“I really don’t like thinking of things in that way. People do what they do. Everyone has their way of communicating and sometimes it’s driven by love or hate or fear or kindness or meanness. Whatever. I don’t want to ridicule someone’s behavior. It’s all pretty much okay with me. The only thing I don’t condone is intentional cruelty.”

-

Brent Spiner, when asked what the creepiest or most awkward fan greeting he’s ever had was. (via stormstouthideout)

Oh look! There’s a respectful way to talk about fans, even when the media tries to bait you. Nicely done.

(via elizabethminkel)

Now, I know what Steven Brill is doing in his Fresh Air interview is more to say that the level opposition to the ACA is irrational, rather than that the ACA is horrible (although there are some elements of both.) But this argument remains utter bullshit:

And, you know, let’s step back and sort of look at the big picture. What I think most Americans don’t understand about Obamacare is Obamacare is a Republican policy position. Obamacare is slightly more conservative than a plan that Richard Nixon proposed in the ’70s to head-off a Ted Kennedy plan that was much more liberal. Obamacare is more conservative than Romneycare.

So imagine the Democrats’ surprise when they sort of finally relent through Senator Baucus in the Senate and write a bill that basically, you know, kind of throws in the towel on decades of Republican opposition to more liberal plans and throws in the towel, and says, all right we’re going to go along with the Republican plan.

Brill, at least, doesn’t pretend that the Heritage Foundation was the source of the ACA, but a lot of the same fallacies are present in his own misleading claims.

Whether the Nixon plan was more liberal than the ACA is debatable. But Brill himself explains why the question is beside the point. You might, at this point, be wondering why if everyone favored health care plans more liberal than the ACA no actual health care reform of any kind passed. One crucial reason is that Nixon’s plan wasn’t a “Republican proposal” in any meaningful sense. It was a proposal a Republican pretended to support when it appeared that Congress might pass something better. Hopefully you’re all aware by now of the Heritage Uncertainty Principle, the fact that federal Republican health care plans only exist if there is no chance of them being implemented. Nixon’s proposal was entirely within this tradition:

At first, Kennedy rejected Nixon’s proposal as nothing more than a bonanza for the insurance industry that would create a two-class system of health care in America. But after Nixon won reelection, Kennedy began a series of secret negotiations with the White House that almost led to a public agreement. In the end, Nixon backed out after receiving pressure from small-business owners and the American Medical Association. And Kennedy himself decided to back off after receiving heavy pressure from labor leaders, who urged him to hold out for a single-payer system once Democrats recaptured the White House in the wake of the Watergate scandal.

When you treat Nixon’s proposal, or John Chafee’s proposal, or Bob Bennett’s plan, you’re being willfully conned. Republicans have an interest in pretending to favor some alternative to progressive health care reform when in fact their offer to the uninsured is “nothing.” For the same reason, the argument doesn’t work as a “gotcha,” because most Republicans never actually favored their nominal proposals, so it’s not as if going along with the scam is going to make anyone moderate their opposition.

As we’ve discussed before, calling Travaglinicare a “Republican” plan has similar problems. We can debate whether it was more liberal than the ACA; the different baselines don’t make the comparison particularly useful. But even if we assume arguendo than it was, the crucial problem with calling it a “Republican” plan is that it was passed by veto-proof supermajorities of Massachusetts Democrats. Yes, Romney decided to make a deal rather than just veto every single aspect of the legislation, as Nixon might have in that different era had Congress been able to pass anything. But this doesn’t make Travaglinicare a “Republican” plan any more than the support of some congressional Republicans for Social Security or the Civil Rights Act makes them “Republican legislation.” (And the term would actually be more accurate when applied to the CRA; Dirksen actually did support many civil rights provisions ex ante, his support was more important to the passage of the CRA than Romney’s was for passing Travaglinicare, and he didn’t repudiate it immediately after it passed.)

In conclusion, calling the ACA a “Republican plan” is 1)wrong, and 2)doesn’t work unless the objective is to give Republicans a pass for steadfastly opposing any health care reform. So can we please stop it? Federal Republicans don’t favor any kind of decent health care reform and never have. Pretending otherwise is dishonest and pernicious.

