quench zine

"To all of the kick ass, beautiful fierce femmes out there..."

2010-04-28T03:18:00.006-04:00

Just wanted to share this. Everyone out there, take note.

Confetti: Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Prevention Act

2009-10-31T21:10:00.003-04:00

So I've clearly been under a rock, because I somehow missed the fact that the federal Hate Crimes Prevention Act has been expanded, in Obama's words, because "we must stand against crimes that are meant not only to break bones, but to break spirits — not only to inflict harm, but to instill fear."

This is the first federal law explicitly protecting transpeople! Hope for momentum!

Comments: fixed!

2009-10-23T10:51:00.001-04:00

Sorry if you tried to comment on a post and couldn't. We had shut down commenting to deal with some spammers, but it's open now. So, comment away!

Accommodation story - wwyd?

2009-10-22T20:33:00.008-04:00

11:37 am
Dear Professor X,

I'm registered with the Student Disability Office and I'll need to use a computer to type the midterm. Blah, yak, blah.

Peace dude,
gromphus

12:14 pm
Dear gromphus,

I can't have any midterms written on a computer given the requirements of the class as written in the syllabus. Blah blah blah.

[NB: Professor X is concerned about internet access. This is just a couple of essay questions: no math, no diagrams. There is no real reason why using an internetless computer should present a problem.]

Harrumph,
Professor X

.......Interlude in which Student Disability Office Chats with Professor X........

4:35 pm
Dear gromphus,

If you are sure that you have to work via computer then you will have to vouch that you will not be using the internet and we will attempt to disable it. It might be really, really complicated to disable the internet on one of the computers the SDO has specifically for testing purposes, but if you really think it's necessary for you to use a computer even though I don't want you to...

[NB: The SDO computers, obviously, have no internet access.]

SIGH,
Professor X

??:??
Dear Professor X,

Great. Let's do that. I'm afraid it is necessary for me to use a computer, since sustaining rapid writing throughout a long exam, or for the short period of time I could keep it up, is the most efficient way to put me back on the list for physical therapy. /try 1

I'm sorry this is inconvenient for you, but I just kind of like being able to use my arm, you know? Especially since I'll lose my scholarship if I can't take a full load of classes on account of inability to do my work./try 2

No, goddammit, I am NOT going to tell you about my body. I'm already registered with the Student Disability Office; they've approved my accommodation request; is this not enough to tell you that yes, I do actually really need to use a computer to write your wretched midterm?/try 3

You've been my most interesting professor up to this point. You introduced me to actor-network theory; I was planning on taking all your classes. I always go to your office hours even though you're busy with other people because you look at our field with a usefully critical eye. Is it going to be really awkward next time I try to talk with you? Are you going to assume I'm just a troublemaker? /try 4

~~I love your work, but I'm not sure I would like you personally. Certainly I don't want to trust you with the knowledge of what is wrong with me. Capice?~~ /try 5

~~I'm a bit surprised at your response, since no other professor has ever had an issue with my need for a computer.~~/try 6

~~shit.~~/try 7

Thank you for your understanding,
gromphus

What would you write?
How do you handle these kinds of situations?
Am I being unfair to Professor X?

(And don't these experiences make it all the more wonderful when we find people who are both intellectually badass and deeply good?)

(Finally, how much do we love, love, love the wonderful people at our SDO?)

Introduction

2009-08-05T08:52:00.002-04:00

Hello friends,

I'm writing this first post to introduce myself as - dare I say it? - a new quenchista. I also have a nascent personal blog but am very excited to be joining quench, blog re:all things near and dear to me. I am a current Harvard senior, although perhaps taking time off in the fall (!) before finishing up my concentration in the Studies of Women, Gender, and Sexuality (mostly the latter two).

This summer, I'm working at a fabulous, tiny organization that focuses on the rights and life chances of transgender, transsexual, and genderqueer people. I'm working on a range of projects, including support for the youth committee and creating youth-related resources, creating and kicking off a sustainable development plan, and serving on a committee dedicated to rewriting the organization's "Trans 101" workshop curriculum. My other past work experience is also in non-profit settings, and I hope to pursue a career doing community organizing and youth development work with trans and queer young people.

I think a lot about gender, including trans and sometimes intersex issues, and my other interests include (female, queer, and trans) sexuality, feminist praxis, and making room in academic work for activist and activist approaches. But I'm fun too! I'm a huge Red Sox fan, an aspiring foodie, and my most recent obsession is with my burgeoning collection of Nike kicks (picture to follow).

Anyway, I'm glad to be here, and I promise a real first post soon! Happy summer.

e

Homophobia in Tel Aviv ... And at Home

2009-08-02T17:11:00.002-04:00

I'm an ardent marriage equality activist, devoting numerous hours each week in California to try to repeal Proposition 8. In my mind, marriage equality is one more step on the long road toward social equality and the end of homophobia. But sometimes, you realize you're already on mile 118 when there are still some people stuck at the starting line.

This weekend, an unidentified attacker in a ski-mask entered the Tel Aviv Gay and Lesbian Association in Israel and opened fire on the people inside. The Center provides services for gay and lesbian youth in Israel. As a result of the attack, two people are dead (a 26-year-old man and a 17-year-old woman). At least 11 others are injured. (BBC News has coverage: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8180655.stm)

Certainly this is a horrifying and cowardly act of pure homophobia. But it shows how deep these emotions run and how truly scared many people are in this world to be accepting. Luckily, Israel is rallying against the attacker. Prime Minister Netanyahu, opposition leader Tzipi Livni, and the chief rabbis of Israel have all condemned the attack. While they may not always be strong on gay rights, at least they know when someone has gone too far.

As of the time I'm writing this, BBC is reporting about the incident on the front page of its news site. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/). Certainly the BBC has always been better at covering international news than American news outlets, which often focus on fluff stories and entertainment. But CNN, right now, is a huge disappointment.

The coverage is not, at this point, on the front page. In fact, the only way I've found it is by clicking "World" on the bottom under "More News". For awhile, this wasn't even under "Top World Stories" on the right, and you had to click "More World Stories" to get it. It slowly seems to be moving its way up the ranks. Mind you, this blatant act of homophobia is still not on the front page though, while "EW picks: Make a date with John & Kate" and "CNN Wire: Michael Jackson's mom goes to..." are.

Ok, ok... I know that CNN is often quick to report on entertainment before major news stories. But probably the most embarrassing part of their coverage is their "facts." Take for example the headline: "2 dead, 11 hurt in shooting at gay club in Israel." As I said earlier, it wasn't a gay club; it was a youth center providing services, counseling, and assistance to LGBT youth. Yes, CNN newsfolks, gay people are in fact capable of congregating in places that aren't clubs.

For the record, it's under "World" on MSNBC.com, and they correctly report that it was a "gay center." (Though their headline currently says the city is Tel Avi, not Tel Aviv; likely to be found and fixed by the time you're reading this.) New York Times also reports it as a "Gay Center" in their World section. So why, then, is CNN the only one who still thinks this was a "gay club"?

In the end, the event is rattling Israel. It reminds me that we have a long way to go in fighting for equality when sometimes we still need to make the case that we have a right to exist at all.

Post Your Testimony in Favor of Non-Discrimination

2009-07-15T17:07:00.004-04:00

A couple of people approached me and said that the quench DIY ethic required required that instead of asking someone else to post written testimony, we should gather and post it here ourselves.

So, here goes. Comment below with a link to your written testimony (anonymous is ok), or email it to quench.zine@gmail.com and we'll post it here. We will only post testimony that respects the autonomy and inherent worth of all people regardless of gender identity or expression, race, sex, religion, etc.

Here is the testimony we already have found:
(Starting with what we found from a simple google search - if I found your testimony online and you would prefer there were not a link here, just email or comment and I can take down the link).
Barney Frank, congressman
Johnny Blazes
Jennifer Levi, GLAD
Lorelei Erisis

Trans Activists in Massachusetts have their acts together

2009-07-15T14:11:00.003-04:00

Yesterday was the judiciary committee hearing for H. 1728, the transgender anti-discrimination and hate crimes bill that was called H. 1722 last legislative session.

Here is some queer press about it. I'm going to write this post assuming you've read or heard a little about it, and just give my additional impressions. If you don't know anything about it, read the article I just linked to and this primer for more info.

Firstly, our side had definitely learned a lot since the last hearing. People were armed for the heat and the wait. I saw our side coming in with their water bottles and staying for the long haul. Lots of people were dressed up, particularly those testifying. Everyone had clearly thought about what they were going to say and rehearsed. All were articulate. The panels were obviously expertly designed. Stand-out speakers included Jennifer Levi from GLAD, a high school senior who believed in justice, a panel of trans folks who had had successful experiences with their employers, parents of trans kids, and a few individual trans folks who were just great at conveying their personal experiences.

Maybe if we are lucky, MTPC will post some of the written testimony on their website so even those who weren't able to make it will be able to read some of the persuasive and powerful stories. Perhaps a few pieces of written testimony could be slected and posted with names removed? In the meantime, MTPC has posted a few stories here, here, and here.

The opposition managed to appear as a living, breathing stereotype of the way that racism, homophobia, transphobia, and sexism band together. Over and over, they noted concern about the safety of those they found to be "vulnerable," such as women and children (especially teens). However, I don't think they had a single young person testify (I left early so I could be wrong). They had no women who appeared to be under 50 testify when I was there. All of these men were worried about what would happen to women in restrooms in the commonwealth, while women's organizations were testifying that they supported the bill and that the bill is good for women's safety. The young people (teenagers) who testified did so in favor of the bill. In addition to these patronizing attempts to speak for women, and in particular young women, we heard tired homophobia (think "gay agenda" and whining about same sex marriage). One person testified about what he saw as good kinds of discrimination, and all in all, I would say the group seemed hostile to discrimination and hate crimes laws in general. Finally, several speakers seemed unable to respect simple rules and customs. They talked back to and talked over the (female) judiciary chair, and one person even had to be told that there was no name-calling allowed.

As a side-note, while complaining about trans people being bathroom predators, one opponent of the bill testified that he has been hanging out near bathrooms with a video camera waiting to videotape transwomen in women's bathrooms, and promised to post the video on his website. So who's the predator now, the woman who has to pee or the guy standing outside with the video camera?

Our community turned out in large numbers to support those testifying. I noticed that in addition to a large trans community turnout including the usual non-trans partners, family, and friends of trans folks at the hearing, there were also many leaders and allies from non-trans LGB, feminist, union, and other progressive groups. I hope we can continue working together to do everything we can to get these long-awaited legal protections passed.

Below are a few photos from the hearing that appeared on GLAD's twitter of the hearing. I recommend reading their twitter for a full account of what happened. I hope others post what they saw so that we can share our experiences of the day.

What can we do to encourage giving in our communities?

2009-05-31T11:06:00.004-04:00

In my community, a common way that people who have more than what they end encourage each other to redistribute their wealth is through house parties thrown to benefit local community organizations. I've heard of other folks forming giving circles. We also help by participating in a culture where used goods are trendy. But is all that money "saved" going to do good things?

What do you and the people you care about do to intentionally redistribute wealth? What can we all do to redistribute resources to help people survive injustice?

There are a lot of things we know about giving. We know that rich people give less as a percentage of their incomes than poor people.

And we know that rich people tend to give more often to institutions and causes that benefit mostly the rich like rich universities and museums. (They at the very least benefit the rich more directly than a group advocating for or enabling low cost local food for local low-income people, for example.)

What have you or people you know done to change the culture to one where people who have more than they need give more than 2%? Please share your ideas, tips, and strategies so that we can all learn. Because 2% is not enough.

Thoughts on 4:20. Your drugs are not "fair trade."

2009-04-20T11:20:00.005-04:00

Each year, many progressives are drawn into a holiday that somehow manages to be both underground and mainstream. April 20, 420, or 4:20, is a day that is celebrated with extensive use of marijuana, and sometimes other drugs.

I'm not trying to be a killjoy or to ruin anyone's fun this year. I'm not going to tell you "this is what your brain will look like on marijuana" or that it's the world's most dangerous drug. But on this particularly drug-centered day, I am going to ask that you that you look at your drug purchases with the same level of scrutiny you would give to a cup of coffee, a chocolate bar, or a pair of shoes. If you care about the lives of the people who are involved in producing and delivering the goods yo use, you should think extra carefully about drugs.

Here are six reasons the drugs you are buying would probably never be certified as "fair trade."

Poor people and people of color are the ones doing time for your drug use. It's not that middle class people, suburban people, or students don't do a lot of drugs. They do plenty. I don't even need to cite statistics on the first point - you know that this is true. Drug arrests and sentences are much more frequent for people in poor communities and communities of color. There are a number of reasons for this, some having to do with the over-policing of these communities, others having to do with who has more access to private spaces. Don't just think about your dealer, but about his/her dealer and his/her dealer. Most drugs go through a lot of people who reach you. And in that chain is likely to be a large number of poor folks who are making very minimal profit and who are risking a jail sentence to get you your product. More info here, here, and here.
A single drug conviction can prevent a person from receiving TANF ("welfare") or food stamps for a lifetime. This can be a conviction for possession, distribution, possession with intent to distribute, etc. So anyone caught in your chain of production and distribution who gets caught can be at an even higher risk for remaining poor. Even a person who is released following a rape, murder, attempted murder, or robbery sentence can access TANF as a safety net. Read more here.
People with drug convictions have difficulty finding housing and jobs. So that person who risks arrest somewhere in the chain of drug buying can be homeless, unemployed, and unable to receive cash benefits.
Immigration law allows deportation of some people convicted of drug crimes. An undocumented person may end up deported even if found "not guilty."
There are no minimum wages or work conditions for drug dealers. Street-level drug dealers, who are usually those at the bottom of the pyramid, are often subject to physical and emotional abuse, threats, and incredibly low pay. Oftentimes, people cannot leave once they begin working for a drug dealer, for threat of injury to themselves or to their families.
Young people are in danger all over the world because of U.S. and other "rich" countries' drug markets. Large global gangs start recruiting and threatening people young, all over the world, trying to force them to join the gangs. The U.S. public is slowly becoming more aware of the problem as a result of recent incidents near the Mexican border, but the problem is not new. Read a couple of articles on the topic here and here.

Spend your money where your values lie. Boycott the drug market until it is fair, regulated, and taxed. If you need another way to spend your money until then, consider donating to the Sentencing Project or the Marijuana Policy Project.

"Big boned," "stripper," "soft belly." Seriously?

2009-04-06T11:31:00.018-04:00

The Washington Post recently published an article called, "An Advocate for the Shimmy," about Rachael Galoob Ortega, a former attorney who now works as a belly-dance instructor. This is an interesting premise for an story, but I found the actual article to be somewhat problematic. The reporter, Christina Ianzito, really focuses a lot on Rachel's body and appearance, and the appearance of the women in her classes, instead of her activities and accomplishments. Here are some excerpts:

Tall and big-boned, she has a soft belly that is bared and shaking along with her hips

"Wow, look at that one!" exclaims a heavyset woman with short brown hair

She injects into her instructions warm laughter and self-deprecating comments about her own "muffin top" bulging over her waistband. This substance, however, is never, ever to be called "fat" in her presence.

Saphira knew she'd never be a ballerina: "I was a big girl. It was always, always very clear to me I would never excel in it, and that I didn't have the body type to be accepted in it."

"Rachael was never the best dancer or the best-looking or any of that kind of nonsense that people think about when they think about a dance performance," remembers friend and fellow performer Susan Turner Ravin.
[Some "friend"]

She found that she had a natural talent for it, and, physically, belly dance fit her perfectly.

When Saphira runs her hands through her long dark hair while gyrating at Casablanca, she isn't too far from looking like a beautifully costumed stripper.

The thing is, if you watch the video, Rachel is not overweight. She is not a "big girl." She's not "fat." She has an extremely normal and healthy body type - and frankly, one that's not worthy of the amount of time and attention that Ianzito spends on it.

Did you find the article a little strange too?

1 in 10 Americans on Food Stamps

2009-04-02T16:26:00.002-04:00

What's going on when taxpayers have bought companies that are paying their top employees millions and one in ten Americans are on food stamps.

I understand that the economy is in the toilet, but the country is bringing in enough money that everyone should at least be have enough income to eat.

I've been reading up on a few interesting ways local companies have tried to avoid layoffs like this one and this one. It seems like lots of employees have sharing spirits during this economy. Do you think the sharing will spread and help redistribute wealth and work more fairly?

Seeing the 1 in 10 number is a shock to me, not just because it is so high, but because it is a real wack on the head for me to realize that my friends are either not representative of the population, or are not comfortable being honest about what's going on with them. How do you think the fact that people are divided into different social groups in part based on income/class ties into all this? I imagine that if someone in my circle of friends lost a job they would be more likely to know someone who knows of a job opening (and doesn't have ten million other unemployed friends who she/he also wants to recommend for the job). To me, this makes the social aspects of class that are often ignored in favor of focusing on the economic aspects all the more obvious. And maybe exascerbates the problems that social class causes?

I <3 Bisexuals

2009-04-02T15:19:00.004-04:00

Looks like the Bisexual Resource Center (a Boston based group) is reinvigorating. This looks like a great time to get involved.

