Believe what we tell you to believe

Dec 23rd, 2017 12:18 pm | By

Egypt plans to make not believing in god a crime.

The Egyptian parliament’s committee on religion has announced plans to make disbelief in God a crime. Under the current law against “contempt of religions” atheists can be prosecuted for expressing their disbelief in public but the committee’s proposal would go further and criminalise disbelief itself.

I wonder how they plan to detect that crime, or collect evidence for it, or present the evidence in court.

They don’t really, I suppose, it’s just a fist under the nose. But there’s nothing quite like people trying to tell you what to believe to bring out the defiance in most of us.



Known for edgy content

Dec 23rd, 2017 11:34 am | By

Least surprising news ever: Vice is another hotbed of sexism. No, really?!

One woman said she was riding a Ferris wheel at Coney Island after a company event when a co-worker suddenly took her hand and put it on his crotch. Another said she felt pressured into a sexual relationship with an executive and was fired after she rejected him.

A third said that a co-worker grabbed her face and tried to kiss her, and she used her umbrella to fend him off.

These women did not work among older men at a hidebound company. They worked at Vice, an insurgent force in news and entertainment known for edgy content that aims for millennial audiences on HBO and its own TV network.

Wut? Is Emily Steel kidding? The “edgy” ones are the worst. The “edgy” ones think pushing women around is an important part of being “edgy.” (I think that’s what Al Franken was doing – not so much copping a feel as performing copping a feel, as part of his persona.) The “edgy” ones think women are the enemy of “edgy” and that cool rebellious dudes have to overturn all that Puritan shit about not grabbing people who haven’t asked to be grabbed…except not actually people of course, just women.

But as Vice Media has built itself from a fringe Canadian magazine into a nearly $6 billion global media company, its boundary-pushing culture created a workplace that was degrading and uncomfortable for women, current and former employees say.

Of course it did. So many men think of women as standing for “boundary” while they stand for boundary-pushing. Pushing boundaries is more of a guy thing, it doesn’t have that estrogen vibe.

The settlements and the many episodes of harassment the women described depict a top-down ethos of male entitlement at Vice, where women said they felt like just another party favor at an organization where partying often was an extension of the job.

What stands out about the women’s accounts — in the wake of a public reckoning over sexual assault and harassment by mostly older men — is that the allegations involve men in their 20s, 30s and 40s who came of age long after workplace harassment was not only taboo but outlawed.

That might have surprised me around 2010 or so, but since then? No. We’ve seen far too much of the “edgy” bro culture to be surprised now. The fact that sexual harassment is taboo and outlawed is just all the more reason to push that boundary, mofo.

“The misogyny might look different than you would have expected it to in the 1950s, but it was still there, it was still ingrained,” said Kayla Ruble, a journalist who worked at Vice from 2014 to 2016. “This is a wakeup call.”

Wakeup call number 475,823,659.



A sensitive conversation in the Oval Office

Dec 23rd, 2017 10:22 am | By

The Times shares a disgusting little vignette of life with “President” Trump:

Late to his own meeting and waving a sheet of numbers, President Trump stormed into the Oval Office one day in June, plainly enraged.

Five months before, Mr. Trump had dispatched federal officers to the nation’s airports to stop travelers from several Muslim countries from entering the United States in a dramatic demonstration of how he would deliver on his campaign promise to fortify the nation’s borders.

But so many foreigners had flooded into the country since January, he vented to his national security team, that it was making a mockery of his pledge. Friends were calling to say he looked like a fool, Mr. Trump said.

No foreigners, god damn it! We don’t want all these stinkin foreigners stinkin up our beautiful country with all its beautiful golf courses and Luxxury High Righzez. Our country is for not-foreign white people with beautiful golden hair.

Then he started reading from the doc, which listed how many dastardly foreigners had received visas to come into the beautiful US in 2017.

More than 2,500 were from Afghanistan, a terrorist haven, the president complained.

Haiti had sent 15,000 people. They “all have AIDS,” he grumbled, according to one person who attended the meeting and another person who was briefed about it by a different person who was there.

Forty thousand had come from Nigeria, Mr. Trump added. Once they had seen the United States, they would never “go back to their huts” in Africa, recalled the two officials, who asked for anonymity to discuss a sensitive conversation in the Oval Office.

That’s the president of the US. That’s the squalid reality we’re living in. Everybody’s meanest ugliest racist uncle is the president.

Kelly and Tillerson tried to explain that many of the visas were just temporary ones for visits, but then Kelly and Miller turned on Tillerson, blaming him for all these filthy foreigners, causing him to blow a gasket.

It’s a miracle they haven’t melted us all down for soap yet.

Tempers flared and Mr. Kelly asked that the room be cleared of staff members. But even after the door to the Oval Office was closed, aides could still hear the president berating his most senior advisers.

For not moving quickly enough on the ethnic cleansing.

The meeting in June reflects Mr. Trump’s visceral approach to an issue that defined his campaign and has indelibly shaped the first year of his presidency.

