You are currently browsing the monthly archive for June 2009.
Nine people died in Monday’s Metro crash in DC. One of them had the poor taste to be a Latina immigrant. Her name was Ana Fernandez and she was commuting to her house cleaning job.
WUSA9 news report:
The family of Metro train crash victim Ana Fernandez says they have been targeted by anti-immigrant telephone messages in the wake of her death.
Callers accuse the family of trying to financially capitalize on Fernandez’s death and have called her an illegal immigrant.
“None of this is true,” said Jose Hernandez, a cousin.
Fernandez was 40-years old and the mother of six children aged 2 to 21.
…Family members say the calls were left at a phone number announced by the Spanish language television outlet Univision, to leave messages of support for the family.
In fact, Ana was a legal immigrant from El Salvador.
The Indigenous Xicano says:
Most people would mourn at the sadness of this story of a hard-working mother going to work and dying in an accident on the way to work.
Many times there will be a call to establish a fund to help defray the costs for the funeral and to establish a fund for the surviving children.
But Ana’s last name is Fernandez. The reality in America today is that there are many abnormal people who quickly demonize people with names that sound Spanish. Deceased mothers are no exception.
…If her name was Ann Smith these monsters would not make a sound.
Gay people, why don’t you realize we love you? Haven’t we explained like a MILLION times that just because we hate everything about you and everything you do, Jesus forces us to claim that we love you?
Gawd, you are so sensitive. You don’t understand biblical principles at all. “The Biblical worldview teaches that all are created equal and worthy of respect but it also teaches that some behaviors, such as homosexuality, are wrong because they violate God’s moral law.” (OK State Rep, Sally Kern)
This message can come across garbled by the liberal media sometimes, I mean, even the President doesn’t get it. “For the first time in America’s history, we have a president who has no understanding of the Biblical worldview and who has even less understanding of the truths of the Bible. This is evident when he says that support for homosexual “marriage” [unions] can be found in the Sermon on the Mount or that certain passages in Romans are just obscure passages. Whereas George Washington expelled from his military those who practiced sodomy, President Obama honors sodomites by proclaiming an entire month as Gay Pride Month…” (Kern)
Don’t get so upset gays! “Sodomites” isn’t a homophobic slur, it’s simply the loving, biblical term for your disgusting sickness.
Oh, and here’s a kind message of tolerance from PA Senator John Eichelberger, who heroically choked down vomit as he said it: “We’re allowing [gays] to exist, and do what every American can do. We’re just not rewarding them with any special designation. “
How sweet! Now why are you people who claim to seek this tolerence we so openly give you so mean and vicious towards us normal, natural and God-blessed folks?
To read Sally Kern’s Oklahoma Citizen’s Proclamation for Morality, in which she lovingly and respectfully compares same sex relationships to human trafficking and child abuse, read further.
A sweet story was on WNYC Radio Rookies this morning. Listen here or read the transcript.
When seniors at a small public high school in the Bronx cast their votes for “Best Couple” earlier this year, they chose a pair they admire but who definitely defy the stereotype of best couple.
From the show:
Vicky: I’m scared to tell my grandmother because she judges other gay people in our family, like: “Ewww! Why does she dress like that? Why does she have a girlfriend?” But, Deoine and I go together like mac and cheese.
Deoine: Okay, the first time I saw Vikky it was on a web site called Sconex and I thought she was pretty. I used to call her my favorite Puerto Rican girl.
H/t Wellsmus.
The New York Times:
Nixon worried that greater access to abortions would foster “permissiveness,” and said that “it breaks the family.” But he also saw a need for abortion in some cases — like interracial pregnancies, he said.
“There are times when an abortion is necessary. I know that. When you have a black and a white,” he told an aide, before adding, “Or a rape.”
That “or a rape” afterthought is the icing on the terrifying cake. What an ass. Not like everyone didn’t already know that.
That seems to be unclear to certain assholes running around.
Because if everyone could agree that immigrants are people, things like this wouldn’t happen:
Immigration advocates are incensed over a Mexican woman’s fight to keep custody of her child after she was reported as an unfit mother two days after giving birth in a Pascagoula hospital.
…According to documents obtained by The Clarion-Ledger, staff at the hospital filed a report two days later listing Ruby as a neglected child.
…Court records obtained by The Clarion-Ledger indicate [Cirila Baltazar] Cruz is charged with neglecting her child, in part, because “she has failed to learn the English language” and “was unable to call for assistance for transportation to the hospital” to give birth. Her inability to speak English “placed her unborn child in danger and will place the baby in danger in the future,” according to the document.
Uh, since when was speaking English a requirement of motherhood? Whoever stole that woman’s baby, and anyone who colluded, should end up in jail. At least there is an apparently awesome organization involved to advocate for Cruz: Mississippi Immigrant Rights Alliance. Their Request for Action is down below the fold. If this incident shocks and enrages you, please check out their action items and get involved!
H/t Alas.
Interestingly, in the light of this sickening language-bigotry-based violation of human rights, just this past weekend Pat Buchanan and his white “nationalist” friends were having a conference where they “suggested supporting English-only initiatives as a prime way of attracting “working class white Democrats.””
Buchanan went on to mock Sotomayor for coming from a Spanish-speaking background, and conference participant Peter Brimelow, editor of white “nationalist” website VDARE.com, “urged the attendees of the Buchanan conference to attack affirmative action in an effort to attract the votes of “young whites” and “yellow people.”"
After claiming it would be “suicidal” for any “white man” to vote for Obama, Brimelow contended that immigrants should not be eligible for affirmative action because “they weren’t slaves to this country, they’ve never been discriminated against”.
Those white “nationalists” sure are eloquent. To hear these actual words come out of their mouths, pop over to ThinkProgress, where you can also view their misspelled conference banner.
Request for action below. Read the rest of this entry »
***UPDATE 4/3/09: I’ve noticed this post floating around the web in a bunch of different places. That’s fine, I’m glad ya’ll like my thoughts. Please, just be sure to credit The Czech and put in a link when you do so. Thanks.***
What Dori said.
The New York Times and Le Monde both reported today on certain remarks from French President Nicolas Sarkozy calling for the elimination of the burqa.
To wit:
“The issue of the burqa is not a religious issue. It is a question of freedom and of women’s dignity,” Mr. Sarkozy said. “The burqa is not a religious sign. It is a sign of the subjugation, of the submission, of women.”
To enthusiastic applause, he said: “I want to say solemnly that it will not be welcome on our territory.”
STOP IT!
There are a thousand things wrong with this. Let me count them.
1. Mandating how women should dress is mandating how women should dress, whether it is a mandate to wear a burqa, or a mandate not to wear one. When a man tells a woman how to dress, it’s paternalism and subjugation one way or the other.
2. Plus, as Dori points out, a man telling a woman that too much of her body is covered, and that she needs to expose more of it to his view, is pretty weird. How much modesty is too much? How much exposed flesh is enough to satisfy Sarkozy?
3. A Christian man imposing rules of dress upon Muslim women does little to actually foster the kind of gender equality he claims to be advancing.
4. Sarkozy talks as though there is no “subjugation of women” among the non-Muslim denizens of France. As though France is a wonderland of gender equality. According to WikiGender: “Compared to other countries, France has always been rather late in adopting gender equality as a goal and designing policies to achieve it.” So why suddenly all this concern for a certain subset of French women, who just randomly happen to come from a community hated and feared by many in France?
5. What other items of clothing does Mr. Sarkozy disapprove of? Do they also happen to correspond to certain disfavored, marginalized communities?
6. Any attempt to “eliminate” burqas in France will only serve to further marginalize the women who wear them. Burqas, for some women, represent a compromise. Some individuals believe women are not supposed to be seen in public, or be looked at by men outside of the family. In this extreme view, women would be entirely confined to the house and removed from outside society unless they can put on a burqa and go out. Eliminating the burqa for these women would mean eliminating their access to the world. Better conditions for such women require a little more work than outlawing a piece of clothing.
7. Eliminating burqas in France would not mean that women’s oppression in Muslim communities would end. It would simply be a cosmetic change that would do nothing to actually work with communities and empower French Muslim women to achieve equality. It is a measure that ignores all nuance and avoids all honest work to actually tackle the heart of the problem.
8. All this “eliminate the burqa” talk fits just a little too snugly with the popular “Islam oppresses women” meme that Christian Westerners like to toss around, particularly when they are trying to frame a “War of Civilizations”.
9. Also, doesn’t this just come off as a cheap attempt at burnishing his Women’s Issues credentials while effectively only harassing a marginalized, already-persecuted minority? And doing little to nothing to further true societal equality for all women in France?
10. What real issues do French women, and French Muslim women in particular, actually face that Sarkozy is completely avoiding by diverting attention with this stunt? Why randomly target French Muslims now?
Ok, so that was only 10 things. Huh.