The New Year is often a time when folk customs suggest looking for hints into the future.  Relax, any skeptical or atheist readers — I am not busting out the colorful scarf, beads, and crystal ball, nor even the tarot cards.  I frankly consider the cards more a way to grasp psychological  hints from the subconscious due to evocative symbols than a tool for predicting the future.

No, when I look forward, I first look back to see patterns and trends that match.  And then, things simply crystalize in my mind — no ball needed.

Even as age frays my concentration and memory a bit — I visualize my brain, at times, as an over-filled file cabinet that has stuff popping over the drawers and falling away to an unseen lost floor.  But I always read very well — at eighth grade level by fourth grade, for instance.  I remember doing adult history books by sixth grade, and not under adult supervision.  I saw similarities and trends back then that horrified me, but told myself I was a child and couldn’t know, really.  Well, I’m not a child now.  As a constant student of history, philosophy, and social observer, what do I see now?  A pretty grim picture.

What do I see, when I look at my country?  I see a country that has based the bulk of its economy on war-making and weaponry since WWII.  It is not we people who have changed, nor our economy based on the military-industrial complex; but war has become so intensively expensive that now instead of a country-wide net profit from warring, we get a net loss except for that 1% that skims the top off.  I see a country that crowed at the fall of the Soviet Union as if it was our own accomplishment; a country deluding itself.

For what happened to the Soviet Union was that they, too, hit the end of profitable warring and ran out of money, and shortly thereafter, the will to war.  (Putin is doing his best to take care of that “will” issue — he is their Reagan, pumping the old successes in a century that can’t maintain those habits.) We Americans seemed so sure that could never happen to us, but it has happened to us. Our infrastructure is beginning to crumble, national will is fragmented and our politics has gone from “loyal opposition” to schismatic screaming of “traitor!” across political aisles.

I see America as an airplane in turbulence, with a pilot(s) not reading  instruments correctly; the oxygen masks have dropped.  But the passengers are not putting those masks ON, instead they are screaming blame at each other and darting around trying to help those that seem even less able to manage.  (My d-i-l to be is a symbol of this; while America stumbles, she wants to go teach and live abroad in ‘less fortunate’ climes even if it means she won’t be my d-i-l.  The America she comes back to at some point could closely resemble whatever third world shit-hole she selects for her little experiment in altruism.) Helping others instead of “masking up” and solving America’s issues first — not the time or place for that, to my mind.  But for now, we carry on as if we are the great masters of our destiny, entitled to tell other nations what to do with themselves.  Pssst, America?  They are laughing at our advice that we can’t carry out for ourselves.

I see cigarettes becoming an anachronism; e-cigarette vapor nicotine delivery systems will be the rage all over within five years or less.  States, like my own, that count on very high “sin” taxes on cigarettes will suffer — as my state already is.  Also, in the next ten to twenty years, as old(er) farts like me die off, marijuana will become the cash crop that tobacco was in the 20th century.  It has many more benefits than tobacco, and not as many bad things — it has been incompletely researched because of being banned as if it were heroin.

I see more religious and political fragmentation.  And it could only too easily lead to violence; one has only to listen to Ann Coulter going on about how liberals are traitors to blame for every ill in society to see her tying folks like me to a stake on her personal gas grill.  Those kind of “revolutions” DO devour their own eventually, so hey, she better stock up on sunscreen and fire extinguishers!

Ecologically?  No matter who denies what, change is happening.  I think the next one to five decades will see Americans forced into flight to areas not wracked with drought and wildfire. (And not just me, seeing this!) I think long-depended upon aquifers like the Ogallala will fail, leaving the center of the country without water.  I think the water wars to come will make the oil wars of the past century seem like minor squabbles.

Personally?  Well, I feel hunkered down here, not like a survivalist with tons of guns and canned goods; but with family drawn in close.  We are intensifying our efforts to be able to supply our own food more often; I want to get solar power to run our well and hope to enlist cooperation from neighbors.  I presently doubt they will want to ante up.  I feel burned out reading and watching news that seems like a re-run loop; I sometimes want a vacuum around me free of hectoring voices so I can simply sit quietly letting the mind ferret out what feels like clarity.  I delete more and more email asking for petition signing, money, etc — I need to focus on OUR oxygen masks first.  I have a retired husband, half the money, and two grown disabled veteran sons dependent upon us.  Yes, our “masks” first now, except for long established habits of helping others selected ages ago.  Nothing new until we are steady in “flight” here.