Here's the info that a reader sent me:

Bisexual Resource Center Volunteer Night
Eat, Talk and Get Involved
Wednesday, April 8th
7:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m.
Boston Living Center, 29 Stanhope St, 2nd floor
Right by the Back Bay stop on the Orange Line

The Bisexual Resource Center (BRC) is looking forward to another incredible year and we need your help! The BRC raises awareness about and creates community around bisexuality. With our 25th anniversary coming up in 2010, we have lots of exciting preparations in the works.

If you'd like to see what the BRC is all about and how you can get involved, please come to our Volunteer Night. We'll have snacks, postcards to sign asking our representatives for LGBT rights, and announcements on available volunteer opportunities, including:
- making signs for Pride
- blogging about the bi community
- assisting with mailings
- tabling at related events
- helping distribute the latest edition of "Getting Bi"

We invite everyone -- bi folks, lesbian/gay/straight allies, and people with no label at all -- to check out our Volunteer Night and get involved!

RSVP to let us know you'll be dropping by.

Come on bi!

Besides having a chance to meet some other great bi-friendly people, and share some refreshments, you'll also have an opportunity to win a bi-fab door prize!

Who wouldn't want to volunteer for the bi resource center? Especially if it involves food. And hopefully meeting new people, too.

Amazing Comic

2009-04-02T10:42:00.001-04:00

You gotta love XKCD.

the haters get ready - will justice succeed over tired stereotypes?

2009-03-24T22:43:00.004-04:00

As I was walking through the state house today, I saw a piece of litter on the floor and, do-gooder that I am, I leaned over and picked it up.

Okay, you all know that's not true. I accidentally kicked a piece of paper on the floor and when it landed, I thought I had dropped myself, so I leaned to pick it up. It turned out to be a flier from the opponents to the gender identity and expression equality bill. Here it is below.

It smacks of desperation, trying to use stereotypes and bizarre phobias to manipulate people to oppose the bill. Quenchistas, what do you think about the flier? Help respond to this nonsense. Explain in the comments what you think is wrong with it, how you would make a counter-argument, and how you would help more middle-of-the-road people who aren't quite as far out to the right as the people who made this flier what's wrong with this flier and why to support trans rights.

I admit it, I still wanna quench

2009-03-20T13:05:00.003-04:00

Hey quenchistas,

I have a question for you all. Do you still want to quench? Do you still want to read quench? If you're a writer, do you still want to write for quench?

I've been looking for some more interactive itching of my queer antiracist, well basically anti--bad things and pro-good things (like "people should be allowed to choose their own identities") itch, and quench was always one of those best places to scratch it.

I know posts have been down recently, but our stats say people are still visiting, and I'm wondering if people are still interested. Perhaps we can use the comments of this post to discuss why we are still/no longer interested?

I for one am interested in using this space to keep learning, growing, and being pushed in new directions. Plus, I like all of you. (Except for icarus - for her, I reserve only hate.) But I admit that I haven't been making the effort recently, and starting today, I will try to make the effort.

What do others think? (Even if it's something short - boy will I be bummed if there is so little interested that no one even comments about whether there is interest).

Free Pie for Pi.

2009-03-13T13:59:00.010-04:00

If you're not dating a hot math nerd, you may want to reconsider before tomorrow...

Free pie at Petsi Pies in Somerville, MA tomorrow on National Pi Day!

You get 10% off for every 10 digits of pi that you know - and 100 digits gets you an entire free pie.

Sadly, I can only get to 3.1459 and then I get overwhelmed.

via.

Rage-inducing story of the day

2009-03-06T12:39:00.004-05:00

This is really upsetting and horrifying:

A Brazilian archbishop says all those who helped a child rape victim secure an abortion are to be excommunicated from the Catholic Church.

The girl, aged nine, who lives in the north-eastern state of Pernambuco, became pregnant with twins.

It is alleged that she had been sexually assaulted over a number of years by her stepfather.

The full story here. The archbishop told press that "the law of God was above any human law."

Is it also the law of God to force a child to suffer? I really don't understand how someone could blindly impose religious doctrine in a situation like this. I would be interested to hear other people's thoughts.

Hey! Free stuff! - Updated

2009-03-03T16:12:00.003-05:00

So, as y'all probably know by now, I love free stuff.

Recently, I embarked on an experiment to see how many free samples of stuff I could get mailed to me by requesting it on the internet. I was really surprised by how many samples people will mail to you. There are a few good sites. I especially like Hey, It's Free! because they try to screen out any spammy/scam links.

I am going to keep y'all updated on what I actually receive in the mail.

So far, I have received:

Hugo Element cologne sample (a little cologne sheet that smells delicious. All you cologne-wearers out there, take note). Click on "Free Sample" on the site.
A little Quaker Rice Cakes MiniDelights packet. They sent me a whole little package of "Chocolatey Drizzle."
Free Barack Obama sticker ("Yes We Did") from MoveOn. You will have to verify it with an email address.
4 Lactaid tablets.
A "Being Girl" sample pack containing: 3 tampons, a pad, two pantyliners and a "Feminine Wipe."
Free Juicy Juice sippy cup!
My friend received the free Charmin toilet paper roll extender. Still not sure what that is, but you too can get one. She also received two packets of Splenda, which are probably worth less than the postage. I find that amusing.
Free Benefiber sample (All gone, but check the Wal-Mart freebies for new samples).
A bag of Orville Redenbacher microwave popcorn. Sadly, they are now out of free samples.

Yay for free stuff! Stay tuned for what else comes in mail.

GLAD challenges the Defense of Marriage Act in federal court

2009-03-03T11:27:00.002-05:00

GLAD has filed a lawsuit in Federal District Court in Boston on behalf of eight married couples and three surviving spouses from Massachusetts who have been denied federal legal protections available to spouses because of Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

Very exciting. You can learn more and get updates here.

Cookie

2009-02-14T02:52:00.005-05:00

by M. Cat Moran

Got 2 minutes?

2009-02-11T10:37:00.010-05:00

Got 2 minutes and a computer or cell phone?

If you or your friends/family are from Maine or Massachusetts, please take action on two quick items today:

1. Support transgender nondiscrimination bill in MA:

Despite having legalized same-sex marriage, Massachusetts still has no state-wide laws protecting transgender people.
You can help to change that. "An Act Relative to Gender-Based Discrimination and Hate Crimes" is being re-introduced for the 2009 legislative session
Call your reps today and ask them to support the bill (calling script available at the link). You can also write to them and sign up to volunteer.
Save the date for a transgender lobby day at the MA Statehouse: Tuesday, April 7, 10 am -1pm!

2. Support same-sex marriage bill in Maine:

If you're from Maine or know someone who is, please take 30 seconds to email your legislators urging them to support the same-sex marriage bill, which will go to hearing in April.
Even better, call them. When I called my state representative and a senator, they both answered the phone themselves. Maine is a small state and your reps are accessible and want to hear from their constituents. Be prepared with what you want to say, because you might end up talking to them directly!
Focus on the Family and their buddies have already started a campaign and set up a creepy website opposing the bill. So, show your support! Thank you.

"Claim Your Share ($78) of The Bank of America Overdraft Settlement"

2009-01-23T10:44:00.007-05:00

I think we've mentioned overdraft fees before, and if you've ever lived on a tight budget, you know that some banks charge progressively increasing overdraft fees and that Bank of America is one of the worst offenders.

So we were psyched to hear that Bank of America has settled a class action lawsuit over its policies that include approving transactions that generate overdraft fees and clearing transactions in high-to-low order to increase the number of overdrafts.

If you had a Bank of America, Fleet, LaSalle or U.S. Trust Company debit card and paid an overdraft fee some time between 2000-2007, you are probably eligible for a $78 settlement payment.

You can submit your claim online (or print a form to mail). The deadline is May 1, 2009. This seems legitimate - I called the "Claims administrator" number and spoke with someone who confirmed the information and the form doesn't ask for your Social Security number or anything like that. FAQ and court docs available here.

The settlement website says:

The lawsuit claims Bank of America made statements in its advertising, website, and customer agreements to encourage its customers to use Bank of America debit cards and increased the number of insufficient funds fees, overdraft fees, returned check fees, and similar fees...through the order in which such transactions were posted and the account balance information it provided. The lawsuit also claims that Bank of America authorizes debit card transactions that will result in overdraft fees; fails to warn customers that specific debit card transactions may result in overdrawn accounts; posts debit card and other transactions in high-to-low order; and provides account balance information to customers that is not current, accurate or as advertised.

Hope this info is helpful, and everyone is having a good day!

Maine Marriage Equality: "The Way Life Should Be"

2009-01-13T13:33:00.013-05:00

Exciting news from Maine:

The drive to end marriage discrimination against same-sex couples shifted into high gear Tuesday as leaders from Maine’s civil rights community joined with several Maine families to outline plans for legislation to be introduced in this session of the Legislature.

The bill, to be sponsored by State Sen. Dennis Damon, would end the prohibition on qualified gay and lesbian couples from marrying in Maine.

Check out the new Maine Freedom to Marry Coalition website, this video about GLBT Mainers, who want to get married and thank Senator Damon for his good work!

If you're in Maine, volunteer to help EqualityMaine send postcards to legislators urging them to support the bill and sign up for email updates.

A Follow-Up to What's Wrong with America...

2008-12-25T01:34:00.002-05:00

Rachel Maddow, who I've recently discovered (apparently, I'm a little behind the times), once again lays out how absurd this bailout has been.

In summary, have you ever filled out forms for a loan? Maybe filled out a FAFSA application? Dealt with, say, your insurance company? I'm sure when you did, all you had to do was fill out two pages, one of which was nothing more than contact information. Right? HA! FAFSA, for example, has been widely regarded as very difficult, if not impossible, to fill out.

Now let's say you're a bank that needs federal assistance from the $700 billion TARP program funded by taxpayers. How long is your form? Yep, two pages, one of which is simply contact information. And, as Rachel Maddow says, the other half is basically "How much money do you want? Is there anything else we should know?"

Don't believe me? Google "TARP Application" and visit the first hit.

Meanwhile, attempts by the Associated Press to figure out where all the money has gone have been rebuffed. Could you imagine getting a loan from a bank, then when they ask why you haven't paid it back yet, you simply say "I don't want to tell you what happened to the money?" Not going to work. Unless, once again, you're a bank getting taxpayer funds.

Seriously, $700 billion would be better spent on things like universal health care, job creation, and infrastructure improvements. Rather, we're giving it away to banks with no accountability. Less accountability than the banks use to loan it to us, because when they loan it to us, you're damn sure they're coming after you.

What's wrong with America...

2008-12-21T15:42:00.003-05:00

Now for something a little different:

According to an Associated Press analysis, of the 116 banks that received $188 billion of taxpayer money last year, the average paid to each of the banks' top executives was $2.6 million in salary, bonuses, and benefits.

For someone who makes Federal minimum wage (which will soon be $7.25 an hour, so let's use that number) and works 40 hours a week, for fifty-two weeks a year, for every year between age 18-65, they will make a grand total of $708,760 IN THEIR LIFETIME.

That's 27% of what the executives made last year alone, and the executives couldn't even do their jobs right.

To quote Mr. Barney Frank: "Most of us sign on to do jobs and we do them best we can. We're told that some of the most highly paid people in executive positions are different. They need extra money to be motivated!"

America has a huge poverty problem, and either our priorities in this bailout are clearly misplaced, or the wealthy are bilking us taxpayers for all they can get their hands on. Or both.

Not hard at all

2008-12-19T22:25:00.001-05:00

New Years in Boston?

2008-12-18T10:30:00.002-05:00

How Harvard Works

2008-12-16T12:01:00.000-05:00

Friends?

2008-12-14T12:16:00.000-05:00

An "M-to-F Kind of Girl" - Awkard

2008-12-12T17:55:00.002-05:00

Imagine someone tells you that she is an "M-to-F" kind of girl. And then you have a whole conversation about how that influences where she wants to hang out and who she hangs out with.

And you have this conversation that seems kind of strange, but you figure, whatever, I'm a socially awkward person who can make any conversation strange.

And then it turns out that "M-to-F" meant Monday-to-Friday, kind of like 9-to-5. Aside from the fact that I'm not sure what "I'm a 9-to-5 kind of girl" means, I left so confused. And I don't think she ever realized that we were on different pages at all.

Straight (non-trans) people sometimes make my head hurt.

Erase Hate

2008-12-12T11:43:00.000-05:00

Notice to all Employers

2008-12-09T18:23:00.002-05:00

Health care is not some unnecessary cost you can thoughtlessly put into your "cost-cutting measures." Especially when you start raising deductibles by the thousands of dollars!

Some people have chronic conditions and know they will reach the deductible every year. And just as bad, people without chronic conditions may not realize to budget this ridiculous raised amount.

The following arguments should never be made: (Note: Not all of these arguments were made by the same employer, as far as I know).

Such a small number of our employees would have even been impacted by this policy had it been in place last year.
One of the purposes of health insurance is cost-sharing (or risk spreading, or whatever you want to call it). You made my the point! So few of your employees would have each had to pay thousands of dollars. So why are you putting a large burden on a few people rather than paying a relatively modest amount overall.
When someone complains and say they will meet the deductible every year, you should not say, "Well, we gave you a raise equal to x% of the new deductible." And the great news is that despite the economy, we are not cutting your pay!
You are cutting my effective pay by approximately (100%-x%)*(new deductible-old deductible).
This will incentivize frugal use of health care resources.
You should try receiving less medical treatment (/fewer doctor visits/fewer specialist visits/whatever).
Health care is a benefit, not a right. We're already paying for a lot for you.
I'm not dignifying all of these with a response.

Stupid employer-dependent health insurance.

That is all.

Guilty Confession # 1

2008-12-09T15:36:00.000-05:00

My Beloved

2008-12-08T17:43:00.000-05:00

Reading comprehension problems at the Herald

2008-12-07T15:24:00.003-05:00

So, ok, I know the Herald isn't known around these parts for its super-high journalistic standards, especially in matters of the queer. But honestly?

Lindsay Lohan still undecided
By Herald Wire Services

Lindsay Lohan isn’t sure what she is. The actress told Harper’s Bazaar magazine that she’s not a lesbian but she’s not bisexual either. “I think it’s pretty obvious who I’m seeing,” the actress said. But, when asked again if she’s bisexual her reply was “Maybe. Yeah” When asked if she’s a lesbian, Lohan replied “No.” Such confusion . . . .

In what world is "Yeah, I'm bisexual; no, I'm not a lesbian" all that confusing?

Let Us Love

2008-12-07T15:02:00.004-05:00

Reader submission: Oxfords

2008-12-05T01:07:00.004-05:00

Click to enlarge.

Announcement: More zine pages, coming soon to Quench blog!

2008-12-04T17:13:00.003-05:00

Hi folks,

As the quench team has gotten more geographically spread out, we've had more and more trouble publishing paper issues like the ones you see in the sidebar to the right. While we are all for saving paper, in the past this has meant that the wonderful zine pages we've received from readers (and created ourselves) have not seen the light of day.

No more. Starting tonight, we'll be going through our backlog of paper page contents and posting the awesomeness for all to see.

Thanks for reading, and please remember that you can submit pages and posts to us for publication.

Harvard Has a Bigot!

2008-12-03T12:24:00.010-05:00

For those of us that have been at Harvard sometime during the last four years, we are well aware of the bigoted ranting of one Ms. Lucy Caldwell. For the record, "Lucy M. Caldwell, '09, a Crimson editorial writer, lives in Adams House. Her column appears on alternate Wednesdays." Unfortunately, I believe that The Crimson has once again forgotten to include the word "bigoted" in front of "column."

Two weeks ago, Ms. Caldwell wrote a horrific article entitled "Misguided Activism", which chided "gay activists" for protesting the Proposition 8 electoral results. Her article, which can be read here, prompted me to send in the following Letter to the Editor. As of today, it has not been published.

I am disappointed to read Lucy M. Caldwell’s poorly-researched and poorly-reasoned column from Wednesday, November 19, 2008. Ms. Caldwell makes the allegation that “gay Americans are not being denied rights” and that “the push for same-sex marriage is a rally for additional rights.” Perhaps Ms. Caldwell should be reminded that the same argument was once used to justify state bans on interracial marriage. The reasoning was that African-Americans were not being denied rights because African-Americans could not marry Caucasians, just as Caucasians could not marry African-Americans. Thus, the argument claimed, there was no discrimination based upon race. The United States Supreme Court rejected this (clearly racist) logic in 1967 and ruled that state bans on interracial marriage violated the federal Constitution in Loving v. Virginia, even despite the fact that the general public overwhelmingly opposed interracial marriage, as evidenced by a Gallup poll in 1968 which found that 73% of respondents disapproved of marriage between “whites” and “non-whites.” I seriously doubt that Ms. Caldwell would suggest that such a foundational case in the civil rights movement was actually caused by “unchecked judicial activism.” When the general population or the legislature votes to eliminate the rights of a protected class, it is the responsibility of the courts to intervene and uphold the principle of Equal Protection under the law. The “popular democratic processes” Ms. Caldwell lauds should never be used to enshrine abject discrimination into a constitution, whether state or federal. Even the “much-beloved” Barack Obama, who publicly expressed his opposition to Proposition 8, agrees with that.

And yet, despite her inane rantings, once again Ms. Caldwell is back. This time, she writes about "Lessons from Mumbai."

In the article, she claims: "Islam has come to possess more extremist members than any other modern religion." Yes, you read it right, Islam has more extremists than any other modern religion. Wait until you read what she cites to prove it.

