Rebel Yelling- The Latest Installment of Awesome

Matthew Jarzen's latest piece up at the UNLV site totes rocked my socks. Here the I-Man and I do a dramatic reading: See original article: Modern liberalism is repackaged totalitarianism (Matthew Jarzen, UNLV Rebel Yell).

I continue to do a great job writing final papers

La dee da, I should be working, but instead I'm drinking one of the Rock Star Juiced (Guava) 24 oz. cans that Thrift Store Champion bought a flat of at Big Lots! and playing on the internet. I am working on which direction to take my paper on Walter Benjamin and the democratization of the means of cultural production. I wanted to do something with that awesome Pin-Up Grrrls book I read this summer, and got a bunch of books about feminism and art blah blah blah. But I was rereading The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction last night and all I could think about was YouTube. And I said to myself, "I do not want to write a YouTube paper. Also, I'd have to restart all my research. And it would have to be like recent journal articles, etc., which are harder to find than books in a cursory search." So here I am trying to figure out where to go with it and just fucking around on the internet instead of reading more. Annnyway, enough about my working block. I just have to have, like, an outline for tomorrow or whatevs. So, links! -Amanda talks about an Evangelical Christian who realizes that maybe morality doesn't have to be based on specific belief in one specific version of god. This is a minister who traces his spiritual journey in a segment of the always-awesome This American Life. Amanda says:

What made the whole thing even more fascinating was that Pearson got all these letters from people who conceded outright that the existence of a hell where the majority of people go was a moral outrage, but who nonetheless suggested that he best comply with god’s wishes. God, in other words, is a terrorist holding a gun to people’s heads. And, more importantly, if you’re moral you do everything in your power to save other people from the wrath of this evil, torturous being by spreading the, um, Good News. Their entire system relies on the belief that people are more, not less, moral than god. Jesus’ role in this is that he became a man, and thus basically adopted some of man’s morality, and he pleads with the vicious, nasty, vindictive god to show a little mercy to his creation.

Obviously, most Christians would deny that this is what they really believe, but thinking about it in these terms is intriguing and ultimately kind of revealing about how much of religion is based on fear. Christian minister finds morality doesn't come from god. (Pandagon) -There's a buzz going around the feministernets (yes, I just made that up) about some bullshit article that I am too lazy to find and actually read and link to that basically blames third-wave feminism for increases in binge drinking among young women. Blah blah blah, women having equal rights and feeling freer to do shit that guys have always done is BAD. I'm not going to pretend that my frequent excessive drinking is healthy or something, I know it's not, but I also know that I can get away with it right now (I'm young, a grad student, live in a small town and have nothing better to do, etc.). I also won't claim that I don't enjoy feeling like somewhat of a badass when I down straight liquor or can match guys twice my size drink-for-drink. I also won't pretend that I don't also use alcohol to lower inhibitions and enjoy casual hook-ups. I realize mixing sex and alcohol can be problematic, but I think the fact that it is so common is largely due to restrictive cultural conceptions of female sexuality that are at odds with physical reality. Getting drunk is fun. Having sex is fun. Often hooking up is far easier when you're both drunk. So what? I'm in my fucking twenties. Is this not the time to sow my wild oats? Why has no one in the past been concerned about young (or old, or any) men and their oats, but get all pearl-clutchy when it comes to girls doing it to? I WANT MY FUCKING WILD OATS AND I WILL SOW THEM ALL I WANT. I'm a feminist. I also drink a lot. I have no bullshit ideas that drunkenness is somehow a "feminist" state. Duh. Just because feminism has allowed for women to "behave badly" without the same kind of social consequences that would have come with them in the past doesn't mean everything I do makes some sort of feminist statement. I'm fucking sick of fucking pseudo-feminist or anti-feminist or just generally "concerned" journalists and pundits blaming feminism for anything they believe is wrong with society, without actually examining the roots of certain phenomena. As if just because our coping strategies have changed means that we live in a fucking post-patriarchy. Assholes. Anyway, there are a lot of good posts out there (see Jezebel, Feministing, etc.), but I particularly enjoyed Jill's discussion: Chicks Drink. Blame Feminism. (Feministe) -This has been bouncing around the 'webs, and if you haven't seen it yet, it's fucking awesome. Jack Black as Jesus as the best idea ever. Also, perennial faves Allison Janney, Andy Richter, Margaret Cho, and that guy who plays Darrell on The Office, as well as NPH!