Resolution wise?  This is the year it has changed, the things I resolved are happening.  I have been a lifelong sugar addict; but that is done.  White sugar is for hummingbird food.  Sweets are less sweet, made with honey, and very rarely.  I feel better and clearer.  While I never drank much alcohol, I drink even less now and after reading this, I am very glad.  I am exercising every other day, building very, very gradually.  I am not hating it, not fighting my aging injury-accrued body — it feels different, it feels like love my body has long awaited.  Change will be very gradual, I’m sure.  I won’t be a size 8 next month.  But I won’t be a size 14 either! I will become stronger, more flexible, more able to pick and WIN my battles.  This exercise, the one they say predicts when and how you die?  I never thought of it as exercise; in my youth it just was how I got down on and up from the floor!  When I did it last week, I got down, but couldn’t get up without using either a knee or a hand.  Yesterday I did it as I always did before and that ability will be maintained.

Oh, and the small “irritation” factor matters?  Like television?  We have a contract with Direct TV to play out.  When it’s two years is gone, IT is gone.  We will re-hook to the bundled bullshit we HAVE to have for internet connectivity, to the Comcast option we already pay for — more or less 13 channels for about $15 a month.  Even that gets less and less watching, to be honest.  Routine hiatus of favorite shows pisses all of us off.  The news is such a laughably controlled and inaccurate portrayal of reality that it isn’t worth the time.  And things billed as “hilarious and charming” like “Galavant”?  So not.  Sophomoric and stupidly boring.  For pity’s sake, I know print editors are an extinct species, but aren’t television producers supposed to  notice the quality is in the toilet so they can make their bucks selling adverts?

We have pets.  That could change this year.  My last two ferrets are of extreme age and one, Helen, is very frail at almost ELEVEN years of age.  I doubt she will see next Samhain.  The other, Fat Farley, may last longer, but not much since he may be as old as eight years.  They are the pets of my heart.  But there will be no more, ferrets have extraordinarily high veterinarian costs and I cannot afford that in the future.

Gracie, the sweet but troublesome cat?  She got into the newly doored den today and deliberately pissed on the blanket folded at guest bed base.  She had been fair desperate to piss on SOMEthing besides her litter box for about 72 hours – since we put the doors up.  Sooner or later, she will pee on the laundry, the sewing pile on my table or living room furniture perhaps.  When that happens, I am finished and she is gone.  I have no money to keep up with such destruction.  She’s been to the vet, she is healthy.  We tried every suggestion; she is not pissing and scent marking out of unhappiness, but because she IS happy and wants to replicate her former semi-feral life here in her new home.  That isn’t going to work for me.  (The man who scooped her and a kitty sibling (who died) out of a ditch thought he was doing a service.  He might have been better off doing the “catch, spay, and release” bit done for feral cats.  Not every feral kitten will adjust to household life.)

The terrier, Fen, gets into little wars with the dogs my son(s) have about dominance.  This ends poorly.  Then HE pisses on something to get the last scentful doggie word.  This will be unsupportable as well if he keeps it up and he will go back to the rescue association where we got him.  Had I known when I took Fen on that my youngest son was returning with two dogs, I would not have gotten a dog at all.

We don’t give up pets lightly, but with resources ever more limited and energy that needs applied to more than watching an animal like a hawk?  Yeah, hard choices will be made if there is not behavioral improvement.

So, yes…the Fallow season is over.  Changes are in the works.  Focus is being applied to new things and dropped from old.  We are warrior-upping here.  Uncertainty is in the wind, and if anything is certain, it is that changes to come will more likely be negative than positive.  We have to be as prepared, as level-headed, and ready to act (not REact) as possible.

 

 

Filed under: Life, Politics Tagged: economy, life, pets, politics, religion, retirement, television, veterans

I have been unusually introspective in this year’s “Fallows” and also almost uncharacteristically hard nosed.  It seems a time to banish things not truly useful, even those things dear to the heart.  So, without cards or further ado, I tell the future I see…

And here?  This blog?  I am keeping it going, somehow.  Not sure what I have left to say, to be honest.  I feel strangely devoid of words of late.

