on a sidewalk. I've been talked over and had my answers repeated by boys who take credit. I've laughed off sexist "jokes" and comments to get out of the situation. I've told myself stray hands where I didn't want them were an accident. I listen for footsteps behind me and use my car window for a mirror as I unlock the car. I accepted advances I didn't want so I wouldn't be stranded. I know who I would and wouldn't tell about sexual assault.

I grew up with an ideology that taught me not to handle big decisions on my own, not to usurp the authority of a man and not to cause one to stumble spiritually because of what I chose to wear or how I moved. No one ever said explicitly that my safety was not intended by God to be a priority, but when you tell a teenager that you can only be released from marriage for death or infidelity, what on earth is one to gather from that?

We can do better. I want to have faith in humanity that common decency might prevail consistently one day.

But Twitler is in office and Troy (thanks, Boom Lawyered for the levity) will be a Justice soon. So *can* we do better?

Push back all around on #believewomen - deja vu

As the number of women coming forward against Kavanaugh rises. ..

So there has been some push back on the 'believe women' mantra across the board from conservative Christians* to well meaning liberals. Some say slow down! We can't assume guilt and the only appropriate response is that we don't know/ maybe we should look into it. Or they believe "truth" or "facts" (which is funny if any of those support the GOP but i digress ...) rather than exclusively women. 

*As far as the conservative Christians, I read a post by Jen Hatmaker, which I can generally get on board with. I support religious people thinking in a humane way about equality and the common good. Her Christianity is against kids in cages and men who rape women and I think it's important for Christians to speak out when they differ with the GOP theocratic patriarchal abuse.

This strikes the same tone deaf note as Black Lives Matter opposition where people intentionally disregard context so they can feel some self righteous indignation. Neither of these statements are happening in a vacuum or a state of anything approaching equality. BLM is not saying no other lives matter,  it's drawing attention to the fact that our society doesn't value black lives, there is still discrimination and racism (readily apparent in the criminal justice system and murders of unarmed black people by police among other areas) and we're fed up. 

In the same manner, 'believe women' is the shorthand that says NOT that only women always tell the truth on everything or any other nonsense, but that women are historically and statistically not being valued or believed (especially in sexual assault, DV, among other life threatening situations) compared to men and it's LITERALLY KILLING US.

In a perfect world and free of the weight of history we could treat his denial and her accusation as equally plausible. But given our current world, knowing he has everything to gain and she is getting death threats for coming forward, I'm going to #believewomen .

#believewomen

#cancelKavanaugh

#bluewave

#womensrightsarehumanrights

*the comments section of the Jen Hatmaker post/article:

Men's Worry and Women's Safety

When Men's Worry is More Important Than Women's Safety

All men should be worried? Really?

Can we trash this excuse and burn it forever? 

If you are not a rapist or have not tried to rape someone, you DO NOT have to worry. If you have assaulted a woman, I hope your life is hell and that you are consumed with worry - or actual punishment - that'd be novel.

Even when these men are facing "punishment," they are just losing a freaking job (and then are reinstated if you're famous). That's NOTHING compared to the damage their violation inflicted on these women.

Quote:

If anything, he went on, it was time for the men of the world to draw a line: “If somebody can be brought down by accusations like this, then you, me, every man certainly should be worried. We can all be accused of something.”

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The implication behind "boys will be boys" is chilling: girls will suffer.

The Truth About 'Boys Will Be Boys' - Huffington - Post Opinion 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Brett Kavanaugh and the Revealing Logic of ‘Boys Will Be Boys’ - The Atlantic

All men can be accused of SOMETHING? All men have tried to RAPE a woman? Is that where we are now? Are you kidding me with that crap? I know this was meant to generate empathy for the abuser over the victim, but this is a horrifying prospect. When you say boys will be boys or all men have done it, so we should be okay with that, you need to think about the implications there. You are saying women are garbage or liars and do not matter.

Quote:

On the contrary: “If anything, it’s the opposite,” the lawyer told the reporter Burgess Everett, suggesting that the White House has been, actually, galvanized by the allegations against its nominee. “If somebody can be brought down by accusations like this, then you, me, every man certainly should be worried. We can all be accused of something.”

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

'Uncontrollable male passion': Writings of Brett Kavanaugh's classmate under scrutiny

This classmate, Mike Judge, won't testify. However, he has already told the world quite a bit about our SCOTUS nominee.

Facetiously, I could say you shouldn't write a book called Wasted detailing crimes and misdeeds if you or your buddies have SCOTUS or political aspirations. . .

But honestly, this is disgusting. A middle ground in consent where a man has to prove himself? ? No. Unless you mean asking permission. Which he doesn't. Degenerates, both.

9/11 memories and constant plea ...

“Perhaps, when we remember wars, we should take off our clothes and paint ourselves blue and go on all fours all day long and grunt like pigs. That would surely be more appropriate than noble oratory and shows of flags and well-oiled guns.”
― Kurt Vonnegut, Cat's Cradle

Every national tragedy we think of where we were. I was 22. On 9/11/01, I was working at Duke and had been at work for a half hour getting started on whatever sciencey thing I was doing that day. People have music or maybe NPR or throughout the labs and so we heard about it as it was happening or as it was reported. One event, then another, then another. And another. Stunned silence. Dread. The other dread. Numb the rest of the day. Wondering if or when there'd be another. Is this war? How many attacks will there be? In how many cities? How big is this?

