FUCK YOU BITCH. THEY DIDN'T WORK HARD JUST FOR FUCKING JORDYN. THIS SHIT IS NOT ABOUT JORDYN. FUCK YOU. FUCK YOU. FUCK YOU. FUCK YOU. THEY KICKED ASS BECAUSE THEY ARE GREAT AND KICKED ASS. THEY CARRIED JORDYN AFTER HER FUCKS UP. THEY WEREN'T "BACKING HER UP." GABBY OUTSCORED THEM ALL ON ALL EVENTS. THIS WAS NOT THEM "BACKING JORDYN UP." THIS WAS THEM KICKING ASS. FUCK YOU. FUCK YOU. FUCK YOU.
NBC commentators:Wow, look at that focus. Look at that. She wants this. She needs this. She knows she can do this. She was absolutely devastated two days ago, but she is a fighter, she is strong, and she will help the Americans finish ahead of the Russian divas on the race to the top of the podium because a flower that blooms in adversity is the rarest and most beautiful of all
Turning a chicken sandwich into Public Gay Enemy Number One makes LGBT people look superficial, vindictive and juvenile — everything that we as a community have worked hard to overcome. Remember, employers don’t want drama queens on the payroll, military service is serious business, and marriage is not a right society grants to spoiled children. While in a perfect world our equality should not depend on our good behavior, in a world where our rights too often hinge on political reality, the way our movement conducts itself matters.
The “movable middle” moves both ways, and they don’t like seeing people attacked relentlessly for their religion. Whatever the nuances, these voters see a man standing up for his beliefs against a politically powerful mob dead-set on driving him out of business. It’s un-American, and when fellow conservatives are finally standing up and speaking out for marriage equality as consistent with the sober values of responsibility and commitment, splashing a popular American company with metaphorical chicken blood in protest is nothing less than friendly fire.
Even if marriage equality activists “won” and Chick-fil-A went out of business tomorrow, what would be gained? True, some businesses may hesitate to donate to antigay causes in the future, but LGBT people would have handed antigay organizations a weapon better than money can buy — confirmation that gay people really are the thought police, willing and able to use the power of the state to impose our will on oppressed social conservatives. Instead of standing for an outdated and dying discrimination, Chick-fil-A would become a martyr for religious freedom.
In a free society there is room for disagreement on marriage, as there is room for disagreement on war, health care and taxes. Remember, this is about fried chicken, not cross burnings. After DOMA is repealed and civil marriage equality is the law of the land, there will still be people who believe that a marriage between two men is no marriage at all. While it may hurt some feelings that not everybody will want to dance at our weddings, freedom will still mean freedom for everyone — even Dan Cathy. But in order to get to that day, LGBT Americans should take a lesson from Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.: “We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline.”
R. Clarke Cooper, Executive Director of the Log Cabin Republicans, in the Huffington Post.
Check it: this isn’t about my feelings. It’s not about Dan Cathy’s beliefs. It’s about where his company puts the money its customers give it. It’s about the fact that a chunk of that money goes to organizations that actively fight every attempt to get me my right to marriage, to groups that actively- as their primary function, as their stated mission- fool young versions of me into wasting the best years of their lives hating themselves for something they cannot and should not change.
If by avoiding being a customer, I can make less money go to those groups, then it is my duty to avoid being a customer. If I can tell other people to do the same, then it is my duty to tell other people to do the same. If one of our allies has an agreement wherein their toys are enticements for new customers, it is our duty to ask them to stop.
Nobody’s punishing a citizen for his personal beliefs. Nobody’s trying to reason with a frog puppet. Nobody’s angry at a sandwich.
(Also, drama queens do quite well in some fields [I can’t imagine PR or talent management without them, for example], marriage is and shall ever be available to spoiled adult children from coast to coast, and for the love of God, the fight for the right of GLBT servicemembers to serve openly was not an attempt to make military service more whimsical.)
I too believe that someday DOMA will be repealed and that civil marriage equality will be the law of the land. I’d like to see that day come soon. The groups Chick-fil-A donates millions of dollars to would like to see that day come never. So I’m going to do what I can to make sure that none of my dollars become any of those groups’ dollars. The end.
