Tea Bagging

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

I don't think I even need to comment on this. Holy fuck nuts. Laughing my ASS off.

Rallies

As an activist and progressive type and queer and everything else, I keep a deep dark secret. It stays inside of me and only my very closest friends know the truth. I put on a good face and pretend it's not true, but inside I feel the conflict to my core. The reality is this:

I hate rallies.

I know. As someone who wants to toss the Man around a little, who wants change and all sorts of other good things, I'm supposed to be all about large groups standing in the freezing cold and inspirational speeches and chanting and signs. I should love picket lines and dramatic displays and chaining myself to things. I should feel the energy, the burn, the drive, the power of the people!

I don't.

I really think that rallies are most often purely for the benefit of the people holding them. I rarely see any kind of change as a result of a rally. If anything, a successful rally is more often a sign that a change is about to happen. The success of a rally, its high attendance and large effect on public opinion, doesn't make the change, it just shows that it's imminent. A rally won't have high attendance or an effect on public opinion unless people are already leaning towards supporting its cause.

I do know that rallies are an important tool in a campaign. They can show that an idea has the support of lots and lots of people. There is power in numbers. I just get annoyed because too many times rallies are held in substitute for other kinds of activism. It's like "there's a war in Iraq that we disagree with, let's march on city hall and say we don't want unnecessary deaths," but that doesn't actually change the fact that we're at war.

If you've got a big goal, you've got to come at it from lots of directions and protesting isn't enough. We're still in Iraq after years and years of protests; it took a concerted effort from politicians working in countless ways to even get someone in power who wants to consider getting us out. You know, there were legislative actions, and lobbying actions, and opinion polls and public service announcements and whatever else. The rallies were relatively insignificant.

I do go to rallies when they're about a cause I support, but I always feel vaguely annoyed and fatalistically amused at the enthusiasm I see there. Yes, I do sometimes get caught up in the spirit, but mostly I'm just standing at the sides trying not to laugh and cry at the same time.

So this is it, me coming out of the closet as a rally skeptic. Shame, shame, and all of that, but eh, I'll be active in other ways, thank you.

National Freedom to Marry Day

Why would you ever want to tear someone's family apart? Why?


"Fidelity": Don't Divorce... from Courage Campaign on Vimeo.

Add your name to the petition begging the Supreme Court not to divorce thousands of families. Support rights. Spread love. Sign here.

Dan Savage on The Colbert Report

Alright, I have mixed feelings about Dan Savage. In case you don't know, he's an openly gay and partnered sex columnist for Seattle paper The Stranger.

On the one hand, he is hilarious as fuck. I've read his column frequently and he's really funny. He's great on some issues, like gay marriage and being understanding of people's kinks. He even gives some good advice sometimes.

On the other hand, I think he often strong arms issues that need a more sensitive treatment. I don't want to be a mushy female feminist (sigh, stupid stereotypes), but in his quest to always be funny, he sometimes becomes a bit misogynistic. He makes no secret of his distaste for women. I mean, "he's gay so whatever," but I think it does affect the quality of his advice.

That said, I absolutely LOVE his recent appearance on The Colbert Report. He is delightfully funny and I think he even made Colbert a little speechless. If you've been paying attention, you'll notice that he says something similar to what I did about the old folks who voted for Prop 8. (He's not as nice.) Makes me feel kind of vindicated.



Go you, Dan Savage.

Election

I just don't know what to say or feel about the election.

I'm so so so so so so so so so so so excited that Barack Obama won. I'm just speechless about it. He's the first black president and the first Democratic president I can remember taking office. I was alive when Clinton made it, but I was small and I don't remember it that well. I'm a young person; the only elections I remember well were ones where George W. Bush won. This has been such an experience for me, and I'm so happy he's our new president.

I just can't even express it. It's huge.

And then there's Proposition 8.

As of right now, it looks like it's going to pass in California, adding discrimination against gay people to our state constitution.

Which is just devastating. Devastating.

I can't even convey how awful it is. It feels like the state which I count on to take care of me, to be a home when so many other places will reject me for my sexual orientation and my "lifestyle," is rejecting me, too. I really did think that we'd be better, that we'd be more accepting, more fair than the rest of the country. It's so sad that it doesn't look like that's going to happen.

I have no idea what's next, where we go in fighting for the rights of queer people. It's so important. We are PEOPLE, we do not choose our orientation, it is a part of who we are and doesn't affect other people AT ALL. It is simple hatred and homophobia that lead to this kind of legislation.

I have so much more to say about this, about how sexism ties into homophobia and how ballot initiatives in California are problematic. Right now, though, I'm going to celebrate for Obama and cry for California and go to bed.

There's time for our next move in the morning.

P. S. Proposition K probably won't pass either, and I'm sad but not surprised. I saw the way the rhetoric was going, and it wasn't in favor of sex workers' rights. Also more on this soon.

No on Proposition 8!

If you live in California (especially if you read this blog), you probably already know that Proposition 8 on the ballot next week is a measure which will add a clause to the state constitution stipulating that marriage can only be between a man and a woman.

