drwex: (VNV)
This may be triggery for some, so I'm going to cut-tag; nothing graphic is below )
drwex: (VNV)

Something like 2.2 million people online are ahead of me in seeing this and none of them TOLD ME!

(be sure you have tissues nearby - yes, it's an advertisement but I don't care.)
drwex: (Whorfin)

You can read this column on two separate but meaningfully related cases of gross workplace harassment. In one case, a New York State Assemblyman finally got some measure of punishment for years of repeated abuse of subordinates. Why he's not in jail for multiple counts of criminal sexual assault is beyond my comprehension.

In the other case, a Cuban Jewish autoworker had to endure 3+ years of racism, death threats, and vandalism at his (Chrysler) workplace. He's finally gotten some measure of recompense in the form of a multi-million dollar punitive verdict against a company that did nothing to respond to his documented complaints but the question of why a multi-national major corporation would allow this kind of situation to go on so long or get so out of control is baffling.

If there's any sliver of good in this, it's that we have a big fat reminder that anti-harassment isn't just a "women's" issue; it's a people issue and it affects everyone. Women sure get a bigger rash of shit than a lot of other folk but someone somewhere really needs to be wielding a much bigger clue-by-four and bashing some heads with it. *grump*
drwex: (Whorfin)
Andrea Friedman from the National Partnership for Women & Families points out how the Akin strategy is currently at work.

Caveat: NPWF is a partisan organization. Pro-birth control, pro-family planning, pro-sex education, pro-reproductive rights, etc. They're arguing to make a partisan case, and I am a financial supporter of the organization. Given all that, though, I believe Ms Friedman has the facts basically correct with regards to the key issues of how statements like Akins's are part of a larger plan, not an isolated aberration, and with regard to how and why the 8th Circuit did decide. The case is called Planned Parenthood v. Rounds and you can read the judgment yourself. (You have to be careful with the cases - this is the fourth time PP has sued Rounds over anti-abortion laws, including one trip all the way to SCOTUS. I'm probably the only one of my friends who reads court decisions as a hobby.)
drwex: (VNV)
I would want her to see this: http://vimeo.com/45539176

And then I would have to be ashamed to explain why the world is such that this video is necessary. I don't have a daughter. I have sons, who I hope can help make a world where this video is no longer necessary.
drwex: (VNV)
Today is the anniversary of Griswold v Connecticut. Given the fact that we seem to be gearing up to re-fight this fight it's a date worth remembering.
drwex: (VNV)
(I put "gay" in quotes because I want people to see it as that-word-Joey-is-trying-to-define not because I think there's anything wrong with gay as a word or concept.)

I suspect there's a lot more to come, but I wanted to link to a couple of blog pieces by Joey Manley on the notion of "gay" versus men-who-have-sex-with-men (MSM) and why Joey thinks that some MSM conservative Republicans aren't "gay". They made me think and maybe they'll give you thoughtful thoughts, too:
First post, “Closeted” Conservative Homosexuals Are Not Gay
Today's clarification/followup, which I think helps a bit, Clarification in re: Non-Gay Men Who Have Sex With Men

I think I see what Manley is trying to do here and to a large extent I agree with him. I also note that culturally and linguistically there's still a lot more to do around defining and claiming the term gay.
drwex: (VNV)

Conan O'Brien officiated the first same-sex marriage on late night TV. It's brilliant.

Interestingly, since I just posted about this earlier in the week, O'Brien has a ministerial accreditation from the ULC; however, New York State probably doesn't recognize that as legal (see the comment thread where someone quotes NY State law).


Aug. 26th, 2011 09:57 am
drwex: (Default)
I would be interested in hearing peoples' opinions on this:

I don't think I have enough information or experience to have a formed opinion myself, yet.
drwex: (Whorfin)
"In the context of laws that limit legally recognized marriages to opposite-sex couples, the proffered legitimate goal telescopes into an interest in maintaining heterosexual hegemony.

[W]hether or not one considers these interests "legitimate" is not an inquiry solved by logic. Instead, it rests upon whether one believes that heterosexuality is the preferred form of human sexuality ­and whether one believes the government, federal or state, should act to guarantee heterosexuality.
Yes, that's definitely what I want my government to be doing: guaranteed heterosexual hegemony!

I need a Zippy the Pinhead icon for posts like these.

(source: http://www.scotusblog.com/2011/08/what%E2%80%99s-rational-about-rational-basis-review/
SCOTUSblog is in the middle of a two-week online symposium around the two main challenges to DOMA)
drwex: (VNV)
New York state has now legalized same-sex marriage. It has been obvious for a couple years now that opponents of marriage equality are fighting rear-guard actions. From a high of passing state-level DOMA laws last decade to now when DoJ won't defend the federal law and we are creeping toward a situation where 1/4th of the country will recognize all couples' rights in marital arrangements. The war isn't yet won, and won't be for some time, but momentum is on the side of equality now.

If you have not read it already, I highly recommend Michael Barbaro's piece in the NY Times about how this was made to happen: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/26/nyregion/the-road-to-gay-marriage-in-new-york.html?_r=1

Nate Silver picks up on some of this in his column (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/25/cuomos-presidential-moment-forms-contrast-with-obama/) and in particular highlights how Cuomo's style contrasts with Obama's. What would it look like if Obama actually got out there and led rather than making nice speeches and letting others do the heavy lifting? I suspect it would look like this fight - tough, nail-biting, down to the individual vote counts. And maybe we'd still lose some, but at least we'd feel like we were in the fight instead of capitulating every time the Republicans say "boo".

Cuomo's style is hands-on and top-down, with tight control over rogue elements in the coalition. He comes across as a guy with political brass balls as well as heart and brains. Right now I think Obama's testicles are named "Hilary Clinton" and "Nancy Pelosi".

Oh, and while we're doing tallies you baseball fans may be interested to know that the Minnesota Twins have announced they'll be making a team "It Gets Better" video, joining the Red Sox, Cubs, Mariners, and Giants who have already done so.
drwex: (VNV)
This week is the anniversary of Griswold v Connecticut, the landmark 1965 case that established a right to personal privacy, and a right of married couples at first, then later all adults to contraceptive medicines.

Griswold was also an important precedent for several later privacy-related decisions, not least of them Roe v Wade and Lawrence v Texas.

Personal privacy protection in the US is still far weaker than I'd like it to be, but it's largely due to Griswold that we have any at all.


drwex: (Default)

August 2017

  1 23 45
67 89 10 1112
2021 2223 24 2526
27282930 31  


RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Sep. 21st, 2017 03:51 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios