Links of Great Interest: Wilma Mankiller died last week. :(

Guess what? Kiely’s song “Spectacular” was putting attention on a serious issue NOT glorifying in date rape. Phew. That’s a relief.

Gloria Steinem reflects on her friendship with Wilma Mankiller.

Youtube can disrupt hegemonic beauty norms.

Want to work for Racebending.com? Yes yes no no? Would you rather learn Lothraki instead?

Read “Creating the Innocent Killer” for a really pointed reinterpretation of Ender’s Game. The only thing I’d've added is the role privilege plays in Ender’s story. This quote especially struck me:

This is a very clever stratagem: those of us concerned about understanding the “other” are redirected from worrying about the alien to worrying about the killer of the alien, and thus our condemnation of genocide reemerges as a sign of our prejudice and small-mindedness. Ender is not the victimizer, but the misunderstood victim of others’ fear and prejudice.

White woman’s syndrome, anyone?

A child bride bleeds to death after rape.

Bristol Palin preaches a classist double standard. Also, Sarah Palin might join the Discovery Channel’s line-up.

The Tea Party’s emails reveal traditional American values… which are, like, totally more bizarre than apple pie, unless you’re going to have sex with that pie and then not call it after.

Is Glee racist?

Can I tell you something? I am still reeling over the fact that Wilma Mankiller is dead. I know that death is not the end and that her energy and spirit have departed this earth to wreak great changes on other spiritual plains, but goddamn this sucks. :( She’s even being mourned by Obama. Anyways, if you’d like to make a donation in her honor, she asked people to use One Fire Development Corporation, which helps Native communities develop economically. Linkies.

Now I’m gonna quote one of her speeches.

I’d like to introduce my husband, Charlie, who traveled with me from Oklahoma, who’s here somewhere. There he is, right there. Some people don’t know I’m married because his name is Charlie Soap and my name is Wilma Mankiller, and when we got married we debated whether he should take my name or I should take his name, and we decided we’d both keep our own names, so he kept his maiden name and I kept mine.

Some reflections on being trans.

Maureen Dowd reflects on the role of women in Catholicism. Here are some more thoughts on misogyny in Christianity. What are your thoughts? There are some obvious flaws in that second link, but I’m wondering why it’s so much easier to criticize the misogyny in Islam vs. the misogyny in Christianity.

Also: What the fuck world are we living in where the Catholic Church is ANTI legislation that would increase the statute of limitations on childhood sexual abuse cases? I mean, seriously? You’re anti-legislation to empower victim survivors? Seriously?

NSFW: Some thoughts on BDSM and abuse.

Here’s a bit of a lust letter to the loads of awesome queer women out there. <3

Dude, you cannot RETURN your adopted children!!!

BTW You aren’t raped unless the police say so. Angry? Change.org has more info.

Some really interesting reflections here on weaponry in video games and their implications.

Short skirt causes riot.

American Airlines REFUSES TO ASSIST a disabled passenger… multiple times.

And people wonder why women of color don’t always trust American doctors. Or, hey, why black women sometimes get really dang bitter in graduate school.

You know what’s a great idea? Sending a six year old to live with a sex offender!

With Amanda Palmer’s (ironic?) endorsement, the KKK revives declining membership. Good thing the NYT is on the pulse of feminism today!

A female soldier wins a discrimination case regarding childcare and the military. I’m glad that this case is highlighting the presumptive nature of unpaid labor of care necessary to make the military go. Here’s a little on the Sisterhood of the Traveling BDUs. Here’s a little on that shite show Army Wives and its role in maintaining mental health for military spouses.

JK Rowling defends single mothers.

EVENT ANNOUNCEMENT: You a Hathite in NYC?  Check out “Green the Ghetto.”

Got a Link of Great Interest? Send it along to LOGI [at] THEHATHORLEGACY [dot] COM!

