Sunday, April 14, 2019

Finally Watched - Won't You Be My Neighbor

Won't You Be My Neighbor?
Trailer

I've been putting it off watching this Mr. Rogers documentary for a year because I knew how I'd feel, and I didn't want to do that yet - you know, deal with the melancholy - like he was the last good person and he's dead... I'm going to be processing this for another year. 

Some notes.

That first week of the show was about WAR! How did they do that? King Friday wanted to build a wall, Henrietta Pussycat was scared of the shooting, and the resolution was to send messages of peace by balloon to the king. Wow. An anti-war message promoting peace and possibly protest! I feel like people would say that's too political for kids – and even some adults – today. You'd be accused of having an agenda, of being divisive, pushing that liberal political message. Why can't we get along and rise above politics would be the message today. But the fact that that was the first week was awesome. He kept that up, speaking to children's deepest fears and hence some adults' as well. 

How he didn't like TV really is great. He saw the pies in the face and wanted to use the medium differently. That was kind of a big idea. The images in the film were of commercials with kids with toy guns and slapstick comedy with people doing mean things.

Of course his mother's quote of looking for the helpers is in there. We bring it out in times of disaster. I look for the helpers. The kind people who do things because they too see the humanity in others and want to put as much good out into the world as possible. Those are my people, but there are so few... 

What he says about silence – that it's the greatest gift. It's what I feel or AM. This one was profound to me and hit hard. I'm naturally this way, but it's always made me feel different and a bit defective. (See later when Daniel Tiger worries he's a mistake...) I've always been teased for that, but I suppose it was harder for him being a man and going up against those toxic masculinity/ male entitlement type expectations. Clemmons explains how he modeled a different way to be a man. That was groundbreaking stuff -- him just being himself. Clemmons debunks the wild speculations that Rogers was gay. They had nothing to compare him to, so they made up tattoos and navy seal stories, etc. That was a great moment as well since it's something that's still lacking in our culture despite strides we've made in equality.

I love his sincerity and the way he connects with each individual and lets them know he's happy to be spending this moment with them and he wouldn't have it any other way. When he says he's glad to meet someone, it's not a formality, he means it. Yo-Yo Ma was funny in describing that. He was three inches away from his face and it freaked him out. The look on his face as he recalled that was priceless.

I always want to be that open as he was and tell people that I appreciate the time I spend with them because I do. There are times in my life I've been able to tell people what they mean to me – usually when someone dies or when I've felt grateful - wedding and baby showers when so many people are so incredibly supportive and helpful you feel like you can't possibly deserve it. A few other random times. But I feel like I don't want to unnerve people by saying it out of the blue. Certain times feel more acceptable for me to express that so they won't think I'm terminally ill or contemplating suicide or something. 

He somehow took the best things from Christianity and Buddhism and acted it out – the love and acceptance and being in the moment, not the authoritarian sexism. Though there was an issue with Clemmons going to a gay bar and Rogers having talk with him that he couldn't do that. I wished he was better on that. They didn't go into that so deeply. It seemed that he came around to personal acceptance of his friend, but who knows whether the gay bar incident was more about the show and how he knew that the public wouldn't accept it or what. Maybe he was protecting his friend? Maybe just the show? 

Daniel tiger saying he thought he was a mistake... That was heart wrenching because I think all of us with an introverted tendency tend to think this at some point – or all points in life about various things about us. The duet is amazing. It's what you wish someone would've told you instead of eventually sorting that out on your own. I sort of told my daughter this on a make up discussion, that I like her just the way she is. I wanted to make sure she knew that it's okay to dress up and have fun with make up, but it's her I love for being her. I hope I said it right.

A big takeaway is when he told why he made the ending song, how he thought every child needed to hear that, that they were loved just the way they are. That's important. I feel like I didn't get that enough.

The film covered a bit of the backlash to Mr. Rogers. I can't believe I said that – backlash. To Mr. Rogers. Fox News blamed him for the state of America and the youth who feel entitled or didn't earn their specialness. Westboro Baptist Church picketed his funeral. There's so much wrong with this Fox News conservative view. He's talking about a human's inherent worth and it being important to know that for oneself and also (or in order to) see it in others. He's not talking about unearned expertise or some former Muslim making the rounds denouncing Islam not because of his or her scholarship but because he or she fit your narrative of hate and vengeance.

