So... Congress can vote to end billions of funds for the less fortunate, "tighten our belts", lay off millions of government employees and crow in glee about it. But God forbid we move to 5 day mail service to save jobs, jobs, jobs and money?
In its latest bonehead move, Congress has voted to not allow the USPS to end Saturday delivery. Per Reuters, "the Postal Service has said that while it would not pick up or deliver first-class mail, magazines and direct mail, it would continue to deliver packages and pharmaceutical drugs on Saturdays."
The USPS, because of Congress' brilliance, is forced to fund pensions today for employees who haven't even been born yet. They've got a $16B deficit. Ending Saturday delivery would save the USPS $2B annually.
Look here, you dumbass Congresspeople.
Just because you're a bunch of stupid old technologically deficient blowhards who never heard of the "INTERNET" and "EMAIL", doesn't mean that the rest of the world doesn't know that ending Saturday delivery wouldn't be the apocolypse. The rest of the world does their banking online, gets and pays their bills online, gets their Netflix porn on their laptops, sends birthday cards and wedding invitations and RSVP to bar mitzvahs via Facebook (NOT that I'm bitter about that or anything).
Is it soooo important that you get your damn junk mail on Saturday? One more thing to recycle (oh wait - you don't believe in caring for the planet - never mind).
Are you that eager to bankrupt the USPS so that you can lay off more government workers and privatize yet another government agency in order to line the pockets of your rich fat-cat corporation buddies?
Oh. Never mind.
Friday, March 22, 2013
Monday, March 18, 2013
#Steubenville, Rape Culture, Devaluing Girls, and Raising Boys
The Steubenville verdict came down on Sunday, with both perpetrators being found “delinquent”, which in Ohio juvenile court is the equivalent of guilty. While I was satisfied with the verdict, the messaging that came out afterward left something to be desired.
First and foremost, the judge. He proclaimed it to be a serious offense, yet sentenced the convicted rapists to 1 and 2 years, including time served. To me, that was the equivalent of a slap on the wrist. Add in his statement about social media – this (case) being a lesson on how you record things on social media that are so prevalent today. In other words, if you’re going to rape, don’t be stupid enough to record it and post it on the internet.
Next, a statement by one of the convicted rapists: "I would truly like to apologize. No pictures should have been sent around, let alone have been taken."
In other words, I’m not sorry I did it, I’m sorry I took pictures of it. Oops. My bad.
CNN talked about how sad it was that these boys’ futures, once so bright, were now ruined. Really? HOW ABOUT THE VICTIM’S FUTURE??? And also? Once someone has been convicted of rape, they are rapists. And the victim isn’t the “accuser”, she is the victim. (Not that she wasn’t before either).
The victim-blaming and shaming in the media that proclaimed these good students, these football stars who had scholarship opportunities, these poor boys were convicted of raping a drunken 16-year-old girl. Putting the blame squarely on the victim. She was drunk? What do you expect? Boys will be boys and all.
All of these things make it easy for boys and men (and yes, women - hello CNN!) to excuse rape. To be apologists. To perpetuate a culture that doesn't proclaim rape wrong in every single instance. To allow legislators to claim that if a woman got pregnant she must have consented. Or allows them to introduce legislation protecting rapist’s rights and calling victims of rape “accusers”, while calling victims of other crimes “victims”. That has the media highlighting what could have been for the rapist instead of what could have been for the victim. That has a football coach claiming that “they’re going after our football program” when in fact, rapists were simply arrested and exposed. That allows our culture to put football programs ahead of crime. And makes grown men in teaching positions support rapists rather than victims.
Perhaps the most sad of all: this statement by a friend of the rapists, who stood by, recorded it, and did nothing. "It wasn't violent," he explained. "I didn't know what rape was."
Right there is a huge problem. There is a misconception in this country that rape always looks violent. Done by a stranger who pulls you into a back alley, beats you up, holds you at gunpoint, and “has sex” with you. And if you don't come out of the encounter with bruises between your thighs, a fat lip, a black eye, and a ripped vagina, then you weren't really raped.
While it sometimes happens this way (with the exception of the “has sex with you” part, which is NEVER the case in rape - rape is a crime of power, control & violence, not sex), more often rape is committed by someone the victim knows. Women are raped because they went out with a guy who then expects payment for his trouble. Because they wore skirts too short. Because they had a drink. Because they were out past dark. Because they flirted earlier. Because they changed their mind.
