What I’m Reading, July 29, 2014

Religious Exemptions and Public Policy: Freedom to Discriminate, Genevieve Cato, Burnt Orange Report, July 26, 2014

Key to the legal fight to allow discrimination under the guise of religious freedom is the Religious Freedom Restoration Act which, under Justice Alito, has become the primary tool for justifying these rulings of religious exemptions. It was also the basis for a ruling by a Texas judge in December, when she determined that three religious universities in Texas should not be required to cover methods of birth control they believe cause abortions.

***

The Catholic bishops had great success with what are called “conscience clauses,” which are laws created to allow certain employees to refuse service if it violates their religious belief. The most widely-used example of this is allowing pharmacists to refuse to sell birth control to consumers if it is against their religion. But this is completely counter to the way many Catholics understand the concept of religious conscience in the first place. “Individuals have conscience,” Smith explained, “not institutions.” Further, conscience is not about enforcing your beliefs on another person by refusing to sell someone their medical prescription. It is an individual journey for each Catholic person. This is why Smith refuses to use the term “conscience clause” and instead calls them what they are: “refusal clauses.” [Emphasis in original.]

Face It, Women: The NFL Does Not Give a Shit About You, Erin Gloria Ryan, Jezebel, July 26, 2014 Continue reading

Share

What I’m Reading, July 28, 2014

Paul Ryan’s “insult” strategy: Why his anti-poverty contract is so grotesque, Simon Maloy, Salon, July 24, 2014

The entire document is premised on the notion that the poor are poor largely because they lack sufficient incentive to improve their station in life. Blame for this is, of course, foisted upon the government programs themselves. “The biggest snag in the safety net is that it discourages work,” Ryan’s document observes. “Many federal programs are means-tested, so as families earn more money, they get less aid. Any system that concentrates on the most vulnerable will face this tension.”

If that’s “the biggest snag,” then the safety net is doing pretty well. Ryan and the GOP have been pushing this argument that government benefits breed complacency among their recipients for quite some time, but the evidence just isn’t there to back it up.

No One I Know Will Ever Be Arrested For Smoking Pot, Atrios, Eschaton, July 27, 2014 Continue reading

Share

What I’m Reading, July 25, 2014

If old white men feel maligned, they should take their own advice to minorities, Alyssa Rosenberg, Washington Post, June 2, 2014

If older white men feel maligned, they might try taking some of the recommendations that they routinely offer to people of color and women who want to better their lot. These suggestions are often presented as radically simple solutions to centuries of structural inequality. In reality, they function mostly as an attempt to make people with legitimate grievances less irritating to the powerful figures who might be expected to respond to their demands.

Africa Is Not a Derailment Tactic: Why Belittling ‘First World Problems’ Is Oppressive, Sian Ferguson, Everyday Feminism, July 11, 2014

Continue reading

Share

Ted Cruz Is Not Happy About “True Blood”

Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) is not happy about the most recent episode of HBO’s True Blood, which included a fundraising event, with a very large picture of him, getting shot up by the Yakuza.

Let us pause a moment to marvel at what might be the strangest sentence I’ve ever written. Who would’ve thought True Blood could put the Tea Party and the Japanese mob together in the same room (with vampires!) and have it be sort of believable? But I digress.

Cruz’s objections to the episode are characteristically incoherent:

“Of all the places I never thought to be mentioned, HBO’s True Blood vampire show would have to be near the top of the list. Sunday night, they aired a misogynist and profanity-ridden episode where Texas Republicans are murdered attending a ‘Ted Cruz fundraiser,’” he wrote on his Facebook page. [Emphasis added.]

“Well, I’m sorry to have lost the vampire vote, but am astonished (and amused) that HBO is suggesting that hard-core leftists are blood-sucking fiends,” the Texas Republican said.

Cruz also threw in a voter fraud quip, because you gotta keep your material fresh, you know?

About that “misogynist and profanity-ridden” bit, though. Senator, have you ever watched this show before? This episode was tame in the woman-involved sex department. It even had a dang marriage proposal! In fact, a considerable portion of the episode dealt with forgiveness (Andy), redemption (Jessica), and healing (Arlene and Sookie)—very WWJD? kind of stuff.

I do wonder if the Lafayette-James sandwich caught Cruz’s attention at all…..it’s almost like he didn’t personally watch the episode. I don’t recall seeing anyone else naked* this week (although I could be wrong about that).

The fundraiser scene itself was uncomfortable, nihilistic, and gory, which is not at all uncommon for this or numerous other HBO series. On the plus side, it had a brilliant homage to Terminator 2 (and I don’t mean the guy who plays Alcide’s dad).

I don’t really think Cruz considers this episode, or this show, “misogynist.” I think he threw that word out there because he knows it’s something liberals take seriously, and he thought he could put us on the defensive with it. He failed to consider, however, that while liberals may take misogyny seriously, we do not have the same concern for the words of Senator Ted Cruz.

As for the episode being full of profanity? Yeah, no shit.

Finally, I assume Cruz got the idea** that “hard-core leftists are blood-sucking fiends” from Pam’s rather clever and off-color pun about being a “Republc###.” Clearly Cruz hasn’t seen much of the show, because Pam hates everybody. Except Eric. There’s nothing political about it.


* True Blood may come closest of any show yet, at least that I’ve seen, to what I’ll call nudity parity (a shamelessly borrowed term). This is not to say it gives equal time. Far from it. Over 6½ seasons, for every naked Anna Paquin we’ve had a naked Alexander Skarsgård, Joe Mangianello, and Ryan Kwanten (all links are tasteful, if technically naked). Don’t even get me started on all the permutations of possible sexual partners on the show.