I grew up with that backlash to being too loving, sadly. Spare the rod and spoil the child! I'm not going to argue about disciplinary methods here. That's another conversation. Parents need to figure that out. That's only one aspect of this. I heard this in CHURCH. People would say from time to time that other denominations focused too much on the love of God like it was some mushy gushy very bad thing. They would say preachers are talking too much about God's love and not enough about church discipline. “When I was a kid, we heard fire and brimstone and we behaved! Church-goers today are just like the children of parents who don't want to hurt their child's self-esteem by correcting him.” They scoffed at self-esteem and love as weak (unless it was tough love in which they were exacting harsh penalties while saying love). But I have to say I died just a little inside whenever I heard it said we don't need to hear about the love of God so much or that it is overemphasized at the expense of harder truths. Every cell in my body was saying NO! But we NEED love! Don't take it away! I need to hear it. I don't experience love in “not even to eat with such a one.” I need you to look me in the eyes and tell me your love is unconditional. I need you to show me you value my inherent humanity (and I, yours). Tough love isn't love. Hating the sin, but loving the sinner isn't love. Of course I only felt those things. I could never ever say them out loud.

One thing that's odd about him was that he was so kind and well adjusted despite being a rich kid and then on to fame. Even with that, I feel he's a kindred quiet spirit I feel a affinity with. Maybe the bullying and music and introspection helped give him that desire to put good into the world as the ultimate goal with no ulterior narcissistic motive. I always say as a shorthand for my philosophy – do the most good for the most people. I feel like despite the Christianity and Republicanism, he thought like that. If I had met him though, I may have feared his Christianity. Though i guess when he was alive, I was one, so maybe I'd have admired the way he took the good from it and left the poison.

At the end of the film, they speculate about what Rogers would say about Trump. I think he'd focus on the problems not from a broad political or philosophical point of view, but he'd focus on how that affected kids like he always did. He wouldn't tell about school shootings, but address the fear they could have worrying about what if that happens to them. And in the same way, those immigrant kids who are scared of being deported or separated from their parents – that's where he'd start. I wonder if he'd have the same compassion for Muslim kids though. He didn't want Clemmons to come out as gay, but was at least good on race with that segment making the point of sharing the pool together. It's hard to say.


************************

One more thing on the Challenger and memory...

I'll put this at the end because I don't associate it with Mr. Rogers, but it was in the film and made me think about that day and how I don't know if what I'm remembering is true to the facts of where I was or what I saw.

Footage of the Challenger exploding was so strange. I saw it and had a very immediate reaction. Gut wrenching. Very sad. I wonder if my memory of watching this in school is real or something I made from news coverage. I swear I remember all the classes at my Christian school gathering around the few TVs, though. There was cheering and excitement- she was a teacher going up, you could feel the teachers' connection. And it lifted off, but then everything turned to just confusion and sadness so completely abruptly. Such a complete shift, opposite emotions. It was jarring even though I didn't know what a space launch was supposed to look like or even really what death meant most likely. I don't know what I knew. But I knew the thing that was keeping them safe wasn't doing that anymore and they couldn't breathe all the way up there. Did I know that even? Then I swear a little kid said “see the pretty colors” and it made me really sad both because they didn't know people were hurt and because they'd find out sometime. You want to help, but you know telling them the truth isn't going to "help" really. That was another kick in the gut. But I wonder how much of that memory is news footage later and how much is really mine. I heard Bart Ehrman speak on memory once and now I don't know what I know. Haha.


If you want to cry again,
what he does when he's sad... It's heartbreaking.

Here's the Congressional hearing where Mr. Rogers secures funding for PBS.


Friday, April 12, 2019

ACTION - Born Alive Bills - NCGA S359



I wrote our governor today about the born alive bill. I did use two paragraphs from a NARAL post, but I added the first and last paragraphs.

So this is one of those ALEC copy/paste things - frequently referred to as the "born alive bill".

See here and here for how they keep popping up, why we don't need them, and how they push an anti-choice agenda through seemingly innocuous means.