One thing my husband and I have always tried to teach our teenage boys (one now in college, one in high school) from a young age is that at any point, a girl can say no. And while it might be the hardest thing you think you've ever done, if she says no, then you must stop. Also, NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING, invites rape. Not being at a party. Not being your girlfriend for a year. Not being drunk. Not flirting and teasing you.
I hate that in this country we have to teach our girls how to avoid rape. I wish the same emphasis was placed on teaching boys and men not to rape. From day one, teach your boys that no at any time means no. That a lack of “yes” also means no. That being unable to express yourself (whether drunk, sleeping, or otherwise incapacitated – like having cerebral palsy) also means no.
I hope and pray that this message has come across clearly to my sons. I hope my sons never utter the words – “It wasn't violent. I didn't know it was rape.” And that they never stand on the sidelines and watch a girl, or anyone, be violated. That they never think a girl “deserved it”. That they understand that in the same way their bodies sometimes confuse them and they aren't quite sure what they want, and they experiment, girls do the same.
Teenagehood is a time of serious learning. And I don’t mean school. It’s a time when young men and women experiment with their feelings, learn about social norms, take those values that you've spent all those years teaching them and actually apply them to real life. They are learning about sexuality. So while they might feel like girls sometimes tease, it’s really that those girls are learning about their sexuality in the same way that boys do. By trial and error. By seeing how far they can go before they don’t feel right. By learning the effect that men and women have on each other.
And yes, sometimes it might feel like deliberate provocation to a teenage boy who is also learning about their bodies and the interactions between men and women. But even if it is perceived as such, the biggest lessons to come out of it all should be autonomy. Self control. And respect.
Our culture is one that devalues women in so many ways. We arrest a woman for breastfeeding on a bench in a mall while she sits under an advertisement showing a woman baring her breasts in sexy lingerie. We value cells more than we do the women within whom the cells are contained. We idolize shows on TV and ads in magazines that put women in skimpy outfits and portray that as the ideal, and then tell women who wear skimpy outfits that they are cheap sleazy whores who are asking to be raped.
Nobody asks to be raped. And Nothing. Nothing gives anyone the right to overpower another person and touch or penetrate them in any way without their explicit consent. And implied consent does not equal explicit consent.
DRUNKENNESS DOES NOT EQUAL IMPLIED OR EXPLICIT CONSENT.
SHORT SKIRTS DO NOT EQUAL IMPLIED OR EXPLICIT CONSENT.
BEING OUT AFTER DARK DOES NOT EQUAL IMPLIED OR EXPLICIT CONSENT.
GOING TO A PARTY DOES NOT EQUAL IMPLIED OR EXPLICIT CONSENT.
You know what else doesn't equal implied consent? If a girl had sex before. Or if a girl previously had sex with you or your friends. Last week, she consented. She is allowed to not consent today.
You know what else doesn't equal implied or explicit consent? Wearing a short skirt. Or coming home from your job on the bus at midnight. Or leaving your window open while you sleep in the middle of summer. Or going out to dinner with someone. Or anything else other than saying yes.
Parents. Teach your children – both boys and girls – what consent is and is not. In the same way that you teach them other values, teach them to value each other’s autonomy. Teach them their wants and desires are not superior to others.
Put them in the other person’s shoes.
If your son was falling down drunk at a party, after dark, while wearing tight jeans that show off his butt and a tight t-shirt that shows off those arm & chest muscles that he worked so hard on in football practice, would it be ok for someone to pull his pants down and fondle him or penetrate him with fingers, with a penis, with an object? No? You mean just because he’s drunk doesn’t mean that he deserves to be penetrated without his consent? Then why is it ok to do it to a girl?
And if that happened to your boy, would it be ok for others to stand by and watch and do nothing except to take video and pictures of the whole thing and laugh about it, and joke about peeing on him? And if those pictures and video were then posted all over the internet, and people from your town and other towns called him a whore? A bitch? A slut? Would it be ok for people who don’t know your son, and those who do, to shame him and say he deserved it?
And if that happened to your boy, would you want the media falling all over themselves to bemoan the lost future of the poor person(s) that violated him?
No? Then why is it ok to do it to a girl?
First and foremost, the judge. He proclaimed it to be a serious offense, yet sentenced the convicted rapists to 1 and 2 years, including time served. To me, that was the equivalent of a slap on the wrist. Add in his statement about social media – this (case) being a lesson on how you record things on social media that are so prevalent today. In other words, if you’re going to rape, don’t be stupid enough to record it and post it on the internet.
Next, a statement by one of the convicted rapists: "I would truly like to apologize. No pictures should have been sent around, let alone have been taken."
