Hello!
So, in case you've been living under a rock for the last week or so, Iowa and Vermont now have marriage equality (well, maybe not right this second, but quite soon)! All that, plus Washington D.C.'s city council voted to recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. So, all in all, a pretty watershed moment for the LGBT movement... or at least a pretty watershed moment for one aspect of the LGBT movement.
Before we wade into the crazies who hate us so, a few thoughts.
First, if you haven't actually read a summary of the Iowa Supreme Court's unanimous decision, you should. It's a pretty remarkable piece of writing. The justices saw fit not only to overturn the ban on same-sex marriage, but also to individually debunk every single argument the "traditional marriage only" people generally proffer. All of 'em. Good for Iowa.
Vermont was interesting as well, as it was the first state to enact marriage equality through the legislature, not by court order. I'm on record as saying that I think it's a much more powerful statement for equality to happen this way... plus it completely undermines the religious right's argument of judicial activists overturning the will of the public and the like. Well, no fear... they're resilient, these people. Always ready with a new idiotic argument. (My favorite part is this quote: "It's sort of like being the first country to voluntarily go communist." It made me laugh, and for that, at least, it gets points for creative nutbaggery.)
But the most interesting thing about the Vermont situation, to me at least, is how little coverage I really saw of it. The day the legislation passed, I had CNN on. When it first happened, CNN broke the news. And then, for the next three or four hours... nothing. Almost complete silence. Certainly no talking heads screaming hysterically into the camera about the Decline of Western Civilization (sponsored by those insidious queers). And yes, I do know that there was some of that later on, over the next few days... but the frequency of it was generally much, much less (at least on the non-Fox News news stations). Even better, in some of the interviews with these sorts of people, I noticed a creeping sentiment from several anchors of "What the hell's the big deal? Let the damn queers marry already!" Worlds away from the "sky is falling" mentality of newspeople following the Massachusetts (and even California) court decision.
Before we fall down the rabbit hole of the hysterical online (and otherwise) reaction to the rulings, let me direct you to adorable nerd Nate Silver's article projecting when the citizens of every state would fail to approve a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage (ignoring the fact that many of these states already have them... this is more about public opinion). It's really fascinating stuff, and his statistical analysis shows how quickly change may come on this issue (FYI, NC would fail to approve an amendment in 2019... just one more decade of bigotry to go!). I'm not sure I agree with all his methods, but Silver is much, much smarter than me... and it's incredibly interesting... so let's just go with it for now.
***
Alright.
I think the last week has caused certain members of the religious right to completely lose their shit. How else do you explain articles like this one, which manages to somehow link mass murders and gay marriage? For serious. It does. It's even there in the title of the article, should you dare to click on it.
If you don't want to wade through the whole thing, this quote can pretty much serve as the author's thesis: "It is my intention to point out that the success of the sexual revolution is inversely proportional to the decline in morality; and it is the decline of morality (and the faith that so often under girds it) that is the underlying cause of our modern day epidemic of mass murders."
Our good friends at Wikipedia tell me that the term "sexual revolution" most often refers to a period in the 1960's and 70's, though it can sometimes include a period starting in the 1920's with Freud's writings.
So, using my fantastical powers of inference, I can deduce that the author feels that, before the 1960's (or the 1920's, if one's inclined to be generous. Which I am not), moral standards were much higher. Yes, indeedy. No immorality existed before then, and no epidemic of mass murders... especially none in the name of faith. Because people of faith are on a much higher moral ground. For sure.
***
Then there's this guy, who argues that the Iowa court decision will be more damaging to the state than the hugeass flood that occurred last year. The flood that caused an estimated $10 BILLION in damages, displaced 40,000 Iowans, and caused one fatality.
Nope, the gays marrying is much, much, much worse than that. It's almost flattering, in a perverse sort of way.
Again, an actual quote: "It is not hyperbole to say that this ruling has the potential to be the worst disaster to strike the state of Iowa. Flood waters destroy houses, ruin offices buildings and displace families. Yet, recovery happens. Houses are rebuilt. Businesses relocate. Families eventually find housing. Legalized "homosexual marriage," on the other hand, does far more pervasive and irrecoverable damage."
I wonder if I went up to an Iowan who had his or her home destroyed by the flood... or the family of the person who was killed during it... or flood victims who began showing signs of asthma and bronchitis because of the levels of formaldehyde present in FEMA trailers... if I went up to one of them and asked: "Which is worse? The natural disaster that significantly altered your way of life, perhaps forever... or the queers marrying?"... I wonder what they would say?
Jackass.
***
One more?
How about this article, which frets about Iowa becoming a "homosexual mecca." What a ridiculous statement! No one could buy into that, right?
Oh wait... this guy.
And this one (an actual legislator)!
Even Omaha.com picked up on the meme, though in a slightly less insulting way.
So will it? Will Iowa surpass San Francisco as the destination for all queers? Will thousands of deviant homosexuals descend upon the unsuspecting citizens of Iowa and amass enough political power to make "YMCA" the official state song?
Probably not. And Dan Savage sums up why, in three short words.
***
Before I go, the Onion has a video report about a hot new video game. And it's awesome. Check it out!
And even better, you can actually play it!
Cheers.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
In which I mention Jesus twice, get overwhelmed by hate crimes, talk about good vs. evil, and actually share some hopeful news
Hello again!
So since I've evidently completely stopped doing schoolwork... and since the empty, fruitless search for a job is slowly killing my spirit... I thought I'd write another blog post.
Let's delve in, shall we?
So, on the Facebook, I've occasionally written about the American Family Association (AFA) and their ridiculous boycotts of various companies (i.e. McDonald's, Campbell's Soup) they think are supporting the gays. The interesting thing about their boycotts is that they're not asking companies to support their side or opinions... no, they just want the companies to "remain neutral in the culture war." I have to say that it seems like a pretty desperate state of affairs if the best argument you can muster is "You don't have to side with me... just don't side with them." I wonder when they decided that asking companies to support them and their batshit insane beliefs wasn't working? (Scroll down in the article to discover how schools are now teaching fisting to high school students!) (And not this type of fisting.)
Anyway. The AFA is now targeting Pepsi for donating some money to the HRC and PFLAG. And for being a member of the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. And for "forcing" employees to attend sexual orientation and gender identity diversity seminars (Because God forbid we learn to tolerate and accept each other? Jesus would be appalled at such a notion, I'm sure). They even have a Facebook Causes page! (What cracks me up most about the Causes page is that it's listed under "Public Advocacy- Civil Rights and Liberties"... although, to be fair, I suppose it does have something to do with civil rights, insomuch as they're trying to prevent a group from having any.)