You ready?

Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

She begins her final paragraph with the following conclusion: "If there existed any doubts that radical Islam poses one of the biggest threats to our time, let the horrifying news from Mumbai erase those. This is a threat far greater than the damage wrought by a dissatisfactory Bush administration or by domestic disagreements."

Perhaps, however, Ms. Caldwell should open a newspaper. If you calculated "biggest threat" based upon number of deaths, then I believe "heart disease" still ranks by far and away as the "biggest threat to our time." Perhaps Ms. Caldwell should follow the liberals in advocating for improved health care rather than retaliatory attacks against entire religions because of a few crazy people. And while I do not know whether Ms. Caldwell is religious, I am sure that there are a few crazy and dangerous people in whatever religion she might be. Perhaps she should be taking a stand to control them, but alas, I have been unable to locate said Crimson editorial to date. Nor do I think I need to respond to her Bush administration claim other than to say that the damage wrought by a "dissatisfactory Bush administration" is not limited to "domestic disagreements", but rather includes the tens or maybe even hundreds of thousands of innocent civilian lives lost in Iraq due to our misguided American invasion. Yes Ms. Caldwell, President Bush just may be the "biggest threat to our time." What do you have to say to that?

In short, Ms. Caldwell should probably abstain from writing her columns. When she is not insulting the LGBTQ community or Muslims, she often can be seen claiming that poor people are dumb.

Sadly, I wish I could say that The Crimson should have higher standards for publication. Instead, it appears they don't know how to use a dictionary! (See this article, in which they write: "There is no question that this will diminish our quality of life and dim students’ prospects in the near future. But that is what a recession does. We cannot expect others to pay the penultimate price without shouldering part of the weight ourselves." Someone should kindly inform the Crimson staff that "penultimate" means "second to last".)

For shame.

Transgender Day of Remembrance 2008

2008-11-20T15:00:00.004-05:00

it’s just another day we find a way to comprehend,
and when we fall, we fall down hard and get back up again,
i understand that there is not much more to understand,
when there is nothing really there to begin with.

but the very first i saw your face i would believe in love,
now and forever more i will declare a god above,
and he is crying out for you with every pain and every sigh...

- Gregory Douglass, "Time"

Today is a day for remembering.

Transgender people continue to be victims of violence, hatred, humiliation and discrimination in employment, housing, medical care and public facilities. Transgender people continue to suffer disproportionately high rates of homelessness, poverty and unemployment.

On February 12th this year, Duanna Johnson was brutally beaten by a Memphis police officer after she refused to respond when the officer called her “he-she” and “faggot.” The beating was captured on video [warning: extreme violence].

She was murdered on November 10.

Take a moment to remember. Take a moment to hold those you love. Take care of each other.

More info about Day of Remembrance here and here.

On the topic of Outrage

2008-11-16T21:48:00.003-05:00

Proposition 8 passed in California and people are outraged. I get it.

Jack at Angry Brown Butch says it better than I can in the post Can the LGBT Community Spare Some Outrage for Duanna Johnson?

Duanna Johnson was brutally beaten by police officers after refusing to be harassed. She went public over the issue.

Just over a week ago, she was murdered. She is one of many transgender people - mostly women of color - who have been killed as a result of transphobia, homophobia, and violence against poor people.

Transgender Day of Remembrance is this Thursday visit this site to find out where you can attend a ceremony locally. I pasted below the information for Boston:

Every year transgender people around the world gather in solidarity and community to memorialize those who have fallen victim to violence, and to reaffirm our solidarity and commitment to stand up for ourselves. This year’s Transgender Day of Remembrance will be observed in Boston on Thursday, November 20. This time we’re doing something a little different: we’re gathering for our traditional community speakout and candlelight vigil at St. Luke’s & St. Margaret’s (“SLAM”) in Allston. In recognition of 10 years passage since the Rita Hester tragedy, we’ll retrace the path taken then, by the vigil that inspired the International Transgender Day of Remembrance. So save the date: Thursday, Nov 20, 7pm, at SLAM in Allston. For more information, visit the TDOR pages at MassTPC.org/dor.

Boston: Gunner Scott speaks on Transgender Rights at yesterday's Anti Prop 8 Rally

2008-11-16T14:13:00.004-05:00

Look at about minute 1. I know there are quench readers and writers all over the US and all over the world. Anyone go to one of these anti-prop 8 rallies that took place today? Please, share us a few words, a clip, or a link with us.

assimilation

2008-11-11T17:18:00.003-05:00

I had a discussion today with a straight person who thought that "gay people are okay - the ones I've met just want to be like everybody else I know. They want to be a part of mainstream American culture." He explained that that's why "they" want marriage, tax rights, etc.

But as a queer person, I don't want to assimilate into mainstream American culture. Mainstream American Culture is full of things that I do not like about the world.

Reading all sorts of white LGBT bloggers writing about how black people or black churches "lost us the proposition 8" battle reminds me of what happens when we try to be just like the straight, white, racist, classist, sexist mainstream. I am ashamed of the many (mostly white) LGBT community bloggers blaming people of color for the passage of Proposition 8 in California. You can read a lot of other people's posts about this more eloquent than mine, but all I want to say is that I am ashamed, and I do not want to assimilate to a mainstream culture that blames people of color for everything negative. How the mainstream gay movement fail to connect with other groups whose families are targeted by prejudice, politics, and oppression like families headed by single-parent households (especially families headed by single mothers of color). I know that I personally contributed money to "no on 8," so I know that I am partly responsible for funding this movement, and I know that this is partly as a result of their being the most visible group working on this to me as a person on the other coast. (The visibility itself is likely problematic). by failing to cooperate with other groups on a multi-issue agenda (Obama got a huge number of California votes with his multi-issue progressive agenda and he opposed Proposition 8!) Partly as a result of this failure to cooperate, this became a very close race, withe enough money dedicated to it that all of the homeless queer young people in Califorina could have been sheltered, or perhaps even we could have created an ad hoc way to get queer people without healthcare some healthcare. That money could have been better spent if we had not allowed the race to be so tight.

I don't want to assimilate to a culture that fails to resist, or even at times condones, domestic violence. Or even a culture of a societal ideal where society is built up of families that consist of two adults, one of whom has significantly more societal privilege and power, who gets to make and break the rules, and who will be considered more of a "whole person" if he leaves.

I don't want to assimilate to a culture that limits the life chances of some people based on social, historical, and intensely pervasive systems of power.

I don't want to assimilate to a culture based on greed, a lust for power, failures of empathy, and social injustice (from local to global).

I love to join, share, love, take care of, be taken care of by, eat, play, sleep, laugh, cry, fuck, and participate in communities based on seeking justice, both within our communities and in the broader world.

Spiders!

2008-11-11T17:07:00.003-05:00

I love spiders. I know I haven't posted in forever, and now I reappeared and posted 3 times in a couple of days, but hey, that's life. That's why we have so many quenchistas - I hope someone else can post 3 times in the next 3 days?

I just saw an awesome link to spider pictures posted on Alas! The spider pictures are on Dark Roasted Blend. Thanks, Alas! for pointing this out.

I hope you enjoy them as much as I do.

passing as straight, standing out as queer, or something else entirely

2008-11-07T21:31:00.004-05:00

In my job, I supervise a few people from time to time. They are about my age, and the nature of the job involves a fair amount of waiting around, and sometimes traveling from place to place together, usually on the T. Therefore, I have a social as well as a professional relationship with most of the people who I supervise.

Because of how young I am, word got around the group very quickly that I was married (see, marriage and civil unions really do have different social meanings - somehow the fact that I am married is some juicy social gossip - who knew?) The other thing that people tend to know about me is that I often bring in homemade tasty treats, and that more often than not, these treats are made by my spouse.

Recently, I have been involved in conversations with two different people that I supervise that became awkward (more so for them than for me). In each case, my supervisee asked me about my "wife," either about what she did as a job or about what part of the country she was from. In one case, I responded by saying "my husband does ___." The person did not even notice and kept asking about my wife. In the other case, I started by saying "actually, I am married to a man."

When each of these two people ultimately realized that I was involved with a man, they seemed suddenly shocked, and extremely apologetic. They were suddenly confused, thinking they had now learned that I was a straight woman. I told them not to apologize* and I told them that people often think that I am a lesbian and that I am very involved in the queer community. One of them, I explicitly told that I was queer, but then that led into a series of questions that I did not think were particularly appropriate in a work environment, particularly with someone I supervise. I certainly would not want to make someone I supervise uncomfortable, and I'm not sure that's superbly easy to avoid once conversation moves toward sexual practices or private gender identities and expressions.

In reality, it does not make a ton of sense that people's partners, or their identities come into play at the workplace at all, but then again people are not just "workers," they are people too and when we spend a lot of time with our coworkers, we share ourselves with each other and want to get to know each other. And yet, there are things that we do not share with our coworkers, things that are private or personal.

Because our society categorizes sexuality and gender as binaries, and considers information about who we sleep with to be non-private information (and society assumes that we have one monogamous partner, or serial monogamy of some kind), this puts queers in an awkward situation where suddenly it seems like our fault that we brought up something taboo, when actually, we were not the ones who brought it up. I am not the one who asked for a description of a coworker's sexual or gender identity, or asked someone why they would allow others to believe "they were queer if they weren't." I'm not the one who brought it up. And yet, I am up against a taboo if I answer the question or respond to the statement. And I'm bad at tiptoeing around issues.

I'm not someone who can hide my queerness - even the most clueless straight people seem to read me like a book. There is something about me that just doesn't fit into "straight," even just upon sight, seeing me walk, or hearing me talk. And yet when I'm not the kind of queer they expect me to be (a non-trans lesbian), confusion always ensues.

*It is a separate (but related) problem that people felt a need to apologize for thinking one is queer. I choose to believe (hope) that these folks were apologizing for making an assumption rather than apologizing for "insulting" me.

Change.

2008-11-05T01:11:00.006-05:00

This is a historic day for America. Yes we can.

i am not a nazi

2008-10-31T18:31:00.007-04:00

hey quenchistas!

long time reader, first time post-er. just some ideas poorly capitalized. enjoy!
_____________

i usually don't think that crazy conservatives who think i don't deserve to exist merit my time--i kind of just block them out. but today i was bored at work, so i thought i'd give them a chance. and now i'm seriously pissed.

so today i watched a video filmed at a Yes on Prop 8 rally in which a speaker roiled a crowd of fervent supporters of taking away marriage rights from same-sex couples in california that i was, in fact, a jesus-hating nazi bully. what hitler did to germany and the rest of europe, so i am doing to america. in the parlance of the bush and co., i represent an "existential threat."

at first, i didn't know whether to be amused or afraid. something so clearly ignorant can't be taken seriously, and any rational person who hears it would clearly see it for the craziness it is.

well, apparently not.

watching the reaction of the people in the crowd at this rally, they not only saw logic in the parallel between hitler and gay people, they were incensed by it. they were mad--furious that those gays were coming to exterminate them just like hitler did to the jews. and the gays. and the gypsies. and anyone else who thought differently from the party line.

i was blown away by the cognitive dissonance required to say that gay people and the nazis who sent them to concentration camps were, in fact, one and the same.

and then my inner nerd kicked in, and i remembered a classic episode of The Twilight Zone starring a young Dennis Hopper as a naive neo-Nazi struggling to convince the masses to take his message of hate seriously. he struggles, that is, until a mysterious stranger arrives to coach him in the ways of rabble rousing. this dark, face-less stranger advises Hopper that in order to get people motivated, they must feel threatened and afraid. and so in his next speech, hopper says that instead of good americans respecting racial minorities and women and immigrants, good patriotic americans need to understand that they are under siege from these insidious groups and must respond before they, the good god-fearing white christians, are wiped out. at the climax of his speech, Hopper yells, "Respect the minorities? Patriotism, my friends, has become the minority. Love of country has become the minority. WE ARE THE MINORITY!"

the similarities to the yes on prop 8 people and the republican campaign nationwide are startlingly familiar. comparisons to john mccain's ubiquitous "my friends" aside, i see the same perverse logic of straight, white, christian men that says that somehow, in spite of every cultural privilege they enjoy, they are nonetheless in the minority and oppressed by people like african-americans and gays and women who want control over their own bodies.

and so i become the jesus-hating nazi bully. never mind i go to church. never mind that all of my grandmother's family were murdered in concentration camps, and that if i had been alive in nazi germany, i'd suffer the same fate. never mind that i was the one who got pushed and shoved and hit and teased mercilessly throughout middle and high school by the same kind of people who attend yes on prop 8 rallies. my access to equal rights, my very existence represents a threat to their hegemony, and because they locate that threat in me and the people i love, i become the oppressor.

i am so not the oppressor. as someone who feels the burden of legitimizing myself every day of my life to the public at large, whose very existence is an acceptable topic of national debate, it's not just crazy--it's scary. truly, deeply, scary. we can't ignore the yes on prop 8 people and their ilk anymore, dismissing them as ignorant and unworthy of recognition, because it's that very ignorance and irrational, perverse hatred that makes them so dangerous.

oh, and that mysterious guy that taught dennis hopper how market his hate mongering friends as the minority? guess who he turns out to be. i'll give you a hint: according to the yes on prop 8 people, he and i have a lot in common....

Time to Vote.

2008-10-29T17:01:00.006-04:00

Transgender? College student? Racial or ethnic minority? Disabled?

If you have faced or may face voting obstacles, check out this nifty fact sheet from the National Center for Transgender Equality: "Overcoming Voting Obstacles."

Then get out there and VOTE!

Same sex marriage means religious intolerance, apparently

2008-10-27T11:24:00.003-04:00

“This vote on whether we stop the gay-marriage juggernaut in California is Armageddon,” said Charles W. Colson, the founder of Prison Fellowship Ministries and an eminent evangelical voice, speaking to pastors in a video promoting Proposition 8. “We lose this, we are going to lose in a lot of other ways, including freedom of religion.”

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a conservative Christian lobby based in Washington, said in an interview, “It’s more important than the presidential election.”

“We’ve picked bad presidents before, and we’ve survived as a nation,” said Mr. Perkins, who has made two trips to California in the last six weeks. “But we will not survive if we lose the institution of marriage.”

Wow. So giving people the freedom to marry the people they love means we'll lose freedom of religion? If it's against your religion, don't marry someone of the same sex. I can't even comprehend the rationale for this one.

And I find it hard to believe that same-sex marriage could have made America fuck up in Iraq, Afghanistan, and New Orleans, more so than Bush's administration.

Credit Cards!

2008-10-17T12:00:00.001-04:00

So, in this time of financial turmoil...I'm trying to pick a credit card.

Does anyone have suggestions? What credit card do you have? What would you suggest looking for - or avoiding? What about credit cards that get you frequent-flyer miles or help save the universe?

I'd appreciate any advice! Thanks, Quench!

google is great

2008-09-26T20:07:00.002-04:00

Today, Google announced that they were taking a position on the California Marriage Amendment. Explaining that they normally do not take positions on political issues, Sergey Brin went on to say:

It is the chilling and discriminatory effect of the proposition on many of our employees that brings Google to publicly oppose Proposition 8. While we respect the strongly-held beliefs that people have on both sides of this argument, we see this fundamentally as an issue of equality. We hope that California voters will vote no on Proposition 8 -- we should not eliminate anyone's fundamental rights, whatever their sexuality, to marry the person they love.

Official Google Blog

"next top tranny"

2008-09-22T00:23:00.004-04:00

Oh, Fox News.

Apparently, there's a trans contestant on this season of America's Next Top Model. There really isn't anything special about this video clip. The two guys throw around a bunch of stereotypes and play the "she-he-she-I don't even know what to call it" game. But it's been a while since I've posted here, and watching this made me feel gross, so I thought I'd share it with y'all:

Has anyone been watching the show? How have they been treating her on air?

(Courtesy Bitch Magazine)

A vote for Palin =/= a vote for feminism

2008-09-11T21:07:00.003-04:00

"Zombie Feminists in the RNC"

I spent about 2.5 hours at work one day trying to figure out how to put this. This post just about sums up how I feel, so I shan't waste any more words.

Harvard Dis-Orientation Guide 2008

2008-09-09T16:23:00.004-04:00

A bunch of folks at Harvard have put together a "Dis-Orientation" guide to life on campus and in the Boston area, from a smart, progressive perspective. The queer section of the guide is really awesome, and has all the information I wish I'd had as a freshman. Plus, there's a shout-out to Quench. Yay!

An Addiction.

2008-09-07T19:40:00.011-04:00

OK, I admit it. I'm following the Lindsay Lohan lesbian romance. And it's kind of growing on me. I think this is due mostly to the severe scarcity of queer celebrities my age.

Plus, I think it's kind of cool that a butch-femme couple are basically dominating tabloid headlines. And as Lindsay's MySpace blog posts about Samantha Ronson become increasingly mushy and obvious, it's really endearing.

And Sam is stepping up her style. Her new haircut is a major improvement over the dirty strung-out look, don't you think?

Weird Moments in Horror: the Glorious Girl Army of the Free Women's Republic of Somaliland

2008-08-18T16:56:00.005-04:00

I've just been rereading the Monster series of zombie horror novels - Monster Island, Monster Nation, Monster Planet - and I re-encountered one of the most unusual things I've ever found in a horror piece: the Glorious Girl Army of the Free Women's Republic of Somaliland.

