Nope. Can't say as I plan to live in Salt Lake city any time soon. How the city could give the Church control of public conduct on what is effectively a public walkway is just baffling. And how the federal court could uphold it is even more baffling.
It all makes Utah in general, and Salt Lake City in particular, sound like an unpleasantly theocratic place to live.
@ 12:14 PM CST [Link]
Speaking of the civilized society of Florida: Florida Legislators Approve an Election Reform Package. (NY Times, registration required.) Florida has actually held hearings, passed a law that establishes procedures and recount standards ... and all in seven months. Less if you realize that through the end of 2000, they weren't focused on actually doing anything about the problem as yet. (Curiously, you can't find this story on the Miami Herald site. At least, I couldn't.)
Meanwhile, at the national level, we've had a studied silence on the issue from George II Fraudulency and Congress.
@ 12:02 PM CST [Link]
"What we basically did was pass a truth-in-sentencing bill,'' Geller said. ``If we want to sentence a child to be raped in prison, we should say so. We do not condone that in a civilized society.''
We don't? Well, my goodness. That would certainly be a surprise to the more than 100 teenagers currently in Florida's adult prisons, now wouldn't it? To say nothing of the countless others in prisons around the country in places not so enlightened as Florida.
I'm not saying that this law isn't a good idea. (A relatively good idea, of course -- it doesn't mean the teens won't be sexually assaulted, but it's ever so much more acceptable to be sexually assaulted by another teenager, right?) What I am saying is that for the most part, once you get into prison, at any age, people simply don't care what happens to you. And they don't consider that most of the people in prison actually will come out, some day. "Civilized society" seems to feel that people being brutalized and killed in prison--some who are there for quite minor crimes -- is just one of those costs we have to bear. (The fact that, if death sentences are anything to judge by, more than a quarter of the prisoners may be factually innocent of the crimes of which they were convicted is, of course, entirely irrelevant.)
It would be interesting to get an actual truth in sentencing law, wouldn't it? I just picture sentences being read by Anne Robinson from "The Weakest Link", somehow: "You are seventeen, and have been convicted of the heinous crime of repetitive shoplifting. You have been sentenced to serve five years in an adult prison, where we expect and hope that you will be repeatedly brutalized and violated. When you try to complain that this violates your rights to humane treatment, just remember: we don't care. If we're being quite honest, we really hope that you die in prison and spare society the expense of having to send you back the next time. You WILL be forgotten and we hope never to see you again. Good-bye!"
@ 11:49 AM CST [Link]
In a clear case of racism in medicine, black stroke victims were one-fifth as likely as whites to receive emergency blood clot-dissolving therapy at 42 U.S. academic medical centers, researchers said on Thursday. [...] "I think it may be subconscious and I don't think it's malevolent. I think it may be related to the perception that African-Americans are less comfortable taking risk with medical therapies," Johnston added. "That's not an excuse. That doesn't excuse it. But it potentially provides an explanation that's a little less caustic." [...] He said the study found no reason to believe that black patients were less likely to want the drug. No black patients refused the treatment, while three whites did. Other minorities were given the drug at about the same rates as whites, the study found. The bias against blacks was seen in all regions of the country except the Southeast.
That last line is one of the more deeply ironic things I've seen in a while.
I will ... agree that the bias is probably unconscious. That said, with no reason to believe that blacks are likely to refuse the drug, and no instances of blacks refusing the drug in the study, then the explanation that blacks are less comfortable with experimental treatment fails, doesn't it? How can you tell if someone will be uncomfortable with a treatment if you never ask them? Even if it is unconscious, at some level, these doctors--all doctors, apparently--are making the judgement that saving black people is somehow less worthwhile, or rather, that black people are less worth saving. That they aren't going to make the simple effort of giving them a single injection, a single medication.
@ 10:59 AM CST [Link]
And what do you say to the family? What can you say? “I’m so sorry” seems like the most ineffectual, weak three words in the English language. But it was all I could think of yesterday. It was what I murmured into Darnetta’s sister’s neck when I hugged her. It was what I said to her oldest daughter and her other relatives in the receiving line as I squeezed their hands. But it just sounded horribly, horribly inadequate. [...] "Unfortunately, I don’t think it’s much of a story in [the media's] eyes. It was a straight domestic violence case. And the family was black.” Had this happened, say, in my parents’ community, to a WASP-y family, I suspect the media would have gone into its usual overdrive—interviews with neighbors, former co-workers, distant family members. Experts talking about domestic violence, warning signs.
@ 10:43 AM CST [Link]
You know, I did realize that Arianna had an actual functioning sense of humor, way back when she let Al Franken make a cunnilingus joke at her expense in front of Falwell, of all people, on national television. But I must say, I never ever suspected she'd do something like this. I can't figure out whether to be appalled or impressed. I mean, I have gone to extreme lengths at times when I ran out of writing ideas, but still ... (Although, you know, I did in fact hear that Al has gained 40 pounds since the election. Can't document it, though. In any event, he does not seem to be distinguishing himself well as a teacher [NY Times, registration required], so maybe he'd better sashay back in to politics.)