It reflects everything – his “visceral” racism and general loathing for people he sees as inferiors, his rage and hatred and lack of control, his grandiosity and cluelessness about the extent of his power, his hideous urges, his authoritarianism, his filthy temper – his thoroughgoing badness on every dimension.

Seizing on immigration as the cause of countless social and economic problems, Mr. Trump entered office with an agenda of symbolic but incompletely thought-out goals, the product not of rigorous policy debate but of emotionally charged personal interactions and an instinct for tapping into the nativist views of white working-class Americans.

But mostly of his own hateful malevolent nature. He boils with loathing, and it bursts out of him all the time (think April Ryan and that press conference and the way he spoke to her). He’s that mean drunk at the bar who empties the room.

Those who know Mr. Trump say that his attitude toward immigrants long predates his entry into politics.

“He’s always been fearful where other cultures are concerned and always had anxiety about food and safety when he travels,” said Michael D’Antonio, who interviewed him for the biography “The Truth About Trump.” “His objectification and demonization of people who are different has festered for decades.”

He thinks they’re dirty. He’s that literal-minded. That’s what all the gold is about, maybe – purity and Cleanness, along with Expense. Gold people are white and clean, and poor people are brown and dirty.

Happy holidays.



From e pluribus unum to MAGA

Dec 22nd, 2017 5:34 pm | By

Oh gawd.

There’s such a thing as a presidential coin. Presidents give them out as little presents. Trump decided they weren’t flashy enough so he came up with his own new design.

The presidential seal has been replaced by an eagle bearing President Trump’s signature. The eagle’s head faces right, not left, as on the seal. The 13 arrows representing the original states have disappeared. And the national motto, “E pluribus unum” — a Latin phrase that means “Out of many, one” — is gone.

Instead, both sides of the coin feature Trump’s official campaign slogan, “Make America Great Again.”

The presidential seal has been replaced by an eagle bearing President Trump’s signature. The eagle’s head faces right, not left, as on the seal. The 13 arrows representing the original states have disappeared. And the national motto, “E pluribus unum” — a Latin phrase that means “Out of many, one” — is gone.

Instead, both sides of the coin feature Trump’s official campaign slogan, “Make America Great Again.”

Mere words can’t do justice to its ugliness. The Post kindly put it next to three of the previous type for a snapshot.

Bill O’Leary/The Washington Post

So ugly, so vulgar, so inappropriate (the campaign slogan! his name in three places! the garish colors!), so narcissistic.



File under Weirdness

Dec 22nd, 2017 3:09 pm | By

Ah the British sense of humor.

Noel Coward eat your heart out.



88.2%

Dec 22nd, 2017 2:44 pm | By

Porn script or sexual assault?

That’s the question two filmmakers recently asked a group of men for a new video project titled “Be Frank.” Created by Dutch natives Damayanti Dipayana and Camilla Borel-Rinkes, “Be Frank” is a seven-minute film featuring men discussing the recent #MeToo movement and the role men can play in combating sexual violence.

In the above “Be Frank” clip, Dipayana and Borel-Rinkes asked men to read different storylines and then guess whether the situation was from a pornography script or a #MeToo story. The #MeToo campaign, originally created by activist Tarana Burke, has recently sparked a cultural reckoning with how we deal with sexual violence around the world.

Although it’s revealed at the end of the clip that all of the stories are porn scripts, many of the guys have trouble discerning which ones are porn and which ones are sexual assault.

Which tells you something about porn.

The last still in the clip features a statistic that sums up the issue well: “88.2 percent of porn scenes contain some form of physical aggression against women.”

 88%. If there’s no aggression against women, it’s not sexy. Interesting.


The chorus of delegitimation

Dec 22nd, 2017 11:31 am | By

Yascha Mounk at the NYRB takes a less optimistic view, pointing out how far the Overton window has shifted in the past 11 months.

[W]hile many of the violations of basic democratic norms that President Trump and his collaborators have perpetrated over the past twelve months would not have been foreseeable before he took office, most of them had come to seem all-but-inevitable by the time he actually committed them. Trump’s unwillingness to dissociate himself from his most radical supporters was evident throughout the opening months of his presidency. The firing of FBI Director James Comey was preceded by a series of outrageous attacks. Even Trump’s endorsement of Roy Moore in the Alabama special election seemed inevitable by the time he tweeted his support.

These realities make it all the more infuriating that we are now hurtling toward yet another constitutional crisis, and that supposedly moderate Republicans are once again refusing to do anything about it.

Isn’t it though. We read stories in the Post about Republicans in Congress who are disgusted shocked appalled by Trump and yet…they never do a damn thing about it.

For the better part of a month, Fox News and other conservative media outlets have been smearing Special Counsel Robert Mueller, all but calling him an enemy of the American people. Over the past week, a series of senior Republicans have joined in the chorus of delegitimation, with a host of voices—from Mike Conaway, who leads the investigation of Trump’s campaign on the House Intelligence Committee, to John Cornyn, who heads the Senate equivalent—insinuating that it is time to wrap up the special counsel’s investigation.

