the inspiring breakdown of Joel Burns

Rivulets of tears streamed down my face as I watched this. It hurt so much to watch, but at the same time it was profoundly uplifting.

I wish I could give Joel the tightest tight hug I could possibly give anyone, stain his chest with my tears.

This is all we ask for, to have a chance at life unoppressed and unsuppressed. The kind of life that all straight people, including you who read this, enjoy and even take for granted. Some of us kill ourselves because of what some of you have done to us.

You have no idea the suffering we must put up with.

You have no idea what I went through, what Joel went through, what those young teens went through before they took their own lives.

Imagine you as a parent walking in on your son or daughter, seeing his or her limp body hanging from a rope, or bloody from a self-inflicted gunshot wound. All because you never took the time to listen, to talk. Or because you said they're going to hell. Your own parent whom you thought loved you telling you to go to hell for what you are through the accident of birth.

Is love, tolerance, and acceptance too much to ask for? It seems with some of us, like Tony Perkins at the conservative Family Research Council, it is.

So to my family and friends and associates, I appreciate and love those of you who have accepted and embraced me for who I am, not for what your god or your society tries to force me to become. Thank you. :-)

stars and stripes and douchebaggery

^ One of the critical tenets of President Obama's fix for our nation is less
emphasis on reckless consumerism and more focus on education.

No More Hummer Nation | Maureen Dowd, New York Times Opinion

I heard a French scientist on a radio show once explain that Americans would always insist on supersizing things because our “reptilian brain” likes things big. We’re still big, as Norma Desmond said. It’s everything around us that’s collapsing and shrinking.

The Wall Street Journal had an article last week reporting that, now that gas prices have gone back down, almost half a million fuel-frugal small cars are piling up unsold at dealers around the country.

“I don’t think Americans really like small cars,” Beau Boeckmann, a Ford dealer in California, told The Journal. “They drive them when they think they have to, when gas prices are high. But we’re big people, and we like big cars.”

That’s the big nettle we’re grasping. How big do we need to be to still feel American? How big can our national debt grow? How big can our cars be? And how big is our clout abroad these days? Will Michelle’s style in Europe make as big a splash as Carla Bruni-Sarkozy’s?

The cowboy push by W. and Dick Cheney to be a hyperpower and an empire left America a weakened and tapped-out power, straining to defend its runaway capitalism even as it uneasily adapts to its desperation socialism.

How do we come to terms with the gluttony that exploded our economy and still retain our reptilian American desire for living large? How do we make the pursuit of the American dream a satisfying quest rather than a selfish one?

What Maureen Dowd hints at here is the serious need to re-define what it means to be American. But first thing's first - where the hell did we get the idea that to be American means to own big things? I mean, physically big, literally big, expensively big? Unnecessarily big?

And I also have to ask, how much emphasis do we put on individualism before it spills over into selfish bragging rights and materialistic whoring devoid of larger social considerations and responsibilities? Sure, we as Americans can easily max out our credit cards on the latest gadgetry, fashion, and huge cars, and yet we can't even take care of our unemployed homeless fellow citizens, much less pay our mortgages on time. We even have the gall to brag about keeping our priorities.

I used to think that to be American is to be the best you can be - hardworking, educated, self made, socially responsible, generous, strong, and fierce. But evidently that wasn't enough. Or worse, we hide our shortcomings in those departments by relying on such things as Hummers, large screen HDTVs, and houses whose mortgages far exceed our annual salaries.

It's a classic situation: dazzle them - and ourselves - with the goods as a way to distract from our decided lack of accomplishments in the areas that truly matter. After all, isn't it easier to impress someone with an expensive SUV than having to go to graduate school and earning a masters or a PhD? Wouldn't it be more convenient to wow our friends with the latest iPod or Louis Vuitton bag instead of making them inspired and proud of us for having volunteered at a homeless shelter for the past year?

The pendulum has swung the other way, and swung hard. And yet many of us are still too stupid to come around - being smart, responsible, and thrifty is NOT the latest fashion trend. Instead it is now a necessary way of life, one that was birthed by our recklessness and lack of values in the right places.

Do you know why many items at 7-Eleven cost so much? Convenience. You pay extra for the convenience of being able to do a jaunt to that store at 3 in the morning for a carton of milk, a handful of Slim Jim's, or a Slurpee to satisfy a desire. And that is how we have been behaving. Patience has never been a part of American values, at least in the past century. And because of that we've created the pathetic mess we're now in. Yeah, we're that stupid.

Given our choice to create the current dismal economic situation, we have also now created an opportunity, one that offers possibilities to choose wisely this time - and for all time. A new choice has now emerged, though which one we pick depends on whether we have finally learned our lesson:

Do we choose to be big, or do we choose to be better?

separate is not equal

^ Separate is not equal | On gay marriage, 'whether you like it or not' | Full program (1 hr. 7 min.)

"Gavin Christopher Newsom is the current mayor of San Francisco. A Democrat, Newsom was elected mayor in 2003, succeeding Willie Brown and becoming San Francisco's youngest mayor in 100 years.

Newsom drew voter attention with his Care Not Cash program, designed to move homeless people into city assisted care.