Online: https://governor.nc.gov/contact/contact-governor-cooper

Please veto these extreme anti-woman, anti-abortion bills. This is a religious/healthcare/moral issue for pregnant individuals. The simple fact is this is a human rights issue. By denying women abortion as healthcare, lawmakers assume women lack the capacity to make health and moral decisions for themselves. What's next? Taking away our bank accounts or forcing our husbands to co-sign loans?

S359 (H602 in the house) is an extreme anti-abortion bill written by politicians, not doctors, that has no basis in medicine or science. The sole purpose of this bill is to intimidate patients and criminalize doctors and healthcare practitioners.

It's yet another effort by the anti-abortion majority to push extreme and inflammatory rhetoric in order to achieve their ultimate goal: banning abortion altogether.

Please veto all anti-abortion legislation and don't let the religious right take away our right to healthcare, autonomy, privacy, and religion.

***********************

*PACK THE GALLERY--#StopS359!*  MONDAY, APRIL 15th, 2pm

North Carolina General Assembly
16 W. Jones Street, Raleigh

Bring all your friends and come pack the NCGA Senate gallery Monday, 4/15, at 2pm.  The Senate will be voting on the extreme anti-abortion bill S359--Come fight for reproductive rights and abortion access and to #Stop359!

The North Carolina General Assembly is again trying to restrict abortion access and use our bodies for political stunts. S359 (H602 in the house) is an extreme anti-abortion bill written by politicians, not doctors, that has no basis in medicine or science.  The sole purpose of this bill is to intimidate patients and criminalize doctors and healthcare practitioners.

It's yet another effort by the anti-abortion majority to push extreme and inflammatory rhetoric in order to achieve their ultimate goal: banning abortion altogether.

Help us pack the Senate gallery of the NCGA

Please also keep calling and emailing your members of the NCGA and tell them to vote against S359 and its companion bill H602! Find your NC House and NC Senate members here: https://www.ncleg.gov/RnR/Representation

And, keep contacting Governor Cooper to tell him to veto S359, to veto H602, and to veto all other anti-abortion bills that reach his desk.
Phone: (919) 814-2000
Online: https://governor.nc.gov/contact/contact-governor-cooper





"Something," Ilhan Omar, and Islamophobia

Why is the GOP hating women of color today?

Well, here it is.




 So several things here. People are mad because she didn't call 9/11 murder, she called it "something." And why she might have done that - the answer to this is absolutely illustrated in the Post's reaction and in people's reaction below. See the quote a few paragraphs down.

She may have said that because she was talking in that moment that was picked out and over-analyzed about the resulting Islamophobia and the blanket assumption after 9/11 that all Muslims and more widely all brown people are terrorists and dealt (and it remains) with everything from death threats and discrimination to actual physical harm.

So proving her point, the NY Post puts the signature picture of the burning towers and responds to the Congresswoman's words with all the power of its shoddy journalism on the front page with a giant headline, guaranteed to whip up the uninformed hatemongers into a frenzy. Aaand this happens...

Quote:
"Hundreds of people protested Omar outside the banquet, with chants that included “Burn the Koran,” “Ilhan Omar go to hell,” and “Shame on you terrorists.”
She used her speech to talk about Islamophobia, and she did not mince words about President Trump, saying she believed that he played a role in fueling “hate against Muslims.” "

So you see the Islamophobia she was referring to is alive and well.

When someone says 9/11 is murder, it puts the attention on the perpetrators, which was done after the tragedy to generate hate widely for brown people and Muslims and flag waving vengeance and a desire to kill in another ill-conceived invasion in Afghanistan and Iraq, the latter having nothing to do with it. Do we call those murders?? There were far more victims of 9/11 than those who died in the towers and she was differentiating between them.

Note that these people aren't criticizing her words, they are saying that she is a terrorist which was the very point she was making about the atmosphere after 9/11 where government policy and GOP/Bush fearmongering had dangerous effects then and continues to now through GOP/Trump.

You can question her phrasing, her tone, or her clothes - women deal with this EVERY SINGLE DAY with sexism and women of color more so than me through racism - but she is making a valid point that we need to pay attention to.