There are several things that make the Glorious Girl Army of the Free Women's Republic of Somaliland unique. First, the book notes that the places with the most per capita gun possession would best survive a zombie holocaust. This means Somalia, which hasn't had a government in 20 years, would essentially shake off zombies like they never rose from the dead while the First World nations just get eaten.

Second, the plot is put into motion because the leader of the Glorious Girl Army of the Free Women's Republic of Somaliland, "Mama Halima", needs HIV drugs. Third, Mama Halima's group is an Islamic group formed to protect women from rape, murder and mutilation. One woman comments that she'd wade into post-Apocalyptic New York City - home to 10 million cannibalistic corpses - just to help Mama Halima because the eminent shaikhah protected girls from suffering infibulation like she had.

It's not earthshaking, but I thought that it was unusual for people of colour to surface in horror, never mind non-English-speakers. The main character is a white American male former UN employee whose (half-Kenyan) daughter was taken and protected by Mama Halima and in return has to fetch her HIV meds.

Olympic Gymnasts and Age

2008-08-14T12:33:00.010-04:00

"It's a bike race. A completely arbitrary set of rules that everyone complies with, for no other reason than that some committee says that they should."

- House, Season 2, Episode 6

I've been thinking a lot about the recent controversy over the ages of the Chinese women's gymnastics team. Gymnastics coach Bela Karolyi has alleged that up to half the team is underage and the New York Times published an article at the end of July alleging that previous Chinese state records showed the ages of several gymnasts to be as young as 13 or 14, under the required minimum age of 16. The NBC commentators have brought up the age controversy during coverage of almost every women's gymnasts event.

I think it's interesting to see the way that people are reacting to the accusations, both online and in NBC's coverage. Here's an example of the a blog discussion on the subject. There are also interesting ethical questions, since the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has refused to investigate the situation further, even after the publication of the Times article, and questions raised by journalists, because the Chinese government supplied passports where the girls' ages were all above 16.

Personally, I agree with Cameron from House. That's the point of a sport. It's a set of rules that everyone agrees to follow. The real question is, what can be done about it? Bela Karolyi has said that the only solution is to remove the minimum age requirement, allowing all countries to use younger gymnasts, who many think have an advantage due to their small size and lack of fear. But if the goal of the minimum age rule is to protect young gymnasts from injury or exploitation, then do the IOC and others have a responsibility to look into whether these young women are being exploited?

Thoughts?

Also, on a lighter note, what is Michael Phelps listening to on his iPod, and where can I get some of it?

CNN Tries to Deal with Gender and Olympics... Ends up Being Awkward.

2008-07-30T12:00:00.003-04:00

Let's look at "things that are awkward..." again.

"Olympians tested for gender." Including great lines discussing how some men might have been used in women's games because the countries "really, really, really, really wanted to win." Or just the general sense of awkwardness. Or the suggestion that they should just "look under the hood."

The best part is that the first half is about gender, and they are MAD awkward. Then the second half is about a guy who shot a lawnmower, and they are so comfortable talking about that. Wtf?

The National Erection

2008-07-26T08:54:00.006-04:00

There can be no doubt that this is one of the most amusing protest actions I've seen in my entire life. It beats even my favourite Code:Pink one where they painted an entire tank bright pink.

Seriously.

This was originally posted on Cambridge Common in May, but I reckon I didn't see it.

Rep. Sally Kern Caught with Gun at State Capitol

2008-07-26T01:18:00.002-04:00

Oh my god, seriously, this post almost writes itself.

OKLAHOMA CITY -- An Oklahoma lawmaker who made headlines in March for her comments regarding homosexuals was stopped from bringing a gun into the state Capitol on Wednesday, troopers said.

But Rep. "Homosexuals are a bigger threat than terrorists" Kern wants to reassure you that her inappropriate gun-toting "has nothing to do with the homosexual situation." (Good to know that, for once, The Gays aren't to blame!)

Apparently, she was just in such a rush to get inside the Capitol building that she just plumb forgot to take the handgun out of her purse. Whoopsie!

I mean, it could happen to anyone, right?

The incident Wednesday is the second time in two months that Kern has been stopped with a weapon at the Capitol. In early June, troopers said, Kern breached security and entered the Capitol with a weapon. [...]

She stressed that in both cases it was merely a matter of forgetting that she had the weapon.

Oh. Okay, then. As RAGING HOMO Oscar Wilde once said, "To ~~lose one parent~~ bring a gun into a government building once may be regarded as a misfortune; to ~~lose both~~ do it twice looks like ~~carelessness~~ a Thing That Is Awkward."

OMG. I hereby pronounce Rep. Kern an official, Hollywood-league, train wreck. All that's left are the nude photos and the rehab.

QWOC Week (Queer Women of Color)

2008-07-26T00:04:00.005-04:00

An update from Queer Women of Color! August 4-10 is QWOC Week: details below.

---

QWOC Week - a once very distant dream - is finally happening in Boston! Mark your calendars and put in those day-off requests because we're putting together an incredible lineup of events.
Visit www.qwocboston.org/Events.html to view the entire schedule, but most importantly, spread the word. We're calling LGBTQ people of color from far and wide to come on down to Beantown and celebrate with us. Going Boston link.
If you're interested in volunteering, email to volunteerqwocboston.org stating
your interest (in any specific event, if you choose).
We have a wonderful group of volunteers working on the events but could use more planning, promoting and admin help.
You ready, people? It's time to paint the city in purple! Don't you think it would be cool to see it everywhere that week? Yeah, it can't be found as easily as other colors, and not everyone has it in their closet cause it doesn't "go" with everything. But, that's what's been said about LGBTQ people of color, too... Seems fitting.

Happy Purple Pride everyone!

... and now some GOOD news!

2008-07-16T18:45:00.003-04:00

I know it's been an inordinately long time since I've posted here, but this is exciting enough that I'll forget about being bashful.

Today, during its debate about the President's Emergency Plan For AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), the Senate effectively approved a measure to end the Federal ban on HIV-positive people entering the country. The ban has been in place since 1987, when the late Jesse Helms got it passed during a peak of homophobic AIDS-related hysteria. The ban has always had a disproportionate effect on queer people, since straight foreign nationals married to US citizens can get an HIV-ban waiver based on their marital status.

There's still a few more votes before the whole PEPFAR bill gets approved by both houses, and the Federal government will still be able to restrict entry into the country based on HIV status, but discretion as to whether or not HIV is "of public health significance" will be transferred to the Dept. of Health and Human Services. Right now, HIV is the only medical condition in the Immigration and Nationality Act that makes a foreign national inadmissible to the US. The public health experts at HHS, who have pushed for loosening these restrictions in the past, are far less likely than Jesse Helms to single out HIV (for which transmission is easily preventable) as a reason for inadmissibility.

In other words, a bad and regressive law is being repealed, with practical consequences for foreign nationals with HIV, as well as more general symbolic significance, since a major codification of homophobic discrimination is being thrown away.

Immigration Equality is following this on their blog. Andrew Sullivan surely will be, too.

Herald outdoes itself with transphobic article

2008-07-11T21:57:00.005-04:00

This latest article has to be something record-setting even for the awfulness of the Herald. Warning: it's horrific. Undercover ‘john’ takes on trannies, pimps.

I'm not smart enough to dissect this article right now, so please... hack the Herald article into tiny pieces, then we'll all mail them to the paper.

EDIT

Here's the contact information for the Herald.

Please contact the Boston Herald and call on them to issue an apology. Tell them that they are failing to meet basic standards of journalistic integrity and that they must remove the defamatory terminology and references from the article.

Boston Herald Contacts:
Jessica Van Sack
City Reporter
jvansack@bostonherald.com
(617) 619-6437

Joe Dwinell
City Executive Co-Editor
jdwinell@bostonherald.com
(617) 619-6177

Kevin Convey
Editor in Chief
kconvey@bostonherald.com
(617) 619-6403

The Internets Has the Future

2008-07-11T17:26:00.002-04:00

Mildly NSFW (language) "Macdonald's brunch hack". Let the lulz flow forth.

Thanks, bOING-bOING!

Famous author Thomas Disch suicides

2008-07-07T06:44:00.006-04:00

It is with horror that I read this morning that Thomas Disch - poet and author of brilliant works - committed suicide on the Fourth of July.

Disch was openly gay since 1968 and his partner for 20 years was the poet Charles Naylor.

This obit isn't just about the loss of Disch, however. It's about something else: it's motivated. See, Disch lost his partner in 2004 and it was a travesty in its own way; insufficient health care, which Disch had been already bitching about for decades, was a significant factor. He suffered badly from a kind of PTSD due to 9/11, and he himself was unable to get appropriate treatment. And finally, after his partner's death, he lost their home in Philadelphia and was being evicted from their apartment in NYC.

Disch became cruel and erratic after 9/11, ranting about Muslims and immigrants. He was no saint, although some may love him like one for The Brave Little Toaster. He was, however, clearly mentally disturbed and - like the characters in his infamous 334 - in the end, died for the NuMerican sin of Not Being Able to Get Health Care because Our Country is Fucked in the Head. Michael Swanwick's comment on the subject was, "Even if he had to commit suicide, he shouldn't have had to worry about being evicted."

I want to close this obit with a description of him posted on the Amazon website, because it says in brief so much:

Thomas M. Disch is the author of such diverse publications as The Prisoner, The Dreams Our Stuff are Made Of, Camp Concentration, and The Brave Little Toaster. A renowned poet and book critic, Disch's review, criticism, and essays have been published in The Nation, Harper's, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, and Entertainment Weekly. He has received the John W. Campbell and O'Henry awards and the Pushcart Prize. Disch has a forthcoming original novel, The Word of God, Or the Holy Writ Rewritten, coming out from Tachyon in July 2008. He divides his time between New York City and rural Pennsylvania.

Go in peace, Mr Disch. You are much loved and hated.

Lyme Disease originated in Europe

2008-07-06T22:36:00.004-04:00

This may seem an unusual post for quench, but as some of you already know, I am disabled because of two severe bouts of Lyme Disease, which is currently ravaging the northeast. The epicentre of the outbreak is Lyme CT, about 30 miles from my parents' home, and nearly every one I know from home and nearly every friend, acquaintance and coworker of my parents have suffered this potentially debilitating disease. My mother told me today of three more people she knows who have Bell's Palsy, a temporary total paralysis of one side of the face that is accompanied by bodily weakness and is often cause for temporary disability of a month caused by Lyme. Long-term (non-reparable) nerve damage is also common: it leads to depression, severe anxiety disorders (such as I have), bodily weakness and paralysis and bone and joint degeneration. Severely increased suicide rates are directly attributable to Lyme infection.

So it was with great interest that I read about Lyme in ScienceDaily...

The bacterium responsible for Lyme disease, Borrelia burgdorferi, originated in America, or so researchers thought. Now, however, a team from the University of Bath has shown that this bug in fact came from Europe, originating from before the Ice Age.
[snip]There is no vaccine for the infection, which can cause arthritis and problems with the nervous system and heart if left untreated.
Wellcome Trust. "Lyme Disease Bacterium Came From Europe Before Ice Age." ScienceDaily 30 June 2008. Retrieved 6 July 2008 from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080629142805.htm

The article is very short, but also notes that it has been present in the New World for "a long time"... I'll be following this for sure.

Live Long and Marry

2008-07-04T13:18:00.004-04:00

What do you get when you combine marriage equality, a charity auction, and a Dalek Christmas Ornament?

...I'm not really sure, but it seems pretty cool.

A bunch of folks over on LiveJournal have started an auction for marriage equality. Everyone is welcome to offer up their goods and services, everyone is welcome to bid, and bids are made as donations to "Equality For All, Marriage Equality USA, Equality California, or your preferred organization or coalition fighting for marriage equality."

Y'all should check it out: http://community.livejournal.com/livelongnmarry/

Bidding is open until July 15th, and over $3,300 has been raised already!

Thanks go to esteemed young adult novelist Tamora Pierce for bringing the auction to this Quenchista's attention. (Tammy has a couple items up for auction here and here.)

awwww

2008-07-01T07:59:00.002-04:00

Liveblogging the first-ever congressional hearing on trans issues.

2008-06-26T10:33:00.108-04:00

Whee! We're excited! You can watch the live webcast here (or just read my brilliant commentary below - keep refreshing the page). More about the hearing and witnesses here. This is historic, exciting, and we are here to keep you in the loop, even if you're secretly reading us at work. ;-)

1:45: This concludes your liveblog of the first-ever congressional hearing on trans rights in the workplace. I think it was generally awesome, and the witnesses did an amazing job. Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments below! Now, I should really go eat some lunch. And maybe do some work.

1:42: As the hearing wraps up, Sabrina Taraboletti goes over to Mr. Lavy. He says that he hopes she finds a job soon. She says, "I do too. And on a personal note, I am a practicing Catholic -" And then the feed cuts out. I sure would like to have heard the end of that conversation.

1:39: Rep. Andrews is wrapping things up. He stresses "job ability and work ethic." He promises a vigorous debate about these issues, and how to "accommodate reasonable concern of employers in the workplace" and religion issues. But he doesn't think it's that complicated - if the person is the best for the job, they should get the job. He notes that "progress in this country is glacial" but encourages optimism, given progress made in terms of rights for women and people of color. He notes that when Rep. Payne was born, that he might serve in the House was unthinkable. He said that he had gay classmates who killed themselves. Things will change over time. Hearing is adjourned.

1:37: Ms. Miller is angry because someone suggested she didn't understand the link between discrimination against trans people and the discrimination against women! She knows about sexual harassment! But she also had mentors who were men! She went to a women's college!

1:30: Rep. Hare takes issue with Mr. Lavy. Excellent. He reminds Mr. Lavy about this guy from a long time ago who hung around with those people who no one wanted to associate themselves with. I think you know who that is. He also believes we can legislate "what is right, what is just and what is fair."

1:28: Diego says that part of it is to "consider us a partner" and work together across the country. Help "make it safe for us to be with you in communities." Sabrina Marcus Taraboletti mentions that the National Center for Transgender Rights, the Task Force and others are available to help out.

1:25: Rep. Payne wants to reassure everyone that there was no "conspiracy" to start the hearing late. There was voting that didn't get finished yesterday. Now he forgot what he wanted to ask. Laughter. Oh - how can we educate Americans?

1:23: Shannon Minter is annoyed by all these restroom questions. C'mon, let's listen to "medical protocol and common sense." Transgender men and women are men and women, and coworkers will quickly come to recognize that. This is a straightfoward issue. Ms. Miller says that maybe it would be a good idea to look at policies about bathrooms that already work. What a novel idea!

1:20: Rep. Payne is here! He is "opposed to all forms of discrimination."

1:18: Colonel Schroer says that this is a similar situation to gays in the military, where a very qualified pool of people are passed over. She notes that such discrimination is common, both in blatant and more "obtuse" forms. We need to send a message that being transgender is "not abnormal or abhorrent."

1:13: Rep. Linda Sanchez is NOT scared of litigation! She thinks people should be protected from on-the-job abuse and harassment. She asks Shannon Minter to elaborate. He notes that laws "make it perfectly clear to everyone...that we as a society condemn discrimination on these basis because they are completely unrelated to someone's abilities..." In the absence of such laws, we have "blatant, shocking" discrimination, like the type described on the panel today. Rep. Sanchez thanks Colonel Schroer for her service to the country and asks her what the country misses out on by denying her job opportunities.

1:07: Time for Rep. Kline. He notes that Mr. Andrews has really enjoyed trying to determine which is the best law school. He wants Ms. Miller to tell him about the distinction between "regarded as" and "perceived as." "Perceived" is "vague language" that can cause "a great deal of confusion" among "managers and human resources people" and of course, litigation. Litigation! How scary! We can't legislate people being nice to each other or their internal thoughts and processes. Um. What? I thought we were talking about not being fired for being trans.

1:03: What about white supremacists? Should they have the right to refuse to hire a person of color, if they held deeply held religious beliefs about white supremacy? Lavy says no. Hypocrisy! The Chairman wants to know why, if we do not allow religious beliefs to excuse racial discrimination, we should allow religious beliefs to excuse discrimination on the basis of gender identity or expression. Mr. Lavy says the issue isn't that simple. It's about "deeply held religious beliefs." The "race issue" is something that has been determined already, apparently.

1:02: What about pacificists? Could they refuse to hire a Marine Corps veteran? The Chairman is getting a little out there with the hypotheticals. Levy says the pacifists should be able to refuse to hire the Marine Corps guy.

1:00: Apparently Mr. Lavy thinks that accommodating a transgender person is like "making an Orthodox Jew eat pork." The Chairman wants to know if an Orthodox Jew could refuse to employ a Catholic. Mr. Lavy says no. One point for Rep. Andrews.

12:59: The Chairman thanks all the witnesses. He also introduces a letter about fair business practices and notes attendees from Garden State Equality. Now, he's going to take on Mr. Lavy. Exciting!

12:54: Shannon Minter, Legal Director for National Center for Lesbian Rights, is the last witness. He is testifying about the "urgent need for a federal law to protect transgender persons." He talks about workplace discrimination, citing the case of Susan Stanton. He says that we "need more than a patchwork of state and local laws and policies." In most parts of the country, transgender people who are fired or harassed at work for being transgender have no legal protection. This leads to transgender people being forced into "persistent, chronic poverty and homelessness." We need Congress to "take action to protect us."

