The corollary
"I am trying to see things from your perspective, but I'm having a hard time getting my head that far up my ass."
But, certainly, there -- there certainly are concerns about having, you know, openly gay people in the military. I mean, the example I like to give is if -- for example, if you put me in a platoon with nothing but, let's say, Hooter waitresses, that's going to distract me, and I'm not going to be focused on winning the war. I am going to be focused on other things.
Mark Smith, Conservative Commentator & Constitutional Attorney, commenting on CNN
Is this guy for real? Did he really just admit on national television that a big set of hooters would be so distracting to him he would be unable to focus on keeping himself and his companions alive in the heat of combat? (We'll ignore for the moment the fact that combat fatigues are a far cry from a Hooters uniform.) OK. So this guy has his own perspective. He is exercising his God given right to be a complete and total idiot. And I am more than happy to let him be an idiot. The problem is he is trying to force his idiocy on the rest of the nation via public policy. What we have here is a classic example of the transference that runs rampant in conservative circles.
Someone who is completely untrustworthy is also unable to trust others. That person will assume that everyone else will try to screw him over in the same way he they will try to rip everyone else off. Conservatives are constantly accusing homosexuals (and the left in general) of harboring agendas which are actually their own. Mr. Smith is apparently such a slobbering Neanderthal that he cannot wrest his attention from an attractive set of mammary glands. He therefore assumes that everyone else is equally incapable of reigning in their sexual impulses.
If you read between the lines of right wing hysteria about the homosexual agenda, their fear is not that homosexuals want America to simply accept homosexuality as a reality with which some people live. Their fear is that homosexuals want America to adopt homosexuality. Apparently homosexuality is so enticing that without strict religious and social injunctions every man in America would start chasing cock. Cigar anyone?
Think about what's really going on for a minute. Who is trying to force their way of life on whom? The laws GLBT people are trying to get passed are basically laws that dictate wingnuts like Mark Smith have to leave us the hell alone. I am not aware of any statute that would require Mark Smith to take a male paramour. On the other hand, conservatives are doing their best to re-criminalize homosexuality and make sure that GLBT people remain marginalized in society.
Transference: because I am an ass who believes everyone should think and f*** like I do, and because I am willing to try to use the law to enforce my views on the rest of the nation, everyone else be equally an ass.
Idiots.
It’s all about perspective
This is a cool concept. From the artist:
This is the way I see this city (or this country for that matter). A mix of different races, styles that don't quite fit together yet and don't understand that in a sense, all of them are necessary to fill one piece of the puzzle and keep this thing going on.
Perspective. Our experience colors everything we say and do. Two people living in the same family will experience family dynamics and pressures differently as a result of personality differences, sibling order, possession (or not) of abilities valued by the family and so on. Two people from the same family will respond to the same situation differently. How then do we expect a whole nation to think as one? But we do. We want everyone to agree with us. We want everyone to look like us. We want everyone to act like us.
Would that more people could understand there is more than one way to see/view/understand everything in this world, and no way is necessarily better than another. Would that people would not castigate others for not seeing the world through the same lens as they. Would that people would stop and say, "Really? That's the way you see it? Tell me about that."
Of Immigration and Elephants
If we want to reduce our dependence on foreign oil maybe someone should figure out how to harness all the hot air that is being generated around the immigration "debate." So much time is spent talking about nothing. The elephant that no one is talking about is every single power player in this issue has a vested interest in the status quo. No one really wants anything to change.
Labor unions contend that the [proposed guest worker] program would depress U.S. wages and create an underclass of abused foreign workers.
As opposed to an underclass of exploited foreign workers who have no legal standing and thus no recourse to address abuses? What the hell? Who makes this stuff up?
An amendment by Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) would impose a hefty surcharge on illegal immigrants granted legal status to help states pay for the medical and educational services such immigrants would claim.