Sadly for all of us, the AFA seems to have learned a lesson from their boycott of McDonald's... that it's best not to post the comments of their supporters, because they sound like absolute lunatics. Don't believe me? Check out this article, which prints some of the best of them.
It remains to be seen if the AFA can bring down the lavender menace that is the Pepsi Corporation (after all... when I think of gay, I think Pepsi. Yep. It goes Pepsi, sodomy, rainbows... in that order). But it should be amusing, at least.
***
Two gay men in Oregon were attacked and beaten unconscious by a group of men who called them fags.
That one's just the tip of the iceberg though. There's been so many hate crimes (and updates of hate crimes) in the last week or so that I just don't have the time or energy to comment on all of them. Which is saying something. So instead, I'm just going to link to this comprehensive roundup found on Towleroad and attempt to resist the Huckabee-bashing I'm so fond of engaging in.
Ah, screw it. Bite me, Huckabee.
***
I'm often accused of being a tad too depressing, so here's some hopeful news. A group in Gainesville, Florida tried to repeal the city's anti-discrimination policy, which prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. The measure was placed on the ballot, and the group advocating the repeal was responsible for one of the most reprehensible tv ads I've ever seen.
The good news? On Tuesday, the ballot measure was rejected. And not just rejected. SOUNDLY rejected. Almost 60% of voters refused to buy into the fear-mongering and thinly veiled homo/transphobia behind the measure.
Go Gainesville. At least the 60% or so who aren't bigots, I guess.
***
The undergrad queer group at UNC-Chapel Hill, in conjunction with the Young Democrats, decided to put on a production of Prop 8: The Musical. I'm not quite sure why or for what, but what the hell? Let's go with it.
If you never saw the original, you totally should. So the performance went on, and it inspired a letter to the editor in the DTH. Really inspired stuff. If you want a sneak preview, it includes lines like this: "If this play had treated any other religion the way it treated Christianity, there would be riots by the same arrogant bunch that put on this moronic musical."
I'm tempted to use this as fodder for my theory that UNC isn't nearly as liberal of a place as it likes to pretend, but I also know that cranky religious bigots exist everywhere. (By the by, the author of the letter is an Economics major (and, judging from his "Chairman Obama" comment (seriously), a Republican)... and I just have to ask... how are those Republican economics working out for us? As mentioned, I'm having no problem trying to find a job. It's awesome.)
***
My sister lives in Delaware.
Two pieces of legislation have been introduced in the Delaware state legislature: one, a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage... the other, a non-discrimination act that includes sexual orientation (it seems like gender identity isn't included... because why should transgender individuals get any protection?).
It's the exact same peculiar situation that's happening right now in NC: at the same time some are seeking to protect the rights of the gays, others are trying to take them away. And I just wonder... do the legislators fail to see the irony in all of this? Because it amuses me to make somewhat mundane things into things that are wildly grandiose, I like to think of this kind of situation as a battle for the soul of the state. Good vs. Evil, and all that.
Unfortunately, evil usually wins this fight. In the name of Jesus.
More irony.
***
Lastly.
I know this has been kicking around for a couple days but...
Where the Wild Things Are is an awesome, awesome book. And when I heard they were turning it into a movie, I was kind of nervous. How could it possibly work (even with an awesome director like Spike Jonze behind it)?
Well, the trailer came out... and it's completely fantastic.
I officially can't wait.
Cheers.
So since I've evidently completely stopped doing schoolwork... and since the empty, fruitless search for a job is slowly killing my spirit... I thought I'd write another blog post.
Let's delve in, shall we?
So, on the Facebook, I've occasionally written about the American Family Association (AFA) and their ridiculous boycotts of various companies (i.e. McDonald's, Campbell's Soup) they think are supporting the gays. The interesting thing about their boycotts is that they're not asking companies to support their side or opinions... no, they just want the companies to "remain neutral in the culture war." I have to say that it seems like a pretty desperate state of affairs if the best argument you can muster is "You don't have to side with me... just don't side with them." I wonder when they decided that asking companies to support them and their batshit insane beliefs wasn't working? (Scroll down in the article to discover how schools are now teaching fisting to high school students!) (And not this type of fisting.)
Anyway. The AFA is now targeting Pepsi for donating some money to the HRC and PFLAG. And for being a member of the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. And for "forcing" employees to attend sexual orientation and gender identity diversity seminars (Because God forbid we learn to tolerate and accept each other? Jesus would be appalled at such a notion, I'm sure). They even have a Facebook Causes page! (What cracks me up most about the Causes page is that it's listed under "Public Advocacy- Civil Rights and Liberties"... although, to be fair, I suppose it does have something to do with civil rights, insomuch as they're trying to prevent a group from having any.)
Sadly for all of us, the AFA seems to have learned a lesson from their boycott of McDonald's... that it's best not to post the comments of their supporters, because they sound like absolute lunatics. Don't believe me? Check out this article, which prints some of the best of them.
It remains to be seen if the AFA can bring down the lavender menace that is the Pepsi Corporation (after all... when I think of gay, I think Pepsi. Yep. It goes Pepsi, sodomy, rainbows... in that order). But it should be amusing, at least.
***
Two gay men in Oregon were attacked and beaten unconscious by a group of men who called them fags.
That one's just the tip of the iceberg though. There's been so many hate crimes (and updates of hate crimes) in the last week or so that I just don't have the time or energy to comment on all of them. Which is saying something. So instead, I'm just going to link to this comprehensive roundup found on Towleroad and attempt to resist the Huckabee-bashing I'm so fond of engaging in.
Ah, screw it. Bite me, Huckabee.
***
I'm often accused of being a tad too depressing, so here's some hopeful news. A group in Gainesville, Florida tried to repeal the city's anti-discrimination policy, which prohibited discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. The measure was placed on the ballot, and the group advocating the repeal was responsible for one of the most reprehensible tv ads I've ever seen.
The good news? On Tuesday, the ballot measure was rejected. And not just rejected. SOUNDLY rejected. Almost 60% of voters refused to buy into the fear-mongering and thinly veiled homo/transphobia behind the measure.
Go Gainesville. At least the 60% or so who aren't bigots, I guess.
