May 27, 2007

Ask.Tell.Act Coalition

Hi everyone!

Wow, so this is my first post. I wanted to let you all know about the Ask.Tell.Act Coalition, which has been formed in opposition to Pride's theme: "Ask. Tell. Proud to Serve Our Community, Our Country, Our World." The theme's description further states, "We are proud of our service and we are happy to share our lives with you. Just ask, and we'll tell!". Below is a letter from the coalition detailing why we oppose this theme.

"Dear Boston Queer/LGBTQPI… Community Members and Allies,

The Boston Pride Committee has chosen a divisive theme (and imagery) for Boston Pride that glorifies militarism and shows a misplaced sense of priorities. In response, concerned organizations and individuals have formed the Ask. Tell. Act. Coalition to encourage our community to think about the issues of militarism, corporitization, transphobia, sexism, and racism that are presented by the theme. We are asking for your support and solidarity in ignoring the Boston Pride Committee’s theme by including the messages below on your floats, signs, and other Pride materials, and by wearing something hot pink on the day of Boston Pride.

ASK: Why celebrate militarism?

We believe that it is wrong to echo militaristic culture for our queer pride celebration when thousands of lives are being lost due to the bloody and increasingly senseless occupation of Iraq. We believe that it is wrong that billions of dollars are spent funding war and occupation around the world while the needs of our veterans and our society’s countless other human needs are left unattended. Furthermore, we stand against the trend of prioritizing the fight against “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” at a time when the youth of our community are facing an epidemic of homelessness, and the transgender people of our community are facing violence and discrimination at every level of our society. There is no pride in war and occupation.

TELL the truth about injustice!

We believe that the language that the Boston Pride Committee has chosen creates the impression that Pride is a day for LGBT people to put our lives on display for the straight, dominant culture. Not all of us are willing or safely able to answer any question asked of us, as the theme suggests. While, this theme celebrates “our service to society”, we believe that Pride should not be a day in which we celebrate our “service” to the dominant culture, but a day for ourselves to celebrate our pride in being who we are. We reject this language because many of us are not willing or able to proclaim our pride in what we do for an occupation, to make money, or to “serve.” We live in a society in which queer immigrants are enduring violent, terrifying raids at work and home. We live in a society in which many transgender people cannot find jobs due to discrimination. We believe it is unfair, offensive, and in some cases dangerous to encourage the most discriminated against members of our community to march in pride of our “service.”

ACT to transform our community, country, and the world!

We owe it to ourselves and to the many brave queer people who came before us to continue the legacy of proud resistance that accompanies queer pride celebrations. We must embrace a spirit of liberation. We believe that there are countless ways to express pride in our identities without allowing ourselves to become owned by Big Pharma, Airlines, Credit Cards, Liquor Companies, and Banks. Major corporations have no right to exploit and profit off of our community. Our sexualities and genders are shaped by all the identities we carry. We believe that in order to truly celebrate our queerness we must make the choice to stand up against racism, sexism, classism, militarism, assimilation, and all systems of oppression.

Please join us in making a visual impact at Boston Pride by including these messages of resistance and social justice in your signs, floats, and materials. Instead of camo, wear something hot pink on Boston Pride day!

In Solidarity, Happy Queer Pride!

The Ask. Tell. Act. Coalition

P.S. Our Alliance meetings are every Sunday at 5PM at Community Church in Copley Square. All are welcome to attend."

There has been a lot of discussion surrounding this response from the greater queer community, and a space has been created for that dialogue on the website http://asktellact.org. There have also been multiple articles by In Newsweekly and QueerToday.com. I'd love to hear feedback from you and, if your interested, see you in hot pink at Pride.

May 21, 2007

The Small Things.

Earlier this semester, I was talking to a student who was telling me about his experience with just starting to come out at college. He said that, as an international student, he had not known many openly LGBTQ people before coming to Harvard, and that he was still nervous about coming out to anyone. He told me that, in a class he helped to teach, there was a student who had a rainbow pin on his bag. He said that even though he didn't speak with the student very much, every time he saw that student on campus, he felt safer and more comfortable. It made a difference to him.

I think we forget that sometimes, something as tiny as wearing a rainbow pin (or a trans-positive bracelet, or an AIDS-awareness ribbon, or an sexual assault awareness button) can make a difference by letting people know that you are a safe, supportive person and a potential ally or friend.