...Newsom's unexpected move brought national attention to the issues of gay marriage and gay rights, solidifying political support for Newsom in San Francisco and in the gay community, and causing several other states to change their laws concerning marriage and gay rights. Newsom is viewed in many political circles as a potential candidate for governor in the 2010 gubernatorial election."

- FORA.tv

Gavin Newsom gives a damn. And as Mayor of San Francisco he's willing to put civil rights forward while taking a step back for himself because he gives a damn, painting his city in more beautiful shades of humanity.

the drone zone

^ The future of warfare lies within what looks like an overgrown toy airplane. Watch as we dissect the Predator system, from the Ground Control Station in Las Vegas to a Ku Band satellite in orbit, then back down to the Predator in-flight over the battlefield.

- Behind The Technology

This is where some of our U.S. taxpayer dollars go. I'll not get into the whole political and ethical discussion over this (that would be another blog entirely), but instead state that I find it intriguing how we've been moving on in terms of warfare strategy and technology. It's a kind of hands off approach, piloting the drone planes from thousands of miles away in undisclosed locations.

The virtual pilots camp inside a portable bunker outfitted with the most cutting edge technology and satellite communications. The planes themselves cost a cool $3.8 million each, with more being produced. In service they provide a scout's view for the benefit of ground military, searching for any signs of opposition miles away and dealing with them as needed.

Recently these drones have even been credited with disposing of Iranian drones over Iraq, possible evidence of Iran supplying Iraqi militant groups with weapons. The introduction of drone plane warfare throws the already volatile U.S. relations with Iran into even more precarious territory.

^ Ace Combat 6 (Xbox 360) | YouTube clip showing multiplayer action.

It's eerie how video game-like this technology is. Inside the secretly located bunkers, the pilots sit in front of several screens (as shown in the video) and are visually informed with real time locations, cameras, weather reports, infrared scans, and other kinds of surveillance simultaneously. Not much different from how we hardcore gamers do it in our little cubbyholes for hours on end.

At a glance there's no difference between what you see in these bunkers and what you see as you play a game like Ace Combat 6 at home. But of course, the true difference is that one is just a video game.

The other is absolutely not.

are you what you do?

^ Welcome to Elsewhere, USA, where the American individual has become extinct.

Acclaimed sociologist Dalton Conley looks closely at a population of intraviduals -- fractured people who struggle to juggle professional, familial, and personal pursuits.

Gone are the days when professionals could count on clearly-defined work days with the same company for twenty years, and clearly defined roles within the family to come home to.

Instead, today's citizens of Elsewhere must try to satisfy their various selves simultaneously.

By examining three arenas – economic, familial, and technological – Conley is able to illustrate how we have all become inhabitants of Elsewhere, where division between home and office has been all but demolished; our wireless economy encourages us to work 24/7, marketing has invaded the most intimate aspects of our lives, and leisure has become a lost art.

- FORA.tv

You know when you meet someone for the first time, say, at a party, or on campus, or through a friend? Often one of the first things brought up between you are such questions as "What do you do?", "How long have you worked there?", "Where did you go to school?"

Such questions clue us in on how we define ourselves and each other, and how we define ourselves is often based on things like our professional life, what we do for a living, what things we own, where we live, how we were able to afford where we live and why we chose to live there, where we went to school, what degrees we earned, and the professional positions and similar things that our social circle holds.

I've had conversations with strangers before that were no different from this. But my answers usually diverge from what most people expect. When they ask me, for example, what I do, I say, "I currently read a lot of non-fiction, I blog, and I listen to NPR." Or I say, "I volunteer as a docent at an Asian art museum and work with grade school kids." Or, "I spend some afternoons at cafe reading and enjoying a coffee, and I help take care of my elderly mother."

These answers catch people off guard, and that's because of how we at large have been conditioned by our society to identify each other through things like a certain job and the social status that such a job would place us in, and other factors typical in a consumer driven society. I didn't lie to these people when I answered the way I did, it's just that we're set up to think and place each other in particular ways. My job is not necessarily me, and vice versa. I've simply gone and redefined myself more on things other than what I do to earn money, and what I buy with the money I earn.

Dalton Conley offers an overture on topics like self-identity and placement in terms of worker, consumer, social creature, and shifting values defined by culture, belief system, industry, and technological progress throughout the 20th century and in the foyer of the 21st century of America.

If you aren't busy this moment, have about an hour and a half, and a cup of coffee or tea, find out what Mr. Conley has to say about it. You may glean a bit more about where you place yourself in your life and why, and where life around you places you. Here? There? Elsewhere?

presidential action....IN action

^ Missed it? Got about an hour? Then view much needed action....finally in action! President Barack Obama's address to Congress.

Taking The Job by Hendrik Hertzberg | The New Yorker

In his first address to a joint session of Congress, President Obama took full possession of his job and his role.

“Dropping out of high school is no longer an option,” he said. “It’s not just quitting on yourself, it’s quitting on your country.” That admonition, which won applause from both sides of the aisle, was not directed solely, or even primarily, at the young and underprivileged. It was a metaphorical call to duty and a redefinition of patriotism.