This is the NY Post's front page news:


And here you have another example of the NY Post's opportunistic bottom feeding exploitation of fear, racism, and stereotypes. Sub par journalism would be one thing. Inciting hatred is far worse.



Sunday, March 31, 2019

Size Matters, But Training Helps!


Most of my jiu-jitsu training partners outweigh me by at least a hundred pounds. Sometimes more. I’m a 5’0” 41-year-old bookish introvert. This sport is hard. I get mat burns and sore fingers and bruises. Am I doing well? Do I look like a purple belt? Everyone’s bigger and stronger. Why keep coming back?


A lot of folks seem to rely on quite a bit of strength at first if they happen to be built that way. I wasn’t born that lucky or with a particular interest in spending hours on the machines in a gym next to guys flexing for themselves in mirrors. Why stick around if you’re not winning?

In working with bigger folks, I have had to be mostly technical and that can be demoralizing, especially as a beginner without many tools in the toolbox. Even later I think – I’m a purple belt after all, I should be somewhat good at this. This sweep should work! It’s hard and I spend a lot of time figuring out how to escape – which is to say on the bottom sucking stale, sweaty air, ineffectually shrimping, being the proverbial nail instead of the hammer, as the Gracie quote goes. I don’t have it all figured out now, but I’m better than I was when I started! That’s a win for me.

There are some advantages to being small like speed and fitting into spaces people don’t realize they’re leaving, but if all my weight isn’t in the two or three points I’m using for the technique, it’s probably not going to happen. Even when I’m doing it perfectly, their strength gets the better of me many times. Size matters. That’s just a fact. That doesn’t have to ruin the fun though! Is crushing everyone you meet what you consider winning? Is that the goal of your training?

Not all competition and vigorous training is bad. I do kind of dread the type of competition when you first get your purple belt or a new guy thinks “oh, this tiny lady should be an easy submission.” But when you find good people who respect each other and watch out for one another, a little competition can be good. There is a way to push each other, up the pace, but still in a playful controlled way. You both understand that your life doesn’t depend on “winning” this particular session. If your guard gets passed or you get swept, it’s not the end of your career. It means a little more work maybe. Now you have to pass guard again. But it certainly doesn’t reflect poorly on who you are as a person. It’s not a character flaw. If you’re on the mat, you’re learning and getting better. If you’re doing the work, you’re winning.


Though I enjoy friendly competition, I’m also putting my life in your hands as a smaller person. We smaller folks have to stay vigilant about a partner muscling through techniques or whether or not to invert or turtle if a heavier person might do something dangerous. Even if not explicitly stated each time, we all – no matter our size – still trust each other with our joints and necks. Training partners are there to make each other better and take care of each other. You’re not there to practice “street techniques” or mark off “wins” in your jiu-jitsu notebook. At least I hope not – not in an open mat and especially not during a regular class. There’s a high degree of trust involved that we don’t necessarily think about on a day to day basis. But if we’re all – regardless of size – in it for cooperative, respectful competition rather than skull crunching, spine crushing, knee wrenching wins we’ll all last longer, learn more and have more fun doing it.




I wrote this for:
https://geoffbalmebjj.com/2019/03/31/size-matters-but-training-helps/

Sunday, March 24, 2019

Toxic Masculinity and Libertarianism



I've been increasingly interested in the links between white supremacy and domestic violence since the mass shootings have been linked to these and toxic masculinity is in the news. There are links and associations amongst those things throughout society as we've seen in Gamergate, guests on sports radio shows and their massive popularity, and even some presidential candidates' problematic associations. In trying to find a driving force, left and right didn't seem all that helpful/conclusive, but libertarianism seemed a possible likely connection with the emphasis on individual liberty at the expense of altruism/equality/liberty for ALL. -- and it says MRA are two sides of a coin, not that if you're one, you have to be the other (but you could be). And, yes, there are different strains of libertarianism, so don't sweat it if you don't have MRA tendencies!

This article is from 2015 and so maybe unacceptable to many, but I wondered if anything like this had been written...and it turns out it had. There are three good quotes below, presented for your introspection.

Why Libertarians and MRAs Sound the Same When They Talk About Feminism

On MRA:

"For those of you who are blissfully unaware, men's rights activists are basically weaponized douchebags. They tell us that feminism has gone too far and men are now second-class citizens."