And then WHO. Soon it was apparent. I wanted it to be anyone but who it was. Let them be wrong this time. My boyfriend and I were talking marriage. He's Palestinian, so a target for anything white people were going to be dishing out. (It turns out we were lucky based on the experiences of so many Arab Americans, but I didn't know that then.) And future kids, how would this affect them? Should we even have kids? His dad's a citizen, but would that be respected? Will we be able to fly? Will we be followed? What about hate crimes? What kind of lists will we be on and how will that affect job prospects and life in general? So "who" brought on a whole other set of questions.

We remember the lives lost. So many all at once, senselessly. But what is a sensible death? I guess being taken in tragedy, too soon, it might seem, heightens the grief. That wasn't nature and we couldn't prevent it. Our response and the deaths that resulted, we could have controlled. We could have stopped those deaths. But we didn't. Our president said "bring it on."

Every year I recall how the victims of our tragedy were used by the powerful to generate support for more killing. Instead of healing and peace, we got war cries and insidious persistent hatred disguised as patriotism and unblinking "respect" for barely elected incompetent leaders.

I have this demoralizing memory of overwhelming hopelessness and disgust with the reaction of fellow Americans: attitudes, flag waving, narrow definitions of patriotism, hatred, warmongering. The policies and perceptions driven by the same bigotry remain today with the Muslim ban, kids in cages, hatemongers wearing red hats and racists in the White House.

I knew in the pit of my stomach things were going to get bad. Overt hatred of Muslims and Arab Americans was going to be in fashion. I knew that. And the way things went, I thought internment camps weren't off the table with that guy, W. Instead, we got the Patriot Act, jailing innocent people and a slew of laws aimed at getting rid of and spying on our Muslim brothers and sisters. Not a whole lot better.

Flags came out in support of war and killing innocent people and I was devastated. Dissent was quashed in the name of patriotism and God. Not even journalists were questioning this rush to war and patriotic fever for such a long time. Americans didn't care that war would only be revenge and not a real solution. All Muslims and brown people were the enemy. Pacific Islanders? Same thing! Can't be bothered with facts! (See, it's always been that way. ) It was all- War! Enlist! Fight! Don't be a pussy! Country!

Peace was laughed at, even among Christians who I thought at the time would see war as tragedy and value life. To me peace is honorable and strong and I trusted that others saw that as well. I was wrong on the last bit. At various times I sat through sermons on how Islam was evil and murderous. (What happened to God is love?) Peace was for the weak, you know, women! (What happened to blessed are the peacemakers?) Real men want to fight to protect you. .. from this tragedy that already happened. .. Nothing made sense. Values I'd learned from the time I was a child were failing to help me comprehend the world now. It caused me heart-wrenching dissonance. Could I be a... a liberal? Say it isn't so!

It became clear to me that war doesn't protect anyone and it isn't brave or just, it just slaughters and sends people to the slaughter- one side we imagine a force of evil, the other we make into heroes. They all died preventable deaths if only we could get over this exceptionalism, greed and hyper masculine gun worship.

Remember the victims. ...of the day... just as much as of the invasions. In the style, if not exact words, of my middle school social studies teacher: War is stupid. War is bloody. War is ugly.

Work for peace instead.

As Kurt said - "Hello babies. Welcome to Earth. It's hot in the summer and cold in the winter. It's round and wet and crowded. On the outside, babies, you've got a hundred years here. There's only one rule that I know of, babies-"God damn it, you've got to be kind.”

Coke float revisited

7 Aug 2018

Today I had a coke float. Maybe not the best choice on an empty stomach. Or was it? I'm conflicted. One thing I realized is that I probably don't like these as much as I once did. Another thing is that I went through a range of feelings besides a stomachache. 

Taste aside, it made me equal parts really happy and deeply sad. It made me think about childhood summers and grandparents who are no longer with us. The boundless joy and endless possibility of freedom form school, nostalgia for childhood when we were filled with potential as opposed to knowing now that so many of those doors have closed, and the beauty of not having to think about mortality or deal with the reality of people you love not being around forever.

I remember drinking these on occasion with my cousin on my grandparents' back patio in Ohio in the summer when I was maybe eight or nine. It always seemed to be the hottest part of summer, so this time of year makes me crave them even now that I've confirmed that I don't particularly like them anymore. I don't know what the attraction was. Was it the beauty or not having to choose between something to drink and dearly loved ice cream? Was it a dessert my mom didn't serve, but my grandma would? Was it just the relief from playing outside as a kid, losing yourself completely in the way kids do, and then having something cold on your tongue?

I do remember other things, though – watching the birds in the birdbath; the windmill spin out by the neat, house-like shed; the hum of the air conditioner beside us; being right outside the sliding door of the house and watching my grandpa's barber shop customers go in next door, ten feet away; hearing the conversation and laughter of the old guys remembering the old days; the contrast of the cool, covered humidity free concrete porch with the blazing sun on the other side of the railing. And the mugs or cups with which to contain the prized treat – not special by an outsiders standards of beauty by any means, but we had favorites. One was tall and yellow with not the most ergonomic handle with an alligator on the front who was, of course, wearing clothes. Another was a tall, white cup with a red handle with the old Disney characters all around it - goofy and the other dog, Mickey and someone else. Both were from the 70s or before - old and worn, but we loved them. Was there fighting over them amongst my sisters and cousins? Almost certainly, but I can't remember that part.