Yes, of course the conversation has gotten heated. Welcome to the internet. But trotting uninvited and uninformed into the argument isn’t helping, Mr. Cooper. You must forever conduct your personal business on the high plane of knowing what the hell you’re talking about.
It may be difficult for a gay Republican to understand this, but we’re not trying to win the personal approval of a rich old white guy. We’re using the free market to gain our own civil rights.
Only in our emotionally-stilted, heterosexist culture of hypermasculinity would we need to invent a special word to describe intimate male friendships as if they are rare unicorns. See also: the concept of a “man-crush” and the fan name “bronies”. Men don’t need special masculinity-reaffirming names for liking shows aimed at girls, for having relationships with other men that are emotionally open or for idolizing another guy.
The dignified thing to do would have been not to review the album at all— as many publications didn’t— rather than spin a few incredibly feeble “lols” at an unmissable sitting duck.
Or if you were that incensed by Brown’s crimes, you’d write something more pertinent and in-depth that raised the issues around what he did, rather than shitting out a few lame jokes.
And as Maura points out, Brown mentions two brands of condom on the record.
Plus: It’s not funny in a format — capsule reviews — where your word count requires you to be funny and incisive; it wastes so many words in being unfunny; it’s rockist; it’s trying to be contrarian when this isn’t even contrarian by Chris Brown capsule-review Tumblr meme standards; it’s offensive (“skitzy”?), it’s not even accurate in being offensive (schizophrenia is not DID); it isn’t even the best dismissal like this.
“Sloppy Relativism. You have critical standards: stick to them. Don’t praise Ghostface Killah as a righteous poet, then dis Elliott Smith as “sexist” (and yes, I’ve seen one critic do this) unless you’re willing to defend and elaborate this obvious contradiction. It’s critical suicide to to turn yourself into an easy target for withering cynics. Keep your principles and standards simple and pure.
Good Taste. This may sound absurd, but writers with Good Taste are inevitably the worst critics. Yes, yes, all critics have “good” taste, or at least they have faith in their own idiosyncratic eardrums. But Good Taste is something different altogether: it’s a combination of middlebrow sentiment, political correctness, multicultural blandness, and moral jitters. Fear of violence and speed and sex and cusswords are somewhere in there, too. Good Taste is what makes a critic love Lauryn Hill but fear Li’l Kim. Good Taste means putting Willie Nelson ahead of David Allen Coe in the country-music canon. The only way to be a truly discerning critic is to brave the elements: slap on albums by ANTiSEEN, Def Squad, Cyndi Lauper, Anal Cunt, Commodores, Star Death, Pink & Brown, Voivod, Johnny Paycheck, Ja Rule, Iron Maiden, Hanson, .38 Special, Blink 182, and see what you like. (Just for the record, I like all of ‘em except Ja Rule and Anal Cunt). Don’t stick to the safe critically received Beck’n’Wilco mulch or you’re gonna dull your ears too fast. Good Taste is for brainless elites. Go for bad taste first, then work your way up.”—
I read some of the responses to Chloe Papas’ Chris Brown review this morning (this blog post in particular), and immediately thought of Mark Desrosiers’ brilliant PopMatters column from back in 2003 (which is basically my bible), and especially these two points.
Whether or not she is racist is not for me to assess, but it did make me think about critics - and there are so many of them - who have a block on genres like R&B, hip hop, reggae, grime, and so on. “It all sounds the same” is not just something that people in FM radio vox-pops say.
Of course there are plenty of other genre-specific aural prejudices (country music, Christian contemporary, and metal commonly turn up the noses of critics), but it strikes me that it’s easy to lay into Chris Brown, based on his behaviour outside of the recording booth, because his music is generally considered to be crap. Kicking crap music is easy and fun and we’ve all done it. It takes a bit more nuance to be able to do the same to the sacred cows of (un)popular music.
Historically rock criticism has tended to turn more of a blind eye to the “indiscretions” of beloved artists whose back catalogues are held in high regard: John Lennon, Mark E. Smith, Lindsay Buckingham, and so on.
As I tweeted this morning, Ike Turner was a pretty great producer, but in the annals of rock writing he’s the violent thug and Phil Spector is the production genius.
Spector’s treatment of women is usually, rightly, front and centre in feature writing, but his production work is still praised without question when it comes to ‘greatest ever’ lists.