12:48: Sabrina Marcus Taraboletti, Former Space Shuttle Engineer, is the next witness. She was fired in 2003 after announcing she was transitioning from male to female. She was told the investigation and subsequent firing was the result of an "anonymous" phone call. She was the fourth transwoman she knew of who was either fired or forced out before leaving. One of those women took her own life. There are no standard policies or procedures on these issues at the Space Center, because there are no federal laws on them, so things were left up to the whims of supervisors. She felt humiliated, and was fired with no severance pay after 20 years of employment. She still has not been able to find a new position in the space program, the field that she loves. Sabrina says that "being transgender is something you are born with." She notes that being fired also made it difficult for her to provide for her family, and her loss of self-esteem affected them too. "It needs to stop," she says.

12:46: We're back to restrooms. People have "genuine privacy concerns." He says there are "men who are are allowed to use women's restrooms before having gender reassignment surgery." No, those are actually WOMEN. Restrooms pose a risk to employers. He doesn't want the committee to make a "moral judgment" on "transgendered people," but he doesn't want them to make the moral decision for other people. Or something. OK, he's done. Thank you.

12:44: Some employers might not be able to accommodate people in restrooms. Now he's talking about "actual or perceived" discrimination. How problematic! Employers could be sued at any moment! Gender identity is a "subjective category." Unlike race, which the employer can "simply tell by observation." More about religious beliefs.

12:43: Glen Lavy, Senior Counsel for Alliance Defense Fund, is gently hassled for not having gone to Cornell Law before proceeding to tell us why trans people shouldn't have protections under non-discrimination laws. He's already used the word "immoral." Right on schedule. Some employers have "deeply held religious beliefs about these issues."

12:41: DOW's policies emphasize good communication between transitioning employees and their supervisor, as well as training for coworkers and updating company documents. He says "on the whole, our program has gone remarkably well."

12:38: Dr. Hendrix is up! DOW has 4,300 employees. Diversity "underpins our workplace." He knows that "creating a respectful, inclusive working environment" actually "gives us an advantage." He says that his LGBT employees often have more protection under DOW's policy than under state laws, and that his policies improve retention and commitment of LGBT employees and allies. They first added "sexual orientation" in 2000 and "gender identity" in 2005, and this has been implemented globally for the company.

12:36: Men might be looking through holes in the women's bathroom! I was wondering when that would come up. We need to "have some sensitivity to the employer." OK, she's done. But still concerned.

12:33: Unclear statutes can cause lawsuits! You better be careful. Gender identity and transgender are unclear terms. "Mannerism" is a disturbing term! She's "concerned" about "perpetuating stereotypes." Haha! Like, what if someone gives a firm handshake. Mannerisms can be changed but "intrinsic characteristics" can't. Um.

12:31: After some banter with the Chairman about whose law school is the best, JC Miller, Partner at Thompson Hine, is here to tell us about "unintended legal obstacles" that "cause a disruption in the workplace." You know what that means.

12:29: He talks about a friend, Ethan St. Pierre (who runs the Remembering Our Dead web site), who lost his job for being transgender, about friends who have to show IDs that do not match their gender. He talks about growing up in the South where he was not allowed to swim in public pools because he was not white. This, he said, "feels like a flashback." He asks people to treat others as they would want to be treated and concludes his testimony. Yay Diego!

12:26: He talks about living as a transgender Latino man, about growing up in a military family in Georgia, and about his family supporting his gender identity. He worked in many corporate companies, including Coca Cola, Holiday Inn and others worldwide. He waited to transition because he was afraid of being who he was: "Diego Sanchez, an honorable man." He said that he "struggled to have self-respect in a world that would seemingly never allow someone like me...I could be honest about everything except myself."

12:25: Diego!! AHH! An amazing guy.

12:24: The Library made many claims why she could not be hired, all of them clearly false. Colonel Schroer says that she hopes every day that the Library will call and tell her they made a mistake, and she can continue serving her country as she has so well.

12:22: Colonel Schroer applied for a position at the Library of Congress working on CRS reports, while in the position of transitioning from male to female. She was hired almost immediately. She had lunch with her future supervisor, and told her of plans to transition from male to female. Her supervisor called her the next day and said that she was "not a good fit" for the library.

12:19: Diane Schroer, Retired Colonel, US Army, is the first witness. She is talking about her vast military experience, including humanitarian de-mining operations in Southern Africa, Special Operations work and programs all over the world. She has done basically every homeland security, counter-terrorism, classified, top-secret military thing ever.

12:17: The Chairman is reading the list of witnesses. He also notes that Cornell Law School is the best in the country, although he may be biased. The speakers will have a green, yellow and red lights to signal their time to speak.

12:15: We're back!

11:48: Still recessed. Hang in there. How is everyone's Thursday going? Leave me some comments.

11:32: The Chairman thanks Rep. Frank and says that he tries to determine the content of hearings by the "depth of the grievance suffered." The committee is adjourning briefly for some people to go make votes on the Floor. Stay tuned.

11:29: Barney notes that if you are uncomfortable, how do you think trans people feel?! He's not asking for you to take anyone to the movies. Just "let em work!"

11:26: Barney says some stuff about how sometimes stuff need to happen incrementally. I think this is about that ENDA thing. The burden of proof is on the person charging discrimination and the disruption argument "just doesn't work." When he first realized he was gay, he made himself uncomfortable. But he got used to it! And so did other people!

11:24: He notes that he doesn't buy the "redundancy" argument (that trans people are already covered under other legislation). He notes that his colleagues are rarely reluctant to use a few extra words. And he also doesn't buy the "it could be disruptive" argument.

11:23: He notes that his colleagues often feel "trapped in the wrong body" when their legislation goes to the Senate. Laughter.

11:22: Barney Frank. He thanks the Chairman for making this hearing a priority.

11:21: She says that it is "high time" that American "declared discrimination based on gender identity and expression to be unlawful." Did I mention we love her?

11:18: She notes that hate crimes against trans Americans are "tragically common" and that trans people also face discrimination in the "mundane and everyday." She talks about having to choose in her own life to live "with truth and integrity" as an out lesbian, and the way that Wisconsin's non-discrimination law made a difference for her. She says, "the importance of non-discrimination laws cannot be overstated." They tell people to "judge your fellow citizen by their integrity, talents...rather than their sexual orientation or gender identity...that irrational fear, irrational hate, have no place in our workplaces."

11:15: Tammy Baldwin is speaking. We love her. She wants to clarify why people want workplace protections that do not "leave behind the smallest and most vulnerable part of our community." She defines gender identity, and explains how it differs from sexual orientation. She notes that there are thousands of trans Americans who lead "incredibly successful" lives, as parents, community organizers, defense contractors and much more.

11:14: Barney Frank is on the first panel. The Chairman notes that he has a great sense of humor. Tammy Baldwin (!!!) is also on the first panel. The Chairman says she is a great listener in "divisive" situations. I believe that was an ENDA reference.

11:13: Rep. Kline says he's looking forward to the hearing. He wants his statement recorded.

11:11: He also notes that ENDA was passed without protection for transgender people, and that he believes it should, and then says some nice things about minority leader Rep. Kline.

11:10: Chairman Rep. Andrews notes that someone's "presentation" is an "irrelevant prejudicial criteria" and that it has nothing to do with how someone "writes code...or fixes someone's car" and that people should be judged on their performance at work. Rock on!

11:09: Chairman Rep. Andrews thanks everyone for coming. He says, in all likelihood, someone today will apply for a job and be denied because an employer does not like the way they look. He says that someone will be denied a promotion because an employer is uncomfortable. He notes that this is legal under federal law.

11:08: The hearing is starting!

11:01: The video feed says:"Will begin shortly." And the most recent liveblog updates will now appear at the top of the post.

11:00: OK! Exciting news. The video feed now says: "Committee on Education and Labor, Health Employment and Labor Subcommittee Hearing on "An Examination of Discrimination Against Transgender Americans in the Workplace."' We're getting started!

10:56: The amendment does not pass. A substitute is agreed to. Now there's another roll-call vote. Stay tuned.

10:51: The clerk is calling the roll on the price amendment. He tells Chairman Miller to settle down. Laughter.

10:48: Now they're voting on a fox amendment. Or something. But we're still excited! The people sitting behind the clerk look sleepy.

10:46: Ah, they are voting on a price amendment. Exciting stuff.

10:45: Rep. Bishop wanders in late and is gently chastised for his tardiness and told not to push his luck. He votes.

10:35: Dennis Kucinich is involved! We love him! They are voting on something. Everyone is voting no. Now they are voting "ay" and "no." I'm not sure what this is about. Hopefully things will get more exciting.

10:30 am: The video player says we are recessed.

First Congressional Hearing on transgender issues today!

2008-06-26T10:27:00.010-04:00

The first Congressional Hearing on transgender issues is happening at 10:30 a.m. EST today and is titled: "An Examination of Discrimination Against Trangender Americans in the Workplace."

There is a live webcast here (you may have to click on the link and then refresh the page to launch the player).

The people testifying are:

Shannon Price Minter, Legal Director for National Center for Lesbian Rights (founding member of NCTE)
Diane Schroer, Retired Colonel, US Army (member of NCTE)
Diego Sanchez, Director of Public Relations and External Affairs for AIDS Action Committee of Massachusetts (Founding Board of Directors for NCTE) - and MTPC member!
Sabrina Marcus Taraboletti, Former Space Shuttle Engineer (founding member of NCTE)
Bill Hendrix, Chair of Gays, Lesbians, and Allies at Dow (GLAD) for Dow Chemical Company

The minority party has called the following witnesses:

JC Miller, Partner at Thompson Hine
Glen Lavy, Senior Counsel for Alliance Defense Fund

More information is available here.

Glenn Beck defines "Conservative"

2008-06-26T10:22:00.004-04:00

On CNN today, Glenn Beck has defined what he thinks a "Conservative" is.

Some of his definitions I expected; others floored me with their pure ignorance. Here's the list and my responses. I considered trying to put together a definition for "Liberal", but decided to forgo that because: a) It's hard and time consuming; and b) I doubt everyone could agree on one unifying definition. So in the meantime, share your own insights on this list:

A conservative believes that our inalienable rights do not include housing, healthcare or Hummers.
Yes my friends, that is Glenn Beck equating Hummers with "housing" and "healthcare." Apparently all you people who are homeless and suffering from treatable diseases due to lack of money should suck it up; not all of us can own Hummers.

A conservative believes that our inalienable rights DO include the pursuit of happiness. That means it is guaranteed to no one.
I don't think this is an "inalienable" right so much as a simple fact of human existence. People generally try to do things that make them happy. The fact that happiness it is not "guaranteed" though suggests that he is really just saying: "Nobody has a right to be happy. You can all just exist though."

A conservative believes that those who pursue happiness and find it have a right to not be penalized for that success.
Who exactly is "penalizing" people who are happy? Who is going around telling happy people to be sad? Maybe pundits; but I'm not sure who else. Thoughts?

A conservative believes that there are no protections against the hardship and heartache of failure. We believe that the right to fail is just as important as the chance to succeed and that those who do fail learn essential lessons that will help them the next time around.
Apparently we should do nothing to help people who are threatened by "hardship" or "failure" and should instead use that as a learning experience for next time. So the next time that somebody loses their job, cannot afford their rent, is kicked out on the street, and cannot get a new job or home due to their lack of housing/eviction on the record, they should be happy because that was an "essential lesson" that will help them the next time around. I'm not sure when the "next time around" is, but Glenn Beck says you've learned something. Congratulations.

A conservative believes in personal responsibility and accepts the consequences for his or her words and actions.
I believe in personal responsibility too. Except not everything is about "personal responsibility." When teenagers are getting pregnant because they aren't getting adequate sex ed programs, and because condoms are not available to them, etc., that isn't just about "personal responsibility" but rather about how society raises and takes care of their youth. It is a systematic failure, and poor Glenn Beck would rather just blame everybody else rather than himself.

A conservative believes that real compassion can't be found in any government program.
I'm not sure what this means. Government programs cannot be "compassionate"? Firstly, I'll agree that government programs don't have feelings. But if a group of Catholics can get together and start a charity to help poor people, so can a group of average people form a government program to help poor people. Either way, it's fairly compassionate. I'm just not buying this other than: "I hate government."

A conservative believes that each of us has a duty to take care of our neighbors. It was private individuals, companies and congregations that sent water, blankets and supplies to New Orleans far before the government ever set foot there.
Wow. Yes, we should all be kind enough to take care of our neighbors. But sometimes that also comes in the form of helping them through our government. More importantly, this is putting the carriage before the horse. The reason private individuals, companies, and congregations sent supplies to New Orleans before the government ever set foot there was because of our Conservative President! If you hadn't noticed, by shrinking the government and failing to make it accountable, it failed. So he criticizes the government for being big, then here he criticizes it for being small. Hello?

A conservative believes that family is the cornerstone of our society and that people have a right to manage their family any way they see fit, so long as it's not criminal. We are far more attuned to our family's needs than some faceless, soulless government program.
Did anybody else just read this and say: "You're right; I want to manage my family the way I see fit. With two male parents/two female parents/two transgender parents/etc."? I think Glenn Beck favors gay marriage!

A conservative believes that people have a right to worship the God of their understanding. We also believe that people do not have the right to jam their version of God (or no God) down anybody else's throat.
YES! Wow, something I agree with him about. Too bad Conservatives are doing much more shoving God down our throats than vice versa. And, for the record, I'm a flaming liberal who believes in God; but I would never force anyone to see the world my way. Sorry hon; conservatives don't own this one.

A conservative believes that people go to the movies to be entertained and to church to be preached to, not the other way around.
Translation: The First Amendment is wrong. I know how speech should be: Movies should be comedies and Churches should be boring and critical. Any other way is a violation of Glenn Beck's "Order of the Universe."

A conservative believes that debt creates unhealthy relationships. Everyone, from the government on down, should live within their means and strive for financial independence.
Therefore, Conservatives believe that people should not have mortgages, borrow money to attend college, etc. Rather, everyone should be homeless or rent; people should not go to college (or college should be free); etc. Too bad he also believes that the government should not provide housing or education. Ooops; hypocrisy again?

A conservative believes that a child's education is the responsibility of the parents, not the government.
Another one of those odd moments for a conservative. The next one says every human being has a right to life, as if all humans should have equal opportunity to live. Unfortunately, he is saying here that all humans should suffer from socioeconomic position of their parents. Research has PROVEN that people who start in poverty often stay there; those that start in luxury stay there too. Social mobility is more fiction than fact. So if your parents can afford education and already value it; good for you! You'll get your education. If not; too bad you lost the "birth lottery" and ended up with poor parents.

A conservative believes that every human being has a right to life, from conception to death.
A conservative also believes that the government should do nothing for you during that life; should force you into unwanted homes; and has the right to kill you if they see fit (see Capital Punishment). Also, Glenn Beck should consider reading Freakonomics, which has shown that one of the biggest things to reduce crime in the 90's was ABORTION. Yep; fascinating stuff, and highlights a lot about the unfortunate reality of unwanted pregnancy.

A conservative believes in the smallest government you can get without anarchy. We know our history: The larger a government gets, the harder it will fall.
I'm sorry; I must be reading different history books than you. The fact of the matter, and this is hard for conservatives to hear, is that no government lasts forever. And no government sits on top of the world forever. But shrinking a government to near nothingness doesn't save it from falling; it stops it from existing altogether!

Unsurprisingly, the tag line at the end of the article reads:
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the writer.

True. So true.

Myths about consulting; or, why consultants aren't automatically greedy mindless soulless corporate minions

2008-06-26T07:50:00.004-04:00

This was going to be a comment, but it got way too long ... so a response post it is.

First, a little clarification, since there seems to be some confusion here. I'm not a consultant. I did actually go straight from college into the stereotype of genteel penury, which is to say graduate school in the humanities. I make $18,000 a year, share a one-bedroom apartment in one of the poorest neighborhoods in the United States, and have a health insurance plan with a prescription-benefit cap that only covers me for about half the year. Most of the people in my program are married and live primarily on their spouses' income; those who aren't, generally receive supplemental money from their families. I'm lucky in that I'll start receiving domestic partner benefits next year ... from a consulting company.

So, yes, despite the fact that I had the luxury of choosing grad school over immediate cash - or rather because of that fact - I'm pretty darn familiar with what actually goes into consulting, and the decision to become a consultant. So I wanted to take this time to dispel a few persistent myths.

Myth #1: People who go into consulting do so mindlessly/by default/because they lack the ambition or imagination to do anything else/because it's what everyone expects of them.

Reality: First of all, consulting companies don't hire people who lack ambition or imagination. It's actually a rather intellectually challenging and creative job, and the people who tend to get hired (out of all those who get interviewed) are precisely those bright, motivated, ambitious people who are likely to leave the company in a few years in order to use the skills they've acquired to do something else (like, um, run a non-profit).

In fact, let me introduce you to the four people from my current university who are joining the major consulting firms next year. "Shane" has coached an inner-city debate team since arriving at college - in her free time, which is to say, when not coordinating efforts to distribute anti-retroviral drugs, clean needles, and condoms, both in our city and in the sub-Saharan African country where the university sent her to study for a semester. "Max" has been volunteering for (and later working for) queer organizations since puberty, organizing more conferences and successful awareness campaigns than can be counted, and (at age 18) producing original legal research that has since been cited by, among other folks, Dean Spade. "Charlotte" spent her summers in a war-torn Eastern European country helping draft their new constitution. And "Stanford" (whom, admittedly, I don't know as well as the others) has been an active member of the ACLU practically since birth.