"Prop 8 - The Musical" starring Jack Black, John C. Reilly, and many more... by Jack Black

Purity balls: creepy patriarchal fad or CREEPIEST patriarchal fad?

Random aside: I just spilled chicken salad all over the tank top I've been wearing since yesterday. I am a classy lady. No doubt about that.

Lesbian princess orgies totally don't break chastity vows, right?

If you see these words written, stay away: "culture war," "hook-up culture," "personal responsibility," "purity," etc.

But anyway, purity balls.* If you haven't heard about them yet, then you can go ahead and thank The Sexy Gay Jesus for sparing you thus far. But I am not as merciful as SGJesus. Because they are gross. And they need to stop. People write these articles in mainstream magazines and newspapers about these creepy, sex-obsessed patriarchs and try not to be all "judge-y," when really we should all be totally judge-y all the time about men who think they own their daughters' reproductive organs so literally that they have the ability and the "God-given" right to give their little girls' pussies away to another man on their wedding day. Ew. So these guys dress up in suits and take their daughters (some of whom are far too young to even understand what a chastity pledge really means) to an anti-sex prom, vowing to "protect" the girls' purity, and we're supposed to believe that when the girls promise to abstain until marriage, they're really making a free and fully-informed choice. Right.

And can I just say something? I always thought the idea of "daddy-daughter dates" was kind of creepy. Sure, I like(d) doing stuff with my dad, but can we keep explicitly romantic concepts away from said stuff? I'm really glad my family wasn't into the "your first date will be with your dad when you turn 16" shit like some other Mormon families I knew. And guess what? I didn't turn into a big whore (until later, obvs). I didn't really date until college, and barely even kissed a boy until a month into that relationship. I was nineteen. And a half. I know the Mormon/sex/fear thing had something to do with my reluctance to date before that, but most of it was due to the fact that the opportunity never presented itself and I was having way too much fun hanging out with my girl friends to ever start feeling that frustrated about not having a boyfriend. Of course, I am a big trashy whore now. As you know. So we should probably go ahead and blame my dad for not properly guarding my 24 year-old uterus from teh evil unmarried penis. And also, I need to take a shower now that certain words (guess which ones) were used in the same sentence.

Jeff Fecke, the father of a daughter, points out what should be an obvious red flag:

This is everything that is wrong with the “purity” movement in a nutshell: it’s incestuous. And not incestuous in that a small number of people seem to run the whole movement — though that is part of it — but incestuous in that it actively encourages incest. It gives fathers an inappropriate level of control of their daughter’s sexuality. Like, way inappropriate.

Uh, yeah.

Also, in a description of the ceremony itself: "Then Randy and his friend Kevin Moore stand in front of the cross, holding up two large swords, points crossed." I feel like there's something... I don't know, meaningful about that type of imagery. Can't quite put my finger on it. But if I did put my finger on it, I'd have to give back my chintzy chastity ring. Ha! Haha! Hahaha! Gross. And the word "purity," when applied to human beings, smacks of eugenics or something. It should only be used when discussing chocolate, precious metals, and/or snobby musical choices.

TBogg, another non-creepy dad, calls out these purity freaks for making sex into this scary thing that is totally going to RUIN YOUR LIFE blah blah blah bad parenting, because most of these girls are going to have premarital sex anyway, but they'll be too afraid to even look into contraception:

And if you think a vow of chastity made by a twelve year-old during a farcical virgin pageant in a Holiday Inn ballroom is going to hold up against the tidal wave of teenage hormones to come, well, you're a bigger fucking idiot than even your kids think you are.

Pretty much.



*"The Pursuit of Teen Girl Purity"?! Ehhhhh.

Is there a Plugger crisis?!