Comments

  1. Charles RB says

    re “Some thoughts on BDSM and abuse” – I read that article and come out thinking “yes, it sounds bloody obvious that it’s possible for a Master to be abusive in a 24/7 total power exchange”. There seems to be no means or mechanism available for the slave to opt out or to change their mind.

  2. Maria says

    Yeah, that’s where I sort of settle. “your kink is not my kink” and all that, but…

    1. I think it’s really possible to pressure young, inexperienced people in the scene by saying that this is a normal part of BDSM

    2. I don’t think consent is an eternal thing — I think it has to be constantly, constantly renegotiated in scene to make sure everyone is cool. You can’t just give it once 2 yrs ago or what have you.

    In some ways it makes me think of some conversations I’ve had on poly where someone will be like OMG I’m SUPER POLY and if you express any discomfort about my actions re: our relationship you are being LESS POLY and are doing it wrong. That’s emotional abuse and emotional manipulation. I’ve seen a similar dynamic in BDSM conversations sometimes as well.

  3. says

    Re: Women in Christianity – I think it’s easier to condemn the Sharia because a) it’s most often not the professed belief of those who criticize, whereas in the US at least many are Christians, and b) the Sharia law regarding women is still harsher than most of what Christian women are subjected to nowadays. Of course, Ophelia Benson wrote a book about women and God, and there are books about the misogyny in Christianity, but still.

    As for BDSM, there’s CDD, or Christian Domestic Discipline :)

    Seriously, there are some people who use BDSM as an excuse for abuse, and people who generalize (e.g., “all women are submissive”, male supremacists and the like) are at least suspicious and anti-feminist. The issue of “consensual non-consent” or “meta-consent” is a thorny one; however, even the toughest 24/7-players would agree that the submissive always retains the power to walk away, and usually even relationship structures that don’t use a safeword are re-negotiated once a year or so. That said, anyone who says they have given up their limits are hard for me to take seriously, anyway, because what if the master/mistress decided to amputate an arm? Yeah, right, either there are still limits, or we have some other kind of problem.

    As a BDSM player myself, I would draw the line to abuse when it’s no longer about both (or all) parties involved, i.e. my partner may get off on being treated roughly, but at least part of why I treat her roughly is then motivated by getting her off. If there is no concern whatsoever about how the submissive partner feels or reacts, then I would call that abuse.

    And yes, some slaves want their masters to ignore them and their wants – but that does not mean the master should really ignore them and their wants, but simply construct a fiction where it seems they do; but in doing so, they specifically don’t ignore them. It’s like in a classroom where all my pupils buy into me buying the one in power, but if they really stopped following my directions, I could do nothing except for maybe failing them. So it’s more the master pretending to be careless, and the slave buying into that, and not being truthfully careless – that would be abuse, imo.

    The thing with the brazilian short skirt is ridiculous and sad – and the girl gets expelled? WTF?

    And the Catholic Church’s reaction to the recent abuse cases is ridiculously awful. The only thing missing is some cardinal claiming the kids wanted it.

    I like Ender’s Game because it represents, to me, how inhuman the military operates in order to fashion the perfect soldier and mass murderer – I don’t think Scott Card wanted the book to be read that way, but I still do. But when I first discovered that essay it really, really made me think about whether I still liked the book, and of course the thing with Ender’s brother and sister reads slightly funny in a day and age where we know forum trolls would never become politically powerful. I agree with the essay, and I think Scott Card is an asshole, and I have no interest in reading anything except Ender’s Game – but I still can’t bring myself to totally disregard the book.

    The rape story makes me want to hit someone, in a nonconsensual way. Preferably the police of that college town.

  4. says

    Maria: as for your 2), I agree – even in cases with slave contracts which are renegotiated every year or so, the submissive partner should always, always be in a position to renege on their consent. The very least is they are always able to walk away (at least figuratively).

    But then again, I’m not a hardcore metaconsent player, anyway.

  5. Maria says

    Yeah, it’s actually really annoying. She’s going from being an artist to being all about attention and being edgy.