The small things matter too.

May 20, 2007

This is what it means

I've spoken before about the close but conflicted relationship I have with my antidepressants. I mentioned in that post that not taking your meds when you're supposed to leads to withdrawal symptoms.

Well, here we are again. This time, I'm in withdrawal (actually just starting to come out of it) because my psychiatrist, scatter-brained to the point of really worrying me sometimes, didn't call in my prescription - despite the fact that I had e-mailed him two weeks before I was due to run out to schedule another med consult (no answer), and then spent an entire week without meds having his office page him once or twice a day. In the past, it's happened because I was too in-denial to keep taking them even when I very much needed to, and once because I had neither the health insurance to pay for them nor the $90 to spend out of pocket.

The why, though, is neither here nor there at the moment. Today I'm talking about the what. When I say "withdrawal," what does that really mean? (I'm tempted to describe what "depression" means for me, too, but honestly I'm still too fragile at the moment to try that.)

I found a partial list of known symptoms online; they include "sweating, fever, abdominal discomfort, suicidal thoughts, anxiety, headaches, insomnia, nausea, vomiting, and hallucinations," and I have (to some degree) experienced most or all of these over the past week, along with irritability, extreme weepiness, lethargy, and - oh right - the depression that I wasn't being treated for.

Sounds a little unpleasant, right? Problem is, it's a damn sight more than a little unpleasant - listing the symptoms doesn't even come close to conveying this.

When I say "sweating" and "fever," imagine a muggy night of summer, but without all the sort of sexual tension that lends it charm in movies. Nah, this is one of those oh-God-let-me-peel-my-skin-off nights, where you wish you could float an inch above the bed because even your crisp cotton sheets are unbearably hot against your skin. Not that they're crisp anymore, since there's a person-shaped blob of sweat soaking through them to the mattress. And add to that the fact that it's not a muggy summer night at all; this is all happening in the spring, when your building very sensibly still has the central heating turned on for the comfort of everyone who isn't coming down of psychoactive medication. Yay for them, I say; but it's just one little additional misery.

As for "abdominal discomfort," let's go ahead and class this with "nausea" and "vomiting," shall we? Not that they're synonymous - abdominal discomfort, to my mind, also covers having to go the bathroom every couple hours so that anything you've been able to eat since last time can come streaming back out of you like Montezuma's Revenge. It means being able to keep food inside you just long enough to absorb the calories but never long enough to feel full, which is a recipe for overeating and weight gain if I ever heard one. (And yes, I've gained weight this week. A little over five pounds, actually.) It means being acutely aware of how far you are from a toilet at all times so you don't shit your pretty little pants in the middle of class. As for vomiting, not only is it the same story from a different angle, so to speak, you get the additional thrill of being mistaken for drunk when you have to beg a bus driver to pull over so you can get out and barf. The joys of nausea in a college town.

"Suicidal thoughts" are, for me, an interesting category. I am, thankfully, not a terribly suicidal depressive; the most proactive thing I've ever done to end my own life was to cross the street without looking and hope that Things Took Care Of Themselves. So for me, suicidal thoughts (and their much more frequent companion, the more general "thoughts of self-harm") are more like catalogue-shopping, albeit against my will. The images flash through my head - some part of my body bloodied, perhaps, or a group of people at my funeral - and while I may stop at the ones which are particularly noteworthy, there's no sense that what I'm seeing in these pictures will ever necessarily be mine. So no, I'm not planning to kill or otherwise harm myself - but I'd be lying if I said that the thought hadn't crossed my mind. A lot.

After all, what else is there to do when you're stuck with insomnia, which is not the next little beauty on our list but might as well be? Actually, that's not true - there's plenty to do when you can't sleep, so long as you have internet access. A world of Flash games awaits the insomniac, and I have actually come into a psych clinic and said, "I've been playing too much Block Breaker and Bejeweled - there's something wrong." There are also new blogs to read and become temporarily obsessed with, online window-shopping to do, and ceiling tiles to count. I mean this last part metaphorically, since my ceiling is of a quite smooth plaster, lacking not only tiles but cracks, paint splotches, and anything else that might be countable or at least visually interesting. Trust me. I've spent nights looking.

