Wednesday, January 30, 2008

To those who want to be my President:

I just sent this e-mail to Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, John Edwards, Mitt Romney, John McCain and Mike Huckabee. I'll keep y'all posted on the responses...


To those who want to be my President:

I'm officially undecided, so I planned to spend this evening going over each of your Web sites to determine which of you was closest to my own point of view. But I was interrupted.

A woman knocked on my door. She's in her 50s, pregnant by her estranged husband, who lives in the apartment building across the street from my house. He's unemployed, his only income what he makes from selling drugs. Janice had driven over out of desperation to get money to pay her electric bill and buy groceries. The man slapped her and told her that the $15 he'd given her earlier in the week was all she could expect from him.

She called the police to report the assault, his non-support and his drug activity. When Janice knocked on my door, it had been more than an hour since she called. I offered to call for her, and she told me I was better off not getting involved.

She finally left, not sure she'd have enough gas in her car to get home. I called the police; an hour later, still no one has come. (For those keeping track, that's two hours from the time the initial assault was reported.)

I've read each of your plans for America. They're all well and good. But I want to know what you would do to help Janice, and to help me, a tax-paying homeowner living across from what the Winston-Salem Police Department well knows is a hive of drug activity. I want to know what you, as President, would do to fix a situation where:

- A convicted felon with no legal income refuses to support the mother of his children,
-
A woman reporting a physical assault is ignored by the local police,
-
A homeowner reporting a neighborhood domestic dispute is also ignored,
-
Citizens don't report crimes because they know that no one will come to help them, and

- Incidents in some neighborhoods are taken more seriously than in others.

This is the kind of thing that my neighbors and I face on a daily basis. I've always been a firm believer in individual responsibility, and that government, especially Federal government, exists only to do what individuals cannot. But what happens when individuals do everything right, and their government still comes up short?

What do you say to women relying on the protection of the law, when that protection isn't there? What do you say to law-abiding homeowners with the misfortune of living on a street written off by law enforcement?

Your positions on the grand issues of the day matter, yes. But I'm a lot more interested in your answers to these small questions.

Thank you for your time.

Monday, January 28, 2008

WTF?, NOW NY?

When I stumbled across this (via Feministing), I thought it was a joke. I mean, it just seems like the kind of oversimplified - for lack of a better word, sorry - hysteria that characterizes the anti-feminist stereotype that we're all crazy screaming man-hating whack-jobs. Unfortunately, it's no bad parody.

The New York chapter of the National Organization for Women (NOW) really did issue this statement decrying Senator Ted Kennedy's "betrayal" of women by endorsing Barack Obama for the Democratic nomination.

Ugh, and more ugh. To echo the Feminsting post, this group does not speak for me. Nor, for that matter, does a 400-year-old senator from Massachusetts. I speak for me, and that's all.

I'm so sick and tired of the notion that all women, even all progressive women, are some monolithic entity that all think and feel and vote the same, and for the same reasons. It's patronizing, and it's just plain lazy. I expect this crap from the Chris Matthewses of the world, but NOW should know better.

Color me disappointed. And kinda pissed.

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Heath, I swear...

I was in a cold-medicine fog all yesterday afternoon, so it wasn't until about 8:30 or so went I went to check my e-mail and saw that Heath Ledger had died.

It still doesn't totally feel real to me, any more than hearing about the death of anyone so young would. Does anyone else feel like a little bit of an asshole mourning someone you've never met, when a) people die tragically every day and I don't even read about them in the police briefs, and b) Ledger has actual loved ones who'll greive for him a million times more than I will?

So yeah, maybe I'm being stupid when I feel sad about this, but it sucks. It sucks, it sucks, it sucks. It sucks for the people who knew him.And yes, it really does suck, too, for those of us who merely loved watching him work. Call me silly all you want, but there it is.

The first thing I saw him in, like most Americans my age, was "10 Things I Hate About You," which is still one of my favorite movies. Do you remember this, Lauren? We came out of the theatre buzzing about a better-than-expected teen flick, and in particular about the male lead, who neither of us had seen or heard of before. (Considering what big movie junkies we were and still are, this was pretty unusual). We memorized his name, debated whether he was really from Australia and agreed that we'd seen somebody special.