In other words, I’m not sorry I did it, I’m sorry I took pictures of it. Oops. My bad.
CNN talked about how sad it was that these boys’ futures, once so bright, were now ruined. Really? HOW ABOUT THE VICTIM’S FUTURE??? And also? Once someone has been convicted of rape, they are rapists. And the victim isn’t the “accuser”, she is the victim. (Not that she wasn’t before either).
The victim-blaming and shaming in the media that proclaimed these good students, these football stars who had scholarship opportunities, these poor boys were convicted of raping a drunken 16-year-old girl. Putting the blame squarely on the victim. She was drunk? What do you expect? Boys will be boys and all.
All of these things make it easy for boys and men (and yes, women - hello CNN!) to excuse rape. To be apologists. To perpetuate a culture that doesn't proclaim rape wrong in every single instance. To allow legislators to claim that if a woman got pregnant she must have consented. Or allows them to introduce legislation protecting rapist’s rights and calling victims of rape “accusers”, while calling victims of other crimes “victims”. That has the media highlighting what could have been for the rapist instead of what could have been for the victim. That has a football coach claiming that “they’re going after our football program” when in fact, rapists were simply arrested and exposed. That allows our culture to put football programs ahead of crime. And makes grown men in teaching positions support rapists rather than victims.
Perhaps the most sad of all: this statement by a friend of the rapists, who stood by, recorded it, and did nothing. "It wasn't violent," he explained. "I didn't know what rape was."
Right there is a huge problem. There is a misconception in this country that rape always looks violent. Done by a stranger who pulls you into a back alley, beats you up, holds you at gunpoint, and “has sex” with you. And if you don't come out of the encounter with bruises between your thighs, a fat lip, a black eye, and a ripped vagina, then you weren't really raped.
While it sometimes happens this way (with the exception of the “has sex with you” part, which is NEVER the case in rape - rape is a crime of power, control & violence, not sex), more often rape is committed by someone the victim knows. Women are raped because they went out with a guy who then expects payment for his trouble. Because they wore skirts too short. Because they had a drink. Because they were out past dark. Because they flirted earlier. Because they changed their mind.
One thing my husband and I have always tried to teach our teenage boys (one now in college, one in high school) from a young age is that at any point, a girl can say no. And while it might be the hardest thing you think you've ever done, if she says no, then you must stop. Also, NOTHING, and I mean NOTHING, invites rape. Not being at a party. Not being your girlfriend for a year. Not being drunk. Not flirting and teasing you.
I hate that in this country we have to teach our girls how to avoid rape. I wish the same emphasis was placed on teaching boys and men not to rape. From day one, teach your boys that no at any time means no. That a lack of “yes” also means no. That being unable to express yourself (whether drunk, sleeping, or otherwise incapacitated – like having cerebral palsy) also means no.
I hope and pray that this message has come across clearly to my sons. I hope my sons never utter the words – “It wasn't violent. I didn't know it was rape.” And that they never stand on the sidelines and watch a girl, or anyone, be violated. That they never think a girl “deserved it”. That they understand that in the same way their bodies sometimes confuse them and they aren't quite sure what they want, and they experiment, girls do the same.
Teenagehood is a time of serious learning. And I don’t mean school. It’s a time when young men and women experiment with their feelings, learn about social norms, take those values that you've spent all those years teaching them and actually apply them to real life. They are learning about sexuality. So while they might feel like girls sometimes tease, it’s really that those girls are learning about their sexuality in the same way that boys do. By trial and error. By seeing how far they can go before they don’t feel right. By learning the effect that men and women have on each other.
And yes, sometimes it might feel like deliberate provocation to a teenage boy who is also learning about their bodies and the interactions between men and women. But even if it is perceived as such, the biggest lessons to come out of it all should be autonomy. Self control. And respect.
Our culture is one that devalues women in so many ways. We arrest a woman for breastfeeding on a bench in a mall while she sits under an advertisement showing a woman baring her breasts in sexy lingerie. We value cells more than we do the women within whom the cells are contained. We idolize shows on TV and ads in magazines that put women in skimpy outfits and portray that as the ideal, and then tell women who wear skimpy outfits that they are cheap sleazy whores who are asking to be raped.
Nobody asks to be raped. And Nothing. Nothing gives anyone the right to overpower another person and touch or penetrate them in any way without their explicit consent. And implied consent does not equal explicit consent.
DRUNKENNESS DOES NOT EQUAL IMPLIED OR EXPLICIT CONSENT.