Insomnia's particularly isolating, by the way, because unless you live with someone and that person is also an insomniac, you have tangible evidence of your aloneness. There is an hour, even here, where the streets go quiet and the pigeons aren't yet awake, when there is no dorm noise and nobody starting flamewars online. Hell, even the spammers aren't awake. Nor am I, really, at least not in the sense of having the brainpower to do anything. I'm just not asleep, is all, and that particular twilight time is when it's the worst.

I am exhausted right now. Not sleeping, being depressed, being in withdrawal, and writing this post have exhausted me. I'm sorry, I promised you more - perhaps a story about weepiness meaning that I saw a picture of a military dog online and burst into tears at the thought that it might die in battle - that would add some color to the whole thing, wouldn't it? Well, sorry to disappoint - which seems to be all I ever say anymore. Sorry to let you down, but I'm just too bone tired to talk anymore, or to type - let alone packing for my upcoming move, preparing for next week's in-class presentations, or studying for a qualifying exam I'll probably fail.

I'm just too tired. And that's part of what it means.

May 17, 2007

Congressional Food Stamp Challenge

Several members of Congress are taking on a challenge that I am guessing few of our national leaders have had to experience. They are taking a "Food Stamp Challenge." They have agreed to live for one week on the average budget that the government allows for food stamp recipients. The national average for that budget is $21 per week - if they can afford 3 meals a day, that is $1 per meal.

At first, I wasn't sure how I felt about this. Is it a voyeuristic exploration of what poverty is like or how fun it is? After reading more about it, I actually think they are doing good work. This is partly because they have a lot of power - they may be able to change government programs and laws, or their colleagues may be convinced by seeing their challenges or working with them. They also seem to recognize that while they are doing this for one week, this isn't their everyday reality and they still don't know as much as people who have to live on that budget each week. They are keeping a blog on what they learn and in this early post they quote a speech Congressman McGovern made on the floor of the house.


Yesterday, Congresswoman Emerson and I went grocery shopping at the Capitol Hill Safeway for the week. However, she was a more efficient shopper than I was. While she made it through the checkout line in 30 minutes, it took me almost an hour and a half to find food that fit my budget, and that was even with the much-appreciated assistance of Ms. Toinette Wilson, a D.C. food stamp recipient, who assisted my wife Lisa and me with our shopping.
Lisa McGovern calls taking on the challenge their "small effort to bring attention to a very big concern... As we all know, some people -- far, far too many people -- are already painfully aware too of the reality of hunger and living on $3 a day. But for others, an article or a challenge like this might help direct attention to this problem and create the understanding and will -- both at the grassroots level and in Congress -- to make better policy. Any little bit that can raise awareness or provoke thought and conversation is good in my book."

Other public servants taking the challenge, who have taken it, or who plan to take it include Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski, Utah Governor John Huntsman, Jr., New York City Councilman Eric Gioia, Rep. Jo Ann Emerson from Missouri, Rep. Jan Schakowsky from Illinois, and Rep. Tim Ryan from Ohio.

On the blog, you can find information about the actual challenge including the McGoverns' grocery receipts, but you can also find out more about the other ways that some of these public officials are working to fight hunger, including the Feeding America's Families Act, about which I know little but plan to learn.

About the food they are eating itself, Rep. Ryan said, "On a dollar per meal, a person can't buy fresh fruit and vegetables," and " No money for meat, milk, juice, fresh fruit or vegetables, save for a single head of 32-cent garlic to flavor the tomato sauce." Lisa McGovern says, "It seems there are two ways to think of this: if we want to eat healthy food, this is like a very strict diet or a semi-fast. There is strict rationing of protein and fruits and vegetables. If we want a more satisfying portion size, the only way to do it is lots of rice, pasta or beans."

As a numbers person who also does a lot of cooking, this seems quite obvious. Obviously for $21, you can't get much. But I have to admit, I've never eaten for $21 a week, even for one week and I am a vegetarian and think of myself as a cheap eater. I hope this challenge gives people like me, but maybe who aren't numbers people, a little bit of an idea of what Food Stamps buy. At least maybe a few more jerks will stop talking about how their tax money goes to food stamps for "welfare queens" to buy caviar.

And maybe they will urge their legislators to increase the amount of aid given by Food Stamps and other anti-hunger programs. The farm bill is going to be on the floor pretty soon and it's important to bring people's attention to food and nutrition issues before the passing and implementation of legislation that has such a strong and long-lasting impact on our food and diet.