I realize that Cornyn suffers from one of the worst cases of cranial-rectal inversion on Capitol Hill, but who does he think he's fooling? Services they would claim? Isn't that what the taxes they will be paying are supposed to provide? (Not that most of them aren't paying taxes already.) The gall of these people! How dare they cross the border illegally to take jobs eagerly offered by U.S. businesses! This is nothing more that self-righteous preening. "Look at me! Look at what I champion I am for U.S. citizens everywhere! (Well, at least in Texas.) Look at how determined I am to make sure that only the cool people are granted citizenship!" What no one will be talking about is how this pretty much guarantees a continued supply of undocumented labor, because, really, who's going to want to stand up and be identified to receive that kind of abuse?
It boils down to big business liking its cheap, exploitable labor that they don't have to pay minimum wage, don't have to insure and don't have to pay taxes for. The incestuous relationship that exists between U.S. business and Capitol Hill pretty much guarantees that immigration reform will get nowhere. And what opportunities for grandstanding! Dipshits like Cornyn will get to rage about criminals and justice, all the while slipping his spare change under the table to immigrants tending his lawns.
Now that I think about it, undocumented workers are a great way to solve the coming Social Security problem. Oh, sure, we could legalize them and introduce a whole new labor force to replace the one that is retiring, but why stop there? Why don't we make sure that they are never granted legal standing in the U.S. so we never have to pay them back? Kaching!
Pardon me while my head explodes.
What the hell? Who puts a baby in a microwave? Obviously I am outraged that someone would do that to a helpless infant. But what is just the icing on the cake is it is okay for manifestly incompetent (for whatever reason, legitimate or otherwise) and dangerous people to parent children as long as a penis penetrates a vagina. This may be an extreme case, but incompetent parents are hardly rare. Talk to me some time about the kids I worked with while interning at County Youth Services whose parents had no business making babies.
The right can stop shoveling the bullshit about marriage being about creating a safe environment for raising children. If states asked questions like, "Do you have a mental illness that would cause you to be a danger to your spouse or offspring?" before granting a marriage license, they might have a stronger argument. But they don't. They are not trying to protect marriage. They just want to regulate sex. Tell you what. If straight folk can ever effectively manage their own sexual behavior, maybe I'll listen to their arguments about state regulation of sex acts.
Edited for the sake of propriety
How can you not note the passing of Jerry Falwell, but what the hell do you say? Though it certainly wasn't I, somebody loved him. Anything I can think of to say about the man seems callous and insensitive to those grieving his absence. So I guess I'll follow Greg's lead and say nothing.
Mine! Mine!
I don't know how many of you follow Kyle's Bed & Breakfast. I've been reading it for years now. I'm not sure I know why I enjoy this little fantasy world of handsome, walking stereotypes, but I do get a kick out it. Still, I'm not sure what to make of the latest episode.
We join the story with Brad (a young, semi-closted hottie, who remains closeted because he's a minor league baseball player and doesn't want to hurt his chances of getting into the majors) reading a comic on the couch in the living room in his tidy whities. This is hardly abnormal behavior for Brad who is often wandering the B&B in his skivvies. Enter, Matt a hot EMT who has recently taken a romantic interest in Brad.
Brad, what are you doing?
Just readin' comic books.
In your underwear? In the living room?
Yeah, so?
It's a bit inappropriate...
For who?
Look, Brad, I realize we just started dating so I don't know if that tecnically makes us boyfriends, but I'm not comfortable with other guys oogling my boyfriend's body.
What "other guys?"
And red-blooded gay man who happens to walk by, Brad. Who could resist?
Matt, I walk around the B&B all the time in my briefs. I just feel more comfortable this way. Nobody cares.
I care.
You never said anything before.
We weren't dating before.
I just don't get it. I could understand Matt's reaction if it was the first time he'd seen Brad hanging out in his underwear, but it's not. The guys living at the B&B aren't going to see anything with which they are not already quite familiar. It's also not like Brad has been out to seduce everyone in the B&B by exposing a little flesh (okay a lot). I can't help but feel like this is supposed to be some expression of affection from Matt. "You're mine now. No one else is allowed to look." Yeah, that sounds really cute and sexy. What is it about humans that we turn love into something possessive?