I saw a few of his movies here and there after that. If you'd asked me to name my favorite actors, he probably wouldn't have been at the top of the list - but I always enjoyed his work. Then came "Brokeback Mountain."

Can I just tell you how much I wanted to not like "Brokeback Mountain"? It was slow, with no plot development that I could discern, and I'm still pissed that they gave that screenplay an Oscar (because it still feels like a book to me). But even when I criticized the film, it always came with the disclaimer that I thought the acting was off-the-charts. That means everybody, but mainly Heath Ledger. The film just doesn't work if he doesn't pull it off. It's astonishing to watch him. You hardly even see him acting. I completely believed him for every second he was on camera.

A few months ago, I caught "Brokeback" on cable, and I told myself I'd just watch it up until my favorite scene (where Jack and Ennis meet up again for the first time and end up just falling into each other - once again, completely believed it). It was the damndest thing - I ended up the entire movie all over again. And 99.9% of what kept me in front of the TV was Heath Ledger as Ennis Del Mar.

The film's last sequence, when Ennis goes to Jack's boyhood home and finds...well, I won't spoil it for you if you haven't seen it. But between that scene and the last, when Ennis's final line ( "Jack, I swear") tells us everything we need to know about Ennis struggle to love himself and others - somewhere in that sequence it clicks for Ennis. And the beauty of it is, Ledger never lets us see exactly where.

It reminded me of when I read "The Age of Innocence" and completely hated the cop-out ending, and then I saw the film version, and it made perfect sense. Daniel Day-Lewis made Newland's actions in that last scene logical, human, in a way the book version didn't. It took a living, breathing, thinking actor to make me understand.

And that's how I feel about that last scene in "Brokeback." Nothing earthshattering happens, there are no histrionics, only that one line - "Jack, I swear" - but yet we know that this man is never going to be the same.


I'm profoundly grateful for that one film moment, and I'll remember it as long as I live. I'm
grateful for the time we had with Heath Ledger, and I'll miss him terribly.

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

Happy Birthday, Roe v. Wade

Today in 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down what's easily the most divisive decision in its history. Roe v. Wade held that most state and Federal laws restricting or banning abortion violated a person's constitutional right of due process as enumerated in the Fourteenth Amendment.

So, 35 years later, where do we stand? Last week it was announced that the number of abortions performed in America dropped to their lowest levels since 1976, but the use of the "abortion pill" RU-486 has increased 22 per cent a year since it was introduced in the U.S. in 2000.

Yet almost 90% of U.S. counties don't have a single abortion prvider.
There are pharmacists who refuse to fill perscriptions for birth control pills. Our Federal government won't give funding to international groups that use abortion as part of their overall family planning missions (I'm sure the HIV-positive woman in sub-Saharan Africa who'll die if her depressed immune system has to go through childbirth is most grateful). It took WAY too long for the FDA to okay the so-called "morning-after" pill. And I still boycott the Eckerd's on Reynolda Road because a clerk there wouldn't sell condoms to an unmarried woman. Can we say mixed messages?

There's an interview today on Salon.com with Dr. Susan Wicklund, who has performed abortions for 20 years. In her view, reproductive rights are more threatened now than at any time since the Roe decision. (Sorry, I'm still pissed at the Eckerd's clerk...)

In that vein, NARAL Pro-choice America is encouraging people to blog about why it's important for them to vote pro-choice. I havent put a tremendous amount of thought into this, mainly because my first response to the question "why do you vote pro-choice?" was something like, "Um, DUH." But here goes:

- I vote pro-choice because voting anti-choice doesn't work. Outlawing abortion won't keep unplanned pregnancies from happening; hell, it won't even keep abortions from happening. (Before 1973, as many as 1.2 million American women got illegal back-alley abortions every year. If you're keeping track, that's about as many abortions were performed in the U.S. last year. The only difference is that 5,000 women didn't bleed to death in the process.)

- Once again for the record - 88% of U.S. counties don't have a single doctor that will perform an abortion.

- What Kay Steiger said: Abortion will always be available for (white) upper class women who need or want it. They can fly to Europe, drive to Canada, or take a quick weekend to Mexico City. Other women -- poor mothers and women of color may not always be so lucky. If the pro-life movement succeeds in criminalizing abortion, it will be the worst off that will pay the price.