On privilege bolstering MRA or libertarianism:

"Obviously, the idea that we all go through life as isolated individuals and that group identities (race, class, gender, sexuality, etc) don't define us in any meaningful way could only seem plausible to a white man of at least moderate financial means—or anyone bound up in the aspirational fantasies of whiteness, masculinity, and economic elitism. Whiteness, and especially straight male whiteness, is treated as the de facto standard from which others deviate, to such an extent that a straight white (cis, able-bodied) man can completely forget his experience is not universal. From within that perspective, it's easy to see freedom as consisting in, and only in, being left alone to do whatever you want with your money."

And ding ding ding - we have a winner!-->👇

"Both libertarians and MRAs are dedicated to missing this point. They speak in the language of individual rights and equality because by reducing all the complexity of the social world down to a set of isolated units, they can pretend that everyone's privileges and disadvantages are rightfully earned."

Banning Abortion in the Case of Down Syndrome

Banning Abortion in the Case of Down Syndrome

Arkansas Senate approves bill banning Down's syndrome abortions

Arkansas ‘Down Syndrome Discrimination by Abortion Prohibition Act’ (SB 2)


As it impinges on the right to an abortion I don't think anything should - if you are pregnant and don't want to be, you should have the right to decide - but I don't think Down Syndrome is a good reason for it if you want kids in the first place. 

I don't think one *should* abort for sex selection or Down Syndrome or anything along those lines. But that's a different question than a legal ban. Bans get into the state requiring you to give a reason and or proof and that's extremely problematic for privacy in medical care and maintaining a right to abortion in general. Obviously there's a movement to ban abortions of which this ban is likely a part, not just a disingenuous slippery slope argument. It's got to remain an opinion and up for discussion rather than law if we want to keep the right to choose at all.

What about Iceland? They've got such a low number of Down Syndrome births.

As long as there is choice in the matter - which is a necessary right of bodily autonomy - it won't be eradicated, as headlines frequently announce. I don't even like using that word, eradicated, but it drives home a certain point about our problem with ableism in this country and the extent to which Down Sydrome isn't really a disease that you can, in good conscience, speak about in such a way. You aren't going to "eradicate" it with any sort of preventative measure at this point - those things aren't known as far as I know. It's not polio. Eliminating a single disease is good and there are vaccines that accomplish that by preventing the spread of them and keep people from catching it. You don't "catch" Down Syndrome though.

The facts are, that Down Syndrome isn't a disease and the eugenics aspect is hard for me to deal with. Eliminating a segment of the population with traits some simply find undesirable is troubling, to say the least. With Downs, sure the are health issues, but there are a host of other traits that make them much needed members of society. We would be less without them. I wonder what the line would be if we could predict blindness or other things from the womb. Who would be next? Maybe in Iceland and the Netherlands they are in general a more cooperative or collective society and services wouldn't diminish despite a lower incidence and there wouldn't be more stigma/discrimination, but I suspect that situation here would be a disaster.

It might seem like a positive, this near eradication in Iceland, but talk of eradication is hard to reconcile (or frankly hear anyone discuss) with knowing Down's people and what they've added to my life. It's not like polio, where there's a vaccine and you're eradicating a disease instead of a set of traits and a particular personality. We would be less without them. 

I hope the thinking doesn't change among our population such that it goes the way of Iceland - I wonder if it comes with a greater intolerance of all disability - but equally I hope abortion is never banned again.

---

If you want to read something by someone who said it better, you can read this by a woman who has experience:

The "Down Syndrome Abortion Ban" Uncovers A Difficult Truth About Pro-Choice Politics & Disability

A couple of quotes from the article, things to think about:

I do not believe my daughter's mutations are an accident. I do not believe they are a gift. I believe they are part of who she is. And I know that I will always feel grateful and honored to be Esmé’s mother, just as she is.

Genetic mutations, genetic difference, is what has allowed us to become more resilient as a species. It is at the root of how we grow and adapt.

Instead, what we need, and what individuals like Esmé require of us, is a turn toward compassion, selflessness, joy, and determination in the face of struggle.