TIME, you can take your condescending, insulting article and SHOVE IT.
Some infuriating lowlights from the article Why Some People Are Gay: Notes (and Clues) from the Animal Kingdom by John Cloud:
One particularly charged finding is that in most species besides humans, same-gender pairings rarely lead to lifelong relationships. In other words, when one attractive bonobo male eyes another in a lovely patch of Congo swamp forest, they occasionally kiss and then move on to other oral pleasures, but they don’t bother anyone afterward about trying to legalize their right to an open-banana-bar ceremony.
Oh I apologize that I bother any of the human species with my annoying desire to have equal rights. Why don’t gays just behave more like the animals to which they are clearly so closely related?
What all these theories have in common is that same-sex sexual activity is either an accident or a quirky genetic method of helping males impregnate females. Which raises the evolutionary question of why men and women who are exclusive gay and lesbian exist.
This comes right after they list several examples of animal species that do have “exclusively gay” individuals.
One answer is that exclusive gays and lesbians are a relatively new creation: the concept of exclusive homosexuality barely existed before modernity; even a century ago, most same-sex-attracted men and women got married and had kids.
This statement is made with no historical evidence, only heterosexist assumptions. And a dose of stunning blindness to not consider that same-sex-attracted individuals may have been forced to marry in the past and did not marry out of free choice.
In January, the journal Evolution and Human Behavior published a paper exploring the idea that certain alleles increase the likelihood of homosexuality by blocking the effect of androgens during fetal development. Having all those alleles hampers the masculinization of some parts of the brain that affect personality, making you gay, the theory goes.
Invisibilizing lesbians again. However, in some cases, such as this, I prefer being invisible to being subject to Cloud’s uninsightful analysis. This same invisibility is what allowed me to have sleepovers at my girlfriend’s house in high school. There are benefits.
Will “the liberation of homosexuals, which allows them to come out of the closet and not pretend to be straight” actually turn out to “contribute to the end of homosexuality?” We may not know for a thousand years, but it’s a great question.
That doesn’t make any sense, but really, none of the article does. I guess you can keep hoping, John.
Read the whole article only if you have previous experience withstanding dangerously high levels of bullshit. Then, discuss: which part of this article do you find most laughable?
1 in 4 South African men admit to rape.
From the article:
Gender advocates say that the 2006 rape trial of prominent politician Jacob Zuma was incredibly damaging to their cause. Zuma, who was elected President this year, was tried and acquitted of raping an HIV-positive family friend. He told the court that the woman had dressed provocatively, in a traditional wrap-around kanga, and that it was against Zulu culture for a man to leave a sexually aroused woman unsatisfied.
Setting aside for a moment the question of What is a “gender advocate”?, this is all quite seriously fucked up. The South African president is essentially a self-admitted and unashamed rapist. Wow, what to say.
For anyone reading in South Africa, here is a list of women’s organizations, some of which may provide support to rape victims and work against violence against women. There is also Rape Crisis, Cape Town and Masimanyane Women’s Support Centre.
This post was inspired by an article at Alternet titled Eating Meat Is Not Natural. I wrote a long-ass comment, but now that I am blogging again, I will turn it into a post, goddamn it! It got a good response over there, but I think my ideas were inspired by a post at Feministe, so I can’t take all the cred.
I am an omnivore. AND I completely respect and support the choices of those friends who are vegan and vegetarian, and I expect the same respect for my choices. We are all thinking adults and have come to our conclusions after careful deliberation.
I do have criticism for *some* vegans/vegetarians for the way they interact with omnivores.
1. Using gory images to try and shock omnivores into not eating meat, much the same way anti-abortion activists use shocking pictures of dismembered fetuses to make a point. It is disrespectful and in poor form for the anti-abortion activists, just as for the anti-meat activists. As a woman, I am turned off by this kind of rhetoric because of its close connection to a movement wanting to take my rights away.
2. Using the tactics of creationists to cherry-pick science and create specious pseudo-scientific arguments. We are talking about a moral choice, and it is clear that there are convincing scientific arguments for and against eating meat, as well as how long human have historically been eating it. When I see a side of an argument refuse to accept evidence simply because it contradicts a preferred world-view, I am reminded of creationists. Anyway, we all know that science can’t prove morality.
3. Using the language of the anti-gay movement. For me, as a queer person, a huge red flag goes up when I see an argument for what’s “natural” or not. Natural is a subjective and loaded term, and is often used by bigots against marginalized groups in society. Why would anti-meat activists choose such a term? Humans are also animals. We are part of nature, not separate from it. Humans and our behavior is just as natural as any other animal and their behavior.