-
Medical decisions aren't the business of anyone but the patient and his or her doctor. My congressman doesn't call me for advice on his medical decisions, so why I should I have to run mine past him?

- I vote pro-choice because none of the anti-choice politicians I see on TV every night will tell me how long they think a woman who gets an abortion should spend in jail. And neither can any of their supporters. This isn't an abstraction. There are real people affected by your rhetoric, so it's time you were forced to consider that. How long are you going to imprison a woman who terminates a pregnancy? Or her doctor?

- There's no one type of woman who gets an abortion, just like there's no one type of person who gets any variety of surgery done. Read the Salon.com interview again. This doctor knew a woman in her 50s who mistook her pregnancy for menopause, and a mother of two with breast cancer who needed to terminate her pregnancy so she could start chemotherapy. I vote pro-choice because it is patently impossible for our government to craft any abortion ban that would never at any time violate the personal autonomy - and therefore the civil rights - of any woman anywhere.

- I vote pro-choice because I'm troubled by the implication of so many antiabortion activists that a baby is a punishment for sin, and that if a woman terminates an unplanned pregnancy she's short-circuiting God's justice. WTF??? I say again, there's no one reason a woman gets an abortion. But painting everyone with the same brush makes them easier to marginalize.

- For that matter, none of the other tactics of the extreme antiabortion wing have really endeared themselves to me: setting up "crisis centers" that lie to women
; stalking and harassing not just doctors at clinics, but the contractors who build the things; attempting to indict doctors whose only crime is providing a perfectly legal medical service, etc. I vote pro-choice because I don't trust these people to look out for my best interests should Roe ever be overturned.

- Above all, I vote pro-choice because I believe that I, and other women, have the capacity to determine what's best for our lives. I've never faced an unplanned pregnancy, and if I did I imagine I would lean heavily on the advice of my parents, my friends, my sisters and my faith. I would not, however, call President Bush for his two cents. It's none of his damn business. I don't believe this makes me "egotistical" or selfish.

And now I'll say a prayer that we'll still be blogging for choice another 35 years from now, because Roe will still be going strong.

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

Wall Street Journal: I hammer stuff 'cause I need a man

I've complained before about the mainstream print media's obsession with what they call Trend Stories (a term no doubt coined at a "how do we get people to keep reading our paper?" conference somewhere). What they say is, a story about a trend is more universal and therefore more relevant. What they mean is, a "trend story" isn't exclusive to a particular readership and therefore is more likely to be syndicated. Money talks.

The trend story trend has produced some particularly craptastic "journalism" in my area and nationwide, for example the MSM's revelation that Hispanic people go to college. (If I had a nickel for every reporter calling me about this story...) And it's directly responsible for this laughable lead from the Wall Street Journal:

"While Hillary Clinton attempts to storm the Oval Office, some of her less renowned sisters are busy liberating one of the few other remaining male strongholds: the hardware store. Strange as it sounds in a country still steeped in Tim Allen reruns, gals are becoming fix-it guys. And at least in some places tools are replacing brass-studded leather totes as the newest female life-style accessory."

It's what my high school journalism teacher called a "rimshot lead," and she gave us F's for it. But I guess the WSJ knows best.

Tortured prose aside, the whole concept of this article is beyond condescending. Hey, women fix shit! But don't worry, patriarchy. It's only because we're "nesting" with our pink tools and all, and rest assured we'll stop as soon as Prince Charming rides his noble steed down the plumbing supplies aisle at Home Depot and whisks us away to a paradise where all we'll have to fret about is our pedicures.

F*ck this. My hammer's just plain wood, and the cases for my socket set, cordless drill and reciprocating saw are black 'cause that's how Craftsman and DeWalt made the damned things. I fix stuff around my house (which I own) because I like it, and because it's cheaper. It's how I was raised, and it has jack to do with my reproductive system. I don't have time to worry about Prince Charming and his tool belt; I'm too concerned with the appreciation of my house's value.

Yes, more single women own homes than ever before. This necessarily means that more women are having to concern themselves with home care than, say, a generation ago. But why does the Journal's coverage have to be so frickin' cutsy? Why can't they note that married women fix shit, too, or that the Girl Scouts have always offered patches for home or auto repair? (The alums of my Girl Scout troop - I know y'all remember the eventful road trip when we had to apply our recently learned tire-changing skills!) And what the f*ck does Hillary Clinton have to do with it??? Sweet Baby Jesus, this shit pisses me off.