I was just thinking,"It's been so long since I senselessly ranted about the latest Gary Brookins/reader-submitted anti-elitist human/animal hybrid horror that promotes prescription drug abuse on your friendly neighborhood comics page. I should find a recent shitty panel and ramble about how much I hate it." So, like I usually do, I just Googled "Pluggers," and what should come up under the usual "Pluggerville" or "Pluggers.com" but this:



WTF?! I like how it says, "Where did Pluggers.com go?" and then proceeds to not answer the question. Apparently you can still read it online, but I am (vaguely) concerned about this latest turn of events. The panels from yesterday and today are totally reruns! Yesterday's identifies it as a "classic," but there is no mention of a source at all on today's. Suspicious. Is Chief Plugger Gary Brookins just on vacation? Do Pluggers take vacations, or is that too French-y? I highly doubt America's working-class, comics-reading, cheap, poor, curmudgeonly, old, drug-addicted-types have run out of bad puns, so why two days in a row of shitty reruns? What is the problem?

Normally, the repeats wouldn't really catch my eye, as the basis of every edition of Pluggers is the same poorly-told joke over and over again, but with the disappearance of the website with no explanation worries me. Did they shut it down due to low traffic? I know real-life Pluggers probably haven't figured out the internet yet--SEE: the fact that Pluggers submissions should be sent to an AOL address--so maybe it just wasn't worth the work to keep it going. I don't know, guys, I would be really pretty sad to see Pluggers disappear from the comics page forever. Sure, I hate other comics, but none with the combination of tenderness and rage I feel for the horrifying anthropomorphized blue collar beasts featured by Brookins. For now, I will keep my eye out for any Pluggers developments. God only knows what life would be like without it to mock and berate.

Welcome to the Land of Linkin'

Yes, those are Abraham Lincoln lollipops. I bet they taste like freedom!


I've got a big batch of 'em, so I'll try and just pick a few faves for the masses. First, a few apropos the recent holiday:

-My pal Josh was apparently perturbed at my tendency to just sit around on the porch and let other people (usually guys) do all the grilling.* Listen, I like eating meat if other people make it, but I am really fucking lazy and prefer to spend my holidays sitting around and drinking. And yes, I do enjoy baking. Because I would pretty much always rather have a delicious cookie than a hamburger. Well, I'd pretty much rather have a delicious cookie than anything else. And I make damn delicious cookies. Which is why Ka$h is always worried about me getting scurvy. Not scurvy, my friend, just $1000 worth of fillings. Anyway, Josh muses on the cooking world's most pronounced gender divide. Girls don't grill, boys don't bake. (Embrace Your Inner Nerd)

-Pogie (a former mentor of our old friend The Pretentious Ex-Boyfriend) writes a lovely post on how liberals express their patriotism, even if they don't love Toby Keith. Choice quote: "Liberal criticism of our nation’s policies is often mistaken or mischaracterized by the Right as hatred of America, or a desire to leave. Nothing could be further from the truth." Makes me want to go home and watch some West Wing. Liberals Love the United States Too. (Intelligent Discontent)

More gender ranting:

Lame-o conservative columnist Kathleen Parker (will not link) confuses concern for the over-sexualization of children (legit) with victim-blaming (so not). Two of my favorite bloggers respond accordingly:

-Jeff Fecke. Choice quote:

“Can I touch you?”

“No.”

“Okay.”

Really, what’s hard to understand about that?

Extra points for the title: Begone, Wanton Trollops! (Blog of the Moderate Left, Shakesville)

-Amanda Marcotte. Choice quote:

What’s the sound of two strawmen mating? Probably the sound of them leaping up and singing in unison “If I Only Had Anatomically Correct Bits Under These Raggedy Pants”.

That tune's going to hit number one on the charts, you'll see! Save the stupid, cruel males. (Pandagon)

And just one more for now:

-I knew I was doing the right thing when I decided to stick with my regular health coverage, eschewing that complicated (and kinda pricey-sounding) health savings account bullshit. Ezra's got my back on that one: it costs more for the ladies. Why do health insurers hate women? (Ezra Klein at the American Prospect)




*Thanks for stepping up on the 4th, Scott! I was afraid I might have to actually touch the grill, possibly causing me to cut down on my alcohol consumption.