In short, they’ve been clearing the path of brambles so that Trump can careen madly down it and fire Mueller at the end.

I fear that there is a simple reason for skepticism about whether Congress will defend the rule of law: over the past year, Republicans had a comparatively easy way to police this particular red line without overtly opposing Trump. “Obviously,” they could have said, “the president would never do anything as crazy as this; but if he did fire Robert Mueller, I would have to support congressional action to reinstate him.” Indeed, following that rationale, they could easily have signed onto bipartisan legislation that would have stopped Trump from being able to fire Mueller in a fit of rage in the first place.

Instead, virtually all of them refused to comment; the few who did actively conspired in undermining Mueller. (When former attorney general Eric Holder claimed to speak “on behalf of the vast majority of the American people,” when he said that “any attempt to remove Bob Mueller will not be tolerated,” for example, Senator Cornyn replied, simply, “You don’t.”)

Yes he does – but that’s not the point; the point is that Cornyn spurned Eric Holder’s warning about firing Mueller. Remember what Mueller is investigating? Russia’s interference with the election. The Overton window is out of sight somewhere over the horizon.



Trump could

Dec 22nd, 2017 10:30 am | By

Painter and Eisen on the ways Trump can and cannot impede Mueller.

Mr. Trump could install someone at the Department of Justice to oversee Mr. Mueller’s investigation, a minder who could control (and cut) Mr. Mueller’s budget, eliminate some of his team or curtail the scope of his investigation. Mr. Mueller seems safe as long as his current supervisor, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, is in place; Mr. Rosenstein just vouched for the special counsel before Congress. But the president has reportedly grumbled about Mr. Rosenstein and could replace him with a crony who would be more willing to interfere.

As Nixon tried to do. It didn’t work out for Nixon, but he didn’t have a Republican Congress…and Republicans weren’t as cynically indifferent to law and morality then.

The president may also try to pardon away the special counsel’s investigation. Mr. Trump could grant pardons to individuals who have already pleaded guilty, such as Michael Flynn, his former national security adviser, who pleaded guilty to lying to the F.B.I. this month. Or Mr. Trump might do so prospectively, to those who may be targets, such as his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, or his son Donald Trump Jr. Mr. Trump might even issue one to himself (he reportedly asked about it), whether individually or as part of a blanket pardon of all those involved in the Russia investigation.

And then we would know we were stuck in a tinpot dictatorship. It would be terrifying.

They can talk smack about Mueller, and they are, but it’s a hard sell when Trump is such a puffed-up turd of a man and Mueller is not.

Trump could just fire Mueller. He said the other day that he’s not planning to, but so what, he says all kinds of things (that’s what makes him such an expert on all the things), and he could say the opposite tomorrow, or just do it without saying anything.

The drumbeat of distortions and threats will, sadly, continue and must be promptly rebutted by commentators, Congress and the public. Democracy demands defense with analysis, opinion and the readiness for public protest (one of the co-authors, Mr. Eisen, has been involved in organizing these efforts). Peaceful force is something that Mr. Trump has made clear he understands. We must continue to deploy it, lest the president achieve by debasement what our collective efforts have thus far prevented him from doing directly: stopping Robert Mueller’s investigation.

I wish us all the best of luck.



Considerable repetition, verbosity and vagueness of expression

Dec 22nd, 2017 8:47 am | By

Also in the Guardian, and not particularly significant but kind of amusing…why Carter Page had such a hard time defending his PhD thesis.

In emails seen by the Guardian, Page compares his decade-long struggle to get a postgraduate qualification to the ordeal suffered by Mikhail Khodorkovsy – the Russian oligarch sent to a Siberian prison by Vladimir Putin.

In one unhappy note to his examiners, he writes: “Your actions to date have been far more destructive than anything I have personally experienced in my 39 years on this planet.” The fate of Khodorkovsky, he adds, represents “the closest analogy in recent history to my trials”.

Well at least we can see he had a scholarly sense of proportion and fitness.

Page first submitted his thesis on central Asia’s transition from communism to capitalism in 2008. Two respected academics, Professor Gregory Andrusz, and Dr Peter Duncan, were asked to read his thesis and to examine him in a face-to-face interview known as a viva.

Andrusz said he had expected it would be “easy” to pass Page, a student at the School of Oriental and African Studies (Soas). He said it actually took “days and days” to wade through Page’s work. Page “knew next to nothing” about social science and seemed “unfamiliar with basic concepts like Marxism or state capitalism,” the professor said.

The viva, held at University College, London, went badly. “Page seemed to think that if he talked enough, people would think he was well-informed. In fact it was the reverse,” Andrusz said. He added that Page was “dumbfounded” when the examiners told him he had failed.

Doesn’t that sound exactly like his future boss? Who once told a journalist he’s the best expert on foreign affairs because he has a very good brain and he’s said a lot of things? Exact words.