Would I drink another? Probably.

I don't even know if I'm remembering it correctly. Was it MaMa or PaPa who made it? Exactly what month was it? Was it a treat or consolation prize? Memory is a funny thing. Maybe in all my stories about my childhood, both of my sisters would tell an entirely different tale. The above is just my account. I suppose every memory is like that.

McCain gets his last pass, remembered lovingly as a mavericky moderate

While McCain's death is being mourned as the death of political civility and remembered as everyone's favorite middle of the road maverick, I'm struck by a bit of deafening dissonance. 

I get that by lavishing praise on a guy you disagreed with a lot seems like a credit to your own vast open mindedness in the era of Trump, where encouraging the beating of protesters is normal, executive toilet time includes degrading people you disagree with via Twitter, and voting as a block is more important than who is president because white supremacy and the patriarchy are in danger. Now, I respect his time suffering a POW  (and lasting effects) and his willingness to sometimes not vote Republican, but as for everything else, you might want to consider another hero...

An incident that sums up McCain's life and philosophy could be that time in 2008, when his bigot supporter stood up, stating she didn't trust Obama because he's an Arab. He corrected one fact, but did so at the expense of revealing his true dangerous, far right of center beliefs: No, ma'am, he's not an Arab. He's a decent family man. He was widely praised for this half response/half insult in every corner of the US as brave, courageous, civil and polite. He was never seriously questioned on what most believed a harmless slip of the tongue. His public statements and policy positions on war, the Middle East, immigration, and adjacent issues support the harmless slip being intentional.

At least one was talking about it:
Arab or Decent? --from 2008
https://archives.cjr.org/campaign_desk/arab_or_decent.php


So as we read the eulogies and feel some warm fuzzies, remember what was - as well as what wasn't. He had some good qualities or moments, but his politics were still pretty terrible run of the mill GOP white supremacist sexist fare. We were able to forget about all of Bush's incompetence, lies, warmongering, prisoner abuse and other atrocities because he made a silly with his rain poncho that one time. Maybe this will be the same.

Respect people by all means, but that doesn't mean giving them a political face transplant and sweeping bigotry and destructive policies under the rug.


Despite what the press says, John McCain has a long record of horribleness -- from  July 2017
Not so mavericky:  voted with Trump 90.7% of the time, hawk, Reagan republican, ran on tax cuts and trying to block MLK Day, supports Israeli massacres.

As FAIR.org media analyst Adam Johnson has observed, we have been fed a “childlike narrative of McCain as brave truth-teller, rather than predictable champion of war and empire who occasionally makes toothless references to human rights for the purposes of image curation.”

https://theintercept.com/2017/07/27/john-mccain-fake-maverick-horrible-record/


Here's a quote from the Palestine Chronicle piece:

And that last pattern has been typical of McCain’s entire public career. Shoot off his mouth, make big noises about being tough and honest, and then crawl back quietly shortly afterward, having achieved nothing but adding a notch to the reputation he relishes as a maverick.

 John McCain: A Matter of Character -- from 2008
http://www.palestinechronicle.com/john-mccain-a-matter-of-character/


And two more, if you want: The Man Who Never Was -- from 2010
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2010/11/mccain-201011

The real McCain -- from 2008
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jun/22/johnmccain.uselections2008


There were quite a few from 2008 when he was running for president because I guess that was the only time it was okay to challenge him on the whole most moral, most civil, most bipartisan guy thing.

Documentary: Mr. Rogers and Me

I finally watched Mr. Rogers and Me.

https://parade.com/37959/parade/19-what-its-like-to-have-mr-rogers-as-neighbor/

I'm not a superfan or anything, though I did watch as a kid and I admire the fact that he seemed to be the same on and off screen and fought not for his own fame, but for solid children's programming that was educational and beneficial.

It's been interesting in the wake of his death and the several documentaries that have come out to see liberals champion and quote him (citing look for the helpers and his sharing a pool with Officer Clemmons in 1969) and Republicans consequently revile him as weak or one who'd give a trophy to everyone. Yet he was in fact a Republican. And a Christian, yet he chose to live and promote kindness instead of yell about abortion and gay marriage bans and how the poor are moochers. They didn't mention political affiliation in this doc. They may go into that in Won't You Be My Neighbor.

Starting off broadly, I'd say Mr Rogers and Me as a film, I don't know if it was great but I did get to thinking about Mr. Rogers and kindness. I want to see the new one, won't you be my neighbor. This one was more about exploring this guy's connection to Mr. Rogers through the media work he does and how he hopes to be like him, which is fine. He interviews "neighbors " of Mr. Rogers, people who met him and weren't disappointed in the way we usually are when we find our beloved TV personality isn't who we thought they were because he actually is that well-intentioned. He does interview Bo Lozoff, who did some good work, wrote some books Mr. Rogers read and then was caught in sexual misconduct against the people hes was trying to help. Probably it was questionable judgement to interview a guy like this, but I don't know the timeline for the allegations and the making of the movie. Or maybe he felt obligated because Mr. Rogers quoted him and gave out his books. But there was also Susan Stamburg and Linda Ellerbee and other good ones.

The thing that brought the tears was they had him in front of the camera when he was quite a bit older, talking to people who grew up watching him, saying how he's going to tell us something he told us when we were younger: that he likes us just the way we are. I felt a little manipulated by the documentarian, but who doesn't need to hear that.