---

From the struggle in Ireland where people with Down Syndrome were used as political pawns by anti-choicers.

STOP USING DOWN SYNDROME AS ANTI-CHOICE PROPAGANDA


Quote from article:

Writing in the Irish online publication The Journal, Darach Ó Séaghdha, the father of a toddler with Down syndrome, takes issue with the "Love Both" flyer. He's tired of seeing faces of children with Down syndrome in anti-abortion propaganda and almost nowhere else. "She's more likely to see a girl like her in such propaganda than she is to see a girl like her in a TV show or even working in a shop," he writes. Meanwhile, he’d like to see these groups put similar efforts into expanding postnatal services.



Gaza war crimes report

Gaza war crimes report and what's been in the news the past two months...


So a run down on news in Palestine. There's always too much to digest, but when the world notices and makes a report of Israel's war crimes I feel it's always a positive.



👉First, a new film. 1949: Creation and Catastrophe

https://mondoweiss.net/2019/02/last-eyewitnesses-nakba/


👉February 2019 - any time war crimes are officially pointed out, I am here for it. There will be no adverse effects for the criminals, but at least it is being recorded - this time.

UN Investigators Call For Arrests Over Gaza War Crimes

UN says Israel's killings at Gaza protests may amount to war crimes



👉Two ads in the Israel elections that seem to say the quiet part loud and incite violence:


First ad -- 

 https://t.co/s8Y4Oziw75

And the shooting one -- with video 😥😤
Jewish Lawmaker Shoots Dead Arab Colleague in Campaign Video; Complaint Filed
👉March 2019 - continued terrorizing of peaceful protesters

Palestinian shot, injured as Israeli army attacks peaceful Kufr Qaddoum protests


👉Israel's need for self-defense just doesn't hold up.

'Endless Trip to Hell': Israel Jails Hundreds of Palestinian Boys a Year. These Are Their Testimonies
"A report a year earlier from British legal experts concluded that the conditions the Palestinian children are subjected to amount to torture, and just five months ago the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe deplored Israel’s policy of arresting underage children, declaring, “An end must be put to all forms of physical or psychological abuse of children during arrest, transit and waiting periods, and during interrogations.”"


👉Susan Abulhawa's social media feed brought this one to my attention. Maybe it's as a result of the Ilhan Omar issue where she called out the US bias and AIPAC lobby group's stranglehold on American politics and was wrongly derided as being anti-Semitic.


Israel’s Stranglehold on American Politics

"The Israel lobby’s buying off of nearly every senior politician in the United States, facilitated by our system of legalized bribery, is not an anti-Semitic trope."


👉Saying the quiet parts loud. Israel isn't a state for all its citizens - only for Jews. We all knew that. Now we can fight apartheid and get rights for all equally?  Right?


Benjamin Netanyahu says Israel is ‘not a state of all its citizens’


👉Somewhat related to the previous link, the US Trump administration recognized Israeli soverignty over the land they stole in Syria although they have no authority to do so.

Trump says US will recognize Israel's sovereignty over Golan Heights

And of course some in the apartheid state would like to make the apartheid official and have the US declare the West Bank the property of Israel, also contravening international law.

Israel MK calls for Trump to recognise Israel’s annexation of West Bank


👉Daily acts of violence and injustice against Palestinians

Two Palestinian Families Forced by Israeli Authority to Demolish Their Homes


Friday, March 22, 2019

Me and Joe Rogan, Part Deux: Is He Liberal and Open-minded?


There has been push back as to my assertion that Joe Rogan isn't as liberal as fans think he is. I still think he's maybe more liberal than his listeners, but definitely right of center on many things, though occasionally leaning left and mostly libertarian.

His anti-PC rants make it clear he's a privileged white guy and trivializes and diminishes anyone else's experience who sees the world as anything but how he sees it. PC is just about not being as asshole, yet he wants to retain his right to be an asshole and be considered nice and reasonable. But this isn't a right. You can say what you want! But don't be surprised when people call your sexism sexism.