Their subsequent report was withering. It said Page’s thesis was “characterised by considerable repetition, verbosity and vagueness of expression”, failed to meet the criteria required for a PhD, and needed “substantial revision”. He was given 18 months to produce another draft.

Also sounds like the boss, who babbles instead of saying anything of substance. Page tried again, failed again, pitched a fit, got new examiners, finally got his PhD.

Here’s where Trump said it, back in March 2016:

Donald Trump finally shared the name of someone he consults on foreign policy: himself.

Asked on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” who he talks with consistently about foreign policy, Trump responded, “I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things.”

Yep. The more things you say, the better expert you become.



Dat woord

Dec 22nd, 2017 8:16 am | By

Yet more shame and degradation on the world stage, this time involving the shiny new US ambassador to the Netherlands.

Trump’s new choice for ambassador, Pete Hoekstra, who was only sworn in by the vice president, Mike Pence, on 11 December, was being interviewed for current affairs programme Nieuwsuur by reporter Wouter Zwart.

Zwart says: “You mentioned in a debate that there are no-go zones in the Netherlands, and that cars and politicians are being set on fire in the Netherlands.”

Hoekstra replies: “I didn’t say that. This is actually an incorrect statement. We would call it fake news.”

Hoekstra is then shown clips of him saying: “The Islamic movement has now gotten to a point where they have put Europe into chaos. Chaos in the Netherlands, there are cars being burnt, there are politicians that are being burnt … and yes there are no-go zones in the Netherlands.”

Oops. So how did he respond? Did he say oh sorry my bad? Did he hell.

Challenged about having called this “fake news”, Hoekstra then went on to deny to Zwart that he had in fact used the phrase “fake news”.

“I didn’t call that fake news. I didn’t use the words today. I don’t think I did.”

Think again, sir.



Hijinks

Dec 21st, 2017 5:35 pm | By

These are the people who are ruling over us.

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bc0wnvLDR3u/

“Some good friends decided that while my birthday is not for 2 weeks that they would get me an early 40th birthday cake,” Trump Jr. explained on Instagram, beside a photo of himself gripping the cookie with both hands and what appears to be a grimace of pain.

Cruz stands next to him.

Newsweek wrote the senator “appeared unmoved by the cookie,” though Bill Kristol saw a “sickly smile” on his face — as though he had some foreboding of the storm to come.

These are the people ruling over us.



That deadline came and went

Dec 21st, 2017 2:17 pm | By

There’s a pattern.

On a summer afternoon in Southern California nine years ago, a commuter train blew through a stop signal and ran head-on into an oncoming freight train, killing 25 people.

After investigators determined that the crash could have been prevented by automatic-braking technology, Congress ordered all passenger railroads to install new systems by 2016. Since then, Congress has extended that deadline and trains have kept speeding into preventable disasters, including the Amtrak derailment that killed three people in Western Washington on Monday.

In Amtrak’s case, this is a recurring nightmare. The crash this week was eerily reminiscent of one just two years ago in Philadelphia, where an Amtrak train barreled into a sweeping curve at 106 miles an hour before jumping the tracks and rolling over. Eight people died.

That crash, too, could have been prevented by the technology, known as positive train control. But five months after it happened, Congress gave railroads at least three more years to install it.

Well, you have to look at it from their point of view. Installing it will take money and effort. Not installing it is more convenient and cheaper. Naturally Congress is going to say yes sure you can have more time, there’s no hurry.

“Here we are, almost 10 years later, and that deadline came and went,” said Kitty Higgins, a former member of the National Transportation Safety Board. “The railroads have been slow-walking it and it still is not implemented. It’s absolutely outrageous.”

But it’s cheaper and less trouble to keep putting it off. That’s the important thing.

Railroads have cited the cost and complexity of adding the technology, which relies on satellites and radio signals to prevent trains from running out of control if an engineer has lost focus or fallen asleep while driving. Industry estimates of the total cost of installation exceed $10 billion.

See? Money and effort! Those don’t grow on trees you know.

Legislators settled for a new deadline of Dec. 31, 2018, with an additional, two-year extension possible on a case-by-case basis. President Barack Obama signed the extension into law in October 2015.

The two Republican lawmakers behind the deadline extension, Representative Bill Shuster of Pennsylvania and Senator Roy Blunt of Missouri, were the top two recipients of political campaign contributions from the railroad industry in 2016, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Of course they were.



You gonna respect us?

Dec 21st, 2017 2:00 pm | By

The UN told Trump to go fuck himself.

The United Nations general assembly has delivered a stinging rebuke to Donald Trump, voting by a huge majority to reject his unilateral recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

The vote came after a redoubling of threats by Nikki Haley, the US ambassador to the UN, who said that Washington would remember which countries “disrespected” America by voting against it.

Jesus. Who else talks like that? Bullies, that’s who. “You will respect me or else.”