***
The undergrad queer group at UNC-Chapel Hill, in conjunction with the Young Democrats, decided to put on a production of Prop 8: The Musical. I'm not quite sure why or for what, but what the hell? Let's go with it.
If you never saw the original, you totally should. So the performance went on, and it inspired a letter to the editor in the DTH. Really inspired stuff. If you want a sneak preview, it includes lines like this: "If this play had treated any other religion the way it treated Christianity, there would be riots by the same arrogant bunch that put on this moronic musical."
I'm tempted to use this as fodder for my theory that UNC isn't nearly as liberal of a place as it likes to pretend, but I also know that cranky religious bigots exist everywhere. (By the by, the author of the letter is an Economics major (and, judging from his "Chairman Obama" comment (seriously), a Republican)... and I just have to ask... how are those Republican economics working out for us? As mentioned, I'm having no problem trying to find a job. It's awesome.)
***
My sister lives in Delaware.
Two pieces of legislation have been introduced in the Delaware state legislature: one, a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage... the other, a non-discrimination act that includes sexual orientation (it seems like gender identity isn't included... because why should transgender individuals get any protection?).
It's the exact same peculiar situation that's happening right now in NC: at the same time some are seeking to protect the rights of the gays, others are trying to take them away. And I just wonder... do the legislators fail to see the irony in all of this? Because it amuses me to make somewhat mundane things into things that are wildly grandiose, I like to think of this kind of situation as a battle for the soul of the state. Good vs. Evil, and all that.
Unfortunately, evil usually wins this fight. In the name of Jesus.
More irony.
***
Lastly.
I know this has been kicking around for a couple days but...
Where the Wild Things Are is an awesome, awesome book. And when I heard they were turning it into a movie, I was kind of nervous. How could it possibly work (even with an awesome director like Spike Jonze behind it)?
Well, the trailer came out... and it's completely fantastic.
I officially can't wait.
Cheers.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
In which I get preachy, endorse something with the word 'faggot' in it, introduce photos into the blog, and try to prove I have a sense of humor.
And I'm back. Just don't get used to such a quick turnaround... spring break helps. A lot. As does procrastination.
So much to discuss, so let's wade right in, shall we?
What should we start with... oh yeah... how about this?:
Evidently, this has been floating around the Internet over the last few days, but it somehow managed to elude my attention. This is an actual sign, made by an actual human being (for lack of a better term), at the Prop 8 hearings last week. Find more info on it here and here.
Equality California used the picture as part of a fundraising email they sent out this week, and I'm actually not quite sure how I feel about that. I mean, my first reaction to that photo isn't "oh, let me whip out my checkbook." Instead, it's "wow... the man who wrote that must be batshit insane." (Plus, I'm a little bitter at them anyway, because I called them today and no one ever called me back. Boo, queers without manners.) I guess I just really wish that more people who don't identify as some sort of queer (or queer ally... qually?) could see it.
I'll admit that I'm a bit on the fence as to how effective putting these sorts of images (i.e. the Phelps clan) front and center actually is. But I do think it's important for people to see how deeply some individuals hate... because I really don't think it registers with some (most?).
Those of us who identify as LGBT are so often labeled or presented as an "other." A large part of this, I think, is because we tend to be reactive as a movement, not proactive. We need to get our messages, our stories out there. And we need to do it first.
So my reaction right now is put this out there. As a newspaper ad, a commercial, a frakking billboard (how shocking would that sign look 50-feet wide?). Show people our "others." Help change the debate. Show people how much we're hated. Make them choose a side. If they're not with this nutbag... well, who are they with? They can stand on the same side as the guy who wrote that. Or they can stand with us. And we're much more fun. (Well, not me, per se. But us in general.) It's time for us to start shaping the debate. And not play catch-up anymore.
End preachy rant.
***
I find this absolutely hilarious.
Evidently, someone put up Red Cross flyers advertising a blood drive around the Minneapolis/St. Paul area. The flyer lists qualifications for donating blood, such as having to be 17 years old, weigh at least 110 lbs, and so on. And at the end of the list of qualifications? It says "No Faggots."
I would encourage clicking the above link and watching the news story. I really think the reporter means well, but she seems to actually think this was a homophobic act. It seems beyond her that it might be a bunch of queers who did it, to protest the Red Cross's discriminatory policy banning gay men from donating blood. Oh wait... not all gay men. Just gay men who have sex.
I couldn't find a jpeg of the flyer from Minnesota, but here's one that a bunch of queer activists whipped up in Maine last year:
I think this is absolutely great. It's kind of subtle, but noticeable enough to make a splash. And it gets a story in the news that most people are clueless about.
***
The queers are coming for your children!!!!!
Not content to simply prohibit the gays from the sanctity and tax breaks of marriage, the religious right is now attempting to prevent us dirty queers from adopting. Some of you may know that Arkansas recently banned anyone "co-habitating outside of a valid marriage" from adopting kids. This, of course, makes it impossible for two queers in a loving, committed relationship to adopt a kid.
And this is catching on.
The Senate Judiciary Committee in Kentucky recently held a secret, clandestine meeting (no shit... it really was... read the article) passing similar legislation. It will now go to the full Senate. Where, because it's frakking Kentucky, it'll probably pass.
The article lays out some interesting figures. It's estimated that, if passed, the bill will cost Kentucky $5.3 million in its first year of implementation alone. Good thing that the economy's in such fantastic shape! I'm sure Kentucky will have no problem finding the money to cover such costs!
That was (obviously) sarcasm, but I actually am pretty sure where they'll find the money. Probably cutting the DSS budget (because wouldn't that just be poetic?) or welfare or some other program that people desperately need.
Also: it's estimated that 630 foster children would have to be removed from their current homes. But that's ok. I'm sure bouncing kids around from home to home has absolutely no effect on their emotional well-being. And I'm sure that Kentucky will have no problem finding hundreds of new foster parents. I'm sure of it. And evidently so are these legislators.
I know I use this expression a lot, but this is just mind-boggling to me. How irresponsible are these legislators? Not only, of course, are LGBT individuals just as capable as raising kids as the straights... but in the middle of an economic meltdown, these individuals are going to do something that's going to cost the state a great deal of money. Not to mention remove kids from loving foster homes, while at the same time limiting the number of people who could adopt them. All in the name of homophobia. Family values indeed.
***
I'm only including this because sometimes I feel the need to prove I have a sense of humor. It may become a bit of a running theme after some of my preachier postings.