Mr. Rogers appearing before Congress was amazing. We need to be reminded of that - caring about people and progress such that we take action.

His respect for silence is familiar to me. I don't remember connecting with it as a child, but as an adult it's refreshing to hear him talk about taking time to think and about silence being something positive. As a child, I hadn't yet experienced the years of relentless jokes and general impatience with my way of being. The documentary highlighted how he'd pause on screen carefully choosing his words. The kinder descriptions of my personality have included that quirk in me as well. This feels entirely unheard of. It's usually a criticism. Everyone rushes to fill the space and entertain on air as well as just in everyday life in an endless stream of noise and chatter. People incomprehensibly describe silence as awkward or uncomfortable instead of how I experience it - as a respite or where creativity is born.

The movie wasn't sad, but it left me with a sad feeling. It feels like the last good person died with him. It just stands in stark contrast to everything: the cruelty of 45, the cruelty of the religion I grew up in - not sparing the rod, tough love, the culture being taken in by that cruelty being love instead of actual love, republican theocrats putting that cruel version of the Bible into law that hates the poor and women and people of color and uses religious freedom to trample everyone else's.

I want to have his care for people. I've always tried I think I do, but sometimes I lose hope.

I wonder how he dealt with sexism or if he just didn't because he didn't have to. He did deal with race and it was good. I wonder if there were people who were just too mean, people he couldn't or didn't want to engage with. I wonder if there were any exceptions to his all people have value and he likes them just the way they are. I can't remember if it was a clip of him or someone who knew him who said people say i like you but you need a hair cut or but you need to lose 20 lb etc - he likes people just the way they are.

If you like a cruel person or sexist person just the way they are, aren't you telling them its okay to treat you like that? Isn't it different to demand empathy and fairness than to demand they look a certain way? Or did he just believe in the good in people that much, however much or little was in a person? Was he able to focus only on that part that's sociable despite cruel politics or church or sexism? Was it his view  that that good part isn't fake, but rather a glimmer of who they really might be? Did he think that that other stuff like politics and religious beliefs are the fake stuff, that it could be just some kind if a crutch for keeping feelings at bay rather than proof of their tendency to hurt and demean?

I wonder what he'd say about writing people off because of 45, the Defendant in Chief. I mean, in a way that's like the rather heartless church policy of disfellowshipping/excommunication/shunning. Adherents advertise it as love -- the desire to produce Godly sorrow in someone to make them return to the church. Shunning Trumpers is more a way to avoid pain and trauma than to teach them a lesson, though, so it isn't the same.

I guess should we all be like Mr. Rogers. Maybe? I don't know. Or could he simply afford to be that way because he was a white man and would come out on top regardless? He was bullied as a kid for being overweight, though. Interestingly, he took from that the need to be kind, not the opposite, as some might. But he obviously didn't have to deal with that all his life. . . so maybe he can afford to be cheery about it?

I don't know.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

If you want to cry again, read the part about when Diane Rehm asks Mr. Rogers what he does when he's sad... It's heartbreaking.

http://www.wbur.org/npr/112758776/story.php

Men's Rights Activism and Feminism

PBS article on the Documentary No Safe Place

Novelist Margaret Atwood writes that when she asked a male friend why men feel threatened by women, he answered, "They are afraid women will laugh at them." When she asked a group of women why they feel threatened by men, they said, "We're afraid of being killed."

Where to start. Let's start with something positive first before delving into the depths of what these guys (and women) believe. A former MRA tells all:

http://narrative.ly/i-was-an-angry-mens-rights-activist-now-im-a-fierce-feminist/

The guy in this article actually tries to pit his new found MRA belief system against feminist theory and he records the result. He discovers what you'd expect- that MRA is a bit like feminism in the problems it identifies but differs in both the why and what to do about it. The unfairness MRA identify as uniquely a crisis of masculinity are actually the same forces oppressing women.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

I didn't know this existed. It looks like a great resource in sorting out this manosphere:

http://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Here we go. We're going in. Get the hip waders; this is going to get messy.

In their own words. . .

True to the experience of the man in article about the MRA turned feminist, they spend an inordinate bit of space up front telling what they aren't and why feminists are evil and feminism is from the depths of hell. And because they are "task focused" and falsely claim not to have an ideology or emotions, there is a list of issues! Yay! Let's take a look.

https://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-rights/an-introduction-to-the-mens-rights-movement/

It's a very strange breakdown of points.

I see three groups: (1) bodily autonomy, domestic violence, father's rights, health, state discrimination, reproductive rights and suicide; (2) unnecessary medication, education; (3) disposability and vilification. Sort of.

Their ideology free tasks are as follows:

1. Bodily autonomy - As discussed, this is the section where they claim circumcision is the same as female genital mutilation.

"Type one FGM would be like removing a male’s testes, type three is equivalent to removing both the testes and the penis. There is no way that would be deemed acceptable," says Taina Bien Aime, director of the Coalition Against Trafficking in Women, who adds that comparisons between male and female circumcision are unhelpful."

So, there that is. You can decide if the two are equivalent.

2. Disposability - Here, they discuss how unfair it is that men have to sacrifice for their community and also to protect hypocritical women who don't pull their weight. Instead of fighting against the Selective Service and militarization of society and the damaging effects of this, they focus on the unfairness that men have to do this but not women.