  6. Charles RB says

    re predators in BDSM: I don’t know if this is the norm, but the London Munch site’s “Beginners Guide” explicitly tells people that, if you’re new, it’s always a good idea to see what other people think of someone you’re thinking of playing with. If that person is well-known and has a good rep, “the probability that they are genuinely dangerous is fairly low (but not non-existent)”. They also advise setting up a “buddy” to contact at specific times when you’re going to be involved in BDSM with someone in private, as a safety precaution; and taking care about not getting too close or looming over women in case it unnerves them.

  7. Ray says

    The Other Patrick, I have similar feelings about Ender’s Game. (And the rest of the series (just the Ender books, not the Bean books); I don’t like other OSC books much, however.) To me, it’s not even so specifically about the military, but definitely about how people use those in their power, and blame displacement, and isolation… In light of the recent OSC homophobia issues I thought that I would have different feelings rereading it but I still find the book itself very affecting.

    I’d never seen this essay before today — I read it over lunch break. The author definitely highlights a lot of the problems of the book. It’s not that I’ve never thought about any of it before, but it’s making me ruminate on why I like the book and what I like about it now. I agree with you — I don’t think it’s going to make me stop liking it — I first read it in middle school and keep going back to it. And I don’t think taking a book the way it is intended is necessarily the best way to read.

    I’m glad that people are writing real, thoughtful criticism of Ender’s Game, as opposed to solely ranting about Card’s columns, or taking the “it’s just a novel, who cares?” attitude. Thanks for the link, Maria!

  8. Patrick says

    The article on misogyny has some very good points, especially regarding Paul. But it does the far-too-common element of lumping many different beliefs together under “this is what X is like and so it is bad.” Which is, frankly, very ignorant. It’s late and I don’t want to go into detail, so I’ll just say this: Christianity is no more monolithic than feminism, to the point that if you ask ten random Christians what the essence of Christianity is, you’ll get ten different answers.

    Paul was still a misogynist, though. Among his many other faults.

  9. Charles RB says

    One of my favourite “essence of Christianity” bits was on Slacktivist/Fred Clarke’s runthrough of the Left Behind film, a while after mentioning the two leads drive past a woman in catatonic grief and don’t ever respond to her, while a man in a goofy hat is the only one who seems to notice her pain.

    “So Rayford starts randomly flipping through the Bible. He’s looking for answers. There, on the floor of his bedroom, in the pages of his wife’s Bible, he’s looking for Jesus.

    He’s looking in the wrong place.

    We’ve already seen where Jesus is and we watched Rayford drive right past him. You might not have recognized him at first in that goofy hat, but once he got down on the sidewalk with that poor woman he was unmistakable. Just like him, too, to sneak his way into this story uninvited, showing up just exactly where the storytellers insisted he would never be.”

  10. says

    Patrick: I haven’t read the article (I have too many discussions about that topic, anyway), but if one talked about Christianity (or better yet, specific sects within Christianity), I would not find that ignorant. When I criticize the Green Party, there are certainly party members who may hold to different beliefs than the ones I criticize, but that doesn’t make me ignorant. And if I criticize Christianity… well, it’s not my fault if there are Christians who don’t share certain tenets – I just shouldn’t go around decrying all Christians.

    I know I once tried to see what beliefs Christians have in common, and when during my informal service someone even said, “I’m not sure Jesus existed, he certainly wasn’t God or the son of God, and I don’t really read the bible or go to church – but I’m a Christian”, I gave up.

    So nowadays, I criticize the bible or the pope or whomever, and if you consider yourself to be a believer in that one, well, there you go.

  11. Scarlett says

    Heh, my ex used to say that although he doesn’t believe in God, he still considered himself to be a Christian on account that he was raised a Christian. No amount of reason would make him part with that notion.

    Me? I spent Easter break telling anyone within easrshot that as a secular country, we shouldn’t have religious public holidays. Went down like a lead balloon but was damn fun :p

  12. Scarlett says

    Absolutely. That’s an even better idea than mine to celebrate only national public holidays like Australia Day, Labour Day etc. I just think it’s anti-secular to be celebrating ONLY Christian holidays. Can you imagine the uproar if someone decided, right, now we’re giving Hannakah the same sanctions we give Christmas/Easter? Yet it’s the same thing we do for Christian holidays. Either sanction ALL religious holidays or none of them if you want to call yourself a secular nation.

  13. Scarlett says

    And re: The Catholic Church. I was reading about the Christian Brothers in WA, and when the author got talked about the sexual abuse, he basically talked it away as ‘well, it was only one guy’ (highly unlikely) ‘who was punished and exiled, and the rest of the boys were just making it up’. He argued that they should have done something BEFORE the perpetrators died – like there was never a sexual abuse victim who felt they couldn’t confront their attacker until after they died. I think there’s a mentality, not just within the church, but from its members, that priests are men of God, ergo, to accuse them of something so heinous is to question God’s judgement. And until everyone accepts that they are still just men who are just as capable of corruption and predatory behaviour as all other men, religion – and in particular the Catholic Church – is going to be viewed with some cynicism.

  14. says

    And you know what? I thought I was joking there. Instead:

    “There are 13 year old adolescents who are underage and who are perfectly in agree­ment with, and what’s more wanting it, and if you are careless they will even pro­voke you.”

    I… words fail me.

  15. sbg says

    Other Patrick, I have just become blinded with rage. Good thing I can touch type.

    With so much invasion of eroticism, sometimes it’s not easy to stay celibate or to respect children. If on television and on the Internet and in so many media outlets there is pornography, it is very difficult to stay pure and chaste.

    WHAT? It’s not my fault I couldn’t respect children. The internets made me do it. It made me fail to live up to the (ridiculous) vow of celibacy, because there’s just too much temptation out there and clearly abusing children is the best route to take. Prostitutes can leave paper trails.

    Uhmmmm.

  16. SunlessNick says

    [b]@Maria:[/b] I misread “Scarlett’s author” as talking more generally than one case. Though it wouldn’t surprise me to hear him disappear girl victims (helps with the “blame it on the gays” tactic).

  17. Scarlett says

    Maria: A bit of contextual fail on my part. In you lived in Western Australia (ie, like me), you would already know that the Christian Brothers ran what was primarily an orphanage/school for underprivlidged boys. While they had some capacity for girls, the girls were mostly under the jurisdiction of the nuns – who I’m sure could be just as abusive, just less inclined to be sexually abusive, and coverage of abuse from the Christian brothers has mostly focused on sexual abuse by the priests. Forgot to mention that :p

    Anyway, this book was all ‘yeah there was ONE priest who MAY have abused a few boys and he was dismissed’ (just dismissed, mind you, not turned over to the police or anything) ‘and any other boys who accused any other priests were just making it up. ‘Cos men of the cloth are representatives of God, and God wouldn’t demonstrate such poor judgement in choosing such men to be His representatives on earth, would He?’.

    He (the author of this book) cited the fact that many of these boys had gone on to live unsettled lives – low-income earners, multiple marriages/divorces, criminal activities – to point out how unreliable they were, like no sexual abuse victim lived an unsetttled life BECAUSE of being sexually abused. And also that they were basically being ungrateful little shits in not coming forward until after the accused priests were dead and couldn’t defend themselves, like no sexual abuse victim in the world ever felt like they could only confront their abuser after they were dead.

  18. Patrick says

    Other Patrick: regarding the article: as I noted, it isn’t criticizing a specific sect or Christianity, but making (false) claims about Christianity as a whole. I stand by my position that doing so is ignorant, no different than saying (for example) “feminism is built around abolishing marriage.”