***
Lastly, if you're around and want to show some support for the queers, there's going to be a press conference for the School Violence Prevention Act tomorrow in Raleigh. More details here. It'll be a smashing good time for all!
Cheers.
So much to discuss, so let's wade right in, shall we?
What should we start with... oh yeah... how about this?:
Evidently, this has been floating around the Internet over the last few days, but it somehow managed to elude my attention. This is an actual sign, made by an actual human being (for lack of a better term), at the Prop 8 hearings last week. Find more info on it here and here.
Equality California used the picture as part of a fundraising email they sent out this week, and I'm actually not quite sure how I feel about that. I mean, my first reaction to that photo isn't "oh, let me whip out my checkbook." Instead, it's "wow... the man who wrote that must be batshit insane." (Plus, I'm a little bitter at them anyway, because I called them today and no one ever called me back. Boo, queers without manners.) I guess I just really wish that more people who don't identify as some sort of queer (or queer ally... qually?) could see it.
I'll admit that I'm a bit on the fence as to how effective putting these sorts of images (i.e. the Phelps clan) front and center actually is. But I do think it's important for people to see how deeply some individuals hate... because I really don't think it registers with some (most?).
Those of us who identify as LGBT are so often labeled or presented as an "other." A large part of this, I think, is because we tend to be reactive as a movement, not proactive. We need to get our messages, our stories out there. And we need to do it first.
So my reaction right now is put this out there. As a newspaper ad, a commercial, a frakking billboard (how shocking would that sign look 50-feet wide?). Show people our "others." Help change the debate. Show people how much we're hated. Make them choose a side. If they're not with this nutbag... well, who are they with? They can stand on the same side as the guy who wrote that. Or they can stand with us. And we're much more fun. (Well, not me, per se. But us in general.) It's time for us to start shaping the debate. And not play catch-up anymore.
End preachy rant.
***
I find this absolutely hilarious.
Evidently, someone put up Red Cross flyers advertising a blood drive around the Minneapolis/St. Paul area. The flyer lists qualifications for donating blood, such as having to be 17 years old, weigh at least 110 lbs, and so on. And at the end of the list of qualifications? It says "No Faggots."
I would encourage clicking the above link and watching the news story. I really think the reporter means well, but she seems to actually think this was a homophobic act. It seems beyond her that it might be a bunch of queers who did it, to protest the Red Cross's discriminatory policy banning gay men from donating blood. Oh wait... not all gay men. Just gay men who have sex.
I couldn't find a jpeg of the flyer from Minnesota, but here's one that a bunch of queer activists whipped up in Maine last year:
I think this is absolutely great. It's kind of subtle, but noticeable enough to make a splash. And it gets a story in the news that most people are clueless about.
***
The queers are coming for your children!!!!!
Not content to simply prohibit the gays from the sanctity and tax breaks of marriage, the religious right is now attempting to prevent us dirty queers from adopting. Some of you may know that Arkansas recently banned anyone "co-habitating outside of a valid marriage" from adopting kids. This, of course, makes it impossible for two queers in a loving, committed relationship to adopt a kid.
And this is catching on.
The Senate Judiciary Committee in Kentucky recently held a secret, clandestine meeting (no shit... it really was... read the article) passing similar legislation. It will now go to the full Senate. Where, because it's frakking Kentucky, it'll probably pass.
The article lays out some interesting figures. It's estimated that, if passed, the bill will cost Kentucky $5.3 million in its first year of implementation alone. Good thing that the economy's in such fantastic shape! I'm sure Kentucky will have no problem finding the money to cover such costs!
That was (obviously) sarcasm, but I actually am pretty sure where they'll find the money. Probably cutting the DSS budget (because wouldn't that just be poetic?) or welfare or some other program that people desperately need.
Also: it's estimated that 630 foster children would have to be removed from their current homes. But that's ok. I'm sure bouncing kids around from home to home has absolutely no effect on their emotional well-being. And I'm sure that Kentucky will have no problem finding hundreds of new foster parents. I'm sure of it. And evidently so are these legislators.
I know I use this expression a lot, but this is just mind-boggling to me. How irresponsible are these legislators? Not only, of course, are LGBT individuals just as capable as raising kids as the straights... but in the middle of an economic meltdown, these individuals are going to do something that's going to cost the state a great deal of money. Not to mention remove kids from loving foster homes, while at the same time limiting the number of people who could adopt them. All in the name of homophobia. Family values indeed.
***
I'm only including this because sometimes I feel the need to prove I have a sense of humor. It may become a bit of a running theme after some of my preachier postings.
***
Lastly, if you're around and want to show some support for the queers, there's going to be a press conference for the School Violence Prevention Act tomorrow in Raleigh. More details here. It'll be a smashing good time for all!
Cheers.
Monday, March 9, 2009
In which I visit Africa, talk about my "lifestyle," and bitch at Huckabee. Again.
And hello.
No excuses. Y'all know how busy I am. Let's just enjoy this while we can.
***
Ten to twenty THOUSAND Burundians held a march last Friday protesting their Senate's decision NOT to criminalize homosexuality. That's right. Upwards of twenty thousand Burundians are, I don't know, so scared of catching "The Gay" that they want to force their government to lock up the queers.
According to one of the leaders of Burundi's ruling party, "[Homosexuality] is a culture which has been imported to sully our morals and is practiced by immoral people."
This is one of those arguments I see pop up from time to time that I just don't quite understand. Why do people think that we queers "import" ourselves into their countries? We're not frakking Wal-Mart. (Besides, I would argue that Wal-Mart sullies a lot more morals than the gays.)
It's such a weird notion to think: "We're so moral and great. We don't have the homos in our country. They must be infiltrating our borders." Let me tell you something: If smug, unfounded superiority based on "morals" and religion actually prevented homosexuality, the US wouldn't have a single goddamn queer in it. For serious.
I'm going to pause here for a moment so that we can all imagine homosexuals in camouflage sneaking across borders to sodomize innocent locals.
Picturing it? Good. Let's move on.
***
I'm pretty sure I posted something about this to the Facebook awhile back, but for some reason, it's back in the news. The good people conducting the U.S. Census in 2010 plan to change the status of any married same-sex couples to "unmarried partners." The reason? Our old friend DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act. Since DOMA prevents the federal government from recognizing same-sex unions, the Census won't count 'em. Even those couples legally married in the states that will let them.
But don't worry. U.S. Census spokesperson Cynthia Endo wants to reassure you. "This is all about the numbers. This is not about lifestyle or anything else."
