Media Matters Article
I can hardly do it justice and it would take forever to redo all the link, so rather than plagerize, I'll just let you read it.
My Commentary:
BRILLIANT!
Common Sense
Friday, October 30, 2009
Laugh a Little: Halloween is Better Than Sex??
Here is a cool little image I found on mypsace while I was approving some stuff for work. I really enjoyed it so I figured I would repost it here. Enjoy!
Common Sense
Practice Non-Religion: Pat Robertson on Hate Crimes Bill
It's always fun to listen to the paranoid, fatalistic rantings of religious extremsists in America. Here is a particularly fun one by a personal favorite, Pat Robertson.
Robertson pulls out the usual slippery slope guns that he has used in the past claiming that protection of gay people will lead to legalization of pedophilia, beastiality, blah, blah, blah. I've already addressed why this is stupid so I wont re-address it here.
He also claimed that the Hate Crimes bill is all about denying christians their right to hate people. well I think I've already discussed why that is also stupid (no one cares what you say, this bill protects against religious people who act upon the venomous language Robertson spits out everyday).
So, anyway, feel free to watch what he says:
I wont go any further than to say, you should seriously question your life choices if you share a religion with this guy.
Common Sense
Robertson pulls out the usual slippery slope guns that he has used in the past claiming that protection of gay people will lead to legalization of pedophilia, beastiality, blah, blah, blah. I've already addressed why this is stupid so I wont re-address it here.
He also claimed that the Hate Crimes bill is all about denying christians their right to hate people. well I think I've already discussed why that is also stupid (no one cares what you say, this bill protects against religious people who act upon the venomous language Robertson spits out everyday).
So, anyway, feel free to watch what he says:
I wont go any further than to say, you should seriously question your life choices if you share a religion with this guy.
Common Sense
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Anti-Gay Rhetoric 101: Scholastic Books says Lesbian Parents are Offensive?
Today, Think Progress, reported that a childrens book that included a girl whos parents are Lesbians was denied by Scholastic publishers. The book, "Luv Ya Bunches" was held up by the publisher because some of the language was considered questionable or offensive. The publisher suggested edits that included removing works like "geez," "crap," "sucks," and "God" (as in "oh my God"). They also requested that one of the girls' parents, who are lesbian, be changed to a heterosexual couple.
The author complied with the language change, but refused to change the parents' sexual orientation and gender, arguing that this was not offensive. The publishers the refused to publish the book, claiming that they didn't want to deal with the complaints from parents. sketchy...
Well after thousands of people complained over their refusal, they backtracked and published the book. If you are interested in knowing more than 200,000 children are raised by gay and lesbian parents. I guess they were just going off the stereotype that gays and lesbians don't raise children. oops.
Here is there most recent statement on the matter.
Common Sense
Well after thousands of people complained over their refusal, they backtracked and published the book. If you are interested in knowing more than 200,000 children are raised by gay and lesbian parents. I guess they were just going off the stereotype that gays and lesbians don't raise children. oops.
Here is there most recent statement on the matter.
Common Sense
Fox Noise: Cash 4 Clunkers = Spread the Wealth
Facts:
Cash 4 Clunkers cost: $3B
Number of Taxpayers in 2008: 154M (2008 IRS Data Book, see Page 4)
Number of Car sales that benefited from C4C: 125,000 (Conservative estimate provided by Fox News)
So,
Average Cost Per Taxpayer = $3B/154M = $19.48
(again note that this is a conservative estimate. For an estimate based on the total number of cars sold during the program replace 125K with 690K)
Congratulations Obama you have successfully spread the wealth by $.0001, Mao would be proud.
This is me laughing at how stupid people are.
Common Sense
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Anti-Gay Rhetoric 101: "Ex-Gays" (Part 1)
I had the random (and somewhat unpleasant) urge today to look up the Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX) website. The first realization I came to is that their acronym is actually PFEGG, and a common sense reinterpretation of their name as Parents and Friends of Anti-Gays would make them PFAG. I'm also curious why they include "& Gays" in their title. Whether or not you think their mission is to hurt gays, it certainly isn't to help them, so it seems silly to include gays in the title. Unless you are trying to legitimize your marginalization (victimization) by associating yourself with an already marginalize group. hmm, maybe thats the explanation.