I must find something to say….topic suggestions, anyone?  Preferably something I might have some knowledge of, lol?

Tagged: future-cast

Lunar Swimming

What if there was a lake on the Moon? What would it be like to swim in it? Presuming that it is sheltered in a regular atmosphere, in some giant dome or something.

Kim Holder

This would be so cool.

In fact, I honestly think it's cool enough that it gives us a pretty good reason to go to the Moon in the first place. At the very least, it's better than the one Kennedy gave.

Floating would feel about the same on the Moon as on Earth, since how high in the water you float depends only on your body's density compared to the water's, not the strength of gravity.

Swimming underwater would also feel pretty similar. The inertia of the water is the main source of drag when swimming, and inertia is a property of matter[1]♬ BILL NYE THE SCIENCE GUY ♬ independent of gravity. The top speed of a submerged swimmer would be about the same on the Moon as here—about 2 meters/second.

Everything else would be different and way cooler. The waves would be bigger, the splash fights more intense, and swimmers would be able to jump out of the water like dolphins.

This[2]Not this one. The other one.​[3]The simplest approach, which gives us an approximate answer, is to treat the swimmer as a simple projectile. The formula for the height of a projectile is:

\( \frac{\text{speed}^2}{2\times\text{gravity}} \)

... which tells us that a champion swimmer moving at 2 meters per second (4.5 mph) would only have enough kinetic energy to lift their body about 20 centimeters against gravity.

That's not totally accurate, although it's enough to tell us that dolphin jumps on Earth probably aren't in the cards for us. But to get a more accurate answer (and an equation we can apply to the Moon), we need to account for a few other things.

When a swimmer first breaks the surface, they don't have to lift their full weight; they're partially supported by buoyancy. As more of their body leaves the water, the force of buoyancy decreases, since their body is displacing less water. Since the force of gravity isn't changing, their net weight increases.

You can calculate how much potential energy is required to lift a body vertically through the surface to a certain height, but it's a complicated integral (you integrate the displacement of the submerged portion of their body over the vertical distance they travel) and depends on their body shape. For a human body moving fast enough to jump most of the way out of the water, this effect probably adds about half a torso-length to their final height—and less if they're not able to make it all the way out.

The other effect we have to account for is the fact that a swimmer can continue kicking as they start to leave the water. When a swimmer is submerged and moving at top speed, the drag from the water is equal to the thrust they generate by kicking and ... whatever the gerund form of the verb is for the things your arms do while swimming. My first thought was "stroking," but it's definitely not that.

Anyway, once the jumping swimmer breaks the surface, the drag almost vanishes, but they can keep kicking for a few moments. To figure out how much energy this adds, you can multiply the thrust from kicking by the distance over which they're kicking after breaking the surface, since energy equals force times distance. The distance is most of a body length, or 1 to 1.5 meters. As for the force from kicking, random Google results for a search for lifeguard qualifications suggest that good swimmers might be able to carry 10 lbs over their heads for a short distance, which means they're generating a little more than 10 pounds-force (50+ N) of kicking thrust.

We can combine all these together into a big ol' equation:

\[ \text{Jump height}=\left(\frac{\tfrac{1}{2}\times\text{body mass}\times\left(\text{top speed}\right)^2+\text{kick force}\times\text{torso length}}{\text{Earth gravity}\times\text{body mass}}\right)+\left(\text{buoyancy correction} \right) \] footnote contains some detail on the math behind a dolphin jump. Calculating the height a swimmer can jump out of the water requires taking several different things into account, but the bottom line is that a normal swimmer on the Moon could probably launch themselves a full meter out of the water, and Michael Phelps may well be able to manage 2 or 3.

The numbers get even more exciting when we introduce fins.

Swimmers wearing fins can go substantially faster than regular swimmers without them (although the fastest swimmer wearing flippers will still lose to a runner, even if the runner is also wearing flippers and jumping over hurdles).

Champion finswimmers can go almost 3.2 m/s wearing a monofin, which is fast enough for some pretty impressive jumps—even on Earth. Data on swimfin top speeds and thrusts[4]This paper provides some sample data. suggest that on the Moon, a champion finswimmer could probably launch themselves as high as 4 or 5 meters into the air. In other words, on the Moon, you could conceivably do a high dive in reverse.