This is a good look at why sending women to war isn't the equality MRA says it is. Men controlling the world governments and sending women to war and the fact that MRA oppose the ERA and Violence Against Women Act are among the disparate situations discussed.

https://bust.com/feminism/16574-why-drafting-women-isn-t-gender-equality.html

The approach to "equality" of MRA is just completely backwards. Insisting women hurt men more and get punished less in domestic violence and calling rape accusations inflated is not equality any more than saying women should be sent and killing in war as much as men. The real issue is ending war and selective service.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/06/soon-women-may-sign-up-selective-service-draft/


3. Domestic Violence - MRA claim that women perpetrate this as often or more than men but aren't prosecuted as much. They do claim that all domestic violence is bad, but choose to cherry pick to keep the patriarchy alive and women and children treated as property as in the "good old days."

https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/06/13/fathers-rights-and-womens-equality/the-fathers-rights-movement-undermines-victims-of-domestic-violence

Many fathers’ rights activists argue that women perpetuate as much, if not more, violence against intimate partners and that most domestic violence is mutual, ignoring or discounting all research to the contrary. They accuse programs that serve battered women of discrimination on the basis of sex, even to the point of bringing (unsuccessful) lawsuits against them on equal protection claims.

- - - - - - -

https://jezebel.com/5397939/the-misguided-message-of-mens-rights-groups

Is domestic violence law marginalizing men? According to Joyce, probably not. She writes that "while some men certainly are victims of female domestic violence, advocates say the number is closer to 3 percent to 4 percent, rather than the 45 percent to 50 percent RADAR claims."

4. Unnecessary Medication - It's possible that Americans are over medicated, but MRA focus on boys and ADHD only. There is no interest in fixing health care or anything else - only WHAT ABOUT THE BOYS and IT'S THE FEMINISTS' FAULT!

This link is really all you need. It explains both the question framed both ways - how are boys actually doing and politically/culturally, what does that mean? Boys appear to be doing worse in school and it is frequently blamed on feminism, the feminization of boys or the perceived pathologized boyhood.

Michael S. Kimmel in "What About the Boys?" What the Current Debates Tell us--And Don't Tell Us--About Boys in School:

https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?cc=mfsfront;c=mfs;c=mfsfront;idno=ark5583.0014.001;g=mfsg;rgn=main;view=text;xc=1

Another look at why mothers would jump on this ridiculous bandwagon. It takes the view that the movement will die out when these mothers seek educational opportunities and boys learn that the ideology is bunk.

https://www.fatherly.com/love-money/mothers-mens-rights-activists-honey-badgers/

5. Education - Yeah, it's basically the same issue as above; the former being a solution to this problem - if you're looking at it this way. This and the previous thing are related and should have been one bullet point.

6. Father's Rights - To me, this is ridiculous to set up father's rights as antithetical to feminism or women's rights. Feminism seeks to equalize gender roles and give everyone the right to participate in raising their children from parental leave to custody and everywhere else.

This is helpful in clearing up some of the odd substitutions and logic employed:

https://everydayfeminism.com/2013/08/bias-against-fathers/

++++

Yeah. I can't. I feel like I'm just dealing with the same points over and over again, so maybe just a few more links are needed. Most of these can be described by cherry picking their data and the concern not even being factual, blaming everything on feminism or subdividing topics that are actually the same thing. In every instance where an actual grievance exists, feminism is working to help solve these issues that the men are complaining about. Having bodily autonomy mean circumcision vs FGM while women can't get birth control or menstrual products on demand and are forced to be pregnant by majority male lawmakers makes this point by point examination impossible.

https://bellejar.ca/2014/03/28/why-the-mens-rights-movement-is-garbage/

https://rewire.news/article/2015/02/27/mens-rights-movement-hilariously-self-defeating/

++++

7. Health - see the medication points

8. State Discrimination - see domestic violence and father's rights

9. Reproductive Rights - laughable premise, but see father's rights

10. Suicide - see medication

11. Vilification - laughable and subjective, but go back to disposability if you must

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

From Movember to believing there's a crisis in masculinity, to denying the pay gap and the patriarchy exist, to believing the disparity in numbers of women in top positions is due to men being better at it, to believing law enforcement punishes too many men and the real crisis is letting women off easy, it all stems from a nearly feminist place that veers off into selfish babyman territory also known as men's rights activism (MRA).

In this BBC link,

https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-17907534

Movember was mentioned, which I'd not considered as part of this MRA hysteria; it's an interesting point. The other complaints of men's rights activists that I already knew are discussed as well: suicide, crime, boys under performing in school, losing custody cases, more likely to be victims of violence.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Next, a great description of the hate groups in the MRA area:

"There's no waxing poetic on the joys of fatherhood, the majesty of a properly groomed beard, or the exquisite joy of scratching your own balls; it's all just variations of "fuck dem bitches" and "amiright!?" It's not an ideology, it's just them feeling bad about themselves and directing that hatred elsewhere ... which is exactly how a hate group works. And that's not just my opinion."

http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-uncomfortable-truths-behind-mens-rights-movement/


This article has a few good hyperlinks and book references, one being:

The Southern Poverty Law Center has identified many of these groups as hate groups. You'll find that proponents like to talk about false rape being prevalent and a "fact" that women assault men as much or more than men assault women.