SHORT SKIRTS DO NOT EQUAL IMPLIED OR EXPLICIT CONSENT.
BEING OUT AFTER DARK DOES NOT EQUAL IMPLIED OR EXPLICIT CONSENT.
GOING TO A PARTY DOES NOT EQUAL IMPLIED OR EXPLICIT CONSENT.
You know what else doesn't equal implied consent? If a girl had sex before. Or if a girl previously had sex with you or your friends. Last week, she consented. She is allowed to not consent today.
You know what else doesn't equal implied or explicit consent? Wearing a short skirt. Or coming home from your job on the bus at midnight. Or leaving your window open while you sleep in the middle of summer. Or going out to dinner with someone. Or anything else other than saying yes.
Parents. Teach your children – both boys and girls – what consent is and is not. In the same way that you teach them other values, teach them to value each other’s autonomy. Teach them their wants and desires are not superior to others.
Put them in the other person’s shoes.
If your son was falling down drunk at a party, after dark, while wearing tight jeans that show off his butt and a tight t-shirt that shows off those arm & chest muscles that he worked so hard on in football practice, would it be ok for someone to pull his pants down and fondle him or penetrate him with fingers, with a penis, with an object? No? You mean just because he’s drunk doesn’t mean that he deserves to be penetrated without his consent? Then why is it ok to do it to a girl?
And if that happened to your boy, would it be ok for others to stand by and watch and do nothing except to take video and pictures of the whole thing and laugh about it, and joke about peeing on him? And if those pictures and video were then posted all over the internet, and people from your town and other towns called him a whore? A bitch? A slut? Would it be ok for people who don’t know your son, and those who do, to shame him and say he deserved it?
And if that happened to your boy, would you want the media falling all over themselves to bemoan the lost future of the poor person(s) that violated him?
No? Then why is it ok to do it to a girl?
Saturday, March 16, 2013
Quote(s) of the day: How come you guys call us racist? Oh, and sexist?
"For what? For feeding him and housing him?"
~CPAC participant Scott Terry, in response to a speaker saying that Frederick Douglass wrote a letter forgiving his slavemaster
He then went on to complain, "Why can't we just have segregation?"
According to ThinkProgress,
CPAC is fast becoming mainstream Republican. While it also includes the crazies like Sarah Palin and Donald Trump, the (losing) Republican candidate for President and Vice-President (a prominent Congressional Republican) and several sitting Senators and Congressmen spoke, as well as several names being bandied about for 2016. Speakers included Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, Wayne LaCrazysauce, Ted Cruz (who Dianne Feinstein took to school yesterday), sitting WI governor Scott Walker, and Jeb Bush.
Republicans are forever complaining that they are labeled as racist. And deny that they believe women are second class citizens. When such prominent politicians as these don't denounce this type of rhetoric, they implicitly (and frequently explicitly) condone it.
So Republicans, stop with the "You're putting words in our mouths" and the "There is no war on women" and the "We aren't racist! Some of my best friends are black!" and the "Liberal media boohoo!" because you're lying sacks of dog doo.
~CPAC participant Scott Terry, in response to a speaker saying that Frederick Douglass wrote a letter forgiving his slavemaster
He then went on to complain, "Why can't we just have segregation?"
According to ThinkProgress,
...when asked if he’d accept a society where African-Americans were permanently subservient to whites, he said “I’d be fine with that.” He also claimed that African-Americans “should be allowed to vote in Africa,” and that “all the Tea Parties” were concerned with the same racial problems that he was.
At one point, a woman challenged him on the Republican Party’s roots, to which Terry responded, “I didn’t know the legacy of the Republican Party included women correcting men in public.”
CPAC is fast becoming mainstream Republican. While it also includes the crazies like Sarah Palin and Donald Trump, the (losing) Republican candidate for President and Vice-President (a prominent Congressional Republican) and several sitting Senators and Congressmen spoke, as well as several names being bandied about for 2016. Speakers included Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, Wayne LaCrazysauce, Ted Cruz (who Dianne Feinstein took to school yesterday), sitting WI governor Scott Walker, and Jeb Bush.
Republicans are forever complaining that they are labeled as racist. And deny that they believe women are second class citizens. When such prominent politicians as these don't denounce this type of rhetoric, they implicitly (and frequently explicitly) condone it.
So Republicans, stop with the "You're putting words in our mouths" and the "There is no war on women" and the "We aren't racist! Some of my best friends are black!" and the "Liberal media boohoo!" because you're lying sacks of dog doo.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)