Lifestyle? Seriously? Is this 19-fucking-75? (Oh, and while we're on the topic of horribly outdated language, did you hear that the New York Times ran a story with the term "sexual preference" in it yesterday?)
But perhaps I'm overreacting. Maybe I should just be content to know that the Census doesn't care about my lifestyle. They only care about the numbers.
Implicit in that statement, and the overall decision, of course, is that it means the queers aren't important enough to be counted... because why would anyone need to know something silly like how many of us there are? How many of us are married or coupled? How many of us have kids and families? How many of us live in poverty? How many of us are military veterans? How many of us live with a disability or are caregivers? Why would there be ANY reason to know any of that?!?
Indeed.
***
Hate crime round-up!
Gay man assaulted in Atlanta.
Gay man assaulted at DePaul University.
Two gay men stabbed in London, one dies.
Gay man assaulted in Seattle.
...all in the last 2 weeks or so.
Good things the gays aren't getting their "skulls cracked"... right, Mike Huckabee? Otherwise you might have to call it a civil rights movement.
***
Milk comes out on DVD tomorrow! If you missed it, here's Dustin Lance Black's, the screenwriter of the film, Oscar acceptance speech. I cried like twice during it, PLUS he's adorable as all hell.
***
And, before I take my leave of you again...
I've pimped this out like hell on the Facebook, but if you like awesome, awesome music, check out Animal Collective's Merriweather Post Pavilion. It's so good it hurts a little.
Oh, and if you haven't already, sign up to come to Equality NC"s Day of Action! Tell your legislator to his/her face why it's totally uncool to be a homophobe and/or a transphobe.
Cheers.
No excuses. Y'all know how busy I am. Let's just enjoy this while we can.
***
Ten to twenty THOUSAND Burundians held a march last Friday protesting their Senate's decision NOT to criminalize homosexuality. That's right. Upwards of twenty thousand Burundians are, I don't know, so scared of catching "The Gay" that they want to force their government to lock up the queers.
According to one of the leaders of Burundi's ruling party, "[Homosexuality] is a culture which has been imported to sully our morals and is practiced by immoral people."
This is one of those arguments I see pop up from time to time that I just don't quite understand. Why do people think that we queers "import" ourselves into their countries? We're not frakking Wal-Mart. (Besides, I would argue that Wal-Mart sullies a lot more morals than the gays.)
It's such a weird notion to think: "We're so moral and great. We don't have the homos in our country. They must be infiltrating our borders." Let me tell you something: If smug, unfounded superiority based on "morals" and religion actually prevented homosexuality, the US wouldn't have a single goddamn queer in it. For serious.
I'm going to pause here for a moment so that we can all imagine homosexuals in camouflage sneaking across borders to sodomize innocent locals.
Picturing it? Good. Let's move on.
***
I'm pretty sure I posted something about this to the Facebook awhile back, but for some reason, it's back in the news. The good people conducting the U.S. Census in 2010 plan to change the status of any married same-sex couples to "unmarried partners." The reason? Our old friend DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act. Since DOMA prevents the federal government from recognizing same-sex unions, the Census won't count 'em. Even those couples legally married in the states that will let them.
But don't worry. U.S. Census spokesperson Cynthia Endo wants to reassure you. "This is all about the numbers. This is not about lifestyle or anything else."
Lifestyle? Seriously? Is this 19-fucking-75? (Oh, and while we're on the topic of horribly outdated language, did you hear that the New York Times ran a story with the term "sexual preference" in it yesterday?)
But perhaps I'm overreacting. Maybe I should just be content to know that the Census doesn't care about my lifestyle. They only care about the numbers.
Implicit in that statement, and the overall decision, of course, is that it means the queers aren't important enough to be counted... because why would anyone need to know something silly like how many of us there are? How many of us are married or coupled? How many of us have kids and families? How many of us live in poverty? How many of us are military veterans? How many of us live with a disability or are caregivers? Why would there be ANY reason to know any of that?!?
Indeed.
***
Hate crime round-up!
Gay man assaulted in Atlanta.
Gay man assaulted at DePaul University.
Two gay men stabbed in London, one dies.
Gay man assaulted in Seattle.
...all in the last 2 weeks or so.
Good things the gays aren't getting their "skulls cracked"... right, Mike Huckabee? Otherwise you might have to call it a civil rights movement.
***
Milk comes out on DVD tomorrow! If you missed it, here's Dustin Lance Black's, the screenwriter of the film, Oscar acceptance speech. I cried like twice during it, PLUS he's adorable as all hell.
***
And, before I take my leave of you again...
I've pimped this out like hell on the Facebook, but if you like awesome, awesome music, check out Animal Collective's Merriweather Post Pavilion. It's so good it hurts a little.
Oh, and if you haven't already, sign up to come to Equality NC"s Day of Action! Tell your legislator to his/her face why it's totally uncool to be a homophobe and/or a transphobe.
Cheers.
Thursday, January 8, 2009
In which I spend some time on Oprah's message boards, amongst other masochistic activities
So I'm well aware that y'all are enormous Oprah fans who never miss a show. But just in case your DVR broke down yesterday... on the Oprah show, a reverend, in response to a question from a gay man, said that "being gay is a gift from God." According to the linked article, this set off quite a discussion at the Oprah Winfrey show message boards.
And because I have much less of a life than I'm sure you do, dear reader (all 5 of you), I waded through some of the comments. The thread begins with a woman from the UK expressing her disapproval of the statement. It then, as I'm sure you would expect, turns into a veritable clearinghouse for Bible-thumpers, with an occasional reasonable voice poking through.
What almost interests me more, however, is that the 18th post was from one of the moderators of the message board, reminding everyone to respect each others views... and that the terms and conditions of the website prohibit people from defaming or insulting people, or posting abusive or hateful comments. Again, that was post #18.
(The following are a random assortment of comments, helpfully paraphrased by me... unless I use quotes... obviously):
Post #26: Leviticus gets dragged out, queers get called an abomination.
Post #30: More like a gift from satan.
Post #34: Knows a lot of gays, all of them are miserable! Can't be a gift...
Post #36: "Women have a whole [sic]... Men have a stick." Not really offensive, but couldn't resist mentioning it.
Post #61: Lifestyle's a choice!!!
Post #63: "Grave sin."
Post #74: Mentions murderers, rapists, child molesters, cannibals... I have to admit I had a hard time following this one. But abomination was definitely in there.
