Thursday, February 26, 2009

If the following were a person, and I a monkey, I'd throw my poop at it.

We've made it to the lame poetry corner of We're Going Vermonting! Take my advice and avert your eyes now, while there's still time.

About My Coworker

She's tall,
she's loud,
she stands out in a crowd,
and everything about her just bugs me.

She has the uncanny ability
to miss the whole point
of the simplest idea.
Please - drug me.

I can take it no more,
I refuse to go on
without the help of some strong pharmaceuticals.
Perhaps with some pills
and mayhaps a strong drink,
Her fat ass won't seem quite so ... shootable.

Would it help, do you think,
if I turned to the bottle
to deaden her voice in my ears?
Ah, to tune her right out,
all those screeches and shouts!
Quick, someone buy me a beer.

My Socialist Senator

I just love this guy. Most Vermonters I talk to feel the same way.

Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Disingenuous Backpedaling

What planet has this guy been living on?

The mayor of Los Alamitos is coming under fire for an e-mail he sent out that depicts the White House lawn planted with watermelons, under the title "No Easter egg hunt this year." 

...He said he was unaware of the racial stereotype that black people like watermelons. 

Tuesday, February 24, 2009

My great idea for baseball

How about this idea? If you test positive for steroids, you're banned for life from Major League Baseball. That should solve the problem, huh?

And, of course, you're not allowed in the damn hall of fame. Maybe there needs to be an MLB hall of shame, where those who can't play fair are lambasted for all time.

Wednesday, February 11, 2009

Oh NO he didn't...

Helen Thomas is my hero. Bill O'Reilly needs to sit down, shut up and be quiet when his betters are talking. (That's all the time, Bill, for a sexist, bigoted gasbag like yourself.)

Why does the world hate women so much??

The Women's Media Center is demanding an apology. Join them here:

Thursday, February 5, 2009

The insidious creep of slut shaming

On my frosty morning commute today, I was treated to a not-so-subtle attitude of victim blaming on Vermont Public Radio, carefully encased in a "feel-good" piece about teenagers wanting to restrict sales of malt beverages that are perceived to be marketed to underage drinkers because they come in colorful bottles, are fruity flavored and are often sold next to soda & other non-alcoholic beverages. 
Fine, you say, so what's so bad about preventing underage drinking? Well, nothing, unless you have to include slut-shaming in the mix, as the commissioner of the Vermont Department of Liquor Control, Michael Hogan, felt compelled to do:
"...there's been studies showing that young girls underage drink a lot of these products and the resulting consequences are not very good."
Aha! And pray tell, what does one imagine these "consequences" are for "young girls underage"? You got it folks, it's the age old "drunken women are asking for it" meme, raising its ugly head once again. Can it be anything else? We're not concerned here about, say, "young boys underage," are we? Nope, we're too busy implying that rape is a consequence of underage drinking by girls. After all, these hormone-saturated young boys can't possibly be held responsible for their own actions, can they? Boys will be boys, after all, and as the dominant sex they should be allowed to do so without guilt or shame, right? Girls that drink, or wear short skirts, or go out alone, are just provoking acts of violence. This is what we're taught from all corners, isn't it? 
Well I'm not having it. No one can convince me that any woman ever "asks" to be raped, no matter how drunk, how she's dressed, how she does any damn thing. It's a load of horseshit that men can't control themselves. Keep it in your pants, dudes. It's not that hard.
So I wrote a letter to our pal Mr. Hogan, and cc'ed the VPR reporter, John Dillon. I have little hope that my crazy radical feminist viewpoint will be taken seriously by either, but we shall see. Here's the text of the e-mail I sent:
Mr. Hogan,
I would like to address your comments in a news item on Vermont Public Radio, broadcast this morning. 
You stated: "Our concerns were naturally not just a taxation issue, but there's been studies showing that young girls underage drink a lot of these products and the resulting consequences are not very good."
I am deeply disturbed by this statement. It would appear to me that you are implying that underage drinking, for young women, is accompanied by the resultant "consequence" of potential sexual assault. Rape, sir, does not occur because a young woman drinks. There is no justifiable reason to shame women into believing that their actions brought on such a horrific event. It is exactly this sort of attitude that minimizes the reporting of rape, as women are taught that the assault was somehow their fault, that by drinking alcohol they were somehow "asking for it". This stereotype is inaccurate and damaging. Your statement implies that "young girls underage" can avoid or minimize the risk of being raped by not drinking. Perhaps they should not go anywhere alone, just to be safe, as well? Or wear burkhas to avoid provoking sexual desire in men on the street? You can see how quickly this line of reasoning leads to the oppression of women. 
If you are truly concerned about the health and well being of women of any age, I would encourage you to take a hard look at your own attitudes and realize that by even implying that rape is a "consequence" is incredibly dangerous and supports a sexist viewpoint that women must take responsibility for attracting the attention of a rapist. This is ludicrous. I cannot stress this enough: it is the man's responsibility not to rape, it is NOT the woman's responsibility to avoid being raped.
If you wish to reduce the incidence of rapes of drunken underage girls, I recommend teaching underage boys that rape is never, ever acceptable, no matter what. Place the responsibility where it belongs, and stop blaming women for being victims.
Thus ends my morning of tilting at windmills. Take that, patriarchy!

Wednesday, February 4, 2009

Blogger uses copy/paste for a good cause

I wish I could take the day off, but I'm out of vacation time until May. Maybe I'll be "sick" and go "home" early. This is a big civil rights issue & you don't have to be gay or even pro-marriage to recognize that.

Cut-and-paste from the e-mail I got from Democracy for America:

Jim Douglas labels gay and lesbian Vermonters as second-class citizens. He opposes marriage equality for all Vermonters and denies same-sex couples the full civil rights that go along with the title.

Now is the time to tell Gov. Douglas and the legislature that all Vermonters deserve equal treatment under the law. Join Burlington DFA and Vermont Freedom to Marry this Friday at 11 a.m. We'll meet with Gov. Douglas at the Ceremonial Office at the State House in Montpelier and tell him where we stand.

Three months after California passed Proposition 8 and wrote discrimination into the state constitution, it is more important than ever to achieve true marriage equality.

This is your chance to stand up for equality. Join us Friday in Montpelier to show your support for the marriage equality bill!

Take a long lunch, take a half-day, and join us Friday from 11 a.m. - 1 p.m. in the Governor's Ceremonial Office at the State House in Montpelier.

Thank you and we'll see you there! 

Kate and Michael

Kate Lesniak and Michael Langenmayr, Field Organizers
Democracy for America

P.S. For more information, feel free to contact us at: 

What are you, an adult?

Obama actually apologized & took responsibility for the problems with Tom Daschle's nomination. 
When was the last time we saw that kind of thing in this country?

I'm not sure what more to say, but stepping up & not passing the buck is honorable and I'm proud of the guy.