(A podcast version of this essay, narrated by Dan Bernard, can be downloaded from the iTunes Store or streamed to your iPhone or iPod Touch via Podcaster)

I've always adored the light footed way Hendrik Hertzberg handles heavy handed political issues, more so now than before, and definitely during last year's presidential campaign. His laser sharp eye focuses on the esprit de corps shifting the nature of our patriotism at long last. This is a very, very critical shifting as we tread unsteadily into the 21st century.

Hertzberg's essay infers a profound question for these times. Even just a few years ago, who among us would have ever thought on a grand scale that to be devoted American patriots, instead of militarily fighting for what our country stands for, we must now fight with intelligence, intellectual vigor, and sheer betterment from the inside out? To compete with, and lead, the world with our brains, not our guns?

And now, far more than ever, what is the price we Americans must pay for our unchecked selfishness, our strident and dunce individualism as pimped by the Republican Party? That price, alluded by both Hertzberg and President Obama, is the sacrifice of our collective morality, and our duty not just as responsible countrymen and women, but more importantly as responsible and conscientious citizens of the world.

After all, one can be as individual as one wants until it begins to interfere with the reality of the world one must live in, with the reality of other individuals.

As well, the more progress we make under the aegis of President Obama and his team, the more unrealistic, backwoods, and embarrassingly myopic the Republican Party seems. Governor Bobby Jindal needs to do more Rhodes scholar homework and go back to charm school while the RNC pays his tuition there. He has far too much catching up to do. President Obama - and we Americans by his side - are light years ahead of him and his cohorts.

an honour bittersweet

^ Celebration of the Signing of the US Economic Stimulus Bill. President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo's Speech During the Celebration of the Signing of the US Economic Stimulus Bill including Filipino World war II Veterans Benefits.

Package includes money for Filipino war veterans | Times-Herald

The vets' quest for compensation stems from President Franklin D. Roosevelt's decision in July 1941 to draft 140,000 soldiers from the Philippines, then an American colony. A year later, Congress passed a law allowing Filipino soldiers to become U.S. citizens with full military benefits.

But in 1946, after Filipino soldiers fought and died side by side with U.S. troops, President Truman signed two bills denying them citizenship as well as most veterans' benefits. The bills were post-war cost-saving measures that Truman said he regretted.

The compensation was not in the House version of the stimulus bill. But it was inserted by Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, who lost an arm in combat in World War II.

The compensation provision has not been without controversy. CNN's Lou Dobbs is railing against it, and several senators -- including Arizona's John McCain -- objected to including the lump-sum payments in a bill whose purpose is to stimulate the U.S. economy.

Inouye said "the honor of the United States is what is involved.''

Of the 250,000 Filipino vets of World War II, about 12,000 live in the Philippines and 6,000 in the United States. About 30,000 came to the country in the early '90s after President George H.W. Bush signed a bill granting them instant citizenship. About 2,000 settled in the Bay Area. But all but a few hundred have either died or returned to the Philippines because life here was too hard.

Daddy (we pronounce it "DAH-dee" in my family) fought alongside U.S. troops in the jungles of the Philippines during WWII. From what Nanay ("Mom" in Tagalog) told me, a shell explosion nearly rendered Daddy impotent. The explosion killed some of his compatriots. Nanay joked that there was a difference of an inch or so between Daddy subsequently starting a family with her, and of none of us - kids, grandkids, great grandkids - ever existing at all.

Daddy died almost 4 years ago. Four years too late to receive the $15,000 the United States promises him now under President Obama's stimulus package ($9,000 had he not been a U.S. citizen), and almost 70 years too late after the U.S. promised some kind of honorary recompense. I don't yet know the details, but I'm doubtful any of that money can be still made available to Nanay, his widow. It may not extend that way.

I feel more sorrowful for those old veterans, Daddy's fellow soldiers, back in the Philippines. They had endured decades of poverty and inadequate health care. The money they never received from the U.S. all those years could've helped them immensely. Alas, many of them have already died. If the money were not extended to their spouses and family, then what good is it? It only magnifies the years of cruel insensitivity the U.S. has displayed toward them. Toward Daddy.

Stimulus To Repay Debt To WWII Filipino Veterans | NPR (audio story)

Morning Edition, February 23, 2009 · The economic stimulus bill signed by President Obama contains $198 million to pay a long-overdue debt to Philippine veterans of World War II. They were promised payments for fighting the Japanese but never were paid. Some of those war veterans in California desperately need the money.

I do know that if Daddy were still alive today and received the money, it would mean nothing to him. What did mean everything to him was the honour of defending his country against invading enemies, of fighting alongside the U.S., the country that to him deeply meant the light of the world in terms of possibilities, the country he eventually made home with Nanay and us, his kids. Being in the U.S. was all he wanted for us, meaning opportunities for us that many Filipinos back in the Philippines would never enjoy.

If Daddy had received that money today he would have divided it among his kids and grandkids, perhaps helping pay for some of my nieces' and nephews' college tuition, investing in bonds for my grand niece, and just endowing us with it and trusting us to do wise things with it.

Money to him only had meaning as a symbol. In this case it would have meant a certain honour, a "Thank You" from the country he had fought with, and in the end, the country he called home.