Well those things aside I wanted to address some of the things I found on the website.
Part 1: What is an Ex-Gay?
The website claims that ex-gays aren't necessarily men/women who have changed their attractions, they are simple people who have changed their orientation or lifestyle. This isn't necessarily a bad argument, since "gay" is an identify not an orientation, a person could legitimately be ex-gay, but still homosexual. The problem I have with it is that orientation is attraction.
Sexuality can be understood as some combination of three factors: Orientation, identity, and behavior.
Sexual Orientation: Sexual orientation is the physical, emotional, and spiritual attraction to a certain gender or genders. If a man is attracted to men, you would say their sexual orientation is homosexuality. If the same man were instead attracted to women, you would say he is heterosexual. And if this man is attracted to both, he is bisexual.
Sexual Identity: Sexual identity is the label and lifestyle a person chooses to take on. For instance, a homosexual might choose to identify as a "gay" man. If they are less comfortable with the connotations of the word "gay" they might choose the more ambiguous term "queer." Recently, queer youth have begun adopting unique words for their sexual identity such as "gaysian" for gay asians.
Sexual Behavior: Sexual behavior refers to the gender with which an individuals engages in sexual intercourse. For a heterosexual, straight man, this is going to be predominantly women. However, this is where the issue of "experimentation" comes in. It is entirely possible for an individual to have sex with men but still be heterosexual and straight. This is because behavior is different from Orientation and Identity.
You may never have heard of these distinctions because society has told you that there is only one acceptable combination, so sexuality has been dubbed as heterosexual, straight men who have sex with women. Anything that diverges even slightly from this combination runs the risk of being lumped in as gay.
So, getting back to the argument by PFOX, attraction is orientation therefor what PFOX is espousing is not changing orientation, but changing identity or behavior through the suppression of all or part of orientation. This is not new. Religions have been doing this since the concept of homosexuality first came to light. not surprising that some of the major tenants of the Ex-Gay movement are tinged with religiosity.
So what is an Ex-Gay?
I can provide three explanations for the existence of Ex-Gays.
1) Ex-Gays are heterosexuals who experimented with male-male sexual intercourse and may have even identified as gay at one time for the community acceptance. After realizing that society doesn't like gays, they returned to a more societally acceptable combination. (Not a very likely explanation, but theoretically possible)
2) Ex-Gays are bisexuals who embraced their same-sex attractions, but decided to transition back to a more societally acceptable identity and behavior pattern, most likely for reasons other than healthy sexual development. Such reasons may include religious indoctrination, social stigma, or family problems. (Somewhat more likely)
3) Ex-Gays are homosexuals who have chosen a more societally acceptable identity and behavior in order to avoid the persecution and stigma associate with being "gay." This is usually associate with individual or family religiosity. (More likely)
So why don't I think there can be a healthy "Ex-Gay?" Because if you were in fact a member of either group 1 or group 2 you would not need to identify as "Ex-Gay." You would simply identify as straight. The only people who would feel the need to identify as NOT something are people who have a problem with the group they are attempting to avoid being associated with. By saying that you are Ex-Gay you are making a point of say you are NOT gay. that is very different from saying you are straight or you are gay. Those are affirmative identities in which you affirm an identity, where Ex-Gay is a negative identity in which you negate an identity.
The point is that being ex-gay is the same as being anti-gay, because you are working to reinforce the "choice" argument that has been proven to be very damaging to the emotional and psychological health and well-being of homosexual and bisexual individuals. Not only that, but PFOX serves to validate the unhealthy suppression of orientation because it mistakenly believes that orientation is akin to identity, when it is not. Orientation refers to attraction which is recognizable chemical responses to arousing stimuli which have been observed a number of times in the past. This is biological, and no one should have to prove a genetic link. Race does not have a genetic link, in fact they have proven that there is no genetic link to race. So why is sexual orientation held to a higher standard than another oppressed group.