May 16, 2007

GLBT youth homelessness. And Shane.

Katherine Moennig (better known as Shane from the L Word), just made a 4-part mini-documentary called "My Address: A Look at Gay Youth Homelessness."

You can watch it here: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 and Part 4.
















"Up to 40% of the 1.6 million homeless youth in America self-identify as gay."

"Nearly 25% of gay and lesbian teens are kicked out of their homes after coming out to their parents."

"One in five transgender individuals need or are at risk of needing homeless shelter assistance."

- National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute, National Coalition for the Homeless

"There are only 25 emergency shelter beds available to the approximately 7000 homeless GLBT youth in NYC."

- State of the City's Homeless Youth Report 2005

May 15, 2007

I was Kidnapped by Lesbian Pirates from Outer Space!

Susan Bell was an ordinary Earth girl with a great job as a secretary. But her life is turned upside down when she is kidnapped by lesbian pirates from outer space who claim she is one of them! Will she ever see her home again?
Clicky clicky.

May 14, 2007

Psychological trauma lurks in the strangest places

When I was in 8th grade, one of the most frequent things out of my mouth was, "Can I get a hall pass?" You know, a hall pass - one of those things that lets you walk out of a classroom?

Apparently, Jessica Turner of Chicago wasn't familiar with the concept. That must be why she's suing the Chicago Board of Education for, among other things, false imprisonment for having to sit in class and watch a movie. According to the lawsuit, the girl was "confined to her seat and felt she could not leave the room" while the movie was playing.

Oh - wait - I've forgotten something. The movie was "Brokeback Mountain," and in addition to false imprisonment, Turner's grandparents are suing for negligence and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Apparently, a substitute teacher played the film without informing the parents, and as a result, Miss Turner required "psychological treatment and counseling."

Now, before I start tearing into the poor kid's family - and you know it's coming - I've got to say, there are some real issues here. First, while participation in the MPAA's film-rating system is voluntary for both producers and movie-theater owners; while there are some legitimate criticisms of what content gets which rating; and while, surprisingly, the Chicago Public Schools Policy Handbook seems to contain no requirement that parents be notified before their children are shown R-rated media ( section 102.4 of the Handbook, available here in .pdf, does give parents the right to " inspect ... instructional materials used in the Chicago Public Schools," which couldbe construed to apply in this case) - I think we can all probably agree that it's a dumb idea to show 12-year-olds R-rated movies with no apparent connection to the curriculum, and it's even dumber to expect there to be no fallout. (I assume it's unrelated to the curriculum because: a - if there had been any mention of The Gay in this classroom before, I imagine the family would already have objected, and b - this was a substitute teacher showing a movie, and in my experience subs do that when they haven't been left a lesson plan.)

I mean, really - Brokeback Mountain? Couldn't she have picked something that wasn't so emotionally intense, like - I don't know - Saving Private Ryan or Crash? I'm 23, and I had to spend some quiet time alone after I saw it, and then talk it through, before I could really process it. It's a hard, hard movie.

But that, I suppose, is the underlying point: I talked about it. I processed it. (Oh, dear, I'm talking about "processing" and listening to Melissa Etheridge. When did I become a lesbian?) Perhaps this is another assumption on my part, but I'm guessing that a family which had previously filed a complaint with the district over the use of "curse words" in a piece of class reading is probably not the best environment in which to verbalize and hash out responses to a very complex and troubling movie about adultery, frustrated sexual passion, struggles with identity and duty, and homophobic violence. If the very mention of these subjects is enough to spark legal action, it's not very conducive to extended discussion. (I mean, heck, even Family Media Guide's Ask the Expert - who has gone on the record against the harmful use of "slang" such as "oh, snap" on television - agrees that judicious exposure to LGBT themes and characters, combined with parental input and discussion, is important for kids.)

And, come on - this family had already filed complaints about "curse words". Did the school not think they'd have difficulties showing a movie that had (according to Family Media Guide):

- 25 instances of "fuck"
- 7 of "ass"
- 2 of "asshole"
- 1 of "balls"
- 1 of "bastard"
- 1 of "balls"
- 1 of "bastard"
- 6 of "bitch"
- 1 of "crap"
- 10 of "damn"
- 1 of "dick"
- 13 of "goddamn"
- 19 of "Hell"
- 1 of "piss" ["piss" is profane??]
- 2 of "pussy" [or, I suppose, "pissy" - the vowel is bleeped out]
- 14 of "shit"

and, of course,

- 1 instance of "Christ," 4 of "God," and 3 of "Jesus."