But it gets even better. A 2012 paper in PLoS ONE, titled Humans Running in Place on Water at Simulated Reduced Gravity, concluded that while humans can't run on the surface of water on Earth,[5]They actually provide a citation for this statement, which is delightful. they might just barely be able to do so on the Moon. (I highly recommend reading their paper, if only for the hilarious experimental setup illustration on page 2.)

Because of the reduced gravity on the Moon, the water would be launched upward more easily, just like the swimmers. The result would be larger waves and more flying droplets. In technical terms, a pool on the Moon would be more "splashy".[6]The SI unit of splashiness is the splashypant.

To avoid splashing all the water out, you'd want to design the deck so water drains quickly back into the pool. You could just make the rim higher, but then you'd spoil one of the key joys of a pool on the Moon—exiting via Slip 'N Slide:

I 100% support this idea. If we ever build a Moon base, I think we should absolutely build a big swimming pool there. Sure, sending a swimming pool's worth of water (135 horses) to the Moon's surface would be expensive.[7]If you decided to bundle a backyard pool into individual two-liter bottles, and sent them in 3,000 batches of 10 each via the startup Astrobotic, it would cost you $72 billion (according to their website's calculator). But on the other hand, this lunar base is going to have people on it, so you need to send some water anyway.[8]Sending a supply of water and a filter system is probably cheaper than sending a replacement astronaut every 3 or 4 days, although I encourage NASA to run the numbers on that to be sure.

And it's really not impossible. A large backyard swimming pool weighs about as much as four Apollo lunar landers. A next-generation[9](or, heck, previous-generation) heavy-lift rocket, like Boeing's NASA SLS or Elon Musk's SpaceX Falcon Heavy, would be able to deliver a good-sized pool to the Moon in not too many trips.

So maybe the next step, if you really want a swimming pool on the Moon, is to call Elon Musk and ask for a quote.

EFF has released its mobile app to help people join in important, timely struggles, but you can't get it for your Iphone or Ipad, because Apple insists that EFF use DRM, and this is contrary to everything it stands for. Read the rest

\o/

G-G the book - G-G on Facebook - G-G on Twitter

Married same-sex spouses of Florida state employees are now eligible for state coverage for health insurance and retirement benefits.

A court in Italy has, for the first time, recognized the legal status of a child born to a same-sex couple.

leavemealone6263:

thebloodyhale:

Indonesian Autumn Adder

Lies
That is a dragon

A judge has decided the state of Washington has the authority to bring a consumer protection lawsuit against a florist who refused to provide flowers for a same-sex couple's wedding.

Almost 1,400 gay and lesbian couples were issued marriage licenses in 28 of Florida's most-populous counties in the two days since a ban on same-sex marriage was lifted.

via http://www.tumblr.com/likes

… one of the problems with having shambling hordes of undead as minions is that their fingers occasionally fall off, which means tracking down typos in the XML they’ve been tasked with.

Part 2 here!

ETA: Here’s a bunch of articles that have come out since I wrote this piece that I concur with, so some of your vitriolic comments can be spread out to all of us at once:

On Satire – a response to the Charlie Hebdo attacks
Trolls and Martyrdom: Je Ne Suis Pas Charlie
Charlie Hebdo: Understanding is the least we owe the dead
Je Ne Suis Pas Charlie: On The Charlie Hebdo Massacre And Duelling Extremisms
Charlie Hebdo: This Attack Was Nothing To Do With Free Speech — It Was About War
Charlie Hebdo Is Heroic and Racist (I disagree with heroic but I understand what they’re getting at)
No, we’re not all Charlie Hebdo, nor should we be

So, I’m generally pretty anti-censorship. I mean fuck, I just worked on a porn where we gently poked fun at the new British porn content laws by enacting all of them in a playful, consensual space. I am a big fan of art, and using humour to hopefully make people think and change their minds.

That said, I do not believe that racist, homophobic language is satire. I think it’s abusive, and I think it punches down, harshly and often. And that was exactly what sold magazines for Charlie Hebdo.