This concludes part 1. in Part 2 I will address the "7 Things I Wish Pro-Gay People Would Admit."
Get ready for it!
Common Sense
Well those things aside I wanted to address some of the things I found on the website.
Part 1: What is an Ex-Gay?
The website claims that ex-gays aren't necessarily men/women who have changed their attractions, they are simple people who have changed their orientation or lifestyle. This isn't necessarily a bad argument, since "gay" is an identify not an orientation, a person could legitimately be ex-gay, but still homosexual. The problem I have with it is that orientation is attraction.
Sexuality can be understood as some combination of three factors: Orientation, identity, and behavior.
Sexual Orientation: Sexual orientation is the physical, emotional, and spiritual attraction to a certain gender or genders. If a man is attracted to men, you would say their sexual orientation is homosexuality. If the same man were instead attracted to women, you would say he is heterosexual. And if this man is attracted to both, he is bisexual.
Sexual Identity: Sexual identity is the label and lifestyle a person chooses to take on. For instance, a homosexual might choose to identify as a "gay" man. If they are less comfortable with the connotations of the word "gay" they might choose the more ambiguous term "queer." Recently, queer youth have begun adopting unique words for their sexual identity such as "gaysian" for gay asians.
Sexual Behavior: Sexual behavior refers to the gender with which an individuals engages in sexual intercourse. For a heterosexual, straight man, this is going to be predominantly women. However, this is where the issue of "experimentation" comes in. It is entirely possible for an individual to have sex with men but still be heterosexual and straight. This is because behavior is different from Orientation and Identity.
You may never have heard of these distinctions because society has told you that there is only one acceptable combination, so sexuality has been dubbed as heterosexual, straight men who have sex with women. Anything that diverges even slightly from this combination runs the risk of being lumped in as gay.
So, getting back to the argument by PFOX, attraction is orientation therefor what PFOX is espousing is not changing orientation, but changing identity or behavior through the suppression of all or part of orientation. This is not new. Religions have been doing this since the concept of homosexuality first came to light. not surprising that some of the major tenants of the Ex-Gay movement are tinged with religiosity.
So what is an Ex-Gay?
I can provide three explanations for the existence of Ex-Gays.
1) Ex-Gays are heterosexuals who experimented with male-male sexual intercourse and may have even identified as gay at one time for the community acceptance. After realizing that society doesn't like gays, they returned to a more societally acceptable combination. (Not a very likely explanation, but theoretically possible)
2) Ex-Gays are bisexuals who embraced their same-sex attractions, but decided to transition back to a more societally acceptable identity and behavior pattern, most likely for reasons other than healthy sexual development. Such reasons may include religious indoctrination, social stigma, or family problems. (Somewhat more likely)
3) Ex-Gays are homosexuals who have chosen a more societally acceptable identity and behavior in order to avoid the persecution and stigma associate with being "gay." This is usually associate with individual or family religiosity. (More likely)
So why don't I think there can be a healthy "Ex-Gay?" Because if you were in fact a member of either group 1 or group 2 you would not need to identify as "Ex-Gay." You would simply identify as straight. The only people who would feel the need to identify as NOT something are people who have a problem with the group they are attempting to avoid being associated with. By saying that you are Ex-Gay you are making a point of say you are NOT gay. that is very different from saying you are straight or you are gay. Those are affirmative identities in which you affirm an identity, where Ex-Gay is a negative identity in which you negate an identity.
The point is that being ex-gay is the same as being anti-gay, because you are working to reinforce the "choice" argument that has been proven to be very damaging to the emotional and psychological health and well-being of homosexual and bisexual individuals. Not only that, but PFOX serves to validate the unhealthy suppression of orientation because it mistakenly believes that orientation is akin to identity, when it is not. Orientation refers to attraction which is recognizable chemical responses to arousing stimuli which have been observed a number of times in the past. This is biological, and no one should have to prove a genetic link. Race does not have a genetic link, in fact they have proven that there is no genetic link to race. So why is sexual orientation held to a higher standard than another oppressed group.