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2012/men%E2%80%99s-rights-movement-spreads-false-claims-about-women

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

This link goes into detail about a few MRA talking points we'll look at down the page - feminists hating men, women being hypocrites because of chivalry, rape is over reported, FGM is the same as circumcision, men are vilified in the media and several more.

https://mic.com/articles/90131/the-8-biggest-lies-men-s-rights-activists-spread-about-women

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Various MRA have made news, this is only the most recent to make the news as he comes down from political controversy in Canada to make the rounds down here.

Here's the deal with that guy:

Basically he has a problem with using the correct pronouns for trans people and wants to use free speech to support his bigotry.

https://medium.com/s/story/a-field-guide-to-jordan-petersons-political-arguments-312153eac99a

- - - - -

On the controversy in my city:

https://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/counterpoint-the-durham-city-council-said-exactly-what-needed-to-be-said-about-jordan-peterson/Content?oid=16096426

MRA Peterson rented a place to speak and the city spoke against him and a debate about free speech ensued.

- - - - -

This quote is talking about an MRA group spawned by Peterson's talks:

"One of their group’s main goals is “waking the police up” to female-perpetrated domestic violence, Mr. Trottier says."

Perpetually the victim, he thinks white privilege is a farce and enforced monogamy and sexual redistribution will stop mass shooters.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/18/style/jordan-peterson-12-rules-for-life.html

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Rather an optimistic and scholarly take - "Finding Common Ground: A Feminist Response to Men’s Rights Activism:"

https://onourterms.barnard.edu/article/finding-common-ground/

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The zero sum mentality that sees women gaining and assuming themselves to be losing can overlap with white supremacy fears along the same lines. Maybe I posted before, but it is instructive that the alt right is attracted to this set of beliefs.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/01/warren-farrell-mens-rights-movement-feminism-misogyny-trolls/

Confronting ones own prejudice

I heard a story today- The Moth is a wonderful hour if you can listen now and again. It's refreshingly devoid of political affiliation, so you can take a break from the dumpster fire that is our current political hellscape. It's about people and their stories and the things that shaped them. Better yet, this is people in their own words and voices.

Birth of A Nation - A coming of age story in a new African state as white domination recedes into the past.

The whole story is beautiful, but there was a part that was especially relevant to me as I've been interacting with more people about racism and sexism in the age of our Nectarine Nightmare (not my term). Certain things are ok because it's tradition (a racist school song, see Birth of a Nation above) or that's just the way boys talk (calling girls whores or rating them) or it was a successful cartoon, why should we think critically about this a decade later?

Petina Gappah found herself in a majority white school just after Zimbabwe won its independence. There is a painful irony in that as a kid who liked to sing loved the point in the day when they sang the school song because she wasn't being bullied or teased, she could just belt out this song she loved to sing. It turns out that the subject matter of the song was the colonization of her land, the takeover and theft and subjugation of her people and ends with the hope that they can do this again. So this is not a comfortable situation.

The teacher was confronted about the song and she had a very familiar reaction. She was indignant and adamant that she isn't a racist, she teaches black children after all. The song means nothing, it's only tradition, was her reply. You can use this logic on any racist or sexist statement. I've heard it. When 45 said "grab 'em by the pussy" he was defended because that's just locker room talk. Boys will be boys. It means nothing. Well, now. It means nothing if you're in the group who has the power and you're dishing out hate and not on the receiving end. No one should be the recipient of hate, but it has more sinister implications in furthering inequality when directed against the group who already has no power. 

Just because something's been that way a long time, doesn't mean we can't re-examine it in light of our own growth and understanding and push for change that makes life better for everyone collectively.

March For Our Lives. . .and objections

People had good things to say very creatively. I'm loving the signs. Arms are for hugging! Yes!!

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/03/march-for-our-lives-here-are-some-of-the-best-signs-from-the-demonstrations.html

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/march-for-our-lives-best-signs_us_5ab65c73e4b0decad04a493b


And then there are the detractors who want to compare their right to gun ownership (free of any pesky regulations to defend the rest of our right to life and liberty) with their desire to control/ban the healthcare of women everywhere.

What's actually ironic is that they want zero regulation on guns, the high concentration of which increases the risk of women being killed and yet they want to ban an aspect of women's healthcare that impacts them not one whit and is absolutely none of their business and should only concern a woman and her doctor. Men are often the ones I see demanding abortion bans the most, yet they'll never ever know what pregnancy feels like, none of it, not the discomfort, pain, nausea, vomiting, fear, depression, extreme health risks and potential complications. They can tune out their partner's "complaints" or even just run away. Those are not options for women. Men have no right to make health decisions for women.


So this is a fun link that relates the two concepts there a bit better than those tired conservative memes:

What if Buying A Gun Were Like Getting An Abortion
https://rewire.news/article/2018/03/05/buying-gun-like-getting-abortion/


Here's a satirical bill introduced in the TX legislature to compare obstacles to women's health to something men could possibly understand- being charged $100 for extra vaginal emissions. Well the state would get very rich if that were real! 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/03/13/satirical-texas-bill-turns-language-of-antiabortion-laws-on-men/?utm_term=.8ac38c38db6c


And a better guide for how to deal with guns is how car crashes were dealt with. Crashes were phenomenally high so something had to be done. The issue was approached as a public health concern and car manufacturers had to be compelled to implement safety features to comply with laws to protect consumers and drivers.

https://www.revealnews.org/episodes/where-criminals-get-their-guns/

Educated by Tara Westover

I finished Educated in just a few days. I was reading two other books, but put them aside for a few days and blew through this one. I couldn't put it down.