Creepy Indian man rearends car

Sometimes crappy writing inspires inside jokes. See: Pretty Indian girl wins contest.

Joe Soucheray still unspeakably lame. Also, kinda racist.

Yeah, he went there.

Remember Joe Soucheray? You don't? Oh, well, you're lucky. Unfortunately, we have a subscription to The Pioneer Press and his bullshit gets delivered to our front door a couple times a week. Usually I skip it in favor of everything found in the Life section (Reading the actual news is depressing/the stories are obsolete by the time I get home from work in the afternoon. And besides, that is what the internet at work is for.). Oh, but yesterday I had the pleasure of spotting the Doucheray's latest journalistic gem: A little dap will do it for Obama and his wife. I'll let you in on some nuggets so you don't actually have to go read it:

And then, here in Minnesota, in the middle of a hockey rink, Barack and Michelle gave each other a little dap.

That's what it's called when you and another person bump fists. I know this because I am a big fan of Sharon Jones and the Dap Kings* and I have also looked up the etymology of the word, which pundits around the country would have been well advised to do because they called it a fist bump in their analysis.

A few observations: I thought maybe "dap" was a word Joe Soucheray had maybe overheard once on the teevee and was misusing. But I investigated his claims, and apparently the fist bump is the simplest form of dap. Right, but it's still a fist bump. See the ultimate authority for a proper definition, friend. I think it's pretty obvious that Joe Soucheray should not try and expound on the technicalities or intricacies of popular cultural phenomena, am I right? I agree with him (thought it pains me to type those words) that the moment was cool. Also, ADORABLE. They are both so fucking hot and they are obviously totally still way into each other. But here's the deal: Joe Soucheray must be one of those "colorblind" conservatives, because he manages to never mention the fact that the fist bump, though co-opted into mainstream white/youth culture, is a black thing. Culturally. Historically. I think he's seriously remiss in omitting that from his "etymology." Because I'm a-just sayin', that if the Clintons fist-bumped it would look totally staged and tacky and, dare I say, minstrel-y. Not just because they're white, but because they're my parents' age. That would not do. Anecdote: I remember being confused by the fist presented to me by one of the two black members of my junior high choir. Though I quickly figured out how to pound, she did (justifiably) laugh at me in the meantime.

And now I wonder, parenthetically, am I going down some sort of weird Jimmy the Greek road because I am assigning to certain people a special ability to capture coordination and grace?

Not just "certain" people, asshole. The problem lies with judgments about certain GROUPS of people. Good thing there's not, like, a stereotype floating around in our cultural consciousness or anything about stuff like this.

Whatever, this guy has a good analysis of the whole thing (esp. regarding youth appeal). Joe Soucheray would probably tell me I'm racist because I think it's okay for the black guy.** Joe Soucheray would be wrong. I'm not saying I'm not racist (though I don't want to be), but I don't believe any of that "reverse racism" bullshit conservative bigots are always spouting off about. Someone like Soucheray trying to talk about a dap/fist bump as if it's something he knows all about is just laughable. And I say this as someone who is both white and uncool: it's embarrassing when older people try to use the lingo and discuss what the cool kids are doing. Okay?

Oh, and this:

If these two make it to the White House, I know who they should book for the dance, and it's not Hootie and the Blowfish or Bruce Springsteen, if you know what I mean.

I think he means BLACK MUSICIANS.*** Don't get me wrong, Sharon Jones and the Dap-Kings totally rock my socks, but seriously, Joe Soucheray. I guess they're an acceptable compromise for him, because he's really not a fan of hip-hop (WARNING: link contains blatantly racist bullshit).



*"I'm not a racist, some of my best CDs are black!"

**I'm not going to lie, I do think he knows what he's talking about because he's black, young-ish (I'm going on the picture and the fact that he is obviously younger than the Doucheray), and not an asshole. And because he knows what he's talking about.