4. Comparing meat-eaters to slave-owners, and animals to black people. As an anti-racist, it raises red flags when I hear the anti-meat argument put this way. It makes vegetarians seem as though they must all be white and privileged to be unaware of how insulting this rhetoric is to blacks. It makes me wonder why a movement would be willing to sacrifice dignity for blacks, to further marginalize an already marginalized group, in order to promote their cause.
Again, I am only speaking to those vegetarians and vegans who use this sort of disrespectful language. I have nothing but respect for those of you who respect me in return!
Please add your vegetarian/vegan dos and don’ts in the comments.
…And I’m back!
After some months away, I have decided to fire up the ol’ blog again and see how it goes. If safety becomes an issue, I will just stop again.
So I thought a good way to start this new chapter would be an explanation of my name. I chose it for a hodge podge of reasons. I identify strongly with my immigrant roots. My family has been bumping around the United States for a couple generations now, but we have retained a connection with our country of origin and I have retained a sense of my history in this country as a descendant of immigrants. I don’t want to forget that there were peoples here before the white man, people who are still here. It is partially out of deference to them that I identify as Czech-American.
My name also has to do with my white privilege. My Czech descendants were light-skinned, and so am I. (Not all Czechs appear “white”.) Czechs have not always been considered white. A certain German dictator had a special name for us: Minderwertige Rasse (“less-worthy race”), insinuating that we were not the white race, we were something else, something less-than.
That is mostly behind Czechs now. In America, we get white-skin privilege, regardless of that history. And I want to own the fact that I receive that privilege, however unwillingly, and the responsibility that bestows upon me. So I make my identity very clear through my screen name. There will be no mistake when I am in anyone’s space- I cannot ignore my white privilege and try to fly under the radar in spaces created by people of color. I will have to confront it all the time, and check myself with each comment.
I chose to identify as Czech-American and not white for a reason. I do not deny the white privilege that I benefit from. But I do not want to “own” my whiteness. I do not want to perpetuate white supremacy and proudly “own” whiteness. Identifying as white is problematic because whiteness only came to exist as a status self-assigned in order to denote superiority over others unwillingly assigned as something else. I cannot further that history by actively “being” white.
I do not want to identify as Caucasian either. That term also has a troubling history. A German anthropologist coined the term for these reasons:
“Caucasian variety – I have taken the name of this variety from Mount Caucasus, both because its neighborhood, and especially its southern slope, produces the most beautiful race of men, I mean the Georgian; and because all physiological reasons converge to this, that in that region, if anywhere, it seems we ought with the greatest probability to place the autochthones (birth place) of mankind.”
Again with the glorifying of whiteness. And so again, I cannot reaffirm this term as a valid description for a group of people, since superiority is inherent in the word.
European-American is acceptable, because it follows the patterns already in use for peoples of color: Asian-American, African-American, Mexican-American, etc. However, I do not feel it is completely correct in my case. As a person of Central/Eastern European descent, my ancestors never were considered part of the ‘higher’ cultures of Western European countries. We’ve always been a bit of a hinterland, and for centuries a conquered and occupied people, to the peoples of Western Europe. I strongly feel a division from Europeans from the West. Czech-American is the descriptor I feel most comfortable with.
And from that, I became The Czech, Esq, MD, MSW, PhD, LMP, EMT, Defender of Justice, Earl of Essex, Lutheran Youth Minister, Head Sous Chef, 4-Time Olympic Gold Medalist, IBEW Local 67 Committee Chair, DnD LARP DungeonMaster, War Czar, Assistant Director of CleenGeorgia Waste Management, Televangelist, Free Range Pygmy Hen Breeder, Down-Low Danny’s Stripper Night Crowd Favorite, US Ambassador to Malawi, CEO Intel Corp, Runway Model, New Guinea Igneous Rock Formations Expert, Chairperson of the PTA, Founder: Doctor McProfessional’s EZ Parasitic Twin Removal System Corp, Cub Scout Leader, Oprah Book Club Author, Crochet Instructor, Badminton World Champion 5 Times Running, Producer: KMart Employee Safety Videos, 80s One-Hit Wonder, Associate Joist Factory Inspector, Winner: East Fairfield Paul Bunyan Pancake Eat-Off, Knight of Columbus, Karate Black Belt, Oscar-Winning Actress, 99 Cent Plus Employee of the Month July 1998.
Recent Comments