Let me tell you - none of these people were expected to become consultants. In fact, most if not all of them agonized over the decision and received precisely the same kind of shit from their peers as people are now dishing out here. And at least two of them do intend to make their careers in the non-profit sector; one, I believe, plans to serve the public by working in the government; one, again, I don't know well enough to predict. Each of them chose consulting for different reasons (though there was some overlap), and each of them weighed their options carefully, including the potential they would ultimately have to do good if they accepted one job or another (or if they went straight to school).

It's also not easy to become a consultant. Sure, perhaps it's easy to post your resume on the recruiting website; but by the time you're even halfway through the interview process, anyone who thinks consulting is the easy way out has had to put some serious thought into why they're still hanging in there. And anyone who gets a job offer has been chosen out of a pool of thousands of graduating seniors from the nation's top colleges - for less than 100 jobs a year. Seriously - it's harder to get a consulting job than to get into Harvard.

Myth #2: Consulting drops you straight into the lap of luxury.

Reference Kaya's comment that "the issue we're discussing is ... extreme wealth vs moderation."

Reality: I would love to live in a world where a mid-five-figure salary (for a job where you're working up to 80 hours a week and must live in some of the most expensive neighborhoods/cities in the world*) is "extreme wealth." Now, obviously, it's nothing to sniff at ... but streets paved with gold, it is not.

*hint: if you're working that late and need to commute to cheaper lodgings, you quickly discover that most cities' public transit systems - especially the lines that run to poorer neighborhoods - often stop running before you'll be ready to leave. options? get a car - and spend in gas and workday parking approximately what you're saving on rent - or live close to work, which is to say in the financial district. this is one reason you're getting more money.

Myth #3: The "non-profit world" and the "corporate world" are actually two different worlds.

Reality, point 1: most non-profits are, in fact, corporations. Learning how corporations work is thus actually a useful skill for someone who wants to work for a corporation for the rest of their life, whether it be of the for-profit or non-profit variety. Knowing how to skillfully and efficiently manage an organization with limited resources is not a sin; it's an asset.

Reality, point 2: non-profit money is corporate money. If you take a $22,000 administrative-assistant job at the Task Force, your salary is probably coming out of Wells Fargo's pocket. If you want to work for Planned Parenthood, get used to taking money from the dirty capitalist swine at Bank of America, Prudential, Wachovia, and Disney. If the ACLU can afford to give you a paycheck, it has less to do with the revenue from Anthony Romero's book sales and more to do with Ford, Hewlett-Packard, Merck, Verizon, and Progressive Insurance. (And, um, RJ Reynolds and Playboy. Just sayin'.)

Ah, but what about individual donors? Well, there are folks like me who give small amounts regularly to a few non-profits which are important to us; but honestly, we barely cover the cost of the mailings we get asking for our next donation. The rest of the donors are the big-ticket donors, the folks who simultaneously make enough money to give very large sums of it away and care enough about progressive causes to give it away to us. In other words, if you have a non-profit job, you can thank someone who doesn't. Your money isn't any purer or nobler or more infused with the perfume of justice than theirs; it's the same money.

A corollary - if you're benefitting from a loan forgiveness or loan repayment assistance program (other than those administered by the federal government), your ability to go into a non-profit job without worrying about student debt is directly funded by major corporate donors and wealthy alumni (who are by and large employed by major corporations). Fabulous for you - but don't pretend you're morally superior to the people who are giving you that opportunity.

Reality, point 3: many non-profits want things from corporations. Take, for example, all the people who want SRS to be covered by health insurance. Awesome. Now how, exactly, do you propose to convince a health-insurance company to fund SRS without an intimate knowledge of how the insurance industry works? Working in a consulting company for a few years gives you - dare I say it - real-world experience in the critical area of "talking to corporations and getting them to do things." You can only go so far on the strength of your convictions and the knowledge that your proposal comes from the moral high ground; sooner or later you have to give up on the idea that willful ignorance of corporate structures is a virtue, or give up on the hope of ever changing those structures.

Myth #4: Things that cost money are frivolous; or, anyone can live on a non-profit wage if they live "moderately."

Ok. Let's break this down. Here is a listing of 127 typical jobs within non-profit organizations, complete with their average salaries. Let's assume for the sake of argument that you enter as an "Outreach Worker" - certainly not the lowest-paid entry-level job, but you don't even want to try this exercise with the office-assistant or direct-service-provider salaries, trust me. So you're making $29,752 a year, or about $2,479 a month. (Not bad. More than I make.)

Let's also say your living situation is that of a friend of mine, who's starting work at a Manhattan non-profit in September. She's sharing a sublet apartment in Brooklyn for about $800 a month. (By "sharing," by the way, I mean "more people than rooms.") This leaves you with $1679 a month. You will also need a Metrocard to get to work; at $81 a month, you are left with $1598.

According to the State of New York, you should be able to feed yourself on $200 a month (more or less the maximum amount of food stamps they'll give to a single person). The idea that food stamps realistically cover food expenses is bullshit, but ok. You're spending $200 a month on food. Maybe you're small. Now you have $1398.

You also have student loans. Financial experts estimate that a minimum of 10% of gross monthly income should be spent paying off student loans (if you have an average amount of loans and decent enough credit to get an average amount of interest). They recommend that you pay 15% if you can, to prevent the interest from accruing too fast. But let's not even go there. Your gross monthly income is $2479; 10% of that is $248. You now have $1150 a month.

We forgot your taxes, though! Approximately 28% of your gross pay will never even make it to your bank account; 28% of $2479 is $694. $1150-694=456, which is how many dollars you now have a month.

Let's also say you have my insurance and take one of my prescription medications (the less expensive one). When your insurance covers the prescription, it costs $25 a month; when the benefits run out, it costs $120. This month, I don't have benefits any more - so neither do you. You have $336 after paying for your meds (and trust me, Bad Things Happen when you don't take them). But you also have a $10 co-pay for the doctor who prescribes your meds. So make that $326.

At this point, your apartment is still empty. By combing Craig's List, you find a futon for $60, a small table for $20, a microwave for $40, silverware and dishes for two for $20, and basic pots and pans for $20. You don't know anyone with a car, so add on a $15 cab ride each for the futon and table. Total damage: $190. In the real world, you have to pay for these when you buy them. For now, let's spread out the cost over three months, for approx. $63 a month. This means you have $263 for the next few months. You still haven't bought clothes, but we'll assume your college clothes are all workplace-appropriate and still fit you. Also, you're a monk/nun and never indulge in any form of entertainment that costs money. So you should be in the clear - $263 a month straight to savings!

Except, oh shit. You trip on a broken piece of sidewalk and break your wrist. You can't type, so you lose a couple of sick days. And when the hospital bill arrives, it's over $700 - after your insurance. If you're less than three months into your "save $263 a month" plan, you're in debt or default. If you had three months of savings, they're gone.

You want to have kids someday? Sorry, that might not be in the cards. If you're fertile (and in a relationship that will lead to childbearing without additional medical intervention), expect to pay around $30,000 to deliver your baby in a hospital, with no complications, and stay there for three days. If, like most of the people reading this, your child is going to be born via some or all of artificial insemination, surrogacy, or fertility treatments, triple that. If you want to adopt, you should know that the average cost to adopt domestically is $15,000; from Russia, $25,000-$35,000; from China, $22,000.

You want to transition medically? Hormones and surgery cost money, too. Which category are you planning on cutting back on in order to save up the tens of thousands of dollars some transwomen find their transitions costing?

Oh, and by the way? If you were paying for both my prescriptions, it would cost you an extra $350 a month. If you were a type-I diabetic trying a treatment your endocrinologist recommended but your insurance company didn't yet cover (i.e. tons of treatments), it could cost you - to take the example of the continuous glucose sensor - $1000 at the outset, and about $350 a month thereafter. If you've got a mystery condition that's looking more and more like MS, and your doctor recommends interferon, one month's prescription will cost more than my entire prescription-benefit cap (a month at standard dosage is about $1800).

These aren't random examples, by the way; these are consultants I know who took the job, among other reasons, because they are chronically ill and can't afford not to make more than $30,000 a year.

So, tell me ... where was the frivolous spending, here? What little luxuries should our hypothetical person be eliminating? Why is it so hard to believe that an entry-level wage at a non-profit is not actually sufficient for everyone's legitimate needs?

Myth #5: I want you - yes, you - to be a consultant

Reality: I don't give a flying rat's left testicle what job you take or what schooling you pursue out of college. I would, however, love it if you stopped acting as if making money was beneath your level of enlightenment; and I'd be thrilled if you didn't act as though people who choose consulting were selling out not only their own souls but the Entire Progressive Movement as well.

Elitism, Public Service and Entitlement.

2008-06-25T12:01:00.010-04:00

So, I've been thinking about two recent articles on the subject of Ivy League students and career choices - a recent New York Times article entitled, "Lure of Big Paycheck or Service? Students are Put to the Test" and a piece by William Deresiewicz in The American Scholar: "The Disadvantages of an Elite Education."

Kaya over at Afropologe wrote a provocative post about the issues raised (and not raised) in the two articles. Check it out.

Racism Watch

2008-06-18T00:13:00.007-04:00

Warren Ellis, the übersnarky British bastard comix writer I adore, actually caught this one... a bad sign when bitchy British cultural monkeywrenchers notice how racist the fucking Republicans are.

I’ve long been fond of American political campaign ephemera. This, however, is not something I’d want in the house.

Nor I... gug.

It gets worse, though: he links to the Dallas Morning News, "this badge was found available for sale at a Republican state convention."

There were other pins that weren’t necessarily conveying the positive, inclusive, united front that has been portrayed during the convention. One said, "Press 1 for English. Press 2 for Deportation" and another, "I will hold my nose when I vote for McCain."

Sweet fucking Christ. I have no words.

A list of the available buttons is here, but don't eat too soon before clicking, it made me hurlicious.

Speaking of Warren Ellis, Geeks of Doom made a list of the best Twitterings Warren Ellis has sent out recently. Here's their intro:

It might almost be worth the Arse-beating you’d get from following around Warren Ellis all day to hear what the comic writer and genius wordsmith thinks about during off moments of boredom and inactivity. If you value keeping teeth inside your mouth, twitter provides an alternative.

If you hopped up "House" with caffeine and shaved his head and aimed his scalpel at the general public instead of patients, you'd get Warren Ellis. Also you'd have armed his assistants with fearless loyalty, rusty shivs and unlubed dildos.

ShakesSis' Racism-Sexism Watch Update

2008-06-13T10:00:00.005-04:00

Yeah, so here I was, reading my usual blogs, when I ran into this. (Shakesville 12 Jun 2008). To quote Michelle Obama Watch,

The exhibit included a picture of Barack Obama’s “Audacity of Hope” switched to “The Audacity of Black Hope”, a giant penis on the wall next to a sign saying “once you go Barack,” hanging nooses, and this picture of Sasha and Malia Obama.

The picture in question:

I'm pretty sure I don't have words. I defer to Shakesville's response, as it has passed the incoherence point and entered pointed sharp words. (I'm still at "Emily SMASH!")

Abstinence and modesty

2008-06-11T17:43:00.003-04:00

Another quenchista sent over this delightful gem. It's a magazine that seems to be created for middle schoolers who were shielded enough not to know the professional layout of Seventeen and would be captivated by their "colorful graphics" and font that looks handwritten.

Beyond the typical abstinence spiel that claims to be bolstering a girl's autonomy of choice while actually degrading it (see Top 8 come-backs for come-ons), and heteronormativity, the magazine seems to have a dose of victim-blaming for immodest dress as well.

True, in their dating tips, they have a lot of good advice for young girls that can go beyond simple abstinence, whether in regards to rape, sexual assault, coercion, or even just an uncomfortable date, including:

" DO develop high standards and set boundaries of personal space. DO let your date know where your boundaries are. DON'T let him violate any portion of your boundaries. If he does, tell him to stop. If he doesn't stop, LEAVE....DON'T think you owe him any physical or sexual favors even if he helped you or spent money on you. DON'T give in to verbal manipulation. It's a form of abuse and can be a red flag that he wants to violate you. DON'T blame yourself if you are attacked. It is not always possible to ward off an attack."

While I'm sure they mean it to be in regards to just boundaries of abstinence, this does sound like sound advice all around.

HOWEVER, I'm suspicious of the DOs and DON'Ts of dating's intentions when I read "The Inside Scoop on Guys."

"Dressing modestly is important if you desire to protect and assist the guys in your life who wish to remain abstinent as well. You might think that it's "their problem," but guys are wired differently from girls in what turns them on....Start respecting yourself and your guy friends by dressing modestly!"

So many UGGHS with this statement, including the idea that girls need to make a guy's actions/staring THEIR responsibility, that guys are reduced to biological machines, and.. so much.

Moonbats See Mujahiddin in Dunkin' Donuts Ad

2008-05-29T20:20:00.006-04:00

In an utterly ludicrous turn of events, Dunkin' Donuts has been forced to pull an advertisement it was running with Rachael Ray, a Euro-American (Sicilian-Cajun, whee!) celebrity female chef, because crazed Christianazis felt her neck scarf was too "Islamist".

Let me be utterly clear about this: Rachael Ray is a Christian white woman and a celebrity chef. She was wearing a black and white scarf with a fringe that resembles the kufiyyah, a typically North African and Near Eastern article of clothing whose name is related to the Arabic word for a napkin. This item of clothing is worn by Arabs, particularly men, everywhere, and in Palestine it was made famous because Yasser Arafat wore one on his head that was supposed to represent the Occupied Territories.

Let me take a page from Wikipedia to clarify:

The keffiyeh (Arabic: كوفية‎, kūfiyyah, plural كوفيات, kūfiyyāt) is also known as a shimagh or yashmagh (شماغ, šimāġ), a ghutrah (غترة, ġutrah), a ḥaṭṭah (حطّة) or a mashadah (مشدة) and is a traditional headdress of Arab men, made of a square of cloth, usually cotton, folded and wrapped in various styles around the head. It is commonly found in arid climate areas to provide protection from direct sun exposure, as well as for occasional use in protecting the mouth and eyes from blown dust and sand.

This item of clothing is worn by Westerners, especially military forces, in many areas: it is issued to British troops and is widely worn by US troops in Iraq as well.

Let's also be clear that there is an association made in the American mind with support for Palestine and the wearing of the kufiyyah, although honestly the degree to which this is known is unclear and has become very muddled since the US has been heavily involved in war in Afghanistan and Iraq over the last however-many-years the War on Error has been happening.

Let's conclude by examining the evidence: do we honestly believe that Dunkin' Donuts was attempting to slip some kind of dog whistle into their ad? Do we think that Rachael Ray and Dunkin' Donuts was secretly attempting to show their support for the Palestinians by sticking a paisley scarf around Rachael Ray's throat? Maybe they were trawling for that huge body of people who would wink slyly, in the know, and buy lots and lots of D&D coffee after seeing that ad - brown people and misguided Jewish youth, perhaps?

I roll my eyes. This is on par with Bush apologising for a US sniper in Iraq using the Qur'an for target practice when nobody even knows how many HUMAN BEINGS have died in Iraq. He is in charge of a military that is gangbanging Iraq like it is going out of style and he hasn't apologised for civilian deaths, an invasion based on pretext, or any of his other equally fucked-up notions.

Muslims all around are in agreement: the Qur'an is a revelation, not a book. Fuck that sniper, actual people die every day because of Bush's policies - Americans and non-Americans alike.

And we're kvetching about Rachael Ray wearing a goddamn scarf while she peddles a beverage that is, to misquote a great author, almost totally, but not entirely, unlike coffee.

Feminism and housing

2008-05-29T00:45:00.004-04:00

In the apartment hunt, I've been encountering the issue of Gender in Roommates.

Currently, due to Leverett individual rooms having locks, towers can have mixed gender suites. I love both my male and female roommates and don't consider anything weird at all.

However, I am finding myself more anxious about living with guys than with girls, particularly about making sure to meet them before deciding.

I found a place that is *delightful* today and I practically would have taken on the spot. Then, I find out that the roommate who is not there is a middle-aged man. I immediately balked. He was subletting to someone else for the summer, so I had two days to meet him before he left. I got nervous, upset, and decided that it would likely be totally fine if I got to meet him, but if I couldn't I wouldn't take the chance and just wouldn't take the place.

It's not that I would necessarily be less comfortable with an older guy than a girl my age, for instance. The idea of it is more uncomfortable, and it's quite possible that person to person it would be fine, as all prejudices and stereotypes are wont to dissipate in the individual.

However, with only the demographics to go on, I am not keen on this one. I tried to explain it to my boyfriend: As a girl, while a guy isn't more likely to be bad to live with than good, I feel like there is more statistical chance of awkwardness/powerplay of emotional or physical sorts to happen. At an extreme level, while most guys aren't sexual predators, most sexual predators are guys. I feel like this goes up with age too, although that might be wrong.