In his 2016 show, which if you had any doubts about his leanings, is called Triggered. Out of the gate with the title he's belittling marginalized groups' daily discrimination and issues by kind of laughing them off. “Oh, why do you need safe spaces and trigger warnings, you oversensitive snowflakes!” He feels this way because he doesn't experience these hardships brought on by gender or race and has no desire to understand those who do. He even goes farther and says they are trying to censor and control him, which is absurd. Instead of trying to understand where people are coming from in his so-called inquisitive manner, he hand waves his obstinance saying “it's all good.” He puts up a wall of objection to much need introspection on his part and then “forgives” the marginalized groups for offending him in a way entirely manufactured by him not putting himself in their shoes. Is that gaslighting? It's something.

Quote form the Maxim review ofTriggered:
“If that title and Rogan’s history of criticizing political correctness has you expecting a 60 minute screed against safe spaces and microaggressions, you’re going to be disappointed. Rogan certainly takes his swipes—feminists, transgender people and Instagram models will find cause to take offense—but...”
--So basically, don't expect a horrible screed, it's just going to be good-natured trans and gay and feminist bashing! It's all good!

Look at his guests if you need further proof of his leanings – and I'll give alternative guest ideas as we go. (I also understand that it won't work if my guest suggestions don't want any part of Joe Rogan or if Rogan himself is completely uninterested in the topics or guests. That would be a further proof that he's not as open as he would have you believe.) He'd rather talk with incels, neo-Nazis, fake moon landing guy or quack pseudoscience when he gets high and “curious” rather than a wide range of people. He's applauded for this “learning” though never really pushes his actual intellectual or ideological boundaries. In order for me to see a leftist or someone liberal and curious about left leaning things, I'd see him asking: what is restorative justice? What does abolishing ICE or abolishing prisons mean? What would that world look like? But he instead wants to find a leftist hypocrisy between feminists wanting to see rapists in jail and leftist talk of closing prisons. And he doesn't really even want to explore that so much as make a declaration. His curiosity just does not extend in that leftward direction like everyone wants to say. He saves all the open-mindedness and curiosity for the right, alt-right and right wingnut part of the spectrum – if it is a spectrum at all, which I would debate.

Same with anything to do with women. He's not open to introspectively challenging his beliefs that feminists hate men or feminism is bad. He has zero curiosity except when he has "proof'" that actually women are the problem  - and then it isn't a feminist guest, but a link with a title he likes (though the article didn't say what he was asserting... ). 

A search for Joe Rogan and feminists will get you JRE #724 with Christina Sommers (and a long list of his problems with feminists and feminism, showing that he really doesn't get it). A quick search on Sommers will give you her connection to conservative think tank AmericanEnterprise Institute where she thinks about gender with Dick Cheneyand those like-minded freethinkers


Rogan likes guns. But not particularly women or trans people. But they could bond over guns, if not a belief in equality or the protection of their further existence on the planet.


Cristen and Caroline, hosts – very long list of references on gun owning groups, if interested!
Queer and Trans Gun Club - https://twitter.com/trigwarnatl

I don't like guns, so I can't really speak to all these groups, but maybe they'd be interesting or sparka liberal's curiosity.

https://www.triggerhappypanda.com/
Trigger Happy Firearm Instruction, LLC is dedicated to empowering women through safe firearms education! We aim to effectively educate 1 million women on firearms safety and fundamentals.

Or this? Socialist Rifle Association.
The Socialist Rifle Association's mission is to uphold the right of the working class to keep and bear arms and maintain the skills necessary for self and community defense.
They oppose assault weapons bans AND the US backed coup in Venezuela. How about that.
I don't know anything about that. Rogan is likely not curious. https://socialistra.org/




For UBI, universal basic income, he had Andrew Yang, Richard Spencer's favorite and not someone who could really explain the pros and cons.


Robert Reich may not come on there, but Dan Savage did in t#512 (2014, so maybe UBI, marginal tax rates and Medicare For All wasn't as popular then?). All people got from this appearance on Reddit was - did Joe Rogan “win” or “lose”. Facepalm. Savage isn't really all that liberal either - he's another with one of these privileged white boy libertarian streaks.



He could have antifa people on and talk about how the media portrays them. He could have democratic Socialists on and talk about how they are demonized as Stalinists. There's very little "inquisitiveness" with respect to leftist topics whereas he gives more of a frenemy vibe and wide latitude to a wide variety of right wing nuts.