It was brilliantly written and it's absolutely amazing to see someone go through everything she did, the violence and physical abuse, bad luck and bad choices of her parents and come out the other side not only just alive but succeeding and creating.

If you had a religious upbringing, as I did, you may find it hard to read for other reasons. It really hits at the core of those beliefs and makes you reexamine. One quote really hit me hard.

She's talking here about one of her brothers' regular abuse, both verbal (calling her names like whore) and physical in contrast to how another of her brothers made her feel:

Suddenly that worth felt conditional, like it could be taken or squandered. It was not inherent; it was bestowed. What was of worth was not me, but the veneer of constraints and observances that obscured me.

But this is really very likely a common feeling for women and maybe women "of faith" as I was. Purity and chastity are drilled into you at every opportunity. Don't wear spaghetti straps, they're immodest. Your skin might cause a brother to stumble (the implication being- and then, well, it's your fault). Don't go to dances, you aren't allowed to move your body that way or let boys touch you (again, your fault is implied). There's no real sex education, just DON'T. Until marriage. Godly men are supposed to marry a virgin, so don't have sex. Do they have to be a virgin? No one really cares, they are preparing to be providers, so any indiscretions we'll sweep under the rug. Girls who have sex though, they are marked, they have a past, they are impure. And you grew up with the story of how Adam and Eve sinned and they got tossed out of the garden and Adam paid by having to work for a living and Eve by pain in childbirth. So there you go, there's your family structure. Created flawed by God so he can punish you your entire earthly life. 

Add to this the doctrine that salvation is conditional (2Peter 2:10). It's a hot topic in the religious world. But I associated salvation and baptism with love an acceptance of my parents, peers and church - basically the sum of my little world. It's supposed to have implications in the next world after death, but it entirely defines your view and interactions on this planet as well. Be saved and enjoy love and acceptance of church family and blood family or don't and be considered a sinner, an object of pity and embarrassment only to be associated with if the mission is to bring you back.

What I learned was that my worth was entirely dependent upon my modesty, virginity and compliance with church beliefs. There's no room for inherent worth there. There's no unconditional love. On the contrary, I grew up hearing every other Sunday that other liberal churches taught TOO MUCH about God's love. We don't talk about the consequences of sin enough. We don't preach about hell enough. We should talk about the hard things, not just love and peace all the time. Too much love??? Who on earth gets too much love or hears too much about love? I wish I'd been brave enough to scream I NEED TO HEAR ABOUT LOVE. Instead, I listened to sermon after sermon about hell and disfellowshipping unbelievers in our midst and faithfulness and the consequences of failing, of false prophets coming to us in sheep's clothing. I worried incessantly about staying home sick, hoping that I wouldn't be accused of forsaking the assembly (Heb 10:25). I nervously read letters from the elders when they ejected a person from the congregation for some sin or another, knowing they could really mount a case against anyone and that person would be gone. How much or how little did one have to do to get one of these? Who knew. The elders are in charge and what they say is law. Don't breathe. 

I grew up knowing for certain that life is a balancing act and I was worth nothing inherently, my value was bestowed, as Westover observed. Bestowed by my creator? Sort of. Conditionally. If I was a faithful servant of God. Who judges that- my dad, the church elders, the church collectively? My worth is bestowed. I am defined by constraints I didn't choose- be "modest", don't dance, don't have sex, don't drink, don't be a liberal. Virginity, attending services three times a week, no instruments in worship- those are the things with value. As long as you value these things, you too can have value.

Tragedy in Parkland, FL

 

Photos above: School shooting inspired school letters going out around the country this week. How to talk to your kids about senseless violence (brought to you by toxic masculinity and our gun worshiping militarized society).

*****

Another school shooting. I don't want to keep saying that. But here are the details:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43081361

The victims:
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/15/us/florida-shooting-victims-school/index.html


An action:



There is always a rash of calls for gun control or an assault weapon ban after a mass shooting. Liberals calling Congresspeople to account for their NRA money. All good things. Conservatives always responding with - wait a minute families need time to grieve and don't politicize these children's deaths. Of course we should be beating down the door of elected representatives and calling them to account and voting out those who prize guns over our lives and safety. We need laws. Thoughts and prayers don't make laws. Lawmakers make laws. Sometimes. Gun control is a very good thing, we should absolutely be talking about that after a shooting, but not the only issue. Also, mental health and health care are very good topics to talk about, but not as a convenient excuse for another white male abuser. The gun fetish and misogynistic culture along with white supremacist terrorism in America is a better place to start.

From Facebook:

Why is this happening to us?? 

“In retrospect Sandy Hook marked the end of the US gun control debate,” Dan Hodges, a British journalist, wrote in a post on Twitter two years ago, referring to the 2012 attack that killed 20 young students at an elementary school in Connecticut. “Once America decided killing children was bearable, it was over.”

What Explains U.S. Mass Shootings? International Comparisons Suggest an Answer
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/07/world/americas/mass-shootings-us-international.html

*****       *****      ***** 

Ultra Violet and others have been pointing this out for some time, that there are some very real correlations between gun violence and toxic masculinity. It's a welcome change from thoughts and prayers and the mental illness cop out. If mental illness were the driving force here, the statistics would look a bit different. 