Because the May court ruling decided that a law banning gay marriage was unconstitutional, they're trying to change the constitution. Woo, putting discrimination in the document that defines us as a state. That's just great.

Shine Louise Houston of Pink and White Productions, a great lesbian porn company, is donating all of the proceeds from her popular Crash Pad Series to the No on Prop 8 campaign for one day, TODAY, October 30th.

Basically, if you're a fan of lesbian porn for any reason or you want equality as a general rule, get your butt over there and spend some money! It's really good porn, and it's for a good cause. Maybe you usually get your porn for free, but think of this as donating with a tasty bonus. Mm, porn for charity!

I also want to reiterate my support for Proposition K to decriminalize prostitution in San Francisco and make known my vehement opposition to Proposition 4, which would dangerously require minors to report abortions to their parents.

Below are a few good videos and links for more information on all of these ballot measures. A lot of bloggers have written very eloquently about these measures, so I will direct you to them instead of trying to reiterate what's already been said.

This post on sex worker blog Bound Not Gagged is a very thorough explanation of the arguments in favor of Proposition K. It's really long, but even just the beginning is helpful.

Here's a great post on Feministe explaining why Proposition 4 would put teens in danger if they don't feel they can report an abortion to their parents. I also explains why the so-called "bypass procedure" written into the law is completely unhelpful and would actually serve to put teens through more stress than "just" their unwanted pregnancy.

Here are a couple of fun videos about the anti-marriage-equality proposition, via Sugarbutch Chronicles.





Lastly, this video gives me goosebumps all over. I don't know how anyone could say this is wrong.


Vote! Vote, vote, vote, vote, vote!!!!!!!!!!!!!

San Francisco Prop K: Decrim for Prostitution

I know I've written about this before, but the election is getting closer and I want to bring it up again.

San Francisco Proposition K is on ballots this year to decriminalize prostitution in the city of San Francisco. The initiative will stop police from prosecuting prostitutes or their johns, making it much easier for sex workers to report crimes against them without fearing incarceration.

This is a huge step in respecting the rights and protecting the safety of these workers. Sex work happens everywhere and it is simply within the rights of consenting adults to exchange sex acts for money.

Prostitution is not always coerced nor does it always (as anti-prostitution activists keep trying to tell us) involve trafficking. Decriminalization, even just in progressive San Francisco, will hopefully be a step in changing the shockingly negative dialogue about the women, men, and people in between who sell sex. Maybe if we can respect them as human beings and laborers, we can help the sex workers who need it and start to break down the stigma against those who don't.

To learn more about the proposition, check out the official ballot write-up of it on page 153, the Yes on Prop K site, the other Yes on Prop K site, and the article on the proposition from the San Francisco Chronicle. Here's a video of Sadie Lune performing at the SF Museum of Modern Art in support of the proposition.

Porn vs. Erotica

I refuse to make a distinction between "erotica" and "porn."

If I see material that depicts something that could be sexy, I call it porn. I don't care whether or not its intent is to get people off. It could be "purely for artistic purposes." If it shows anything that's sexually explicit, I consider it porn.

I don't think we need to differentiate between what's sexy art and what's sexy but doesn't count as art. This creates a system where we value the art more and the non-art less. It's another way of saying that eroticism for its own sake is negative, and I think that's a big pile of hooey. I think something that's purely intended to cause orgasms can be beautiful, and something intended just for aesthetic beauty can be erotically titillating. I jill off to "erotic art" all the time.

The difference between the two terms is also heavily tied in with censorship. Material can be deemed obscene and banned if the government decides that it has no artistic merit. Creating a linguistic distinction between porn and erotica opens us up to this kind of censorship. If we've already labeled some things as "less than artistic," it's a small step for the government to label them obscene.

Now, I know that the word "pornography" comes from inauspicious roots. The Oxford English Dictionary defines the word as the following:

The explicit description or exhibition of sexual subjects or activity in literature, painting, films, etc., in a manner intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic feelings; printed or visual material containing this.

So it's true that the very definition of the word creates a distinction between aesthetically arousing and erotically arousing material.

You could argue that we should apply the term "erotica" to all sexually explicit material. This new word doesn't have the connotation of artlessness and baseness. Why not apply it without discrimination? That's a valid point. I just like the word "porn" better.

Porn came first. Before we started calling things "erotica" instead of "pornography," we didn't have a word for sexually explicit art that (supposedly) wasn't erotically thrilling. It's the creation of the new word that's given us a hierarchy. Now we're trying to decide which sex acts we can depict: which ones are "artistic," and which ones aren't. It's just another form of sexual elitism.

So let's just cut the bullshit and call it all porn. Just like there shouldn't be a scale of kink, we don't need a scale for the "artiness" of our sexual materials.

Tina Fey again, and This Weekend

Hey everyone. I know I've been terribly remiss this weekend with my posting. My best friend is in town from New York City, and I am just taking a personal weekend. It's been absolutely lovely, a whirlwind of too many substances and catching up and cuddling. I promise I'll do better again once she leaves on Wednesday.