** The other possibility is that he got the idea from flashbacks showing Bill Compton being opposed to slavery and secession at the start of the Civil War, but let’s stop right there with that, shall we?

Share

A Date with an MRA

Here’s a tale of a woman’s one (and only) date with a man who, she learned from verbal cues during conversation, appeared to be a rather strident men’s rights activist (MRA). The date started out okay, she says, but did not end well at all. Trigger warnings should abound.

Now, I’m sure not all MRA’s are like the doucherocket described by this woman (more on that below), but the level of sexual entitlement on display in this account (“He tried repeatedly to get me into his car…He said that I was untrained. He said that I owed him for the drive. A drive, mind you, that he suggested and made willingly. He kept pleading that I wasn’t giving him a chance to prove himself.”) is shocking for at least two reasons: Continue reading

Share

Ladies and Gentlemen, Presenting ‘Murica

The DeLorean Monster Truck is a thing that actually exists:

Where we’re going we don’t need roads, but let’s tear some shit up anyway!

It’s not the only heir to the DeLorean style out there, either.

Share

Homophobes Doth Protest Too Much

Bryan Fischer of the American Family association is upset that a Burger King in San Francisco (of all places!) is wrapping burgers in rainbow-patterned paper. For one thing, he’s concerned that this aesthetic may spread and turn hamburgers across the country gay. For another thing:

Fischer just thinks the entire thing is a disastrous marketing idea because “when people sit down to eat a hamburger, the last thing they want to be thinking about is two guys having sex.”

I’ll let Ed Brayton take it from here:

Okay, here’s the deal: If seeing rainbow-colored wrappers makes you think about guys having sex, you might just be a tad bit obsessed with gay sex. Like more obsessed with it than any gay person on earth.

Share

What I’m Reading, July 17, 2014

Man mansplains that men also mansplain to men. Another man mansplains why. Ally Fogg, Heteronormative Patriarchy for Men, July 11, 2014

Where women complain about harassing and intrusive behaviour on the streets or public transport, you can always bank on some arsehole piping up “But that’s not sexism, men shout random abuse at each other too!” It’s true, they do. So it is not always sexist. Sometimes it is racist or ableist or homophobic or just plain, simple bullying. So can we cut all that out too while we’re at it?

Where women complain about feeling the threat of violence when walking outside at night, Mr Bloke can be banked on to respond “What are you complaining about? Men are much more likely to be randomly assaulted by strangers than women are.” This is also true. So can we please join with those women who are quite keen to see an end to such behaviour? Sooner than later would be good.
Or in the case in point, men use conversational exchanges not (just) to communicate, bond or exchange views and knowledge, but as a competitive sport, a test of dominance and status. It is quite true that this becomes an opportunity to establish social dominance over women (aka mansplaining) but also over other men. This is not an especially healthy trait. I’m sure we’ve all been in meetings (whether in work, politics, voluntary societies or whatever) which are dominated not by the person with the best ideas or the greatest knowledge, but the one with the most regard for the sound of (usually) his own voice. I’m dreadfully guilty of this myself, and am quite happy to acknowledge it and try to catch myself on.

The American Century is over: How our country went down in a blaze of shame, Michael Lind, Salon, July 12, 2014

Continue reading

Share

What I’m Reading, July 16, 2014

Right-wing “populism” is a joke: Poor-bashing, immigrant-hating and a revolting agenda, Heather Digby Parton, Salon, July 10, 2014

There are some areas of agreement among the left and right populists. They are both hostile to the “wealthy bipartisan elite” although for somewhat different reasons. It’s possible there could be some common legislative ground if both sides were sincere in their desire to rein in money in politics. But Sarah Palin’s words speak of a different priority — the visceral hostility toward immigrants and the obvious belief that they and other poor people are at the root of “workers’” problems. One certainly hopes that the poor and immigrant populations aren’t seen as chips in a negotiating session on these issues, but it wouldn’t be the first time that such devil’s bargains were made.

The real impediment to any agreement is the fact that most of the populist right is being funded and informed by the same wealthy interests they claim are destroying America with their immigrant-loving ways. These wealthy interests are actually less concerned about keeping their cheap immigrant labor (there are many ways of skinning that cat) than they are about the fact that the Republican Party is in grave danger of locking itself out of the executive branch for generations if it is seen as being overtly hostile to Latinos. They’ve invested a lot of time and money in the GOP and they do not wish to lose their grip on power simply because Sarah Palin and her friends don’t like immigrants. But there’s not much they can do about it — they’ve been stoking this right-wing populist base for decades now and that fire is now burning out of control.

Obama and the imperial presidency meme, Steve King, Death and Taxes, July 11, 2014

Continue reading

Share

Blame the Phones!

I’m not usually one to complain about people these days and their phones, but this was pretty interesting. A restaurant was receiving bad customer reviews, saying that its service had gotten slower over the years. They found old security footage from 2004 and compared it to footage from 2014 to see what, if anything, had changed. The results, while unscientific, are interesting. Maybe the restaurant business, much like our legal system, doesn’t change nearly as fast as our technology.

In 2004:

Customers walk in.

They gets seated and are given menus, out of 45 customers 3 request to be seated elsewhere.

Customers on average spend 8 minutes before closing the menu to show they are ready to order.

In 2014: Continue reading

Share