It’s critical laziness as much as it is something/anything more sinister (and as I’ve said many times in Spector’s case, “Shadow” Morton was a far more interesting producer, anyway), but I think these conversations are really important to have.
It looks like everyone on Tumblr’s support staff failed basic Civics and Economics, so let me tell you how freedom of speech works. Your freedoms end where mine begin. You may have the right to blog all you want about Neo-Nazism and Culturalism, but the moment you enter someone else’s space and threaten them, you have violated their freedom. Tumblr explicitly places the rights of white supremacists, Neo-Nazis, and violent racists over the rights of black and brown people who’ve committed no other crime than talking about their daily lives.
To add the cherry to the bullshit sundae, Tumblr has been known to go as far as blaming the victims for their abuse. I once sent an email to Tumblr support about a user who had basically made his entire blog a dedication to adding racist commentary to everything I said. Tumblr’s response: “It sounds like you’re both to blame here.” There are dozens if not hundreds of users who can give similar accounts of Tumblr staff’s mismanagement of abuse complaints by blaming the victim for the problem. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. I had the nerve to talk about racism, so a white person has every right to call me a nigger. Right. Okay. Cool story. It’s gotten to the point where most recent death threats aren’t even reported because users are not confident that Tumblr staff will help them.
This isn’t the treatment everyone gets though. When Laci Green, an inexplicably popular Youtuber, first came to Tumblr, she faced immediate criticism due to some Islamaphobic and cissexist comments she’d made in the past. A few overactive trolls hurled death threats in her direction. She, however, received the full cooperation of Tumblr staff and even the local police authorities. When a story about a Jewish man assuming a black woman was a prostitute began burning up everyone’s dashboards, people requested the story be removed from Tumblr so as to not cause judgement against the Jewish community. Not only did Tumblr remove the original post, they began deleting the post from people’s blogs once it was re-posted. Anyone have a guess as to why those complaints were responded to aggressively? Could it have been because those victims were white? Survey says…
They were white. The message is clear here: if you’re black or brown on Tumblr and want to receive messages, you have to endure abuse.
plot twist: just when Victoria Foyt begins write up “Save the Pearls”, the most beautiful hand rests itself upon hers. Surprised by such a presence, she looks up and finds herself gazing into the immaculate face of Kanye West. “No” he whispers. A single tear drop rolls down her cheek.”Ok” she says and proceeds to sleep for a thousand years.
The world never hears of “Save the Pearls” ever again.
“If this book is a true reversal of our own world, then the author is implying that black people are treated unfairly in our world because they are a genetic dead end with inferior traits.”—via save the pearls facebook comments (via asakite)
Hey, Gay Activism (TM): Intersectionality! Intersectionality! Intersectionality! AIDS is disproportionately impacting black gay men almost eight times as much as white gay men, and you are too busy talking about ‘homophobia in the African-American community’ (i.e. against white gay men) to deal with the fact that there are people who are BOTH black AND gay and whose needs are being ignored by the government and HRC etc.
Racism & Classism = When marriage equality and military service are ‘gay issues’ but health care and homelessness and racial discrimination are not.
Phony. I’m considered a fake in many facets of my identity. I’ve found out that it takes another person involved for me to be fake, that it isn’t an innate quality. Someone from a point of privilege makes a judgment of whether or not I’m authentic or real, and if I’m allowed into the club. Geek culture is full of people waiting to do nerd cred checks to make sure whether people like me are allowed at cons, publications, and merely being in the presence of others in a geek setting. One such person is Joe Peacock, who wrote on CNN’s Geek Out! blog about his distaste for falsies. At least, when it comes to deciding which beautiful women are geeky enough and are permitted to dress up as sexy elves. His piece reinforced my experience with this line drawing to be completely arbitrary to the person making the decision, since one’s exclusion of Felicia Day is OBVIOUSLY out of hand, but not these soul sucking attention mongers with nice boobies over here. Wait let me take a picture before you go.
Here’s the deal: Who put anyone in charge of deciding whether someone is authentic or not? What is blind rage-inducing about Joe’s piece is the unprecedented arrogance thinking he can make a decision like that. That for some reason, geekery is such a holy grail of attractiveness that a Batman shirt is all you need to go from a 6 to a 9 for Joe. Do you understand what you’re doing when you assume others’ intentions, and tell them they are not real?