Post #77: "This is like giving [gay young people] a green light."
Post #78: Queers compared to alcoholics and people with anger management issues.
Post #120: More rapists and child molesters.
I could go on (really, I could... there are like 18 more pages of this), but I think you get the point... and the site keeps crashing anyway.
Ok, so here's my question: In what universe are the above comments not insulting, abusive, or hateful?
And I don't mean to just pick on Oprah... this happens on a lot of other sites that have comment sections and message boards and happen to post something about the queers. But what really kind of aggravates me about this is that a moderator felt the need to reiterate the terms of the site because it was obvious that people were/were about to post unkind things... but since that moderator's post, there's been no enforcement of any kind (at least not that I can tell).
I always find myself coming back to the notion that maybe poster #34's legions of gay friends are miserable because they have to continually see and hear crap like this.
Thanks, Oprah.
***
Moving right along. I have to give this article a mention because one of the author's arguments against giving gays the right to marry is this:
"There is also the danger that misusing terminology long agreed upon in western thought will impoverish the language to the point that it is incapable of expressing nuanced thoughts and concepts."
Gays marrying will destroy the English language as we know it and lead us all to become idiots.
Yeah.
***
Obama watch! Our next president has appointed another gay! This one will serve as the deputy director of the White House Office of Public Liaison.
I like to consider myself a fairly intelligent human being, but I'd kind of appreciate it if Obama would appoint a queer to some position where I could understand what the hell the job is.
***
This has been floating around for a couple days, but from the AP: 9 men in Senegal have been sentenced to 8 years in jail for "unnatural acts and criminal conspiracy."
(That means they're gay.)
While admittedly an improvement over the Gambian president who wants to decapitate all gays, I can't say I'm exactly encouraged.
One of the problems with the LGBT rights movement... wait... One of the MANY problems with the LGBT rights movement (at least in the US) is that it tends to be focused on only the US. Perhaps understandable, but a lot of really bad things are happening in a lot of places, and the fact that no one is aware of it is kind of frustrating to me.
***
And finally, something not gay. So I received my student loan check today, and am somewhat ashamed to admit that my first thought was: What can I buy? I managed to restrain myself somewhat, but did end up downloading "Visiter" by the Dodos. I had been a bit wary of the cd from the snippets I had heard on the iTunes. But enough people recommended them to me that I decided to check it out... and it's all kinds of awesome. Although it incorporates a lot of elements from the music I love, it still manages to sound very different... and I mean that in the best possible way. If you're interested in learning more, here's the Pitchfork review.
Until some other time.
Cheers.
And because I have much less of a life than I'm sure you do, dear reader (all 5 of you), I waded through some of the comments. The thread begins with a woman from the UK expressing her disapproval of the statement. It then, as I'm sure you would expect, turns into a veritable clearinghouse for Bible-thumpers, with an occasional reasonable voice poking through.
What almost interests me more, however, is that the 18th post was from one of the moderators of the message board, reminding everyone to respect each others views... and that the terms and conditions of the website prohibit people from defaming or insulting people, or posting abusive or hateful comments. Again, that was post #18.
(The following are a random assortment of comments, helpfully paraphrased by me... unless I use quotes... obviously):
Post #26: Leviticus gets dragged out, queers get called an abomination.
Post #30: More like a gift from satan.
Post #34: Knows a lot of gays, all of them are miserable! Can't be a gift...
Post #36: "Women have a whole [sic]... Men have a stick." Not really offensive, but couldn't resist mentioning it.
Post #61: Lifestyle's a choice!!!
Post #63: "Grave sin."
Post #74: Mentions murderers, rapists, child molesters, cannibals... I have to admit I had a hard time following this one. But abomination was definitely in there.
Post #77: "This is like giving [gay young people] a green light."
Post #78: Queers compared to alcoholics and people with anger management issues.
Post #120: More rapists and child molesters.
I could go on (really, I could... there are like 18 more pages of this), but I think you get the point... and the site keeps crashing anyway.
Ok, so here's my question: In what universe are the above comments not insulting, abusive, or hateful?
And I don't mean to just pick on Oprah... this happens on a lot of other sites that have comment sections and message boards and happen to post something about the queers. But what really kind of aggravates me about this is that a moderator felt the need to reiterate the terms of the site because it was obvious that people were/were about to post unkind things... but since that moderator's post, there's been no enforcement of any kind (at least not that I can tell).
I always find myself coming back to the notion that maybe poster #34's legions of gay friends are miserable because they have to continually see and hear crap like this.
Thanks, Oprah.
***
Moving right along. I have to give this article a mention because one of the author's arguments against giving gays the right to marry is this:
"There is also the danger that misusing terminology long agreed upon in western thought will impoverish the language to the point that it is incapable of expressing nuanced thoughts and concepts."
Gays marrying will destroy the English language as we know it and lead us all to become idiots.
Yeah.
***
Obama watch! Our next president has appointed another gay! This one will serve as the deputy director of the White House Office of Public Liaison.
I like to consider myself a fairly intelligent human being, but I'd kind of appreciate it if Obama would appoint a queer to some position where I could understand what the hell the job is.
***
This has been floating around for a couple days, but from the AP: 9 men in Senegal have been sentenced to 8 years in jail for "unnatural acts and criminal conspiracy."
(That means they're gay.)
While admittedly an improvement over the Gambian president who wants to decapitate all gays, I can't say I'm exactly encouraged.
One of the problems with the LGBT rights movement... wait... One of the MANY problems with the LGBT rights movement (at least in the US) is that it tends to be focused on only the US. Perhaps understandable, but a lot of really bad things are happening in a lot of places, and the fact that no one is aware of it is kind of frustrating to me.
***
And finally, something not gay. So I received my student loan check today, and am somewhat ashamed to admit that my first thought was: What can I buy? I managed to restrain myself somewhat, but did end up downloading "Visiter" by the Dodos. I had been a bit wary of the cd from the snippets I had heard on the iTunes. But enough people recommended them to me that I decided to check it out... and it's all kinds of awesome. Although it incorporates a lot of elements from the music I love, it still manages to sound very different... and I mean that in the best possible way. If you're interested in learning more, here's the Pitchfork review.
Until some other time.
Cheers.
Tuesday, January 6, 2009
Today in depressing gay news
Alright. Since I've started this blog, I figure I might as well use it. Normally, I would post these things to Facebook, but let's take this format for a test drive, shall we?