It even manages to be condescending to men, too. (Good on ya, WSJ, marginalizing both genders at the same time. That takes some talent, right there.) Yeah, apparently men only fix stuff around the house because they need to impress their wives. Not, you know, because they just like to live in a place where things work as they should. 'Cause men are such Neanderthals and being around women is the only way to civilize them. (Yes...I'm actually getting more pissed off just writing this...)

Two weekends ago, when it was relatively warm and my cold hadn't yet hit, I set out to wrap up the terracing project I started in my front yard last fall. It took longer for Home Depot to cut my lumber (a good half hour convincing the cutting guru that, yes, I did in fact know exactly what kind of wood I needed and in what lengths I needed it cut, plus a ridiculous amount of time for him to actually do it - I had a diagram and everything!) than it did for me to put the three different walls in the ground. I guess having boobs makes me incompetant. Not like the crack woodcutting gurus at Home Depot.

Sure, there are things as a woman that I outright can't do, like pee standing up or impregnating someone. Building, painting, power-tooling, etc., aren't in that category. F*ck you, Wall Street Journal. I'd come up with something more articulate, but unfortunately my kitchen sink needs unclogging.

Feministing posted on this, too. Read the comments - I think my favorite is the guy who bought the tool set marketed to women because it was all-inclusive and cheaper than individual tools.


Monday, January 14, 2008

The week's second-best story involving Texas

First, my week starts with a big happy when the Dallas Cowboys blow yet another playoff game, and now this...


Dozens in Texas Town Report Seeing UFO

"People wonder what in the world it is because this is the Bible Belt, and everyone is afraid it's the end of times," said Steve Allen, a freight company owner and pilot who said the object he saw last week was a mile long and half a mile wide. "It was positively, absolutely nothing from these parts."

I swear, you can't make this stuff up.

Friday, January 11, 2008

Chris Matthews is a big fat idiot

Okay, I took way too much time off over the holidays, thanks to computer trauma (I don't want to go into it...) and my annual New Year's cold (which I can't seem to shake). I'm still not up for a full-blown rant, but I just couldn't pass this up.

I generally avoid MSNBC's Chris Matthews, as I do the rest of his ilk, because the screaming heads don't really add anything to our political or societal discourse. It's possible that Matthews's various comments this week about Senator Hillary Clinton may reflect the attitudes of many opposed to her candidacy. It's within the realm of plausibility that this over-fed, under-sunned desk jockey (who perpetually sounds as if he has my cold) might have blundered his way to the pulse of the zeitgeist.

I prefer my pet theory - he's a big fat idiot.

Let's see, according to Matthews, he's never going to underestimate Clinton again. (Wise move - she's pretty fierce.) That is until the next day, when he says that she only got elected because her husband "messed around." Note: Matthews wasn't captured spouting this condescending crap on a hidden cell phone camera in a bar or a dressing room. He said it right out loud on national television.

Dude, when
Bill frickin' O'Reilly says you've gone too far, you might want to re-examine things. Tom Brokaw had to slap Matthews down this week, too. Media Matters has a nice collection of Matthews' other anti-Clinton statements made along the way. Clearly he has an issue with this one particular woman, and maybe even with powerful women in general.

Maybe this rankles a bit more than it otherwise might because of this week's emerging media narrative that Clinton only won the New Hampshire primary because women felt sorry for the way the press (like Matthews) had been hammering her. I can see how a few votes might be swayed by something like that. I mean, my grandmother voted twice for Clinton/Gore because she thought they were cute. Some people do vote based on the candidates' personailties, perceived or actual.

But most of us vote on the issues. I guess it's just inconceivable for the Matthews-led MSM to think that some of us li'l wimmin-folk have brains after all.

For the record, I think it's just as sexist to vote for a candidate because of her gender as it is to not vote for her for that reason. Not all women politicians are good for women, you know. Witness the current 5th-NC election between Satan Incarnate, a.k.a. The Evil Troll, a.k.a. Virginia Foxx, and Coach Roy Carter. No secret who I'm supporting there, and anatomy has nothing to do with it.

Unless you're Chris Matthews. What a tool.