Despite the warning, 128 members voted on Thursday in favour of the resolution supporting the longstanding international consensus that the status of Jerusalem – which is claimed as a capital by both Israel and the Palestinians – can only be settled as an agreed final issue in a peace deal. Countries which voted for the resolution included major recipients of US aid such as Egypt, Afghanistan and Iraq.

Although largely symbolic, the vote in emergency session of the world body had been the focus of days of furious diplomacy by both the Trump administration and Israel, including Trump’s threat to cut US funding to countries that did not back the US recognition.

But only nine states – including the United States and Israel –voted against the resolution. The other countries which supported Washington were Togo, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Marshall Islands, Guatemala and Honduras.

Ouch. Micronesia – says it all, dunnit.

35 countries abstained, including a lot of allies like Australia and Canada.

While support for the resolution was somewhat less than Palestinian officials had hoped, the meagre tally of just nine votes in support of the US and Israeli position was a serious diplomatic blow for Trump.

On the one hand he’ll hurl insults about it, on the other hand he’ll blame it all on Hillary and Fake News and The Swamp. What he won’t do is learn anything or feel chastened.

Speaking to the assembly before the vote, Haley – who earlier in the week told members that the US “would be taking names” – returned to the offensive.

She never left the offensive. She’s stuck in the offensive as long as she works for that excrescence.

“I must also say today: when we make generous contributions to the UN, we also have expectation that we will be respected,” she said. “What’s more, we are being asked to pay for the dubious privileges of being disrespected.”

Who’s “we”? She doesn’t represent the whole of the US, and Trump certainly doesn’t. US payments to the UN don’t come out of Trump’s pocket, and he doesn’t get to take UN votes personally.

While Thursday’s resolution was in support of existing UN resolutions on Jerusalem and the peace process, the clumsy intervention by Trump and Haley also made the vote a referendum on Trump’s often unilateral and abrasive foreign policy.

You know, the foreign policy designed to insult and alienate everyone on the planet except for Netanyahu – that “foreign policy.”

Updating to add:



30 years for a stillbirth

Dec 21st, 2017 11:12 am | By

Last week in El Salvador:

An El Salvador court has rejected the appeal of a woman sentenced to 30 years in prison over what she says was a stillbirth.

Teodora del Carmen Vásquez, 37, said she was working in 2007 when she began to experience intense pain, then bleeding. She called for help before fainting. As she came round, police officers surrounded her and accused her of murdering her baby by inducing an abortion of her nearly full-term baby.

She was convicted of aggravated murder in 2008.

The non-profit Center for Reproductive Rights, which has been campaigning for the release of dozens of other women convicted of murder in El Salvador for obstetric emergencies, said the decision was “another slap in the face for Teodora, who never committed any crime”.

“The Salvadoran court is perpetuating the criminal prosecution of women who suffer pregnancy complications, denying women their dignity, freedom and rights,” said Nancy Northup, the centre’s president and CEO.

“El Salvador’s abortion law criminalises and wrongfully imprisons women. Today the Salvadoran court chose to deny Teodora her due process.”

That “savior” really hates women.

In 2014, a coalition of NGOs, led by Agrupación Ciudadana and the Center for Reproductive Rights, launched the “Las 17” online campaign to call for the release of women who had experienced obstetric emergencies and who were charged with having an illegal abortion and then convicted of murder. Three women have been released. But in July 19-year old Evelyn Beatriz Hernandez Cruz, who had been raped, was sentenced to 30 years for murder after she had a stillbirth.

What was that about witch hunts again?



The wave quickly grew

Dec 21st, 2017 10:45 am | By

Sweden too.

Cissi Wallin was inspired by the explosion of the Harvey Weinstein racket to name a name.

Ms. Wallin had filed a police report in 2011, a few years after she was sexually assaulted, only to see it dismissed within weeks. Now she decided to do something different: She put the name of a well-known columnist for Sweden’s largest left-wing tabloid newspaper on her Instagram page, alongside a statement saying he had drugged and violently raped her in Stockholm more than a decade ago.

Soon more people came forward about the man. I was a co-author of an investigation into his behavior.

And suddenly, just as in the United States, stories of other national figures in the arts and media began pouring forth. About men who had used their professional power and influence to harass or abuse younger, often subordinate women, often at work. About situations in which “everyone knew,” but men viewed as indispensable had been protected by management for years (sometimes the perpetrators were management). In contrast to the situation in the United States, however, the wave quickly grew beyond accusations against the famous and powerful: Tens of thousands of Swedish women have signed a series of appeals in the national press detailing incidents of brutal sexual assault and harassment in almost every professional field, from law, medicine and academia to politics and defense. Committed by Swedish men.

The libertarian crew will say oh no, that’s a witch hunt, that’s infantilizing women, that will never do; all those tens of thousands of women must deal with their own personal harasser or harassers and then Move On. But knowing it happens a lot lets women know they’re not alone in being harassed and they’re not alone in saying it should stop. It’s not weak or infantile to want to know what the truth is and to want fellow resisters in fighting back.