So I'm trying to explain to my boyfriend: obviously I won't draw on these biases if the guy is fine, but I'm going to use them to propel me to make sure to meet him before I decide. In my opinion, the mistake would be to have these statistics and biases override his characteristics as an individual, and that it is ok to play it safe and still make decisions based on them when they are all I have and am not able to meet him.

I told my boyfriend this, that I of course wanted to meet him and I'm sure everything would be ok, but I throw out those fears and statistics, the experience of a male temporary roommate last year possibly having had sex on my bed while drunk, etc. And I get completely pinned for being a bad feminist, judgmental, and prejudiced.

As a friend said, this boils down to: If feminists don't want women to be judged as a group, are we allowed to judge men as a group? But seriously: how do we deal with gender politics feministically (?) in terms of safety? The same friend pointed out that even while he may seem harmless in the rote extreme fears, that he is both male and older gives two positions of "power" over me, which could be used even in things like who gets to use the kitchen or whose fault it was that the living room is so dirty. Can I call myself a feminist and still try to avoid living with men because of feared potential situations like this? I think deluding myself that we are in a totally feminist world and that none of this stuff will happen just because he is a guy is the wrong course of action. What do you think?

Pope Benedict Announces Reforming of The Crusades

2008-05-28T17:03:00.004-04:00

A brief quote from the article:

Considered by many to be the greatest religious-based warfare ever recorded, Crusades I set a new standard for bringing God into battle. While the Crusaders borrowed heavily from earlier influences such as Greeks, Romans, pre-Christian barbarians, and even the Jews and Muslims whom they fought, they fused these holy war influences with the seemingly non-violent message of Christ, making something uniquely their own.
“Crusades I took the world by storm,” said Rolling Stone editor David Fricke. “But beneath its everyman popularity was a real complex, even contradictory sound, meshing ‘turn the other cheek’ with ‘hit that cheek with a mace.’”

Muwahahaha. Also don't miss this guy's Transcript of President Bush’s Address to Israel’s Knesset.

Thanks, Ginmar.

trans, genderqueer, gender variant youth in MA

2008-05-25T12:19:00.002-04:00

Some young folks in MA, supported by MTPC, are planning and organizing the state's first ever Trans Youth Summit for folks under 24 who identify as transgender, genderqueer, or gender variant, or may otherwise fit into the "transgender umbrella."

Support these young folks planning the event by spreading the word far and wide, and letting young people you know know about the event.

MTPC can help with transportation costs, and will also pay for t-shirts and a free lunch. Folks just need to sign up soon so that the planners have a good sense of the numbers of folks attending. If you are under 24 and trans, genderqueer, gender variant, or otherwise a part of the "transgender umbrella," please sign up and attend the summit. It's just one day (Sat Jun 28), and it is the first event of its kind in Massachusetts.

More information, including registration information at the Youth Summit website.

George Takei (Star Trek's Sulu) Gets Gay Married

2008-05-20T19:00:00.002-04:00

Woot! Huzzah! Free at last!

George Takei, who played Sulu on the original Star Trek, is getting married at the age of 71 to his same-sex partner of 21 years.

Yay!

Interview with Parvez Sharma

2008-05-20T14:04:00.004-04:00

Faisal Alam dropped this note:

Salaam folks,
Parvez Sharma, director of A Jihad for Love, had an amazing interview today with Amy Goodman from Democracy Now. Check out the interview in audio or video. Its about 30 minutes in.

I haven't viewed the clip yet because I'm in a studying place, but I am looking forward to seeing it.

Bad Questions to Ask a Transsexual

2008-05-19T16:23:00.005-04:00

We've covered quite a bit of this material on quench before, but this is a pretty awesome overview:

A Jihad for Love

2008-05-16T15:47:00.006-04:00

This film is playing at the Boston Gay & Lesbian Film Festival on May 18, 2008.

Parvez Sharma's Jihad for Love... it's produced by the same man as Trembling before G-d. I really want to see it.

Edit: Added link to the official film website, which indicates the US premieres will be on 4 June 2008 and general openings will follow. The play dates for the non-premieres are available here.

Update on the DSM-V Issue

2008-05-15T14:53:00.006-04:00

This crucial bit of information has come to us from Dr. Marshall Forstein. Please read it.

Before people get overly hysterical about the Gender Identity Work group for the DSM, some things need to be made clear.
The letter you are asking us to sign onto is inaccurate in many ways and does not help our cause. Let me clarify what I know as someone who has worked with the American Psychiatric Association for many years.
1- there are TWO professional associations: Both unfortunately go by A P A
a) one is the American Psychiatric Association [this is a MEDICAL society of physicians who specialize in psychiatry]
b) the other is the American Psychological Association [this is a non- medical society of psychologists who are not medical doctors but have a PhD or PsyD or EdD in psychology, either clinical or research or academic or all.]
The American PSYCHIATRIC Association is the organization that publishes the DSM. This is a guide to diagnosis and NOT to Treatment.
Dr. Zucker, although not my preferred choice to head the work group on Gender and Sexuality, does not decide himself what the American Psychiatric Association publishes in the next DSM. In fact, there is a lengthy, and complicated process of peer review based on PUBLISHED scientific literature- in fact, the way we got homosexuality OUT of the DSM [1973] was to force the scientific program committee to produce evidence that homosexuality was an illness, and then in 1989 we removed ego-dystonic homosexuality because there was no evidence to support it and we suggested that there was also ego-dystonic heterosexuality that was a phase of people coming to understand their inner nature.
Sexual orientation is NOT even an issue for the DSM committee to consider. Transgender Identity is a bit more complicated, especially in childhood. The DSM work group will struggle with these issues in coming up with criteria for what to diagnose as a true gender identity disorder. I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT TREATMENT RECOMMENDATIONS ARE NOT A PART OF THIS ENDEAVOR.
Any treatment recommendations that the American Psychiatric Association makes are the result of significant process of creating EVIDENCED based research.
I am currently the Chair of the Work group on Practices Guidelines on HIV Psychiatry for the American Psychiatric Association, and so am intimately aware of the process. Guidelines go through rigorous research review for controlled studies in order to make recommendations. Hundreds of people review these guidelines before publication, and the same will be true of the criteria set forth by the work group on the DSM gender identity subcommittee.
EVEN if there is literature out there that disturbs those of us who are comfortable with the concepts of transgender identity, unless it meets peer review by legitimate journals ( i.e. non religious based periodicals) it will not be considered in the development of criteria for diagnosis or treatment.
I hope that what I have written makes us pause a bit before we do something to alienate even our supporters and friends in the American Psychiatric and the American Psychological Association who have been very pro-gay and pro-trans in their deliberations so far. There will always be a vocal minority that claim otherwise, but the process is vetted by many people committed to scientific integrity and evidence.
I have alerted the Association of Gay and Lesbian Psychiatrists to the announcement of Dr Zucker's appointment and we will be addressing the implications of this within the psychiatric and psychological professional groups. I will also be talking with the Medical Director of the American Psychiatric Association and the Director of the Research group that oversees the DSM to convey the concerns that people have about the "transphobia" that may emerge.
In good conscience, however, I cannot sign a petition that is inaccurate and misleading - it may do far more harm than good. Clarity of the scientific evidence, asking the right questions of the committee, and addressing the criteria that will be put forth for review before it is ever considered ready for publication is the only way we will be taken seriously.
Please let me know how I can help to keep the issues clear.
Marshall Forstein, M.D.
Associate Professor of Psychiatry
Harvard Medical School Director, Adult Psychiatry Residency Training
The Cambridge Hospital
The Cambridge Health Alliance
APA STATEMENT ON GID AND THE DSM
May 9, 2008
The American Psychiatric Association has received inquiries about the DSM-V process, particularly concerns raised about the Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders Work Group.
The APA has a long-standing mission to provide guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of mental disorders, based on the most current clinical and scientific knowledge. Through advocacy and education of the public and policymakers, the APA also affirms it commitment to reducing stigma and discrimination. The DSM addresses criteria for the diagnosis of mental disorders. The DSM does not provide treatment recommendations or guidelines. The APA is aware of the need for greater scientific and clinical consensus on the best treatments for individuals with Gender Identity Disorder (GID). Toward that end, the APA Board of Trustees voted to create a special APA Task Force to review the scientific and clinical literature on the treatment of GID. It is expected that members of the Task Force will be appointed shortly.
There are 13 DSM-V work groups. Collectively, the work group members will review all existing diagnostic categories in the current DSM. Each work group will be able to make proposals to revise existing diagnostic criteria, to consider new diagnostic categories, and to suggest deleting existing diagnostic categories. All DSM-V work group proposals will be based on a careful, balanced review and analysis of the best clinical and scientific data. Evidence accumulated from work group members and hundreds of additional advisors to the DSM-V effort will be considered before final recommendations are made.
The Sexual and Gender Identity Disorders Work Group, chaired by Kenneth J. Zucker, Ph.D., will have 13 members who will form three subcommittees:
--Gender Identity Disorders, chaired by Peggy T. Cohen-Kettenis, Ph.D.
--Paraphilias, chaired by Ray Blanchard, Ph.D.
--Sexual Dysfunctions, chaired by R. Taylor Segraves, M.D., Ph.D.
Each subcommittee will pursue its own charge, provide ongoing peer review, and consult with outside experts. The DSM-V is expected to be published in 2012.

Yay California!

2008-05-15T14:11:00.014-04:00

Roundup of coverage of the CA marriage decision:

Congratulations! And stay tuned for a Quench update from our California correspondent on the celebrations tonight!

breaking news!

2008-05-15T13:21:00.002-04:00

California Supreme Court Legalizes Gay Marriage.

That is all :)

Updated info on anti-trans moron

2008-05-14T05:33:00.002-04:00

This came over the TransMuslims list - a member asked a friend of his about this issue, and she responded as follows. I have no further information.

Unfortunately, the petition is not very well written, and Zucker may chair the whole committee on Sex, Gender and Paraphillia, he doesn't have direct control over anything trans related. That is in the Gender Identity subcommittee, headed by Dr Cohen-Kettenis who actually has a good head on her shoulders.
If you want to complain (and I STRONGLY recommend you do) here are the contacts you should be sending it to.
Rhondalee Dean-Royce, 703-907-7820
rroyce@psych.org
Sharon Reis, 202-745-5103
sreis@gymr.com
Zucker is pure insanity. His policy for dealing with pre-puberty transkids is to first deny them all "cross gender stimulus" (toys, TV, even drawing that corresponds to the opposite sex), then when that doesnt work to prevent them from even playing with, or contacting friends of the opposite sex. He has said "transition is an unfortunate and totally avoidable outcome in gay youth". He advises parents and school administrators NOT to provide information to fellow students so that a transyouth may be "peer pressured" (read: bullied, physically and verbally assaulted) into a gender normative role.
Blanchard is also in there, though he is heading up the paraphilia sub-comity. Blanchard his half of the half-brained idea of autogynaphillia (the other half is Bailey). Their theory is that there are only three types of transpeople
1) men who are too ashamed of being gay so they want to be women so they can be straight men
2) men who want to masturbate with a vagina.
3) liars

The sender notes, "Anyone notice a distinct lack of transmen?"

Anti-Trans Moron Appointed as Head of DMV-V Committee on Trans Issues!

2008-05-13T05:02:00.004-04:00

I am forwarding this from where I encountered it on TransMuslims: here's a quote from a site that has more information and a petition.

The American Psychological Association (APA) recently appointed Dr. Kenneth Zucker to chair the task force responsible for updating of mental health language and treatment of diagnoses such as Gender Identity Disorder (GID) for the upcoming DSM-V (Diagnostics and Statistics Manual, Fifth Edition).
Don’t let his recent appearance on NPR sounding like a nice guy fool you. At a time when the American Medical Association (AMA) is supporting stopping discriminating against and stigmatizing transgender people, Dr. Zucker is a widely recognized proponent of reparation (”ex-gay”) and aversion therapy for children and youth. These techniques have been proven to be ineffective at best and–more often–severely damaging to the mental health of people who are LGB or T.

I am looking into this more but I am mostly just making this post a flag for us... please look into it if you can.

Thing That is Awkward: A Publick Apologee

2008-05-13T04:55:00.004-04:00

I come before you to confess my sins.

O friends, I did in fact rent and enjoy this horrid and tawdry film, 27 Dresses, & during the viewing of which did ogle Katherine Heigl lesboppropriately, but only whilst committing the sin of enjoying a hypertawdriclicous romance film of the genre known as "extreme heteronormative chick flick", for which my excuse of lesboögling is no excuse at all.

O my friends, I compound my error by buying into the heteronormativity of said "flick" and imagining it were, in fact, me as Katherine Heigl's character, but while James Marster is in fact pretty cool I did substitute also Katherine Heigl or another hot woman whenever he did appear with Witty Male Banter.

My sins are made worse by my shame at not truly being contrite for having enjoying this film, and duly confess that I also rented another film with Katherine Heigl in't, namely Knocked Up, of which I am of the understanding is even yuckier heteronormativity (but O sweet friends, she is so hot, ever since I saw her as a youngun on that show where she were an alien, ahhhh), wherein a drunken frat boy is "redeemed" as the ideal match for her.

In an attempt to hide my sins, I do duly confess that under the pressure of feeling ill, I did rent also extreme violence movies to try to "water down" my sins, namely Hitman & Live Free or Die Hard.

HOWEVER! I did also rent Michael Clayton, which though it has George Clooney, does in fact feature the unbearably desirable Tilda Swinton, with whom I fell madly in love as a child while watching Orlando and who, over the years, has only gotten hotter. (Her portrayal of the Archangel Michael in the otherwise horrid Constantine made me swoon with desire...)

O my friends, forgive me these lapses, as I am only human.

Queer educational insect porn!

2008-05-07T16:33:00.003-04:00

Tip from The Hater over at The A.V. Club.

Isabella Rossellini is kind of my new hero. In a new series of shorts for Sundance, she explains the reproductive processes of a series of gross bugs in a way that is so delightfully enthusiastic, absurdist, and, seriously? A bit queer, no? There's something so hilarious and wonderful about her cheerfully declaring, of her snailish penis and vagina, "I have both!" Here's the awesome trailer, and you can, and should, check out all the hysterical shorts here.

On the topic of body love...

2008-05-06T11:46:00.005-04:00

So, for those of you who don't obsessively read the comments (it's ok, although you're missing out!), a little update: a comment by the illustrious Miss CripChick on my BADD post has been leading to a sub-discussion of, among other things, body love.

How timely it is, then, that I just discovered an extraordinary site called The Body Image Project. It's kind of like PostSecret, in that it invites readers to submit anonymous comments (and, in some cases, mixed-media "postcards" which look directly inspired by PostSecret) about things they would otherwise be ashamed to say. As the name suggests, though, these comments are all about how the posters see their bodies.

They're not all positive, mind you - not hardly. (In fact, I think the site should probably come with an ED trigger warning.) The site's stated goal is:

to have women and girls take that brave step to share their stories, break the hold these perceptions have and ultimately reveal to those who share and to those who view this site - you are not alone.

And a lot of the stories that people are sharing are incredibly painful. I'm picking excerpts here that I think are illustrative but least likely to be triggering; still, if you are likely to be distressed by depictions of ED, don't read the excerpts ***preceded by asterisks.

"Age 70":

***Next came the diet doctor. I remember my mother bringing me and the doctor taking my "before" picture. Every week I went, got pills, weighed and had a little question and answer session with the doc. One of the answers I can recall was, "if you eat from a pig, you'll look like a pig." His name was Dr. Repp in West Philadelphia. Needless to say, when I passed out one day my mother threw the pills down the toilet and I didn't go back to Dr. Repp. I think I weighed 150 lbs when I started with him; I recall losing 10 lbs in one week.

"Age 22":

I have hundreds, probably thousands, of dollars worth of tattoos on my body. I am more proud of them than anything else, but just once I want somebody to say "Oh, she would be so pretty if it weren't for all of those tattoos" instead of complimenting them. I have them so people look at the tattoos instead of looking at me, I want somebody to really see me someday, and think that I'm beautiful. Maybe someday I'll stop putting beautiful things on my body and actually believe that my body is what's beautiful.

"Age 20":

***I am standing in front of my boyfriend, naked. He is staring at me. I don't know what he is seeing. Appreciation? Awe? Disgust? He turns away. He hands me his tee shirt. So you don't get cold, he says. I turn away. Do you think I'm fat? I ask the carpet. No. I think you are too skinny. I can see your veins beneath your skin. He doesn't know what's important. He doesn't know what this means to me. He thinks girls should be big and curvy, and I think I should disappear.

Or simply, from "Age 24":

I'm a feminist, a confident woman, an advocate for body positivity - and it takes a man telling me I'm beautiful for me to believe it. I make myself sick.

Heavy stuff. But there's some hope there - some stories, not just about women with "perfect bodies" unquestioningly accepting that definition and bragging about it (though, hell, it would be nice to love one's body uncomplicatedly, wouldn't it?), but about women with variable types of human bodies and how they came to love them. And these, I think everyone should read:

"Age 61":

That said, here is what I have deprogrammed. Mother said my lips were big; I know they aren't. In fact, I think I have a beautiful mouth. Mother said my legs were fat, like tree trunks; my legs aren't small, but they're not fat either. I have the same legs as my Dad, my brothers, and 2 of my 3 children. They are solid Italian legs, but not fat. My mother's people have skinny legs. I almost like my legs. Mother told me that my butt was big. I am very proportionate. Mother said my hair was too straight and she was always putting perms in it. I love my hair. I've put back the red (strawberry blond) I had as a child. I think my hair is very, very pretty. I love my eyes; they are strikingly attractive.