France is kinda known for racism, particularly against Muslim folks, so I find it difficult to treat a magazine where that’s their primary “hook” to not be a reflection of widespread racist, xenophobic attitudes. I couldn’t believe it when I found myself agreeing with the Catholic League on anything, but yeah- Muslims have a right to be angry.

“Stephane Charbonnier, the paper’s publisher, was killed today in the slaughter. It is too bad that he didn’t understand the role he played in his tragic death. In 2012, when asked why he insults Muslims, he said, “Muhammad isn’t sacred to me.” Had he not been so narcissistic, he may still be alive. Muhammad isn’t sacred to me, either, but it would never occur to me to deliberately insult Muslims by trashing him.” – Bill from the Catholic League

Reminder, folks- there is no such thing as “just a joke”. Humour impacts how people treat others, especially marginalized people. From that humour study I feel I quote all the time:

“By making light of the expression of prejudice, disparagement humor communicates a message of tacit approval or tolerance of discrimination against members of the targeted group. Our theory proposes that the recipient must accept the disparagement humor for a shared norm of tolerance of discrimination to actually emerge. Furthermore, our research suggests that people high in prejudice are more likely to accept disparagement humor and thus perceive a norm of tolerance of discrimination in the immediate context. Finally, people high in prejudice are likely to use the activated normative standard as a source of self-regulation, or a guide for interpreting discriminatory events encountered in that context.”

Additionally I’m really struggling with this expectation of freedom of speech not being related to “freedom from the government prosecuting you”. Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom from consequences, after all. And supporting a massively racist magazine’s freedom to incite hatred seems pretty fucked up. You can’t look at the shit Charlie Hebdo printed, making fun of raped girls as welfare check grabbers, or depicting black women as monkeys, and tell me that it’s “just a joke” and they were fucking martyrs of free speech, here. I hate how many people are saying “terrorists can’t kill an idea“- an idea like sexism, racism, rape culture, and xenophobia. Thank goodness those ideas can live on! Phew! Otherwise what’s a journalist to do?!?!?!

I don’t think that shooting up the Charlie Hebdo office was ethically Right with a capital R, ok? But I do think it’s understandable (and I’m not alone). I think that after extended periods of police violence, if a protester attacks a cop, that’s pretty understandable too. Do I think that’s the best way to go about things? Not really, but I think to pretend that people being abused by people in power should just turn the other cheek or as those people in power to stop abusing them is the best method is fucking absurd. THAT DIDN’T EVEN WORK FOR JESUS.

ETA: OH MY GOD READERS

Saying that I understand why a culture that is being systematically and individually mistreated and ignored by the privileged in power may eventually spawn some folks who resort to violence doesn’t mean I condone that violence! It means I can see why decades of hurt, fear, and institutionalized abuse may lead to a violent reaction. Understanding is not supporting, it simply means I can connect the dots. Can you not?!?

What I find incredibly disappointing is that on my social media, I see a bunch of white people “standing up” for the “bravery” of a racist magazine to incite hatred against people of colour. I have seen next to nothing about the bombing of the NAACP by a white man on our own soil. I see anti-Muslim protests being started in Europe, and people calling for the genocide of Muslims on Twitter, but very little attention to the number of Muslims who condemned the violence.

It just makes me think about what gets justified under “freedom of speech”- Porn WikiLeaks outing sex workers legal names putting them at serious risk, or Gamergators doxxing women and threatening to rape and murder them, often graphically, or radical feminists claiming trans women are all rapists.

Is that really the hill you want to die on?

Gross.

It makes me sick to think that the people working for Charlie Hebdo got exactly what they wanted- the public riled up into violence against Muslims.

 

Or, what I did with my Wednesday evening.

He’s the hero Gotham deserves, but not the one it needs right meow. (via)

Frederick County, Maryland, Councilman Kirby Delauter on Saturday threatened the Frederick News-Post with a groundless lawsuit for using his name without his permission. The newspaper's editorial board responded on Tuesday with an article, titled "Kirby Delauter, Kirby Delauter, Kirby Delauter," naming him 29 times, including the headline and photo caption.