As someone who has lived and worked in both Sweden and the United States, I’ve seen sexual harassment in both places over decades. In my experience, the American workplace is more openly sexualized and flirtatious, a place where women are expected to be open and enthusiastic to advances by men, whether in the form of offers of mentorship that must happen over dinner or as more direct abuses of power.

Sweden, on the other hand, is more cold, correct and asexual on the surface. But give a Swedish man a drink or two after work, and you’ll be surprised how quickly many of them will take out their various frustrations in the form of lewd behavior against women, only to seamlessly go back to voicing egalitarian ideals the next day.

#ThemToo



An atmosphere of mutual respect

Dec 21st, 2017 10:05 am | By

Via Actual Feminist News:

Stop the Harassment and Threats
Against Radical Feminists

Ad in the December 2017 Issue of The Progressive

[Note from the editors: Below find the text of an ad that appears in the December issue of The Progressive. In our view the issue raised warrants a conversation on the revolutionary left. We are therefore reproducing the ad here as our way of helping to facilitate that discussion.]

As socialists and progressives we are committed to building a united movement of the left rich in our diversity capable of creating a just, democratic, and egalitarian society freed from all forms of oppression and discrimination. To build such a movement for fundamental change will require an atmosphere of mutual respect, and an ability to tolerate political differences among our movement sisters and brothers. It will also require a willingness to engage in open debate and discussion in order to find common ground and build solidarity among various oppressed groups with at times divergent interests.

Radical feminists have been an essential part of the broader progressive movement for social justice from the Second Wave of feminism in the 1960s through the present. Radical feminism puts front and center the question of female liberation, i.e., how to end female oppression and subordination by a patriarchal society, therefore raising important issues for the left.

We are therefore disturbed by recent demonization, intimidation, and threats of violence against radical and lesbian feminists by certain segments of the transgender community and their supporters who have attempted to silence feminist voices and have had a chilling effect on the ability to engage in open discussion and debate on complex issues of sex, gender, and sexuality, a debate that is sorely needed in order to build an effective and united movement.

These disturbing incidents include the following:

(1) Ann Menasche, a long time social justice activist, socialist, Green, and civil rights lawyer was cyberbullied on Facebook in March of 2017 by a group of trans-activists and their supporters. She was labeled a “TERF” (“Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist”), “Nazi,” “rapist,” “racist,” and a supporter of “genocide” who, like other “TERFs” are hateful bigots that deserve to die. Several people contacted her employer in an unsuccessful attempt to get her fired from her job. Her “crime” was to respond to a post by writing that persons born female are oppressed on the basis of sex (a position taken by many leftists since the time of Karl Marx), and that it was unfortunate that many males fail to recognize this fact.

(2) Feminists involved in the Vancouver Women’s Library faced similar threats and epithets by a group calling itself “Trans Communist Cadre” during its opening night event in February of 2017. Though the library welcomed transwomen to participate in the event and to join the library, more than two dozen protesters showed up, blocking and assaulting female patrons, tearing a poster from the wall, pouring red wine on the bookshelves and books, and tripping the fire alarm. They labelled library supporters “TERFS” and “fascists,” demanded that the library take “TERF” books off the shelves (authors such as Adrienne Rich and Mary Daly) and made groundless accusations of violence against library founders.

(3) In March of 2017, Tasha-Rose Hodges, a mother of six with children in the St Paul, Minnesota, school district, announced her candidacy for Board of Education. The focus of her campaign was to improve the quality of education in St. Paul and address problems like lead in the drinking water. She had also taken a strong stand against bullying of any kind in the schools, including on the basis of gender identity. However, because she had expressed gender-critical views, within 24 hours of announcing her candidacy, an on-line campaign began to bully her into dropping out of the race. They described Hodges as a “loathsome snake,” accusing her of spreading “venom” and “hate,” with one writer telling her crudely to essentially go home and masturbate. Another reminded readers “to punch your local TERF.” The harassment escalated to include death threats. Hodges ended up dropping out of the race because it was no longer possible for her to focus on the issues that had motivated her campaign to begin with.

(4) In January, 2017, the Working Class Movement Library in Salford England, a small volunteer-run library which archives stories of working class people’s lives and activism, announced that it would be hosting feminist journalist Julie Bindel as a speaker. Julie is a founder of Justice for Women, a movement for women who live with domestic violence. She was to speak on her experiences growing up as a working class lesbian. In response, hundreds of people began a petition campaign demanding that the library rescind the invitation, claiming that her work and her views on gender constituted bigotry. Julie was accused of “violence,” and was called a “fascist” and “Nazi.” The protesters even went so far as to go after the library’s funding. However, many women around the world voiced their support for her right to speak. Ultimately, the library did not cave into the pressure to no-platform her, and on February 4, 2017, Julie gave her talk.