***I know that Hootie guy is black, but whatever.

MoDo is a no-go*

Mauren Dowd's writing gets excoriated on the internet enough for me to know not to bother reading her most of the time. However, her latest column is particularly heinous. The Pulitzer Prize-winning writer christened The World's Most Obnoxious Feminist Concern Troll by some of the awesome ladies of Shakesville, needs her own Bingo game. I mostly only read her column when someone else is bashing it, and though I think this makes me pretty familiar with the terms she uses most, I am not the person to make a MoDo Bingo board. However, I do suspect she's gone the Ann M. Martin "select some key phrases, push a button, and out comes a new column/BSC book." I'm just going to list a few of the obnoxious words and phrases she used in yesterday's column, "She's Still Here!" and suggest that someone break her "Op-Ed-O-Matic" before somebody gets seriously injured:

• "Oh, Bambi" -- directed to Barack Obama. Patronizing much?
• "...hadn’t met the Clintons." Even a casual observer realizes that MoDo has an unhealthy obsession. She later describes the Clintons and/or the campaign as "rapacious," "self-pitying," "devilish,"** "vociferous"
• "Barry has been trying to shake off Hillary and pivot for quite a long time now, but she has managed to keep her teeth in his ankle and raise serious doubts about his potency." WTF?!! This is not only a shitty metaphor, but I love the she is able to fit in both basketball and sexual references.
• "Rampaging feminists" re: Geraldine Ferraro. Fuck you, Maureen Dowd.
• "henpecked," "emasculate" in reference to Hillary Clinton and the aforementioned rampaging feminists. I hereby declare the word "emasculate" to be one of the STUPIDEST AND MOST OFFENSIVE WORDS EVER. As if gender is something someone can take from someone else. Emasculate is dead to me. Besides, MoDo calling Obama "Bambi" and commenting on his "potency" does far more to *insert word that is dead to me* him than anything Clinton has done.

Anyway, it's a terrible column. She's not funny, or clever, or any good at being anything but a huge jackass. Maureen Dowd continues to suck. And this is why I don't read her column. *This is almost stupid enough to be one of her headlines. **Who is she, Michael Jackson?

Local columnist finally too annoying to ignore

Please stop funding this man's career.

Dear Joe Soucheray,*

I hate you. Your column sucks. As the mouthpiece of the "You Kids Get Off My Lawn" demographic, your writing is pretty much Pluggers in a "political commentary"-type forum. And I thought nothing could be worse than Pluggers. Well, I thought wrong. I've been able to pretend you don't exist ever since you pissed me off by claiming we didn't need to spend that much tax money and/or time to replace the 35W bridge.** WHATEVER. But that was until yesterday. Yesterday I saw this headline sneering at me: "Hillary's coffee cup runneth over -- with humiliation."

First sentence:

When at last they shoot a large tranquilizer dart into her behind and drag her off the national stage, the lasting memory I will have of Hillary Clinton is Hillary at the coffee machine.

TRANQUILIZER DART?!!*** Ahem. Hillary Clinton is apparently a large, rampaging wild animal that must be "put down" to avoid causing damage to regular Americans. Yep, regular Americans who drink crappy gas station coffee. I see that one of the neighbor kids showed you how to use the "YouToobz" and you were able to see a video of her being confused by an automatic coffee machine. As a non-coffee drinker, I have to say that whenever I have to use one of those machines to fill up some hot chocolate or something, I definitely have to read the directions and look around for the lids and sometimes fuck it up and spill a little. And I don't even have the national press corps recording my every clumsy move. It could be that my blonde female compatriot and I are just DUMB, but I imagine you and your "traditional values"-promoting friends in the media are trying to promote the idea that she's "out of touch" and "elite." Can I just say something? Wait, why did I ask your permission? I'm going to say something: WHO GIVES A FUCK? You make a big deal about how she showed up at a gas station for some (admittedly dumb) publicity stunt about gas taxes or whatever, and not only did you accuse her of only "pretend[ing] to understand how gas gets pumped," but you also make a big show of calling out that

...[B]ehind her was the large carbon footprint of six Suburbans full of security people, two squad cars and a news van with the press pool and the photographers.