Postscript:

According to The Seattle Times:

"The U.S. Embassy in Manila said it will start accepting applications next week for lump-sum payments of $15,000 for veterans who have become U.S. citizens and $9,000 for non-U.S. citizens.

Applications must be submitted by Feb. 16, 2010, and claims by spouses, widows or children of veterans will not be accepted..."

Related:

audio blog: croissants & swindlers | a space alien

aesop owns our a$$e$

^ So which one are you? Grasshopper or ant? Disney inteprets the classic fable for the 20th century: The Grasshopper And The Ants (1934).

I am horrible with money. Always have been. I won't even go into the ugly details but suffice it to say that there are, I'm sure, others who are even worse than I.

I own no real estate, partly because I can't stand the complex responsibility of loans, mortgages, equity, re-financing, and other terms quite foreign to me. I prefer to rent. I own no car (so far) because I don't like the idea of paying insurance, especially if I get into a collision with another driver or Ganesha forbid, a pedestrian, and the insurance company pays them and in turn jacks up my premium.

Life is expensive. I'm much better balancing states of mind than my checkbook. I stopped using credit cards years ago and only spend the money I have instead of money I don't have. I detest the social and cultural pressure of owning things to impress others, the idea that having material things equals success on many levels. But that's how the world has been set up, for better or worse.

I could say that my decided insularity renders me immune to the current disaster of home foreclosures and investment banking worldwide. Just as well. If I had bought a home I probably would've been as stupid as many other Americans and borrowed on the equity to buy a stupid expensive SUV or vacation. I would've shot for a big showy house I couldn't otherwise afford on my salary. The temptation would've been overwhelming.

But that's not to say my avoidance of all that makes me an Ant. Grasshoppers also come in different shapes and sizes. Nowhere in Aesop's tale is there a third breed of character which, in periods where I'm able to save a bit and don't touch it, I can more readily relate to: an Anthopper.

audio blog: city of garbage

^ Imagine living and playing here as an 8-year-old with little possibility of a better future. More in-depth videos (in 5 parts) about the "city of garbage", reported by a young Scandinavian man visiting Manila. Countries in Scandinavia, particularly Sweden, boast some of the world's very best health care systems (arguably better than the U.S.) and generally excellent quality of life for all its citizens.

Uploaded by www.cellspin.net

Postscript:

The video above was presented by United Methodist Communications. I understand that there are many Christian organizations helping impoverished people in third world countries around the globe and I salute their noble efforts. However, I vehemently oppose some of them in their influencing governments (including the U.S. government under the Bush administration) to stop planned parenthood programs. This is because such programs advocate abortion, contraception, condom use, and education on safe sex practices, which many Christians oppose, especially the Vatican.

This is moronic, I say, and is completely at odds with the ugly reality these poor people deal with day to day. As a result of such Christian influences families keep growing under festering circumstances, thus more children are born into poverty and disease. People who are well educated about safe sex, contraception, and the burden of familial responsibilities while in poverty are more likely to think twice before having another child.

the $cience of hope

^ NOVA: Personal Genome Project explores the lifesaving possibilities of genetics, the research of which may one day prevent deadly diseases like diabetes and heart attacks.

Scientists Hope Stimulus Will Give Jolt To Research | NPR

Bad Economy Could Affect Future Of Science

The impact could fall hard on individuals like [Anirvan Ghosh's postdoctoral candidate, Stefanie Otto, who attends the University of California San Diego]. But they also can affect the future of science in the United States. Ghosh thinks of both as he looks to the stimulus package to provide his lab — and many others like it — some relief.

"Being able to provide some support right now has an immediate effect in stabilizing the positions of postdocs and graduate students and research scientists now so they don't leave the system," he says. "But in the long run, as we look forward with our regular budgets, one has to think of ways in which this can be sustained."

That's actually the bigger challenge. Sure, labs are eager to get a two-year infusion of cash under the terms of the stimulus package. But if the money disappears just as quickly, labs will be back in trouble again. The NIH's Kington says they're trying to be careful to avoid that hangover.

"The greater the flexibility we're given in the legislation, the more options we have to plan so that we don't have a problem two years down the road," Kington says.

What many textbook Republicans, and especially those figureheads in the Bush administration, failed to realize is that the very institutions that they shat on with apathy in lack of funding in the past decade could have made great strides in such fields as stem cell research, environmental research, and biotechnology. It also helps foster education and a culture of learning and inquiry and who knows how many kids whose inner fire it may ignite that one day they may be authors in curing diseases their parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, siblings, or friends once suffered or died from.

Let's just hope money will finally arrive.....and continue to arrive.

I posted my own thoughts in the readers' comment section of the above NPR story:

This is disheartening to hear, the possibility of scientific research not getting enough funding by us.

I mean, part of why progress has been made to combat HIV/AIDS is credited to government spending - OUR money being spent on it. This is far, far closer to home for me than you think. Some of my friends have HIV and of course, many of us also suffer from cancer, Parkinson's disease, and other potentially lethal ailments.

Any funding towards scientific research is a chance at lifesaving treatment, or possibly even a cure one day.

happy birthday, charles!