(5) In January, 2017, Carey Callahan, a person who has detransitioned from a transman back to female (not herself a radical feminist), posted on her blog a link to screen shots of responses a friend of hers, also a de-transitioner, had received to a post the friend made on twitter. Her friend had tweeted that she believed there was a need for female-only space. Two transwomen responded by providing a detailed description of how they would rape her, sending her pictures of their genitals. Casey, who describes herself as “invested in the well-being of anyone with gender dysphoria, whether trans-identified or not,” declared that she was done with taking seriously people who use the word “TERF” because of the harassment and threats that go along with the word.

Tragically, both radical feminists and transgender persons experience oppression and violence (overwhelmingly at the hands of heterosexual males) as a result of the strict gender norms, sexism, and homophobia of our society. Women as a group are subjected to systemic physical and sexual violence. Moreover, many radical feminists are lesbians who remain a marginalized and stigmatized group because of their sexuality. Most lesbians are also gender nonconforming in other ways and many have themselves experienced “gender dysphoria.” To the extent that conflicting ideologies and interests have developed between activists from two oppressed groups—transwomen and radical feminists—we are challenged to find ways to enhance communication and debate and to ensure that all voices are heard.

We, the undersigned, as supporters of feminism and progressive politics believe that regardless of one’s views on gender, the tactics of name-calling, no-platforming, and threats to individual feminists’ jobs, livelihoods, and personal safety must be wholeheartedly rejected by progressives. Such tactics have no place on the left.

Signers:

Mick Allan—Author, British Labor Party & union mem-ber: UK • T. Grace Atkinson—Radical Feminist, author: New York • Jessica Barr—Lesbian Feminist: North Carolina • Tina Beacock—Lesbian, socialist, Chicago Teacher’s Union member: Illinois • Julia Beck Jean-Baptiste—Case manager, Dept. of Health; feminist activist: Maryland • Steve Bloom—New York City activist, poet, composer: New York • Michael Brackney—Green Party activist: California • Sandi Brockway—Founder, “Microcosm USA,” peace & justice activist: California • Ras-Iras Charles—Non-western progressive, writer on politics/economics: Dominica • Beth Chopp—Engineer, former union president: California • Paul Cocksholt—Socialist author, Scottish Republican activist, Member, Solidarity (Scotland): UK • Kim Cortez—Marxist feminist writer: Arizona • Max Dashu—Historian, educator & writer: California • Peter Dolack—Activist, author, writer of “Systemic Disorder” Blog: New York • Martin DuFresne—Translator, pro-feminist activist: Canada • Theresa El Amin—Founder & Regional Director, Southern Anti-Racism Network: Georgia • Marisa Figueiredo—Redstockings: Massa-chusetts • Mariana Firestone—20 something radical lesbian feminist & activist: New York • Laurie Fuchs— Founder & director, Ladyslipper Music: North Carolina • Rochelle Glickman—Feminist & Green Party member: California • Rick Greenblatt—Independent Socialist, Green Party activist: California • Shani Handel—Long-time activist: New Mexico • Carol Hanisch—Women’s Liberation; co-editor of Meeting Ground On-line: New York • Kim Harmon—Educator, feminist: Ohio • Chris Hedges—Author & social critic, “On Contact”: New Jersey • Pete Healey—Long-time activist: New York • Andrea Houtman—Long-time socialist & Green Party activist: California • Rya NT Jones—Trans YouTuber: Wisconsin • Morgan Laird—Writer, student, radical feminist activist: Texas • Traven Leyshon—Dual mem-ber Solidarity/Democratic Socialists of America, socialist labor activist: Vermont • Rachel (“Charlie Rae”) Lima—Writer, “The Fifth Column”: North Carolina • Merritt Linden—Lesbian Feminist activist: California • Karla Lindquist—Domestic violence counselor, reproductive rights and union activist: Oregon • Fran Luck—Host/Producer, “Joy of Resistance,” Multi-cultural feminist radio, WBAI: New York • Sherry Lypsky—Red-stockings: Pennsylvania • Matt Meyer—Int’l Peace Research Association: New York • Selene Michaels—Visual artist & feminist activist: New York • Blaine Mogel—College instructor, Sierra Club & Green Party: California • Nichole Montoya—Web developer, Housing & Green Party activist: California • David Morrison—Green Party Activist: California • Meghan Murphy—Founder & Editor, Feminist Current: Canada • Lisa Neuman—Translator, Radical Feminist: UK • Damien Oheix—Factory worker: France • Sarah Palmer—Marxist freelance writer: Massachusetts • Marge Piercy—Poet, novelist, memoirist: Massachusetts • Lynne Sandoval—Lesbian-feminist & Green Party activist: California • Kathie Sarachild—Redstockings: New York • Kathy Scarbrough—Women’s Liberation; co-editor of Meeting Ground On-line: New Jersey • Meg Starr—Resistance in Brooklyn: New York • Jean-Baptiste Studer—Polemicist; former local secretary, Movement des Jeunes Communistes de France: France • Linda Thompson—Past co-chair, Green Party of Connecticut: Connecticut • Emily Weir—Trade unionist, communist: UK • Parker Wolf—Radical feminist, Butch Lesbian blogger: Illinois • Miranda Yardley—Transexual blogger; editor, “Terrorizer” music magazine: UK

All organizational affiliations for identification purposes



If she is willing to play the victim

Dec 21st, 2017 8:32 am | By

For years, decades, workplace sexual harassment goes unreported and unprevented, then one big perp is outed and the dam breaks – so naturally the next step is the move to say repair that dam right now. Spiked came up with several women prepared to say this has gone much too far – not the routine harassment but the reporting of the routine harassment.