"Age 22":

I think I started to be less ashamed of my body when I dropped my long hair and got my gigantic mohawk. Suddenly everyone around was complimenting me. They said things like, we love your hair, it looks like the sun. I felt powerful with my hair spiked out to look like it could kill someone. The mohawk is long gone but the feeling of confidence in being visible is still there.
And I love my body. I really do. I walk around in my apartment naked and whenever I see myself in the bathroom mirror I smile and look at how long my armpit hair is getting. Sometimes I feel like a five-year-old, sitting in the bathtub poking at my belly and thinking of how it's like a flotation device. I'll never drown.

"Age 51":

Gravity and hot flashes have begun to take their toll, but I still love my body. It is strong and healthy, hasn't failed me yet and has given life and nourishment to three wonderful children. The miracles of the workings of the human body are often taken for granted and shouldn't be. Watch a woman wrestle with news that the pregnancy being carried won't have 10 fingers and 10 toes and one has a new respect for the miracle of conception and embryonic development. Watch that child grow and learn and beat the odds of her birth and prognosis and in the end we are each a miracle in our own right. A few pounds, curves, or lack of either do not form our soul, our heart or our unique contribution to this world we live in.

Now, I understand, objectively, why this particular site is geared toward women - so for those of you who either:

identify as women

have found your body image significantly influenced by being perceived as women (and thus held to women's body standards, rightly or wrongly)

... I encourage you to submit to the Body Image Project.

But we here at Quench have a little more flexibility in our gender policy (... and, um, in our genders, most of us) - so I'd like to encourage any of y'all, of any gender, to comment here as well. I'll ask the same question they ask there:

"When you look in the mirror, what do you see?"

And I'll add another one:

"How did you come to see that?"

(... my own answer upcoming, when I'm not in class!)

Mother's Day!

2008-05-05T12:42:00.007-04:00

Wow, there have been some really great posts lately. I hope everyone is reading and joining in with the Blogging Against Disablism Day conversations here on Quench.

On another subject - it's almost Mother's Day! I'm looking for suggestions for Mother's Day gifts that also benefit others (ie, where a percent of profits go to nonprofit work, or even referrer links that I could use to buy regular gifts that would benefit charity). Let me know!

BADD

2008-05-04T17:06:00.002-04:00

Hey all!

I've been swamped and dealing with issues, so I didn't even read this set of articles on BADD until today.

So, yeah. In answer to a comment by M.E., I am a Quenchista and I am disabled.

I am also one of the "invisible" disabled - I suffer the unholy of triad of anxiety disorder, which in my case veers around the two peaks of agoraphobia and claustrophobia.

Maybe I didn't feel like posting at first because I thought, "Duh, who doesn't know I'm disabled, I think I must talk about nothing else sometimes." I also am sick of talking about being sick. I try to go without thinking about it, but you know how well that works.

Right now I have finals for my Arabic class. The stress is getting to me pretty badly for some reason; I switched non-crazy medications a while ago and hormones are notoriously destabilising. I sleep all day despite pretty hard attempts to move that back to the evening and I have a hard time being productive. That I was able to spend this morning memorising 8th century poetry was a great victory for me: I got half the poem down, which I haven't been able to even look at for the last four weeks.

So. I feel like I hate my disability. I accept it, mostly, grousing all the way, but I really really hate it. It made me a better person in some ways: I am compassionate because I have suffered. I don't feel like it was worth it. My life is a wreck, I cannot do the things I want to do. Plus I have nightmares and am afraid of the night time.

I feel like half of an adult. I feel unloved and unlovable. I am turning into an asexual old woman thirty years early, and it's because I am afraid of cars and public transit and crowds because some bug destroyed part of my brain.

Not pretty words for BADD. I am in a place full of anger and frustration so often. I apologise like it is a way of life for my failings. I am lava, the anger and fear radiates off of me and burns others and I hate it. My brain is broken and all my workarounds are unreliable. I am out of control - that's what disability means, right? loss of control - and my disability is obsessed with control, triggered by loss of control and no amount of practice or letting go makes it better.

So: I am a Quenchista, I am disabled. And I am angry and afraid.

Somewhere between pride and prejudice

2008-05-01T21:56:00.004-04:00

On Blogging Against Disablism Day.

I. I do not have disability pride. I realize this makes me something of a political anomaly, especially among the folks who are posting today, but I see nothing positive in the train-wreck that is my neurochemistry, and if the Cure we all like to hypothesize about were found, I'd be first in line to try it. For those of you who are new here, by the way, I'm talking about major depression and basilar migraine with aura. And luckily, although they're not cures, there are treatments that at the moment are working pretty well - meaning that, although I still have to pretty much micromanage my life around avoiding triggers, my migraines are becoming rarer and it's been a while since the last time I seriously believed the world would be better if I weren't in it. If I'm proud of anything, I'm proud of that.

II. This isn't a perspective I'm particularly comfortable with. Isn't it a sign of internalized ablism, after all, to hate one's disability, to want it cured, to view it as a source of weakness rather than a rallying point? I'm the first one in line, in my personal and my professional life, to point out that Deafness isn't inherently worse than being hearing, and that there is definitely some logic to the idea that cochlear implants can be considered offensive. I play devil's advocate in conversation, pointing out that nobody is entirely self-reliant, and that the difference between someone who can't grow their own food and someone who can't lift food to their mouth is only a difference of degree. I read along with glee or fury (depending on the tone of the piece) as activists every year describe their protests of the Jerry Lewis telethon, arguing that focusing on the Cure devalues the lives they have lived and takes resources away from efforts to support them as disabled adults. In short, it seems I'm very pro-disability - except when it comes to my own.

III. So, if I'm not proud of having disabilities, I must be ashamed. Once I work through that shame, I can take up the banner and see myself for the unique badass depressed migraineur that I was always meant to be. Right?

Well, no. I'm not ashamed, per se. I don't believe that having a doubly-dysfunctional brain has anything to do with my worth as a person (except insofar as doubting my worth as a person is actually a symptom), and although I'm cautious about how and when I disclose, it has more to do with stigma management than any sense that I'm actually in the wrong. No, I'm not ashamed so much as pissed off. I don't like fighting against my own mind for the right to get out of bed in the morning. I don't like suddenly being hit with so much pain that I'd claw my own eye out were it not for the fact that I have to remain completely motionless or the pain will get worse. And I don't really care that Poe, van Gogh, and Kierkegaard had depression, or that Hildegard von Bingen's miraculous visions were actually the result of migraine auras: I look at them and I don't think, Wow, look how creative depression made them, but rather, Wow, I wonder how much more we could have seen of their brilliance if it hadn't been hidden in the fog of so many bad days.

And that's the thing. So many people I know say that their disability has made them who they are in ways that they wouldn't want to change. Mine have made me who I am in ways that I would trade in a heartbeat. There has been no advantage to the loss of clarity they have caused me, the loss of forward momentum, the long-term and nearly permanent loss of hope. The fact that I have recovered, for the time being, from these things is not a testament to the character-building power of adversity. It's a testament to the power of good psychopharmaceuticals - nothing more mystical than that. Depression and migraine aren't part of me, like some disabilities are part of the people who experience them. They're malignant little houseguests who have long outstayed their welcome.

IV. That's not to say that I don't feel the need for disability advocacy. I've been on the receiving end of ablism even worse than the mere thought that maybe I'd be better off not disabled. In academia, where the mind is everything, anything that interferes with the life of the mind is a threat; and so it is that my advisor (a wonderful woman who watches my back) warned me that the faculty considered me "intelligent but unstable," and that it was not my smarts but my sanity I needed to prove. So it is that my graduate-studies director told me, in front of the dean of the division, that "academia isn't the place for everyone, and if you're too emotional to survive here, there's no shame in getting out now." When I responded by asking the dean for the contact information of the university's disability services office, he said, "Well, there's really no need to be adversarial, I think. I believe we can all just keep our wits about us and be rational about this rather than resorting to any formal proceedings."

Yeah. In other words, don't be crazy. If you'll just do things my way - the sane way - we'll see about letting you stay here.

I insisted on getting her contact information. I've never used it, though. Just knowing that I had it made a big difference in the administration's attitudes. The fact that I could call myself what I was - a student with a disability, not just some overwrought weepy little girl who shouldn't be in grad school - gave me some power in their eyes. Not enough to make them believe that I belonged there, but enough to make them believe that I'd dig in my heels and insist on staying.

What I have done since then is formed a network of sorts - an underground information railroad of female grad students with mental illnesses. We trade reports on who the most punctual psychiatrists on campus are, what new meds each of us are trying, how we're coping with the stress of grad school and the tightrope walk of depression, which administrators are sympathetic and which to avoid. We're not particularly proud, but we're not going be shamed, either. We're savvy, we're in control, and we're fighting the ablism that hits us the hardest, with the tools we have. And, you know what? It works, more or less.

V. My life is worth living. Most days, I believe that. But I don't believe that my disabilities have any effect on the equation one way or another - except that, if I had never had them, I would probably have a longer time in which to lead a worthwhile life. In my case (and I don't want to generalize to other disabilities, or even to other people with my exact same diagnoses), disability is not a crucial part of my identity, except by accident, so the prospect of removing it from my life isn't a judgment on who I am. But the fact is, it's here - and accident or not, it's a part of the person other people see as me. You can offer me help on my terms, but don't you ever offer to "help" me by shutting me out of opportunity on the grounds that I "might not survive it." I may fail the Internalized Ablism Litmus Test, but I'm still activist enough to protect myself.

Disability, Being an Ally, Invisibility, and Outness.

2008-05-01T09:24:00.005-04:00

This is my post for Blogging Against Disablism Day. A friend suggested that I post a bit of a "status report" of where I am as a non-disabled ally. I have a few more substantive posts on the way in coming weeks so don't expect this to be the end of it. Please, if you have the energy, criticize it and call me out on things that I say that are offensive. I'm very early in my journey to learn more.

I don't really think of myself as non-disabled. I don't know if that is something that I need to work on and change. I can remember a time in my teens when I didn't think of myself as white and didn't believe race affected my life. Now, I understand that I was just a part of an unmarked category and so able to use my privilege to pretend to myself that nothing in my life related to my race. However, in a way being non-disabled is different - it's not having a disability that I know of, or not having a disability yet. In the disability communities where I am involved, there are so many people with such different disabilities that everyone is impacted by different barriers in their lives. In a way, it's like we are all allies to each other in that very few people have experiences around disability that are similar to each other's.

I spend a lot of time around people with disabilities - some have physical disabilities, some mental health issues, and some both. As far as peers, I have a partner, close family members, and close friends who I know have physical disabilities and/or mental illnesses.

I think of myself as someone without a physical disability but as an ally to people with physical disabilities. I am actively involved in various projects designed to make change at policy and community levels, and on a personal level try to host activist and social events in the most accessible spaces possible. I understand variable movement restrictions in a very intimate way as my partner and I trade off household tasks depending on whether it's a good day or a bad day. Perhaps because of the intimacy of asking these questions and sharing these experiences with someone so close, I have found myself able to comfortably travel through disability-spaces, particularly physical-disability-focused spaces with increasing ease. As an ally, I am confident in myself, know why I am there, and feel like I am playing a role that makes sense.

In mental health/illness related spaces, I often feel more confused. In my experience, there is more emphasis on disclosure or non-disclosure. I don't know if it is true, but it feels like there is more of a fuzzy line between being a person living with mental illness and not. When I have been involved in mental health related disability work, I tend not to disclose my status as a person who at least is not aware of any mental illness I do have, if I have one. It feels like each person disclosing their status applies some amount of pressure on others to disclose. Kind of like how great it is to have straight or non-trans allies committed to LGBT work because it gives people who aren't willing to be out the opportunity to be involved but to blend in. Or perhaps it's because I'm not confident enough in myself as an ally and not ready to be called out each time I fuck up. Or because I somehow think that if I say, for example, that I don't have a certain condition in my life, I am saying that that I judge or dislike people with that condition. In any case, I sort of blend in - I mean, everyone has issues so there is a level of empathy that just makes sense. However, I also know that my own issues, even my experiences of trauma, tend not to get in the way of what I want to do, or to hinder my daily life. I don't know if there is a "right way" to be involved.

But like my involvement in physical disability work, a lot of my involvement with mental health related disabilities is not on some organized picketing of a building. It's about asking someone how their day is going and wanting to hear the truth, or quietly taking on part of a coworker's project when he just can't do it that week, or stopping a bigot from spewing hurtful shit at least for today, at least for now. I don't think that these kinds of interactions make me an ally. They are basically the bare minimum necessary to make me a decent human being.

So maybe I'm not an ally after all.

Melange Lavonne = Badass

2008-04-28T22:57:00.005-04:00

This interview made me love her even before I realized that her songs are genuinely awesome. She says no one owns her; I swoon and believe it. What do you think? How about the reasoning in her interview behind the Gay Bash video (embedded below)?

Hear that? That's the sound of Western civilization crumbling around you.

2008-04-27T11:14:00.003-04:00

After all, not only are The Gays getting married - they're getting married young, according to a recent piece in the New York Times Magazine. "Young Gay Rites" profiles a herd of twenty-something gay men who are either married or soon to be (and two who were married and divorced by age 26, proving that straight people don't have a monopoly on bad choices). Clearly, straight marriages are being destroyed by the second.

The whole article is worth reading, but there were a few moments that particularly caught my attention:

...more than twice as many lesbians 29 and younger have married in Massachusetts than have gay men of that age...

Dan Savage, in the article, attributes this to Ye Olde Femayle Nestinge Instincte. The author also quotes a demographer who attributes it to the ticking of the biological clock - after all, they'd best be gettin' married before their eggs shrivel up and die.

Incidentally, this and a throwaway reference to U-Hauls are pretty much the entirety of the article's references to women. The author explains (in the end of this very sentence) "...I chose to focus on the latter [i.e. men]." Oh - wait - that's not an explanation, is it? It's just a statement of preference - a preference which any attentive reader could have deduced from the fact that the article focuses on men. But I suppose it's more newsworthy to see promiscuous mansluts settling down than serially monogamous domestic earth-goddesses, is that what you're saying?

“It never ceases to amaze me how many people will say to us, ‘So, who’s the woman, and who’s the man, in your marriage?’ ” says Jason Shumaker, who lives in a Boston suburb with his husband, Paul McLoughlin II, who is an assistant dean at Harvard. They met eight years ago when they were 25, and they legally married at 29 (registering to wed on the first day gay couples could do so in Massachusetts). “I just think that’s the dumbest question ever,” he added. “Yes, we’re married, but we’re also two guys, so neither one of us has to be ‘the woman.’ ”

Yay! Dean McLoughlin shout-out!

“Once, [gay] relationships were only respected if we had remained together for a long, long time,” [Dan] Savage said. “Only longevity earned us some modicum of respect. Straight couples could always rush that validity by getting married. Now I just worry that some gay kids, desperate to have their gay love taken seriously, will wield their new marriage licenses and say: ‘See how real our love is? We’ve only been together five months, but we’re already married. You better respect us now!’

'Cause lord knows, straight couples never do that. And if they do, everyone totally takes their marriage seriously as an automatic consequence of their having signed the right papers.

I'm sorry, why exactly are we expecting people entering same-sex marriages to be, as a group, any smarter than the people who've been entering "traditional" marriages for lo! these many years?

And finally ...

If I was lucky enough to find love, I thought, I’d better hold onto it. And part of me tried, but a bigger part of me wanted to pitch a tent in my favorite gay bar.

Did the New York Times Magazine actually let the phrase "pitch a tent in my favorite gay bar" into print? Really? Pitch a tent, guys? Who let that one slip by?

poorly-closeted racism

2008-04-25T12:28:00.006-04:00

I promise to stop this series of overposting so you can hear from some of our other great writers but I wanted to comment on a breaking news story and what I see as inappropriate reporting, and inappropriate comments by a variety of government officials. And by inappropriate, I mean racist.

This story explains that three detectives were found not guilty this morning in the death of an unarmed black man who died when officers shot 50 or more bullets outside a club in Queens. (If you don't want to give NYT your info, you can go to bugmenot.com to get a login). The detectives were found not guilty on all five felonies and three misdemeanors.

Everyone is focused on the racism of the verdict itself and while I don't know all the facts, I don't question that people are right, but I will leave that discussion to those more informed than I am. But look at these quotes from the article:

"[The mayor said] 'We don’t expect violence or law-breaking, nor is there any place for it.'"
"[The district attorney said] 'I accept his verdict, and I urge all fair-minded individuals in this city to do the same.'"
"Commissioner Kelly, speaking in Brooklyn, would not comment on the verdict itself. But he did say that while there were no reports of unrest in response to the acquittals, the Police Department was ready should it occur."
"'We have prepared, we have done some drills and some practice with appropriate units and personnel if there is any violence, but again, we don’t anticipate violence,' Mr. Kelly said. 'There have been no problems.'"

Are these comments reminding people not to be violent? Are they trying to reassure people that other people won't hurt them? Or are they just saying people will not be violent in order to bring up their expectation of violence following not guilty verdicts when a black man gets shot by police? And how, if at all, do the images in the article add to this theme of racial panic? What do you think?