^ Evolution Primer #1: Isn't Evolution Just a Theory? Primer #2 | Primer #3

Darwin, Britain's Hero, Is Still Controversial In U.S. | NPR (audio and text)

"There are actually 34 states in the United States that have passed anti-evolution laws of one kind or another," says [paleontologist] Leonard Krishtalka, "whether it's stickers in textbooks or warnings that 'Reading this book with be injurious to your mental health," whether it's California or Alabama or Louisiana. For the record, in Kansas, the teaching of evolution in schools never stopped because all of the regulation and rules that the anti-evolution segment of the Kansas City Board of Education tried to get through were never enacted."

They're scared! These creationists are simply scared! And utterly superstitious, which in itself is just a natural and understandable consequence of lack of scientific knowledge. But the fact that there had been incredible leaps of knowledge in science and technology ever since the Bible was first put together throws into sharp relief the astonishing degree to which such religious people cling to their beliefs, often in the very face of cold, hard scientific evidence against those beliefs.

Death scares us. Which again is understandable. We, as humanity, freak out easily at the very thought of oblivion, of non-existence. That's an unfortunate [side-]effect of sentience and intelligence, I suppose. We're profoundly frightened of unknowable things. And death is the ultimate unknowable thing. The only way we can know its nature is to actually experience it. But there's no turning back. You could say it's the ultimate experience of life, and how ironic is that. And yet that thought still leaves us mortally frightened. We imagine the worst, or the best. Preferably the best.

And so, to comfort ourselves we dream of transcending death. We postulate a realm beyond it, whether it be an actual physical place, a metaphysical land, or even a state of consciousness. It's purported to be experienced in Catholic belief as physical and spiritual perfection that lasts forever, known in Hinduism as Moksha, the final liberation from samsara (the cycle of birth and death), and as a "non-state" of mind (as we know it) known as Nirvana in Buddhism.

And this is what Darwin's theory of evolution threatens in part.

But I notice that it's certain Christians who most vehemently revile the theory, even in light of the overwhelming evidence. Why is this? Why have we not heard any shout outs from Hindus and Buddhists? Even Muslims haven't shown up in the news with any kind of complaint, have they? In fact, there's evidence that mathematics goes back as far as 70,000 years, farther back than Christ and the Virgin and all that. Would the development of mathematics be alongside the development of supernatural explanations of otherwise natural phenomenon?

Not sure where I'm going with this but I'm curious as to why it's Christians who are most upset over evolution. Furthermore, I'm puzzled that they would interpret their bible as literal, which of course conflicts with Darwin's evolutionary theory and astronomical, geological, paleontological, and other -logical findings. That conflict, I figure, has a lot to do with the religious' fear of the unknown. Because the more science answers questions, the more questions arise still.

Oh, and we freakin' humans think we're so damn special, too. We go around preaching that the universe was created by a supreme being with us in mind. That's part of the problem. I wonder if 'overblown ego' is an evolutionary screw-up.

Guess I'll keep pondering this a while.

to those idiots

Senate To Vote Tuesday On Stimulus Plan | NPR (audio & text)

Leading the Republicans' opposition to Obama's stimulus plan was the man who lost to him in November, Sen. John McCain of Arizona.

"This is not bipartisan. This is two Republican senators that decided to join after meetings behind doors from which almost all of the rest of us were not present," McCain said.

And he had a dire warning for his colleagues: "If this legislation is passed, it'll be a very bad day for America."

Far less caustic but equally negative was the Senate's Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

"I will not be in a position to recommend support for this product as it has developed," he said.

But those Republicans' votes won't be needed for the stimulus to pass, as long as the two or three who've shown support for the compromise hold firm.

To those Republican idiots,

And these children that you spit on,
As they try to change their worlds
Are immune to your consultations,
They're quite aware of what they're going through

- David Bowie

lilly's law at last

^ Lilly's story, told by President Barack Obama.

Obama Signs Equal-Pay Legislation | The New York Times

WASHINGTON — President Obama signed his first bill into law on Thursday, approving equal-pay legislation that he said would “send a clear message that making our economy work means making sure it works for everybody.”

The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. It's a bittersweet victory in a way. The bill was originally introduced to Congress in response to a Supreme Court decision against Lilly that would have otherwise awarded her the maximum back pay of $360,000 (as per the law) by Goodyear Tire, where she worked a supervisory blue collar job. Goodyear appealed the decision.

According to the New York Times "...Congress passed the bill, which restarts the six-month clock every time the worker receives a paycheck." Before that women only a had a window of 180 days after the actual discrimination occurred to file their suit, which Goodyear pointed out in its appeal in the Supreme Court. Lilly lost that case.

Listening to Lilly's story on NPR, I couldn't help shed a tear for her. She was just really trying to provide for her family as well as she can, something my own mom does so beautifully, even sharing some of her Social Security money with her grandkids when she can. But male dominated society continued to shove her down in a STFU gesture. Why is that? What do men actually get from doing that, especially when women - their wives, mothers, sisters, nieces, associates - are in it for the same reasons they are? And that reason is to just try to live a good life, earn a good living to provide for their family, their children. Why must men punish women for that?