Here is an excerpt from the editorial:

Round about then, we wondered, if it’s not a joke, how should we now refer to Kirby Delauter if we can't use his name (Kirby Delauter)? Could we get away with an entire editorial of nothing but "Kirby Delauter" repeated over and over again -- Kirby Delauter, Kirby Delauter, Kirby Delauter? OK, imagine we agreed because of temporary madness or something funny in the water that week, how would we reference "Kirby Delauter" and do our job as journalists without running afoul of our lack of authorization?

And here is Kirby Delauter's original demand, which he posted on Facebook:

(The Frederick News-Post)

sexyboysandnerdythings:

sweetchainschocolates:

Pfft~ >u> We Heart It.

bahaha

So on the heels of my earlier piece, wherein I indicate that I feel rather strongly that the contributors to Charlie Hebdo consciously consented to creating controversy, including violent controversy, I have been asked why I hate freedom of speech, particularly as a pornographer.

Never mind that I fiercely support freedom of speech – and demonstrate that by critiquing Charlie Hebdo’s work, including by investigating the hate speech laws in France – but never mind.

Here’s the thing. I know very well that being a porn performer is a balancing act when it comes to freedom of speech (and I actually know that freedom of speech isn’t a black or white issue). Obscenity is not protected, after all, and with a long list of what’s obscene including fisting, squirting, spitting mouth to mouth, no male/male penetration, no trans people, etc, the sex I like to have is pretty obscene. And I like to have enjoyable sex on film, so I know freedom of speech is not going to save me if I’m hauled into court on obscenity charges. While I’ve been writing this I found out the porn I’ve been working on, showing acts banned in Britain by their censors, is also censored by our distributors here in the US. So we’ll print it ourselves.

Being a sex worker is the hill I have chosen to die on. By that I mean, I made a strategic choice that I care enough about sex worker rights and other sex workers to be willing to ride out the consequences of my actions. As a white, cis, middle class woman, too, I felt that for me it was a hill I could defend better than others with less privilege. It’s not a safe hill, by any means. I made the choice to be a sex worker and to be upfront about it knowing that the consequences could include being threatened, raped, arrested, deported, made homeless, made unemployable, alone and undefended. And it has led to a good number of those things – I have dealt with some serious and horrible threats to my life. Yet I dig my feet in and keep fighting, because for me, this is the stand I want to take, consequences be damned.

I know that it might harm me some day. I do what I can to minimize the impact on my family, on my lovers, on my friends. I also inform them when there’s a threat, and I take them very seriously. But thankfully, they, too, support me in this battle, and fight with me. It’s a choice we make consciously and together.

I support freedom of speech, but I do not feel that hate speech should be protected. I don’t feel that doxxing should be protected. Since the “freedom of speech” hill often seems to feel that you either have all freedoms or none, it’s not a hill I’m willing to die on. I don’t feel humans can be trusted with that level of responsibility when that “freedom of speech” has been used to defend racist incitements to violence, abuse of trans women, threatening the safety of women. I refuse to defend the freedom of speech of a magazine that felt making fun of raped children of colour was fair game, and yes, I will judge you for thinking that’s defendable.

Standing against rape culture, xenophobia, violence against women, and racism? THAT is a hill I will happily die on. So screw me.

Additionally:

The implication I’ve now seen more than once that a bunch of privileged white men who courted controversy gleefully being shot for that (and putting other, NONconsenting people in fatal danger) is *the same as a woman walking in public getting raped* disgusts and horrifies me. I think it is possible to say that being abusive to someone and utilizing your power and privilege to do so is an action that is likely to have reactionary consequences. I think to then imply that a woman walking in public deserves to get raped, or that the comparison is at all logical one, is completely absurd and suggests an alarming misunderstanding of how rape culture works.

To say that the contributors to Charlie Hebdo knew full well that they were putting their dick in a wasp’s nest is not the same as a woman walking down the street apparently knowing she’s going to get raped, unless you believe walking down the street is an action that incites violence, which I do not. I don’t think that the contributors at Charlie Hebdo “had it coming”, but I do feel that they were very aware that their actions caused violence in the past and might again and, as people with privilege, they had agency in their decision. To compare that to women being raped is offensive, illogical, and disgusting, and yes, I’m sideeying you for that.