In the meantime, here's another delicious tidbit from Tina Fey:

I Love Tina Fey

So, this has been up for a few days and a lot of you have probably seen it already. If you hadn't, though, here's Tina Fey as Sarah Palin. I don't need to say much else because you can see for yourself how funny and amazing she is.



And one more (not so timely) reason I adore her:



Because yeah, bitch is the new black. I like being a bitch and I should do it more often. I shall take a page from Tina Fey and let my bitchiness fly. :-D

San Francisco Prostitution Proposition

I just learned in the last few days that there will be a proposition on the San Francisco ballot this November to decriminalize prostitution.

I'm really happy to see this. I'm not an expert on prostitution, partly because I'm not a prostitute. I feel comfortable talking about stripping and criticizing that industry because I'm a part of it. Of course I can't speak for all strippers, but I do at least have some personal experience to draw from.

I do very strongly believe, though, that criminalization of prostitution is awful and stupid. It ties up needless amounts of money in punishing people (mostly women) who are simply trying to make a living. I won't call it a victimless crime because I know that's a controversial statement. Some would say that the prostitutes themselves are victims, and in cases where it's coerced (whether physically, culturally, financially, whatever) prostitution I agree. But that is not always. Some would say the clients are victims, and while I think that's a bit harder to argue, like I said I don't have the personal experience to draw from.

Criminalization also makes it really hard for prostitutes to report crimes committed against them. In a country where a judge will convict a rapist of "theft of services" after he and his buddies gang rape a prostitute at gunpoint, there needs to be a lot more protection for these workers. It's a travesty that we're not doing more to keep them safe. Decriminalization will make it easier for prostitutes to report crimes and hopefully make it harder to commit them in the first place by providing more sex worker support.

I know that I support decrim, but I'm not as sure about legalization. I'm curious what any of you think about that. I've heard a lot of support from the sex workers I know for decrim, but what would be the benefits of legalization, and the drawbacks? Opinions?

In any case, I am a San Francisco voter because I consider the Bay Area my home. So I'm voting yes on Proposition K. If you're a San Francisco voter, I hope you are too.

I Really Want Obama to Win

I just can't articulate it enough. He's so...much...better.

And I would've been happy with Hilary, too. I probably would have felt similarly, and been excited at the idea of a woman president. It's their policies that do it for me more than their sex, race, age, whatever.

But it is kind of fun to have young, hopeful Obama as a candidate. He started out in non-profits for Christ's sake, not running Daddy's friend's oil business into the ground. This is a man after my own heart. He works at making the world better. This is good.

And I pray that Americans aren't stupid enough to be taken in by the young, pretty, and female Palin. I mean, that's as important as the fact that Obama's got a pretty wife and he's kinda handsome. Palin is uuuuuultra conservative. She may be a woman, but she is not at all pro-woman. She's VERY pro-life. She's in favor of creationism. She'll continue this crusade against sexual health in America. She'll support the breaking down of GLBT rights. Noooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Oh yeah, and her 17-year-old daughter is pregnant. Because abstinence-only sex education WORKS. (Poor girl.)

And of course, McCain, who is the actual presidential candidate and the one that really matters, has not improved any for choosing her. He's just as bad when it comes to human rights for all citizens.

And I so very, very, very, very much want a president whose power doesn't make me fear for my rights every day. I said this to my friends when the Democrats took over the House. It's not that I think they're so great, it's just that having them in power makes me much less afraid. It's like a consistent threat has been removed.

I'm so hopeful and excited that Obama will win and the threat of a closed-minded, anti-feminist, anti-gay president will be gone for at least four years. I can't wait. Please vote! Please vote for him!

Representatives vs. Tokens

In thinking about tokenism, it occurs to me that this stems from our idea that one person can serve as a representative for a huge population of others like them. We elect representatives and those representatives are supposed to be capable of serving the needs of all their constituents. Because they were put into office by a majority, their actions are suppose to reflect everyone. (As though majority interests reflect everyone anyway.)

The same seems to go for academic conferences and social groups and community blogs and otherwise "diverse" groups. It happens all the time and is endlessly annoying for members of minority groups: one black person or one queer person or one woman or one trans person etc is invited to sit on a panel or speak at an event or participate in a group with the expectation that they'll be able to "cover" any issues pertaining to the minority they're a part of.

Race activists have been writing about tokenism for a long time. They explain that it's a problem because one black person (or latino or muslim or asian etc) cannot speak to the experiences of every person of their race. There is diversity within minority groups, and tokenism ignores this. It allows majority groups to feel that they're being inclusive when really they're just continuing to oppress most minority voices and only allowing one (usually one that's supportive of the group's interests) to come through.

I think this says something about the idea of representation in general. It is pretty foolish to think that any single person can accurately represent the interests of a diverse group of constituents. I don't think we should dismantle our government; theoretically I like the idea, but I don't have any better solutions so I just try and work within the system. I do think, though, that we should try to be more aware of the fact that representatives really don't represent. It's more than a little bullshit.