The bill was rejected by almost every Republican in a filibuster move in the Senate, among them Senator John McCain: "I don't believe that this would do anything to help the rights of women except to maybe help trial lawyers and others in that profession." Yep, the same guy who would've been in the White House had we Americans chosen wrongly again. Interesting that in his statement he fixates on lawyers' opportunities while ignoring the bill's true importance. Nice going, McCain. And remember, you lost your bid for the White House. Twice.

^ If you are a man reading this, imagine how it might feel after working loyally and diligently for years for a company you thought cared, you discover you had all along been shoved down and kicked, being paid less because you are, say, too young, too old, not good looking enough, gay, or are Jewish or Muslim. That's how Lilly felt. The Subway, a painting by the American artist George Tooker.

Lilly continued her fight to get the bill passed in Congress. When she got wind that McCain rejected the bill she totally went through the roof and vowed never to vote for him, instead siding with Barack Obama. She appeared in an Obama campaign commercial: "My family needed that money."

At age 60, Lilly suffered another setback. Goodyear re-assigned her to a position where she was required to lift Hummer tires weighing at least 50 lbs. in order to inspect them. She retired early. Her husband, a retired Alabama Sargeant Major, all the while had supported her cause and for the first time during his 53 year marriage with Lilly, he voted Democrat. If he had only been able to hold on til at least today, he would have seen Lilly champion this, standing proudly next to the new president. He died of a heart attack a few weeks before this morning's signing of the bill into law by President Obama.

^ Lilly in black turleneck and red blazer, just behind President Obama after he signed her bill into law.

Lilly, you owned this, girl. On behalf of all your fellow Americans, I'm proud of you.

Postscript:

Lilly is not the first woman to win this fight. New York Times Op-Ed columnist Gail Collins introduces us to our American sisters who also championed equal rights causes.

Lilly's Big Day | The New York Times

to president obama: "i'm feeling good"

This is my personal presidential inauguration song. We got this, man. Let's do it. And to Ms. Simone, you are damn fierce, thank you for you.

our difficult but worthwhile journey begins

Bakary Kamara, an immigrant from the west African nation of Gambia, cried in New York after Mr. Obama was sworn in.

Obama Is Sworn In as the 44th President | The New York Times

Let's get to work, my fellow Americans, and my fellows around the world. We got this, man. Let's do it.

The swearing in and inauguration speech.

it's not from Prada

^ December 14. The other shoe as well didn't so much drop, as it was hurled.

Seems our very soon to be ex-Prez is just as good avoiding oncoming footwear as he is at avoiding oncoming questions. How fortunate (for us) the reporter was not wearing a pair from Prada, as he would've been less willing to part with it, even to make a political statement.

Unless it was last season's.

the deadly risks of just being you

^ Sajida Bibi tells her story.

From Victim To Heroine | The New York Times (video, 5:26)

From rape to slavery to honor killings, extreme oppression can be the norm for Pakistani women. But, Times Op-Ed columnist Nicholas D. Kristof reports from Pakistan that one courageous woman has built an oasis of hope in her village.

Chances are some of you reading this blog post are female, American, and enjoying the freedoms of being a woman in a democratic first world country in the 21st century while still advocating for even more rights, from preserving Roe v. Wade to a law for equal pay. You can easily and effortlessly bare your face and head in public, wear pants or leg exposing skirt and heels, go on dates, even fall in love and couple with someone without necessarily marrying them first. You know, all the things we take for granted. You embrace personal responsibility for your own decisions, you're respected and admired for your accomplishments, and you breeze through life on your own terms.

But in a country like Pakistan, staggeringly huge amounts of money are being invested by the government in nuclear arms (with some help from the U.S., not surprisingly). In fact we Americans continue to give our tax money to the Pakistan government, who in turn continue to funnel it into their military. And yet little effort is spent on building their human infrastructure - education, schools in remote villages, domestic industries and jobs, and human rights assessment and legislation, especially for women.

In Pakistan if you even dated a man without the approval of your family, you could easily be scorned by them. And your own family could, by tradition, allow you to be gang raped, or even murder you for it. Your own family. Your own brothers and father would be more than willing to sell you off as a slave, if not kill you instead. This is happening today, right now, as it has happened again and again for hundreds of years. Be glad you don't live there as a woman.

^ This is what could easily happen to you as a woman if you simply wanted to marry for love in Pakistan. ABC News, September 2008. I had tears in my eyes watching this story.

Sajida Bibi is a beautiful young woman who is simply trying to live her life. In The New York Times video above she tells her story. Because she had "shamed" them, her own brothers couldn't even decide whether to kill her or sell her off into slavery. There are many other women like her, surviving and eventually getting on while still existing in the shadow of a vicious and cruel patriarchal society and culture. But there are also other women who aren't as strong and must live in mortal fear, they continue to be subjugated to a tradition that treats women as the property of men.

And isn't it hard for you to enjoy your life and your accomplishments when you live under the threat of abuse, torture, and even death for simply trying to be you?

Related:

when fierce, wear pink! | a space alien

earth hugging fundamentalist retardation?