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gun-violence-toxic-masculinity-tweets_us_5a85ead4e4b05c2bcac8ec08

A thought and a prayer from Twitter:

After the Las Vegas shooting four months ago, it became popular to declare that that common condolence, thoughts and prayers, is not enough. This is still true and we need to call Congress again.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2017/10/thoughts-and-prayers-politicians-las-vegas-shooting/

Also from Facebook:

But it is good to see a spotlight even if only journalistically on mass killings and domestic violence:

Of Course Florida School Shooter Was A Girl-Hating White Supremacist. Of Course I Am Tired Of Writing This Article.
https://wonkette.com/629807/of-course-florida-school-shooter-was-a-girl-hating-white-supremacist-of-course-i-am-tired-of-writing-this-article

Control and Fear: What Mass Killings and Domestic Violence Have in Common

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/16/world/americas/control-and-fear-what-mass-killings-and-domestic-violence-have-in-common.html

***
My post on Facebook with accompanying links:

Along with guns, white supremacist violence is a problem no one (Congress, White House, FBI and police) wants to identify. Everyone wants to excuse the men who kill this way as a lone wolf or mentally ill, yet there are more telling patterns with these guys (white supremacy, domestic violence, basically toxic masculinity).

https://www.salon.com/2018/02/15/white-supremacy-group-florida-school-shooter-was-a-member/

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/01/the-resurgent-threat-of-white-supremacist-violence/550634/
***


And Twitter with another reality check:

Aaand finally, just what are these gun rights that are so important they trump the lives of school fulls of children:

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/06/second-amendment-guns-michael-waldman/

Urgent! This is true!

I am embarrassingly fascinated by these things- how they spread, who passes them on, how long they survive, what tactics they employ to compel a person.


Via messenger in the present, February 12, 2018:

In the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, Abraham asked the Lord to spare the city if he could find 50 righteous people. God responded to Abraham's plea "If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all ....Genesis 18:16-33The movie "Corpus Christi "is due to be released this June to August. It is a disgusting film set to appear in America later this year which depicts Jesus and his disciples as homosexuals! As a play, this has already been in theaters for a while. It's called "Corpus Christi" which means "The Body of Christ". It's a revolting mockery of our Lord. But we Christians can make a difference.That's why I am sending this e-mail to you. If you do send this around, we just might be able to prevent this film from being shown in Australia, Canada and America etc. Let's stand for what we believe and stop the mockery of Jesus Christ our Savior. Where do we stand as Christians? I am forwarding this to all I think will respect and appreciate being informed. Please help us prevent such offenses against our Lord. There is no petition to sign, no time limit, or minimum number of people to send this to.It will take you less than 2 minutes!If you are not interested and do not have the 2 minutes it will take to do this, please don't complain if God does not seem to have time for you. Imagine what would happen if this film were depicting Mohammad in the same way...the Islamic world would be in flames!!. Apparently, some regions in Europe have already successfully banned the film. All we need is a lot of prayer and a lot of E-mails.JUST GET THE WORD OUT!....Will God be able to find at least 50 righteous people who are willing to express their concern and voice their opinion against this act of blasphemy?

It is true... so please forward to everyone you know

*********     *********     *********

My usual source will give you the history. Conservatives tend not to like this site. OOh- has Snopes rated that - Conservatives don't believe Snopes' research? I should look that up- but for now:

https://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/gayjesus.asp


Just on the surface, it's pretty funny. Or you could call them red flags. I love how there was no studio executive's address, no concrete film information or times, no state officials to address complaints to, no specific information really, just an exhortation to get angry or offended and email your friends. The premise is wonky, too- it seems like an odd position to take given that Christians are to show Jesus' attributes to others through actions, not by banning everything and trying to control their perception or trying to protect Jesus' reputation. Does he need that?


Also great is that it says "this is true" which you don't really say unless you know for a fact it's spurious to begin with. Another highlight is how they just moved it from the 90s email to messenger without updating the wording. I'm a little disappointed it didn't promise a wish for each person I forwarded it to - or predict my doom if I fail to act within 10 minutes of receiving it.



Before Googling the thing to see what was what, I started to think of the nature of the hypocritical request and Christianity and wrote this:

Seems like people should be more interested in giving and being kind and campaigning for peace instead of war- all the good things the Bible teaches in order to spread Christianity.. . Banning films and books (among other things, like abortion, alcohol and divorce) is both ineffective and impossible and doesn't teach people any of the good things you want people to know about Christ like peace or love or kindness towards your neighbor. I would think the Bible approach (rather than this urgent message to help ban a film) would be who cares what they think of you, you just live the Bible and the truth will prevail if he wills it. And if the truth doesn't prevail, you ran your race (2 Tim 4:7), turned the other cheek (Matt 5:38-40) and you'll be justified in the end with you eternal reward. The Bible, as I understand it, doesn't teach that you are to control everyone else's actions to be found faithful.

Also, this Christian tendency for knee jerk bans that appear to be a litmus test of faith reminds me of some Muslims trying to ban disrespect of Mohammed (there was a cartoon in Denmark?) or a dictator banning disrespect of himself. Book and film bans are impossible to police and an abysmally ineffective evangelism tool since bans usually give free people a goal or mission to unify around and fight for. If Christians start living the peace and love in the Bible, the Quakers do a pretty good job on that front, that would go farther in demonstrating the respect one needs to have for Jesus than just banning things and demanding respect be given arbitrarily.