In Ohio just after Xmas, Nathan Runkle, 24, was attacked outside of a gay club. Nathan started his own non-profit animal rights organization, Mercy for Animals, when he was 15. That organization issued a press release, stating that Runkle sustained "two facial fractures, a broken nose, a deviated septum, and severe facial bruising." You can see the rest of the press release, which includes more details on what happened, here (the man who assaulted him has not been found yet):
http://queeranimals.wordpress.com/2009/01/02/gay-animal-rights-activist-attacked
I think that it's a really sad state of affairs when my first reaction to this horrific attack was "At least he's still alive." And I can't help but think of my old friend, Mike Huckabee. For those of you who don't remember, Huckabee made the incredibly asinine statement a few months ago that gay rights aren't civil rights because not enough queers have been assaulted or killed. You can refresh your memory of that here:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/11/18/huckabee-gay-rights
Since Huckabee made that statement, there seems to have been an upswing in violence against LGBT individuals. Perhaps some of the Huck's followers took his comments as a challenge?
If you're interested in reading more, a blogger at the Huffington Post wrote an essay discussing the attack on Nathan and other recent assaults. You can see that here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mikko-alanne/a-hate-crime-you-wont-see_b_155665.html
***
Speaking of hate crimes, in 2007, Sean William Kennedy was attacked outside of a South Carolina bar. He died from his injuries. His attacker was convicted of involuntary manslaughter, and sentenced to an extremely short prison sentence (5 years, which the judge suspended to 3... and time already served would count). You can read about that here:
http://www.foxcarolina.com/news/16570367/detail.html
When I originally posted about this on Facebook, I said "Evidently murdering a queer in South Carolina only gets you a slap on the wrist."
Well, I was wrong. It gets you even less than that.
Word came today that, thanks to South Carolina's early parole system, the man who murdered Sean Kennedy could get paroled as early as NEXT MONTH. Total time served? 8 damn months.
8 months. That's... so unbelievable to me that I don't even know what to say about it.
There's a lot of things going on here, but, honestly, I have a hard time faulting South Carolina's parole system. If that's how it works, that's how it works. What I DO have a hard time with, however, are the aspects of our society that caused a grand jury to refuse to hand down an indictment for murder for what was obviously a hate crime (after all... I don't know how much more clear-cut it can be when a person attacks a gay man while calling him a "faggot") and a judge to sentence the murderer to a ridiculously lenient sentence. That I have a problem with.
Other things that I have a problem with? A media that steadfastly ignores these crimes (although I guess I should be thankful for this, or I'd have to listen to some evangelical nut on the news talking about how queer=sin... since the media can never cover anything LGBT-related without allowing someone who believes that I'm worse than Hitler to have air time), people like Mike Huckabee (I know, I know... but he has it coming) who manage to scapegoat and then marginalize a whole community of people being assaulted and killed all around the world for political gain, and LGBT individuals who pause for a moment (if even that) upon hearing of a murder like this and then retreat back into their worlds of clubbing and sex. One of the things that I'll never understand is how hearing about things like this doesn't motivate more people to get involved in the LGBT movement.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. I really feel like every single LGBT individual (and our straight allies) needs to be a part of this struggle. Equal rights can't be procured by a small handful of people "doing all the work." It's not just "activists" who need to be involved. Everyone does. This is supposed to be a MOVEMENT. As it stands now, it's more like a gentle rustling in the breeze. If that.
But that argument is for another day. (I bet all three of you who read this can't wait for that posting!) I'm getting off my soapbox now.
Anyway, Sean Kennedy's mom is trying to start a letter writing campaign to keep her son's murderer in jail. If you're interested in learning more, click here:
http://seanslastwish.wordpress.com/2008/12/23/action-alert-from-seans-last-wish
***
In other news, Obama's picked a gay to be a secretary! Awesome.
I'm being a bit facetious here. I'm thrilled that Obama can include queers in his administration in positions that have no impact on policy-making.
I'm probably being a bit harder on him than I really mean to be, but I think the above items made me a tad grouchy. If you're interested, read more here:
http://www.gaypolitics.com/2009/01/05/obama-names-gay-director-of-office-of-management-and-administration/
Cheers.
In Ohio just after Xmas, Nathan Runkle, 24, was attacked outside of a gay club. Nathan started his own non-profit animal rights organization, Mercy for Animals, when he was 15. That organization issued a press release, stating that Runkle sustained "two facial fractures, a broken nose, a deviated septum, and severe facial bruising." You can see the rest of the press release, which includes more details on what happened, here (the man who assaulted him has not been found yet):
http://queeranimals.wordpress.com/2009/01/02/gay-animal-rights-activist-attacked
I think that it's a really sad state of affairs when my first reaction to this horrific attack was "At least he's still alive." And I can't help but think of my old friend, Mike Huckabee. For those of you who don't remember, Huckabee made the incredibly asinine statement a few months ago that gay rights aren't civil rights because not enough queers have been assaulted or killed. You can refresh your memory of that here:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/11/18/huckabee-gay-rights
Since Huckabee made that statement, there seems to have been an upswing in violence against LGBT individuals. Perhaps some of the Huck's followers took his comments as a challenge?
If you're interested in reading more, a blogger at the Huffington Post wrote an essay discussing the attack on Nathan and other recent assaults. You can see that here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mikko-alanne/a-hate-crime-you-wont-see_b_155665.html
***
Speaking of hate crimes, in 2007, Sean William Kennedy was attacked outside of a South Carolina bar. He died from his injuries. His attacker was convicted of involuntary manslaughter, and sentenced to an extremely short prison sentence (5 years, which the judge suspended to 3... and time already served would count). You can read about that here:
http://www.foxcarolina.com/news/16570367/detail.html
When I originally posted about this on Facebook, I said "Evidently murdering a queer in South Carolina only gets you a slap on the wrist."
Well, I was wrong. It gets you even less than that.
Word came today that, thanks to South Carolina's early parole system, the man who murdered Sean Kennedy could get paroled as early as NEXT MONTH. Total time served? 8 damn months.
8 months. That's... so unbelievable to me that I don't even know what to say about it.
There's a lot of things going on here, but, honestly, I have a hard time faulting South Carolina's parole system. If that's how it works, that's how it works. What I DO have a hard time with, however, are the aspects of our society that caused a grand jury to refuse to hand down an indictment for murder for what was obviously a hate crime (after all... I don't know how much more clear-cut it can be when a person attacks a gay man while calling him a "faggot") and a judge to sentence the murderer to a ridiculously lenient sentence. That I have a problem with.