^ "Ian Plimer, Professor of Mining Geology at the University of Adelaide, argues that most atheists are in no position to attack religion if they support environmentalism, which he claims is becoming an almost cult-like religion of its own." | iPhone friendly YouTube version

Mr. Plimer definitely raised my eyebrows. After reading books by outspoken and prolific 'brights' such as Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, and Christopher Hitchens (all of whom are categorically lumped as radical atheists), and after my own personal falling out with Catholicism (where I agree with Bart Ehrman's summation of Christianity's seeming incompetence at logically explaining God's apathy towards profound human suffering and tragedy), I watched this clip of Mr. Plimer's proposal. It just makes sense.

In the NPR interview with Terry Gross, Bart Ehrman, who wrote the book God's Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question: Why We Suffer, as well as Misquoting Jesus, had a few thoughts to share. He is also chairman of the department of religious studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. A former priest, now agnostic, Mr. Ehrman hints at a 'spiritual hole' left when one chooses to walk away from religious faith. Staunch atheists Mr. Harris and Mr. Dawkins argue that the hole can easily be filled by very tangible secular values based on one's understanding of life experience and scientific evidence and observations - God has nothing to do with familial love or the beauty of a sunset. Instead just give the damned credit where it's due: family itself, and our own innate talent to emote based on our aesthetic appreciation and awe of natural phenomenon. In other words, secular values created by us as human beings, to be enjoyed on that merit alone.

But according to Mr. Plimer, once again our ignorance and the consequent fear it brings causes us to cathect yet another religion. Anthropologically superstition and supernatural beliefs were created by us as a species to try to allay our fear of unexplainable goings on in the universe. Today as our disillusion with a Judeo-Christian deity grows, thus gradually leaving a gaping hole in its wake, that hole is being filled by a new kind of manufactured belief - frantic earth hugging. Or as it is more commonly known, Environmentalism.

So far there are conflicting arguments among scientists around the world about the actual causes of global warming. We do know that man-made pollution and senseless exploiting of natural resources, made possible by a huge surge in the human population, industrialization, and rampant consumerism, are causing damage to our environment, and that bickering and pointing fingers aren't really helping to even at least tamp down the global hemorrhaging. And we know, too, that it's always good to be mindful of how and how much we use our natural resources, to be moderate in our consumption, and that we need to re-assess the infrastructure of our industries, habitats, communities, and personal lives to waste as little as possible.

However there's a difference between being realistically, common sensibly responsible and being an extremist ignoramus about it. How many of us, for example, know that recycling aluminum is more expensive and energy consuming than just making things from the original ore being mined?

But there has yet to be an across-the-board consensus supported by irrefutable scientific data that shows what's actually causing global warming, whether man-made or entirely natural, and whether it's fixable. Brian Dunning of Skeptoid.com has a lot to say about this:

I believe the United States was clearly right in its refusal to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, because of its fundamentally nonsensical exemptions. In short, the Kyoto Protocol restricts nations based on how wealthy they are, not based on how much greenhouse gas they produce! The United States would have had to adopt economy-strangling restrictions, while China, which will surpass the United States as the world's largest producer of greenhouse gases by 2010 at the speed at which an IndyCar passes a hobo pushing a shopping basket, remains exempt from any restrictions. India, the world's third largest producer of greenhouse gases, is also exempt.

Blanket proclamations like the Kyoto Protocol are not the way to approach the problem with any workable practicality. In fact, 13 of the 15 European nations who did ratify Kyoto have been unable to comply with its requirements.

I agree with Mr. Dunning's inference that, as a species, keeping our shit in check must absolutely be a worldwide effort, and no nation, not even the tiniest ones, should be exempt if we want efficacy. But the stupid, juvenile arrogance of upcoming countries like China and India is as pathetic as the arrogant extreme liberals demanding impractical conditions and time-lines for carbon emission reductions. Some advocates of industrial, economic, and commerical growth of those upcoming countries have even gone so far to say, in effect, "Well, the U.S. and Europe had their chance to be big, it's our turn now!" Does that sound like a mature and responsible global citizen to you?

^ The entire program: "Would We Be Better Off Without Religion?" (1hr. 40min.)

"While the world's religions have inspired stunning acts of creation, they also have been implicated in some of the darkest deeds in human history.

If God cannot be blamed for such moments of evil, His priests and prophets at least have a case to answer.

So what might they say? That religion is unfairly blamed -- and that we should look to other factors? Admit that there are problems but argue that on balance the good outweighs the bad? That there is no alternative; that people need religion like they need air?" - Intelligence Squared

Anyway, I ramble. Environmentalism is at its core a very noble cause. But as with any kind of cause or belief system it has that peril of easily slipping into dangerous radical fanaticism when unchecked. I've watched YouTube clips of crazed tree huggers sobbing uncontrollably at the death of even one plant by human hands (warning: that video is extremely hard to watch in how those people willingly descend into sheer moronism). Believe me when I say that I honestly can't tell the difference between their behaviour and that of televangelists or Baptist preachers causing their flock to burst into fits of screams and cries toward their god, or of anti-abortionists planning bomb attacks on abortion clinics.