This concludes part 1. in Part 2 I will address the "7 Things I Wish Pro-Gay People Would Admit."
Get ready for it!
Common Sense
You Might Be a Racist: "Miscegenation is a Crime" Photo shows up on the RNC website
Oops, someone wasn't watching that facebook feed. Apparently a proponent of the more hateful brand of neo-conservatism created this photo and put it on the RNC facebook page.
What exactly makes people think this kinda stuff is ok? I'm all about freedom of speech, but just because you CAN say something, doesn't mean you SHOULD. Stuff like this, similar to the Louisiana justice of the peace case, deserves condemnation of the highest order and strongest language. If the RNC really expects anyone to believe that they are not a racist party then they need to smack this down with the same indignation that they throw at the president everyday. or is Health Care Reform really more abhorrent to them than racism? maybe thats a question someone needs to ask them.
This photo was legitimately not on the GOP website. It was on facebook, and someone let it show up on the facebook feed on the GOP main page. However, the GOP threw a temper tantrum when the same thing happened to MoveOn.org. At least MoveOn had the good sense to apologize.
Someone should explain to Michael Steele the whole concept of "what goes around comes around."
Common Sense
Monday, October 26, 2009
Fox Noise: Is it "News" or "Opinion?"
I'll let you be the judge on that question, but here is some food for thought from Media Matters for America.
The News and Opinion segments sound pretty similar... hmmm...
Common Sense
The News and Opinion segments sound pretty similar... hmmm...
Common Sense
Fox Noise: Fox News vs. The White House
here is a wonderful little clip by Media Matters for America.
Here's a little background for those who haven't been following the news. The Fox News channel has been engaged in an all out war with the Obama administration since day one (actually even prior to that). They have accused him of everything from socialism, to murdering old people, to condoning child rape. Now, the Obama administration is fighting back. Yet for some unknown reason people are surprised by this! In my opinion, it's about bloody time!
Here is what Fox has been doing for the past 8 months:
Doesn't sound like news to me. It sounds like slander, but who am I to judge.
P.S. can we just take a moment to appreciate how pathetic Sean Hannity is if he truly believes that Fox, Talk Radio, and the Drudge report are the only news organizations left? First of all, Talk Radio and Drudge are opinion. Second, Fox news on its best day is poorly researched reporting on conservative pet issues laced with neo-con propaganda. On it's worse days it sounds more like a bunch of howler monkeys looking for conspiracy theories (Glen Beck all the time).
Common Sense
Here's a little background for those who haven't been following the news. The Fox News channel has been engaged in an all out war with the Obama administration since day one (actually even prior to that). They have accused him of everything from socialism, to murdering old people, to condoning child rape. Now, the Obama administration is fighting back. Yet for some unknown reason people are surprised by this! In my opinion, it's about bloody time!
Here is what Fox has been doing for the past 8 months:
Doesn't sound like news to me. It sounds like slander, but who am I to judge.
P.S. can we just take a moment to appreciate how pathetic Sean Hannity is if he truly believes that Fox, Talk Radio, and the Drudge report are the only news organizations left? First of all, Talk Radio and Drudge are opinion. Second, Fox news on its best day is poorly researched reporting on conservative pet issues laced with neo-con propaganda. On it's worse days it sounds more like a bunch of howler monkeys looking for conspiracy theories (Glen Beck all the time).
Common Sense
Life's Little Joys: Cardozo Law School LGBT Recruitment Letter
Here is a pretty awesome example of a law school that is doing a great job recruiting a special population. Cardozo Law School sent me a recruitment letter from the LGBT organziations, OUTLaw, on their campus that was specifically geared toward recruiting LGBT students. Check it out:
Even though I don't plan on applying to Cardozo Law School, I am very appreciative of the effort, and maybe more schools should follow their lead. It has definitely made an impact.
Common Sense
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