D is a speed skater. Yes, he has the ass and legs appropriate to the sport. Guys are oogling D's ass all the time. I hardly give it a second thought. Appreciative looks and comments are not uncommon. It doesn't even particularly bother me when some guy has the stones to reach out and give it a squeeze. All it does is reinforce my belief that I have a hot boyfriend and that I'm damn lucky he chooses to be with me.
Am I a radical?
Finished – Dispelling the Myths About Addiction
This is a good first book to read if you're interested in addiction issues. It gives a brief overview of the issues surrounding addiction treatment including brain chemistry, psycho-social factors, public policy and barriers to research. For the most part it didn't tell me anything I didn't already know or hadn't already concluded myself. Some of the brain chemistry stuff did go over my head. I understand basic synaptic function, but I don't know the significance of the more specific structures of the brain. I also found it interesting that with some addictive drugs it's not just about developing a tolerance. They actually rewire the brain to create dependence. Along the same lines, the chemical processes that produce intoxication are separate from the chemical process that produce addiction which are separate form the process that produce tolerance. It's amazingly complex, and that's just the biology piece.
Some interesting statistics from the book:
- The annual cost to society for all types of cancer (1990): $96.1 billion.
- The annual cost to society for alcohol abuse (1990): $98.6 billion
- The annual cost to society for substance abuse (alcohol, nicotine, illicit drugs) (1990): $256.8 billion
- The 1995 research budget for cancer: $1,215.5 million
- The 1995 research budget for substance abuse: $472.1 million
- Higher education is related to decreased drug use.
- Higher education is related to increased alcohol consumption.
- Two thirds of people over the age of 14 drink alcohol.
- Dividing the amount of alcohol produced by the number of alcohol drinkers equates to 10 gallons of whiskey per person annually.
- However, 10% of alcohol drinkers consume 50% of alcohol produced.
- 500mg percent* blood alcohol level is considered fatal, suppressing brain function enough that breathing stops.
- The record non-fatal blood alcohol level is 1500mg percent.
If you'd like to take a shot at calculating how much alcohol you drink in a year, here is a handy liquid measurement conversion calculator. Don't forget your basic alcohol equivalences: 1 12oz. can of beer = 1 5oz. glass of wine = 1 1.5oz shot of whiskey.
Just to give you an idea, a bottle of wine a week is "only" 2.1 gallons of alcohol a year.
*mg/percent is a standard measure for concentration of substances in the blood, but I don't quite understand what it means. Googling "mg percent" demonstrates its wide spread use, but I couldn't find a definition. If any of the more biologically minded out there want to enlighten me, I'd appreciate it.
Abstinence Only Idiocy
Over at Positive Liberty, Jason Kuznicki presents a few intellectual arguments against abstinence only sex education policies. Not wanting to dilute the intellectual tenor of that post, I chose to post my comments here. Please allow me to present a more practical example of the idiocy of abstinence only sex education.
I recently had a teenager explain to me his idea of safe sex: you simply do not allow the female to be on top. You see, if the female is on top she enjoys herself too much and it is hard to get her off before it is "too late."
Abstinence only education at work. I did my best to disabuse him of his notion that he was well informed, but I'm not convinced anything I said sunk in. It's likely only a matter of time before he gets his girlfriend pregnant and wonders why. After all, he never let her be the top and he always pulled out in time.
Finished – Patrick: Son of Ireland
I have an affinity for Ireland. I've always been drawn to Irish folklore and Irish music. I can't really say why, though I'm sure my grandfather has something to do with it, even though I never knew him. He was killed by a drunk driver before I was born. Whether it's simply in my blood or there is some psychological track etched in my mind by my grandfather's status of legend, who can say. Whatever the source, I love stories of Ireland, the Celts, druids, and so on. Having read Lawhead's Merlin trilogy many years ago, when I saw this book on the bargain counter, I picked it up.
Steven Lawhead's talents as a story teller are pretty solid. His books are easy to read, engaging and the characters are well done. I'm not real crazy about this book, however, and it's simply because I'm not real crazy about the story the story is telling.