< Yes, it's possible for us all to be responsible stewards of our natural planet without resorting to the stupidity of fundamentalist left leaning beliefs and pseudoscientific nonsense.


I am an atheist, and one who respects the beliefs of others as long as they don't force them on me or mess with governmental legislation to force others to live according to their beliefs. I have good friends who practice their faith and I admire them for it precisely because they respect my stance. They're good people, they do good things.

But like anyone with a reasonable demeanor based on rationality I will remain an atheist until there is undisputable scientific proof of the existence of any kind of superior omnipotent being out there, whether or not it even wants to be worshipped. That, too, applies toward any new kind of religion or dogma that encourages the projection of one's ignorance, insecurities and fears onto real concerns with potentially detrimental consequences, no matter how noble its intent.

Mr. Plimer's words are a warning to us to stay in check, an echo of Winston Churchill's wisdom for the ages:

"Whoever fights monsters should see to it that in the process he does not become a monster. And when you look into an abyss, the abyss also looks into you."

Yeah, I know the value of trees, but that does NOT oblige me to have to embarrass myself and throw my arms around one and try to force others to do the same. And even if the trees had feelings, I don't think they would want to be embarrassed like that, either.

when fierce, wear pink!

^ Meet the pink ladies of India. You DO NOT want to fuck with them, they are at least a hundred strong and getting even stronger with new recruits. Fierceness never looked so chic, don't you agree? | Part 2 of this program.

I first found out about this incredible gang of women from a BBC News story last year. My initial reaction was the typical "You go girl!", but the more I ruminated on it the more I felt both inspiration and sadness. Inspired, naturally because of the extreme courage of Sampat Pal Devi, founder of the Gulabi Gang. She had the balls (so to speak) to finally stand up to the physical, psychological, and social abuses she and other women of her region had endured for years from the very family they relied on and from the community they lived in.

The very thought of being perfectly conditioned from birth to accept your lowly status not only as a woman, but as one of the worst treated groups in India's traditional caste system seems like an entire world away from what American women in the 21st century just about take for granted. Yes, there are still parts of the world today where it feels like you exist in the Bronze Age. It's also mind bogglingly ironic how India, one of the upcoming leaders of the world in terms of technology, industry, and commerce still treats many of its citizens like animals. Many of the 'dalit' class are subjected to what we would consider supremely humiliating and dehumanizing work.

Like you and me, these are good people, and given the chance they can do incredible work to contribute to the progress of their community, their country, and of the world. They are no different from us, yet they have been intently thrown into the garbage by their own people, by their culture, their government.

And of course I felt sad about this gang because of why they had to form themselves. To have your very own husband beat you day to day, your own in-laws physically abuse you. And you can't fight back because it is all you've ever known. And even worse, the local police do nothing because they're so corrupt and, frankly, don't give a shit. It simply makes Sampat's story, and the stories of her female allies, all the more extraordinary. Yes, in this case it needed extreme measures to counter and eventually champion equally (if not more so) extreme, horrible situations.

^ The legendary Vogue editor and fashion icon Diana Vreeland once declared that "Pink is the navy blue of India". I wonder what she would have thought of Sampa and her girls. I bet she would have then declared, "Navy blue never looked so fierce and chic, my dear!"

Think about it, we're talking about hundreds of years of brutal physical abuses of women living within their culture, which is all they've ever known. Sampat and her sisters-in-arm have never been properly educated if at all, most of them are illiterate, but all they want is to live with some respect and dignity and to work and to provide for their children.

Sampat and her gang are trying to undo centuries of cruelty and mistreatment in perhaps a radical way. But if this must be the way for them to do it, so be it. It is her ultimate way of saying "Fuck you! You mess with me and you'll never live to see tomorrow! And I will look so fucking chic wasting your sorry ass, too!"

f*** you detroit!

^ Ahhhnold at once rightly smack talks Detroit, advocates alternative energy sources, environmental respect, U.S. job security, and sex appeal!

There was a discussion about the Tesla all electric sportscar in a recent NPR news story about the possible government bailout of Detroit automakers. One listener suggested that the U.S. government (i.e. we taxpayers) dump GM Motors as we know it, allow Tesla Motors to take over the factory in Detroit, and re-tool it to produce Tesla electric powered cars, thereby killing the many old birds with one stone.

^ The Tesla all electric powered sportscar: from zero to sixty in 3.9 seconds, no carbon emissions, no greenhouse gases, absolutely no loud engine noise, 100 miles per electric charge, and....made in the U.S.A.! How sexy is that?

With Tesla Motors keeping production domestic, a segment of the U.S. auto industry would be spared and re-birthed, jobs would be saved, and the environment would be respected. It would also force other automakers like Ford and Chrysler to ramp up their R & D on developing fuel efficient and environmentally friendly vehicles, as well as spur foreign competitors like Nissan and Honda to further innovate.

^ While still being a 'proper sportscar', the Tesla is also the shape - and substance - of things to come, of the future of motoring. Wait, what am I saying? The future is actually here, now! Poor Detroit is probably seething at Tesla Motors right now.

As a footnote, California won the contract to host Tesla Motors' first production plant.