Other things that I have a problem with? A media that steadfastly ignores these crimes (although I guess I should be thankful for this, or I'd have to listen to some evangelical nut on the news talking about how queer=sin... since the media can never cover anything LGBT-related without allowing someone who believes that I'm worse than Hitler to have air time), people like Mike Huckabee (I know, I know... but he has it coming) who manage to scapegoat and then marginalize a whole community of people being assaulted and killed all around the world for political gain, and LGBT individuals who pause for a moment (if even that) upon hearing of a murder like this and then retreat back into their worlds of clubbing and sex. One of the things that I'll never understand is how hearing about things like this doesn't motivate more people to get involved in the LGBT movement.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. I really feel like every single LGBT individual (and our straight allies) needs to be a part of this struggle. Equal rights can't be procured by a small handful of people "doing all the work." It's not just "activists" who need to be involved. Everyone does. This is supposed to be a MOVEMENT. As it stands now, it's more like a gentle rustling in the breeze. If that.
But that argument is for another day. (I bet all three of you who read this can't wait for that posting!) I'm getting off my soapbox now.
Anyway, Sean Kennedy's mom is trying to start a letter writing campaign to keep her son's murderer in jail. If you're interested in learning more, click here:
http://seanslastwish.wordpress.com/2008/12/23/action-alert-from-seans-last-wish
***
In other news, Obama's picked a gay to be a secretary! Awesome.
I'm being a bit facetious here. I'm thrilled that Obama can include queers in his administration in positions that have no impact on policy-making.
I'm probably being a bit harder on him than I really mean to be, but I think the above items made me a tad grouchy. If you're interested, read more here:
http://www.gaypolitics.com/2009/01/05/obama-names-gay-director-of-office-of-management-and-administration/
Cheers.
In which I pause to reflect on withstanding another year.
Alright, so I’m a tad late in posting this, but I thought I would take a moment to reflect on the past year before I abandon it in a trash bin and move on with my life. What follows is a brief synopsis of the lessons/important points I’m going to take away from 2008. These are in no particular order, but I will say that I do think Number 1 is a particularly keen insight.
1) If you have a panic attack while driving on I-40, it’s best to pull off the road.
2) I’m a sucker for a man with a guitar, a nasal singing voice, and ridiculous amounts of tape hiss. (On the off chance he ever stumbles across this, I’d like to take a moment to formally offer my hand in marriage to John Darnielle. Just let me know John! I’ll be waiting!)
3) The fact that I had to actually utter the phrase “I’m not saying I’m against the restorative power of song” in one of my classes was probably the final nail in the coffin of what was left of my respect for social work.
4) More people came over to my house in the first two months that I had a Wii than in the entire year before the purchase. Yet another indication of where I place in the hierarchy of fun things to do. (And no, I don’t mean that in a sexual way. Mostly.)
5) If you make your Facebook status updates long enough, and update them often enough, they’ll eventually amass a following.
6) As evidenced by Obama’s win, real change can happen. As evidenced as by his selection of Rick Warren, it’s never as much change as I’d like.
7) Every single year (and 2008 was no exception), my ability to engage other human beings in a conversation drops dramatically. At the rate I’m going, by the time I’m 30 I’ll be communicating solely in non sequitors and saliva bubbles.
8) Certain members of the LGBT community need a real swift, hard kick in the ass… and I’m doubtful that Prop 8 is going to be enough for any real, sustained change in attitude.
9) If enough people bother me about something (i.e. not cutting my hair, starting a blog, etc), I’m apt to do it. Evidently, I’m remarkably susceptible to peer pressure.
10) I’m an old, sad, hopeless nerd. (Though I kind of knew this already, it was constantly reinforced to me throughout the year, so I think it’s valid to include it.)
Well, 2008 certainly was action-packed, wasn’t it? (Note to self: must find way to denote bone-dry sarcasm in blog form.)
As for 2009, I’m not really one for resolutions, as mine generally stay the same every year (which should indicate how much progress I make on them). However, I do think I’m going to try to take the advice of one of my professors. After the class I referenced in Lesson #3, she pulled me aside and told me that despite the fact that she was not my mother, she felt like she needed to tell me to “lighten up.”
So we’ll see how that goes. Anyone willing to guess how long it’ll last?
1) If you have a panic attack while driving on I-40, it’s best to pull off the road.
2) I’m a sucker for a man with a guitar, a nasal singing voice, and ridiculous amounts of tape hiss. (On the off chance he ever stumbles across this, I’d like to take a moment to formally offer my hand in marriage to John Darnielle. Just let me know John! I’ll be waiting!)
3) The fact that I had to actually utter the phrase “I’m not saying I’m against the restorative power of song” in one of my classes was probably the final nail in the coffin of what was left of my respect for social work.
4) More people came over to my house in the first two months that I had a Wii than in the entire year before the purchase. Yet another indication of where I place in the hierarchy of fun things to do. (And no, I don’t mean that in a sexual way. Mostly.)
5) If you make your Facebook status updates long enough, and update them often enough, they’ll eventually amass a following.
6) As evidenced by Obama’s win, real change can happen. As evidenced as by his selection of Rick Warren, it’s never as much change as I’d like.
7) Every single year (and 2008 was no exception), my ability to engage other human beings in a conversation drops dramatically. At the rate I’m going, by the time I’m 30 I’ll be communicating solely in non sequitors and saliva bubbles.
8) Certain members of the LGBT community need a real swift, hard kick in the ass… and I’m doubtful that Prop 8 is going to be enough for any real, sustained change in attitude.
9) If enough people bother me about something (i.e. not cutting my hair, starting a blog, etc), I’m apt to do it. Evidently, I’m remarkably susceptible to peer pressure.
10) I’m an old, sad, hopeless nerd. (Though I kind of knew this already, it was constantly reinforced to me throughout the year, so I think it’s valid to include it.)
Well, 2008 certainly was action-packed, wasn’t it? (Note to self: must find way to denote bone-dry sarcasm in blog form.)
As for 2009, I’m not really one for resolutions, as mine generally stay the same every year (which should indicate how much progress I make on them). However, I do think I’m going to try to take the advice of one of my professors. After the class I referenced in Lesson #3, she pulled me aside and told me that despite the fact that she was not my mother, she felt like she needed to tell me to “lighten up.”
So we’ll see how that goes. Anyone willing to guess how long it’ll last?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