    What pisses me off most about the recurring abuse scandals isn’t so much the action taken to cover things up – I (sadly) expect that from any institution that feels threatened – but the efforts to defend the abusers and demonize their victims that completely uninvolved people keep making.

  19. Scarlett says

    You’d've LOVED growing up in my family then, Patrick. Especially since we’re Polish, so by their twisted logic, any accusation against the church was an accusation against THEIR pope :8

  20. says

    Christianity is no more monolithic than feminism, to the point that if you ask ten random Christians what the essence of Christianity is, you’ll get ten different answers.

    Yeah, but Patrick: they would all then insist the other nine aren’t real Christians, are stupid, were sent by Satan, and only THEIR version of Christianity is the right one. But you know what else? The one thing they might actually all agree on? That a woman’s place is beneath a man. (There are Christians who disagree, but it’s a whole lot fewer than 1 in 10.)

    The article IS full of flaws, but the point is that Christianity contains misogyny no matter what individual Christians and sects have made of it. It’s in there. And a helluva lot of people have suffered because of it.

    The Catholic church has a long history of what can only be called crimes against humanity. It’s hardly surprising they think victims should know their place and like it, too. It’s worked for them for 2000 years, after all. I like how they’re worried about “frivolous abuse suits.” What’s that for? “For the sake of our Lord, it was just a hand job?”

    I blame the leadership of the church, but: I submit that maybe Catholics who think the church is behaving irresponsibly and immorally should start putting their tithes in an escrow account and let the church know precisely what it has to do to get its hands on that money. After all, it’s just some “frivolous tithes.”

  21. Patrick says

    I’ve re-written this post a number of times, but finally I’ve decided to just address this:

    “The article IS full of flaws, but the point is that Christianity contains misogyny no matter what individual Christians and sects have made of it. It’s in there. And a helluva lot of people have suffered because of it.”

    There is misogyny in Christianity (Paul in particular). There’s a lot of other stuff in there too, about a lot of things, no matter what individual Christians and sects have made of it. It’s in there. And a hell of a lot of people have suffered or had their lives bettered or been driven to better the world because of it.

    Yes, I am a Christian (specifically a Quaker), so this is personal for me. I oppose misogyny [i]because[/i] of my beliefs, not in spite of them. So are many others of different sects or no sect. So are many of the Catholics who are condemning the Church leadership’s actions.

  22. says

    We’re mixing two issues, Patrick. The first article was asking how women resolve being Christian and not seeing themselves as second class citizens with few or no rights, since that view of women is predominant in the Bible. I think that’s a worthwhile question despite his flawed assumptions. I also think it’s way different for you, a man, to be a Christian non-misogynist than it is for a woman to be that. The woman will be surrounded by people claiming to share her faith and telling her to know her place (media moguls, if nothing else). You aren’t going to have that experience wearing away at you. You aren’t going to ever get criticized for speaking up for yourself and not tolerating abuse.

    As for the Catholic issue, I’m somewhat sympathetic to church goers, but I think the time has come for them not only to condemn this verbally but draw a line in the sand. Once you know the problem, you have to pick a side or else rightly be branded a collaborator.

  23. Patrick says

    “The first article was asking how women resolve being Christian and not seeing themselves as second class citizens with few or no rights, since that view of women is predominant in the Bible. I think that’s a worthwhile question despite his flawed assumptions.”

    I’d argue against the view that it is predominant, but yes, it is a worthwhile question. Unfortunately, the article addresses in a very shallow manner, presenting the impression that no one has raised it before. Along with the writer’s monolithic depiction of Christianity, this basically pushes my “I am sick of being lectured by ignoramuses” button. Kind of like how you can’t seem to get away from people making gender essentialist arguments.

    “You aren’t going to have that experience wearing away at you. You aren’t going to ever get criticized for speaking up for yourself and not tolerating abuse. ”

    True. I was raised believing in the absolute equality of men and women. It wasn’t until I was a teenager that I realized that most people didn’t share that view. Textbook invisible privilege.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.