Rogan has had Ben Shapiro on, but no one from anything like Current Affairs? https://www.currentaffairs.org/



I wonder how this show compares to Rogan? https://burnitalldownpod.com/
“What do you get when you put a Think Progress sports reporter, a Canadian sports activist and a Hofstra professor together on the same podcast? One capitalist-hating, Trump-hating, NFL protest-loving group of far Left women.” – NewsBusters
  • Brenda Elsey, Associate Professor of History at Hofstra in New York
  • Jessica Luther, freelance sportswriter and author in Austin, Texas
  • Shireen Ahmed, freelance writer and sports activist in Toronto
  • Lindsay Gibbs, sports reporter at ThinkProgress in Washington, DC
  • Amira Rose Davis, Assistant Professor of History and Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies at Penn State University
Any libertarians there?


Anyone from Can We All Be Feminists would be a good informative gues, but I think anyone in trans or fat activism he'd just laugh at with no curiosity to be found whatsoever. Not that they would be open to such a forum given his reputation...



Another author is Kendi. I can't see him coming on, but who knows.


I really can't see NPR types like these going on Joe Rogan, but that would be interesting.
John Biewen and Celeste Headlee, Scene On Radio


Josie and Clint do the Justice In America podcast. Would they come on? They could explain criminal justice if he wanted, though.
“Justice in America,” hosted byJosie Duffy Rice and Clint Smith III, is a podcast for everyone interested in criminal justice reform—from those new to the system to experts who want to know more.


Another author - not sure she'd come on, but I loved her book. She explained feminism well.
Soraya Chemaly, author Rage Becomes Her

-Vienna women's city mentioned in RBH --
https://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2016/oct/13/why-arent-we-designing-cities-that-work-for-women-not-just-men

-Brazil - the self defense class mentioned in RBH --


PrisonCulture to talk about Cyntoia Brown or others she's advocated for.


Jeremy Scahill on imperialism/warmongering – I feel like he could talk with Joe and not be too academic for him. I couldn't find if he's been on. I feel like he could appeal to the Abby Martin folks.


Maybe he could have someone on to talk about the ERA - he likely thinks it's not needed, but why not push himself to find out why people think it is?




Sunday, March 17, 2019

The New Zealand Mosque Attack and Clinton's Concern Trolling

Chelsea Clinton went to a memorial for NZ victims of the mosque shootings and was confronted by two NYU students, a Palestinian Muslim and her Jewish friend (Rose Asaf and Leen Dweik ) to tell her she wasn't welcome at the event- they aren't comfortable with it- for endorsing the same sort of Islamophobia that inspired the NZ attacks. It seems even the left is accusing the students of both saying Chelsea caused the attacks and for attacking a rich white pregnant lady. How dare they. I know the left is new and divided on support of Palestinians and standing up against Islamophobia, but this seems very backwards.

**********

I posted this on FB mostly to shout my dismay at the void so excuse the tone:


One of the US Democratic Socialist groups on FB posted this, uncharacteristically:

It says Clinton is the epitome of grace under fire, would that we all could be like this rich white lady whose white teary words we quoted extensively! 

Um no. 

Also, Leen Dweik and Rose Asaf were misquoted as accusing Clinton of causing the NZ attacks. False. Read the students' actual account:

Don't defend Cheslea Clinton. Are we applauding her not punching someone? She deserved to be spoken to (she was neither yelled at nor attacked) and the young woman did NOT say she caused it but that her attacks against Ilhan Omar (and others) were the same sort of Islamophobia you see leading up to the violent attacks and it needs to stop. 

The Palestinian student felt Clinton's presence was detrimental to the healing process and she shouldn't be there. Valid concern. Clinton did not respect or understand that.

Do not applaud concern trolling.

What white people saw and identified with in Clinton was the confusion and hurt we white people feel for exerting white privilege or trying but failing to be an ally. But that isn't victimhood, it's coming to terms with our privilege, it's growth. Growth is painful, as we see in the video. She should just listen, correct herself if she wants to help, and leave if they want her to. She shouldn't be exalted or pitied. She's no more a victim than Megan McCain.


This person is remembering the victims on twitter:


Another truth...