The main character, Succat, is a spoiled, noble Briton Roman who is captured in a raid and returned to Erie, a.k.a. Ireland, as a slave. Naturally, his every thought is about escape and returning home. It is over six years, a few failed attempts, and not before he is befriended by a druid and inducted into the druidic order before he manages to make good his escape.
Let me pause here to outline my first beef with this story. It starts by challenging our assumptions about druids, rather Succat's assumptions, which are based in basic Christian disdain for all things other. So far so good. Christianity can stand to be taken down a peg or two. He talks about druid powers, visions, their skills and understanding. All fine and good. However, we eventually learn that the druids have essentially converted to Christianity even if they don't follow the rituals and practices dictated by Rome.
Now the book takes multitudinous shots at the established clergy, and I suppose one could read this book as a critique of priest craft, which I have no problems with. Additionally, Stephen liberally mixes his mythologies. For example, it is the sun god—who's got a bit of time on his hands during the three days of darkness following the crucifixion—who decides to drop in on the Irish folk and let them know what is going on. Perhaps this mythological mish-mash is Steven's way of saying there is room in Christianity for a great many traditions and beliefs. Not a bad way of thinking. Still, this idea that all things can be improved with a little bit of Christian faith just rubs me the wrong way.
Our hero, in the mean time, has affected his escape back to Briton only to find it a cold and unwelcoming place. His parents are dead. His family lands have been declared abandoned and sold by the local magistrate. It doesn't take him long to decide that Ireland holds more promise for him and determines to return. Somehow, he just never makes it. His life turns into one disaster after another. He ends up in Rome and marries into a wealthy and powerful family. The final tragedy in his life as a free man is losing his young wife and newborn daughter to the plague. Once again, he decides it is time to return to Ireland. This time, however, he is impossibly wealthy—he being the sole survivor of his wife's family and thus inheritor of their estate—it is a simple matter to hire a boat to take him back.
And here's where we come to my second beef with the book. Most religious/spiritual traditions revolve around the idea that one must let go of his expectations and desires, find and then follow the path that God has ordained for him. You get on that path, life is good. You choose your own path...well things get harder. Christianity is hardly unique in its variation on this theme: you don't follow the will of God and you're screwed.
So here we have the quintessential example of not accepting the path God has set for you in our hero, Succat. He won't accept that Ireland is the place God intends him to be and he runs away. Whereupon he is forced to endure one life threatening disaster after another. He decides to return to Ireland and everything is instantly better. Everyone he abandoned when he escaped, everyone he lied to in order to make good his escape, including his pregnant fiancé, has forgiven him. The king to whom he was enslaved puts up a token fuss, but is more or less overpowered by the will of the people. (The gold Succat brings with him doesn't hurt either.) Succat goes on to be the rising star in the new Christian/Druidic order he was always destined to be. The End.
Not. Maybe this is supposed to be some kind of allegory for Heaven and redemption, but life is never that tidy. This belief that walking in God's path brings prosperity, happiness and peace probably endures the most abuse at the hands of religion than any other.
Religions, you see, claim they know what God's path is for you. They've got it all lined out, complete with road maps, mile markers and detailed instructions. All you have to do is follow their rules and viola! Instant happiness. So what happens when you follow all the rules and you still find that your life is empty? What happens when you do everything right and your husband is still selfish bastard? What happens when the things that should bring you joy and happiness (family, service in the church) don't? The only logical conclusion is that it must be your fault somehow. There must be some commandment you overlooked. Maybe prayer and scripture study twice times a day isn't enough. Maybe three is better. No? How about four? It's an insidious, destructive spiral of shame and guilt and it all stems from the belief that if you follow God's path for you (as outlined by the religion of your choice), He will see that your life is a walk in the park. Life just doesn't work that way and I can pretty much guarantee you it was never meant to.
I would have enjoyed the book more if Succat had returned to Ireland when he first determined to do so and we go to know him and his life there without all the heavy handed sermonizing. If you want to read two books about struggles with religious faith that don't make it all tidy in the end try, The Sparrow and Children of God