Lionel Shriver is one.

In the complicated dance of courtship, someone has to make a move, and the way one conventionally discovers if one’s attraction is returned is to brave some gentle physical contact and perhaps accept rebuff.

Actually it’s not. There are many other “moves” in that complicated dance; physical contact is not the first step. Also, the workplace is not a dating agency, and it’s a bad idea to treat it as one. The issue isn’t just groping in general, it’s mostly groping at work and how it can handicap women.

Julia Hartley-Brewer is one.

Women who put up with sexual harassment and keep quiet about it for years, protecting the perpetrators, are hailed as heroines and strong, powerful feminists. Yet, bizarrely, women who speak out and deal with sexual harassment forcefully at the time, and then happily move on with their lives as I and millions of other women have done over the years, are derided as ‘victim-blamers’ or even ‘rape apologists’. It’s almost as if a woman is only ‘the right kind of woman’ if she is willing to play the victim.

Horse shit. Women didn’t “put up with sexual harassment,” they had it forced on them and weren’t able to speak out and deal with it. Some did speak out but got nowhere; some did speak out and got fired or blacklisted. Apparently Hartley-Brewer had better luck, which is great for her, but it’s far from a reason for her to accuse women who had worse luck of “protecting” the perps. Situations differ; perps differ; outcomes differ.

This is not what feminism was supposed to be about. It was supposed to be about empowering women, not infantilising them.

The top fave libertarian trope – oppressed groups must never discuss their oppression, because that’s “playing the victim” and being “infantilized.” They have to suck it up and move on, take responsibility and tough it out, be empowered. There’s no such thing as structural oppression, it’s all just random incidents between Free Individuals, and the strong will survive.

Feminism was too so supposed to be about structural oppression. Hartley-Brewer is confusing feminism with the self-help movement.

She ends by saying with emphasis that it’s a witch hunt.

It’s all like that – typical libertarian talking points, Living Marxism morphed into Droning Randism.



One heck of a leader

Dec 21st, 2017 6:59 am | By

Don’t read this if you’re feeling at all queasy. It was party time at Donnie’s place yesterday.

President Donald Trump recognized the “great chairman” Sen. Orrin Hatch while celebrating the passage of the Republican tax plan Wednesday on the White House steps.

In turn, Hatch, R-Utah, said, “We’re going to keep fighting to make this the greatest presidency we’ve seen not only in generations but maybe ever.”

That’s like holding a bowl of warm shit and saying you’re going to keep fighting to make this the most beautiful marble sculpture we’ve seen not only in generations but maybe ever. You can’t turn a bowl of warm shit into a marble sculpture and you can’t turn a Trump presidency into the greatest ever seen. You don’t have the materials.

Exultant House and Senate Republican leaders gathered with Trump on the White House South Lawn to hail the newly passed tax overhaul and slap each other on the back, with no one heaping higher praise on the president than Hatch.

“Mr. President, I have to say you’re living up to everything I thought you would,” the seven-term senator said. “You’re one heck of a leader.”

I did warn you.



It was her fault

Dec 20th, 2017 5:24 pm | By

Rebecca Solnit:

Oh look, it’s hate on women for not stopping men from doing horrible things to women, again? Street poster blaming Merle Streep for raper-dude, though she has said she didn’t know and made a strong statement for victims, against him (in comments below). Possibly connected to the Pentagon Papers movie she’s starring in, and the poster is by right-wing artist Sabo, who Mike Cernovich (Mr. Pizzagate if you’re not familiar with him) is urging people to donate to. The gist of these kind of attacks is so fundamentalist: men are women’s responsibility, not their own.

Image may contain: 2 people, outdoor

Sure, blame Meryl Streep for Harvey Weinstein; that makes all the sense in the world.

Solnit quotes herself from a couple of months ago:

Remember that every time a man commits a violent act it only takes one or two steps to figure out how it’s a woman’s fault, and that these dance steps are widely known and practiced and quite a bit of fun. There are things men do that are the fault of women who are too sexy, and other things men do that are the fault of women who are not sexy enough, but women only come in those two flavors: not enough, too much, and it is the fate of heterosexual men to endure this affliction. Wives are responsible for their husbands, especially if their husbands are supremely powerful and terrifying figures leading double lives and accountable to no one. But women are now also in the workforce, where they have so many opportunities to be responsible for other men as well.

She knew.



Snow day!

Dec 20th, 2017 4:40 pm | By