This had the makings of p*ssed-off parents all over it. It was a stupid, stupid thing to do, and I'm beyond upset that CPS may have to take $500,000 away from its students in order to clean up this sub's ill-thought-out mess.

But this suit isn't about the profanity in Brokeback Mountain. "Curse words," whatever they may be and however they're defined by Miss Turner's family, did not necessitate professional pscychological intervention. After all, she was untraumatized when they showed up in her reading, even if she was partially corrupted.

Nor is it about emotional intensity. People don't say things like "It is very important to me that my children not be exposed to this," when they're talking about things that could make them sad or pensive. They don't say things like "This was the last straw ... it was against our faith." After all, Chicago's entirely uncontroversial Mayor Daley Book Club includes on this year's reading list (.pdf) books about parental suicide, racial tensions in 1959 Florida, life in a Nazi concentration camp, car theft, the Cultural Revolution, and autism. Heck, I read My Brother Sam Is Dead in 5th grade, and just narrowly escaped the harrowing experience that was Where the Red Fern Grows. In fact, parents generally expect their kids to be introduced to tough and gruesome things in school; the only controversy is which tough and gruesome things. Yeah, the point of this lawsuit was not that the movie tackled an important topic in an upsetting way.

No, no - Young Miss Turner had to go to therapy because the movie was queer, end of story. The trauma she was recovering from wasn't the trauma of seeing death on film, or coming to terms with societal violence, or having to ask hard questions about honesty and happiness - it was seeing two men fuck despite the fact that her grandparents said that sort of thing was morally wrong. If she was actually traumatized, it was by the cognitive dissonance of seeing a movie which depicted two men in love as real, imperfect, complicated, conflicted people - rather than the venom-coated archetypes of decadence and sin she's apparently been taught to believe they must be.

And I guess I understand. That kind of maybe-my-family-doesn't-speak-for-everyone confusion would have screwed with my mind, too.

But if I'd been that upset, I'd probably have just asked for a hall pass.


Read more:
USA Today (the basic AP story that's making the rounds everywhere)
NewsBusters.org
(a site dedicated to "Exposing Liberal Media Bias," but also the only place I've seen the allegations of false imprisonment, so that's why I'm including it)
CommonSenseMedia.org reviews "Brokeback Mountain."
The MPAA explains its ratings.
Gay.com snarks.
So does AfterElton.com.


May 09, 2007

The Problem with Trans 101s

I have always felt awkward doing trans 101s. I always feel like there is too much talk and not enough action. People seem to learn "about" trans people without actually having to commit to making any changes. They can stare at us and ask all sorts of questions but it doesn't seem to get us anywhere. When I do trainings, I like to focus on the barriers that trans people face in accessing basic everyday resources. I tend to use resources like a flow chart on the disproportionate poverty and homelessness faced by trans communities or one about incarceration in trans communities.

I always frame it as focusing on the systems that hurt us and how people can create change rather than obsessing about how we identify or what our bodies look like. I say things like "if it's private on you, it's private on me."

However, I have never been good at articulating my general "ick" factor at most trans 101s. Today, I read something by Dean Spade that explains the problems with a lot of trans 101s. I hope you take the time to read it and that if you are involved in trans groups, or trans organizing, that you share it with the people you work with. Here are a few quotes from the piece:

From the articles I’ve been reading, I’ve noticed a basic formula to these trans primer sections, which usually precede the analysis of law or policy the article focuses on. The point of these primers is “trans people are human.” To get to humanness, three key things are always cited: 1) intersex conditions exist, 2) some native American cultures had non-binary gender formations 3) studies show that trans people have “female brains in male bodies” or “male brains in female bodies.” I’m interested in thinking about the labor that each of these three pieces of evidence perform. How does the legitimacy and humanity of trans people get confirmed by a racist notion of the “ancientness” of non-binaristic gender through the (usually overgeneralized and inaccurate) portrayal of gender in native cultures? How do intersex conditions purportedly function as a “safe” articulation of the reality of gender variance? Why are inverted brains necessary to establish a basis for an article about, say, cases where trans people get their kids taken away from them or lose jobs for being trans?
He goes on to quote his own writing about how trans communities could be better represented.
“In terms of how I want to represent trans communities and see trans communities represented, I do have some new ideas about that recently. I think the thing I’d like to see most is for films, trainings, shows, speeches, panels and other public education tools to stop trying to answer the questions “Why are people trans? How do they feel about themselves? What are they like?” and start focusing just on “What are the obstacles to trans people’s survival and equality? What does discrimination look like? How can it be prevented?” I think that as soon as the first set of questions are in play, trans people are objects of fascination. We’re suddenly defending our very existence, participating in the assumption that we are strange, unusual, interesting, and, ultimately, that our humanity has to be proven and defended. When people attend trainings, film screenings, and events that attempt to make trans people human by explaining who we are and why we are this way we further entrench the objectifying method of viewing us that is already indoctrinates people who view us on Montel Williams or Jerry Springer and Law and Order. What we really want to be training people to do is to stop seeing trans people as rarified objects, to stop asking trans people inappropriate questions about our bodies, sexualities and life histories, to stop creating policies that demand trans people disclose genital status when non-trans people are never asked to do so, and to begin to be able to identify obstacles that they are participating in or creating to trans people’s equality and survival. This is a totally different framework for trans public education. It would include documentary film where trans people didn’t do the usual things, like talk about their childhoods and surgeries and put on make-up or binders in front of the camera, but instead where trans people, never having to explain themselves, talked about their issues with Medicaid or prisons or schools or shelters.
Read the whole piece. Share it with people and keep making changes.

On Hypocrisy

A lot of things really piss me off in life, in general, but hypocrisy probably tops the list. One thing that especially bugs me is the phenomenon whereby victims of hate and intolerance become the haters and...intolerators? I've noticed this a lot in the queer community, and it makes me embarrassed to be associated with the group. (I can really only talk about Harvard, but I feel that this is not a local thing.) Example:

"I just found out that John's a ___. Can you believe it?? Eww!"

Replace the underscores with "queer," and we all get (understandably) upset.

Replace the underscores with "conservative Christian," and you get a statement that I've heard coming from the mouths of my friends on multiple occasions.

In the queer community, the first statement is homophobia, but the second is an in-joke. I find it downright sad that people who have dealt - personally - with assumptions made about them based on an identity think that it's okay to make the same sorts of assumptions about other groups of people. I find myself constantly defending Christians, Republicans, Right to Life folks, True Love Revolution folks, and it bothers me that I find it necessary. Just like not all queers are promiscuous fuck-ups who are against traditional family values (although some are,) not all Republicans are snobby tools who hate queers (although some are.) Talk smack all you want about homophobic individuals, but please stop assuming that their views represent their religion or political persuasion or associations.

This has been on my mind for quite some time, but it was an editorial in today's Crimson that made me finally write it. To summarize, an editor from The Salient writes about how the publication represents a very small minority of conservative opinions on campus. (Something I've always assumed, but was pleased to see in print.) We (Quench) have been mocked and quoted in The Salient before, and as a non-white, female, Jew I really have no love for them. However, what's that quote again? "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." (Thank you, google.) The editorial writer talks about how he often disagrees with the opinions and practices of the publication even though he's an editor. Keeping that in mind, I hope that people will stop associating The Salient and hate speech with Conservatives who don't even have a part in the magazine.

I just ask that next time Righty groups come up in conversation, you think a little more about what you really mean to say.

May 06, 2007

May 03, 2007

Men, Media Sexism, and ending violence

I think this video by Jackson Katz interesting because it covers a ton of issues in one short video.

It starts with the recent VT shooting as a point of entry, but ends up talking about the invisibility of boys' gender when talking about youth violence.

He also makes a case for allies in feminist, anti-racist, and anti-homophobic struggles.



What do you think of the video? I am wondering 1] what message do you get from what he is saying? 2] do you agree with what he is saying? 3] do you agree with the way he is saying it? 4] who is his audience? 5] do you think these videos are useful in some way? If so, how? Obviously, you don't have to answer all these questions but I would be interested in knowing your thoughts.

Thanks to Republic of T for the video.