Ahem. Again. God, I must have something in my throat. I'm just going to point out a few things here. Hillary Clinton doesn't "pretend" to know how gas is pumped. I am 100% POSITIVE that at one time, Hillary Clinton regularly pumped her own gas. It's not like she's from Oregon. Oh, and I'm sure that condescending tone has NOTHING to do with her gender. NOTHING AT ALL. (More on this later, obvs.) Also, it is obvious to me that you, Joe Soucheray, don't give a fuck about anybody's carbon footprint and you're just trying to make fun of liberal environmentalists. We are aware that this was a public event. Did you know that Hillary Clinton is not only a presidential candidate and a United States Senator, but also the former First Lady?!!! Do you know that that means she gets, like, super-extra-awesome Secret Service service, whether she wants it or not? So, even if she wanted to pop down to the SA for some of their gourmet roast every morning, it might be too much of a hassle. It might actually make sense for someone to get her coffee for her. And sometimes it might even be SLIGHTLY classier than gas station coffee.

And another thing, you accuse Hillary Clinton with the ol' "inauthentic" chestnut by pointing out that the ridiculous truck bed she gave a speech from was a restored classic pick-up that WASN'T EVEN DIRTY. I'm not saying the whole truck thing was a good idea, it was stupid. Obviously. But The Sexy Gay Jesus and I both know that if she had pulled out a "real workingman's" truck with mud all over it, you would have accused her of pandering even more. Going on about her "pantsuits,"**** and how she's encroaching on the GARAGE, where only men, working men, dirty working men who pump their own gas and can use an automatic coffee machine blindfolded and with one grease-stained and calloused hand tied behind their backs belong.

But the most revealing moment came for me at the end of this week's column:

I liked her at that moment. She seemed so ultimately vulnerable.

When they come to get her with the dart or the net, I hope somebody takes care of her.

So you only like helpless little ladies. I get it; it's a misogynist thing. But Hillary's, like, totally PMS-ing and just WILL NOT get off the stage like a good girl. So you're not going to ask nicely anymore, you're just going to drug her against her will and drag her away like a sea turtle we can tag and track.***** But don't worry, Hillsy, we'll find you a nice lady friend to take care of you. Maybe she can show you which button to push on the coffee machine. Now, lest you accuse me of being a humorless feminist who is just LOOKING for misogyny in all the wrong places, I present to you:

EXHIBIT A: Your radio show's dictionary. Perhaps I will post on just this one day if I can stomach talking about you again.

EXHIBIT B: This not-so-subtly gender-based Hillary-bashing is part of a widespread misogynist backlash. See Shakesville's (now) 90-part series.

So, in closing: You may have called yourself an "amateur psychiatrist" in this column, but in my heart, you're a professional douchebag. Still, always, and forever.

Love and vodka shots,

Lauren



*Or should I say DOUCHE-eray? Haha.

**I'm not going to lie, I kind of hope this (not-)recession turns into a depression and we totally bring back the Works Progress Administration and finally fucking reinvest in our crumbling infrastructure, not mention funding the arts. Also, I bet those working for the WPA would have to partake of Teh Dreaded Socialized Medicine! Of course, "FDR" was probably a dirty acronym in the Soucheray household growing up.

***Something I should not have to point out: Any time you make light of violence against an individual woman, even imagined violence, you are promoting violence against ALL women. It's called a SYSTEM OF OPPRESSION for a reason, and threats against one of us are used to subdue and control all of us. This is not up for debate. Unless you are an asshole. Which I suppose is why we're here in the first place.

****What is the media obsession with pantsuits? Men wear pantsuits all the time. But they're boys, and their outfits are the norm by which all other variations of clothing are measured, so they just get to have "suits." I mean, come on, do we make a big deal when women wear "skirt suits?" Maybe if a candidate started wearing a "tiger suit" or a "glow-in-the-dark swimsuit" on the campaign trail, we could start making a thing about it.

*****I actually think tracking animals with electronic devices or putting cameras on them and following them is really cool. For, like, educational purposes. Not cool for people.