I feel sorry especially for the Muslim police officer who died, and the bystanders who were injured.  I feel very sorry for other Muslims, who are now likely to have their homes and businesses and places of worship smashed up, their lives threatened, their ability to travel limited.

I do not feel sorry for people who put themselves *and others* at risk by being intentionally and consistently inflammatory and cruel. Because that’s the thing- sometimes your actions impact OTHER PEOPLE. Your freedom of speech affects and impacts other people. And the contributors to Charlie Hebdo apparently and selfishly didn’t give a fuck about that, or take any responsibility or accountability for that. So my empathy for them is rather limited. “But they insulted people equally!” I hear cried. You cannot offend people equally when there’s systematic imbalances of power and access.

I’ll just quote the White House when this issue came up in the past:

“We don’t question the right of something like this to be published,” Jay Carney, the White House press secretary, told reporters. “We just question the judgment behind the decision to publish it.”

Link: the artist is Eric Brunning of Vancouver's Adorned (via JWZ)

The 32-year old Tao Liu knows the city of Hefei like his backyard. Since 2005 he’s traveled up, down and across the city in Eastern China on his motorbike reading water meters for a local utilities company. The job was tedious, exhausting and unrewarding, until he picked up a camera.

For the past 3 years Liu has used his spare time to capture intimate, witty and humorous street photos of Hefei. “I like taking photos because I can hang around on the streets and capture an image when something interested me but was neglected by others,” Liu told the Global Times. “I want to remind people of the touching moments in life.” He was interviewed after his photos went viral on China’s social network Weibo.

Liu has no formal training in photography but cites Daido Moriyama – often referred to as “the father of street photography” – as a primary influence. “I found him [to be] a very focused photographer,” says Liu in an interview with TIME. “I chose my camera based on what he uses.” Liu’s photos, intentionally or not, seem to poke fun at things like commercialization and urbanization. Liu clearly has a knack, not only for being in the right place at the right time, but for a keen eye that spots charming, serendipitous scenes amongst the hustle and bustle of everyday life. You can keep up with him and his work on Lofter. All photos courtesy the photographer. (via Time)

KERPOW!

whosthewhatnow:

thefrogman:

There is also a death for the immortal jellyfish. He is very bored.

Artwork by Chris Gugliotti [webcomic | tumblr]

I drew another thing

Online, Retail | TN, USA

(I manage a customer service department for a company that sells aftermarket automotive accessories. We needed to confirm a shipping address to ship a product to a customer because the address that the customer entered during the online checkout process wasn’t coming up as valid in our system – so we called the customer for verification.)

Customer: “Hello?”

Rep: “Yes, ma’am, this is [Rep] from [Company] and we are needing to verify your shipping address because it’s unfortunately not coming up as valid.”

Customer: “Umm, what do ya’ll have down?”

Rep: *reads off address*

Customer: “Yeah, that’s it.”

(I had already googled the zip code provided and have now figured out the problem. The customer put in the state as Iowa but, to our disbelief, the address and Zip code links her to Ohio.)

Rep: “Ma’am, according to your Zip code you’re in Ohio and not Iowa.”

Customer: “Oh, no, that can’t be right. I’ve lived in Iowa for 10 years at least. Who are you to tell me where I do and don’t live anyway? I just want my stuff shipped! THIS IS A CHRISTMAS PRESENT AND YOU WILL RUIN MY CHRISTMAS IF I DON’T GET IT!”

(We have since pulled up Google maps and located her residence to be certain. We are positive that she really lives in Ohio and not Iowa since the address is still matching our search results and at this point everyone in the office is listening since the rep has graciously put her on speaker phone.)

Rep: “Okay, ma’am, just to double check…” *proceeds to describe the customers residence to the customer*

Customer: “Wow, that’s exactly what my house looks like. Ya’ll are some smart people! Where are ya’ll located?”

Rep: “Our office is in Tennessee, and where do you live again?”

Customer: “IOWA! Gosh what is so hard to understand about that?”

Rep: “I’m sorry ma’am. We’ve got this worked out and we are shipping your package today, to Iowa.” *but really to her confirmed address in Ohio*

(The rep finished up the phone call and hung up. We shipped the package and a few days later we called to confirm that the customer received her package. She did, in Ohio according to the UPS tracking number.)

Related:
Out Of State, Out Of Mind