It’s easy to see where this attitude comes from; the conversation always starts at how women are ruining things for the geek community. For some reason, these articles aren’t about how geek culture is predisposed to wanting women being sexy at all times. Instead, it’s women acting as sirens, striking at the weak spot geek men have for beautiful women. Obviously there’s no talk about how handsome men use their good looks to win favors, and there isn’t a question raised as to why that imbalance exists.
What I’d like to point out is how no matter their authenticity on the Peacock-o-meter, there is a correlation between successful women in geek spaces and having conventional beauty. When Joe regards other women accepted into the fold, he doesn’t talk about merits outside of sexy cosplay, because that’s mostly what men in geek spaces are focused on. My question is, why aren’t the men involved in geek structures promoting and highlighting women on their merits, but instead constantly talk about their looks? Why does Olivia Munn need to be “real” as according to you in order for her to be respected as a human being? How come a model hired to be a model MUST have geek credentials? It seems like Joe needed to turn this critique inwards and at other men for their inability to support the meritocracy they imply is in existence.
Women are not invaders into geek spaces. No, games are not that much more inclusive than ten, twenty years ago, it’s just that women and girls enjoyed games before they realized there was a huge sexism problem. Many didn’t realize it was just a boy thing until after they started playing. I know I didn’t find Paperboy especially masculine when I was four, I just really liked cracking up at that dude breakdancing in his driveway.
Let me parallel this to my own life. For the past seven or so years, I’ve been adjusting to a society that likes to tell me I’m not a woman. And I’ve met all sorts of different criteria for why I’m not considered a woman, but it usually falls into two camps: I wasn’t born female or I don’t try hard enough. I’ve been called deceptive, artificial, weak, and often denied my identity by others. Isn’t there a little bit of cognitive dissonance when you tell someone they aren’t who they feel they are? Saying someone isn’t a woman is disgusting mostly because you’re unaware of how much you actually don’t have a say in deciding someone’s identity. It also showed me that to be a “true” woman, I would need a lot of investment in my looks merely because we revolve so much of womanhood around men’s aesthetic sensibilities.
How does this relate to geek culture? I wrote a piece about why I felt compelled to wear heels every day I was at PAX East. I wasn’t there to cosplay, snag a modeling job, or pick up men. Rather, there is a silly notion that I’m becoming a professional in games media, and I’m extremely aware of the homogenous identities that make up publications and development studios. I know that because of my open transgender identity and the topics I write about, I better be damn well easy on the eyes if anyone is going to give me a chance. This isn’t speculation, but raw data from the life I live. I have others to vouch for my talent and authenticity, but in the face of what matters, it’s what makes heterosexual men comfortable. People who lie outside of that are constantly harassed and ignored, and we have examples at major sites and scenes of such happenings. And there’s no winning - men assume that because I put effort into my looks, I can’t be a serious gamer.
It’s easy to say that I, and other women, just don’t have the strength to weather through the crap and let our insides matter more than our looks. Unfortunately, if it wasn’t for cosmetics and sexy outfits, I would have anxiety and depression plunges multiple times a day. I’ve been there, and I resisted makeup and such adamantly until I couldn’t take it anymore. I couldn’t take people making disgusted faces at me, fumbling with pronouns, treating me like they could catch The Gay if they stood too close. If there was this wand that guaranteed no one would even blink at seeing my morning face and assume I wasn’t a woman, I would throw every bottle of MAC I own out the window, laughing manically.
It isn’t me or sexy women that needs to change. It’s a culture that values women mostly on their looks that has to. It is hypocritical to say women are the problem when you are consuming geek media that has 90% of the women sexualized towards heterosexual men’s liking. And really, there is nothing wrong with men liking sexy women, and women enjoying being sexy for men. It’s just the culture doesn’t allow variance by shaming and ignoring women who don’t fit popular ideas of beauty. Geek men want everyone to stop treating them like adolescent boys, but this lack of self-awareness has to stop first.
Reblogged because this is fantastic, because that CNN piece was bilge, and because this is inescapable, no matter how much you recognize it’s bullshit. I’ve gone to so many conferences, both professional and otherwise, where I’ve had sudden, preoccupying variations on the thought ”I feel like Game Design/Copy Editor/Journalist/Music Writer Barbie.” (Not to make this about me, just to say how insidious all this is.)
there’s this whole thing that’s been bugging me, and it hit me what it was as i was reading about Le1f, who’s getting a very different reception *due to* his fucking with ideas of male normativity. Frank Ocean makes music your favorite rapper likes and dresses like any other blipster and there’s this whole underlying sense of “he’s just like straight dudes in every other way so we can totally still fuck with him” that’s running through all of this, i think.
Could you reconsider your comment regarding mental health and gun controls please? There is a long standing meme that mental illness means evil/bad/wrong-doer. This simply isn’t true, having a mental illness doesn’t mean you’re evil, and being evil doesn’t mean you necessarily have a mental…
Maybe JGL’s character also. But yeah. Anne Hathaway was wonderful, and with the exception of the plot contortions they made her go through at the end, an utter delight in an otherwise ponderous film.
Batman always feels like the least interesting character in his own films. I think it’s because the movies are usually afraid to go there with his character and really examine (like the comics have) just how much of his crusade is a super-unhealthy psychological issue and not a noble cause he undertook because he’s just such a good person.
But yes, Catwoman was charismatic and funny and brought a lightness to the film that was very needed, but I didn’t entirely buy her ending. She honestly had more chemistry with that unnamed girl she lived with that we never see again.
Ripped from today’s headlines, see, only reversed: now it’s the police who get mauled and the protesters who do the mauling.
[…] this movie isn’t just ideologically rotten to the core, it’s rotten in the regular way, too. Bad, stupid, lame, embarrassing, and seemingly interminable, full of main characters delivering long-winded speeches explaining their histories from childhood so we’ll be sure to understand their motivations, which are murky and trite in equal measure. Famous and excellent actors do their damnedest to put all this crap across. But don’t let all the cinematic embiggening fool you! Nolan lays on bogus profundity with a trowel!
- eileen jones (my favorite movie critic) on “the dark knight rises”
this is pretty much most of my thoughts about the movie. Also, that it’s terribly structured and suffers from a lot of the same issues as the first season of the Legend of Korra did in terms of how it manages to mount a legitimate critique of the world built in the previous installments, and then avoids addressing that critique by placing it in the mouths of BAD PEOPLE.
The worst bit was when Bane gives a prison abolitionism speech, more or less, that could have made some cogent points about how the ridiculous Harvey Dent Law, by keeping everyone who has been involved in ‘organized crime’ locked up FOREVER is totally messed up and totalitarian and also classist, but in the context of the movie is BAD and EVIL because: supervillains are in jail! And must be kept there!
Anyway, my favourite part of this review is this:
Selina Kyle/Catwoman is also unambiguously good in this Batman, because she’s played by Anne Hathaway with her giant doe eyes and schoolgirl pertness, and more importantly, because she renounces “class warfare” at the end. Sickening little scene when Catwoman, portrayed here as battling her way up out of poverty and exploitation, comes upon a looted apartment and shudders with horror at the property damage. A framed photo of a nuclear family has been smashed! It’s unbearable, in a city of poverty and suffering, that the glass in this framed photo of blonde people should get broken!
Although the riff on the football scene comes close.
The movie was an enjoyable popcorn flick, a structural mess, and politically noxious. I liked it, but mostly when I was able to ignore it.
And I say this as someone who really dug the first two.
All of this. Having your noble thief and your virtuous cop snark about Bruce being a pampered billionaire and bleat about paternalism respectively every now and again =/= an actual critique of class and power structures. Also disappointed in yet another piece of comics media generally and Batman media specifically that reduces the problem of crime and poverty to one of beating down and locking up all the bad guys forever and ever. That whole “home for orphaned boys” side-story had potential but went nowhere.
“One white woman raised her hand and protested, “Why are we reading about Black people? I thought this was a women’s studies class.” The professor lost her temper and told her that in case she didn’t know, it was a Black woman teaching the class and that Black people can also be women. The white woman started crying and angrily left the class. I was amazed at this white woman’s sense of entitlement and privilege, of being able to protest and cry in the classroom.”—
Siobhan Brooks, ”Black Feminism in Everyday Life”
The failure to grasp intersectionality that I think a lot of white feminists (and really people of every type of movement seem to miss)