@ 01:02 PM CST [Link]
Just after George II Fraudulency removes funding for the tobacco lawsuits from his budget, we find out more about how tobacco was marketed to the poor and other communities. I must admit, it's impressive. I mean, the part about marketing to gays, everyone pretty much already knew. (Although not that it was part of something called "Project SCUM." How very special of them!) But can you imagine the type of mind it takes to deliberately market cigarettes to the homeless and very poor? Can you imagine the thought processes? "These people have little or no money. Therefore, we should do everything we can to make sure that they spend their money on a product that will kill them just that much faster! It'll get a few homeless off the streets permanently and everyone will be happier!"
That said, I have never ever EVER understood the smoking rates among gay men. Marketing be damned; for 20 years now, we've understood the effects of cigarettes quite clearly. At some point, the conscious thought "Hey, they're trying to sell me cancer!" ought to have set in. Many gay men are some of the most body-conscious people around; they eat right, they exercise ... and they smoke like chimneys. I just do not get it.
@ 11:54 AM CST [Link]
So, everybody's heard of the MISS UNIVERSE® pageant, right? That pageant owned by The Donald. Held in Puerto Rico sometime during May sweeps, and we, the viewing public, get to watch it for free. So anyway, I was wandering around their site (Flash impeded ... er, I mean, enhanced -- oh, all right; it's not actually at all bad; it's just totally unnecessary), and discovered that people attending the contest in person have to pay. Which isn't a surprise, really; it looks like the sort of even that you'd pay for.
That said ... the ticket prices themselves! Good GRIEF!
The Donald, he has the chutzpah, no?
@ 05:12 PM CST [Link]
I think this must be a sign of the coming apocalypse. Or at least some very strange days indeed.
That said, at this point, I suspect the governor will veto the bill. In the grand political calculus, signing the bill could possibly be political suicide; the conservative right would go into a frenzy. And immediately start a petition to reinstate the laws, I expect. (I can't believe they decided to have adultery remain a crime. They can't possibly have prosecuted people for it; half Arizona's adult population would be in jail! And retaining the law renders the repeal itself subject to constitutional challenge, I would think. Although it is surely something to make you laugh, that they would retain laws that punish only heterosexuals.)
@ 12:23 PM CST [Link]
Oh, dear. Here we go again. I mean, I don't watch or like the damn show, but poor Jack is never going to get any. Basically, he gets kissed once a year (during May sweeps, of course) followed immediately by The Big Breakup. OK, I'm judging from a sample of one -- last year's Big Kiss show -- but if he doesn't wind up without a boyfriend by the end of the show (or at least the end of the season), I'll be really surprised. (Especially since Kerr Smith has never been particularly happy or comfortable with this direction for his character.)
And purely as a side note, I love that bit about the judge ruling for Steven King, down at the end of the article. It's not plaigerised; it's just bad. Heh.
@ 12:05 PM CST [Link]
The key, according to Joseph Nicolosi, a psychologist with the National Association of Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, is to "attack early." His idea, which serves as the starting point for Focus on the Family's multi-tiered campaign, is that an errant sexuality is more easily stopped early than reversed later. Accordingly, he offered the parents, teachers, and school counselors in the audience a list of the warning signs of "pre-homosexuality," which, for boys, included having a sensitive temperament, being aesthetically inclined, and responding strongly to either well- or badly dressed women. Janelle Hallman, a daintily attired therapist, gave a parallel accounting of tomboy red flags, which included wearing army boots. What to do with a fashion-obsessed sissy boy? Nicolosi recommended corrective nudging toward macho recklessness. When an audience member worried that such an approach might stifle a budding artist or performer, the therapist responded that a boy wouldn't necessarily have to give up piano entirely; he could simply tickle the ivories a little less and toss the football a little more.
... Army boots? (Hey, I just bought a pair of Sketchers "Bully" boots. Does this make me, like, a seriously butch Manly ManTM? Hey, there's a concept!)
So, let me get this straight (oh, just stow it; you know what I mean!): The cure for "prehomosexuality" is to get the guy into football, where he'll be around nothing but people of the same sex who will periodically be completely naked. Well, all-righty, then! (And since when is recklessness a desired value, anyway?)
I swear, if they weren't so utterly distasteful and detestable, these people would be hysterical.
@ 11:56 AM CST [Link]
I hardly know what to say about this.
On the one hand ... they're right. Even if the decision didn't cost him the election, in political terms, it was extraordinarily costly and he had to know at the time that it would be.
On the other hand ... are they NUTS?
@ 02:26 PM CST [Link]
Even as the media was reporting the chimps' terrible fate, one man was quietly racing the clock to sneak the LEMSIP chimps into hiding before Coulston could get to them. Secrecy was vital. But now, five years later, his extraordinary story can be told...
It's a remarkable story, it really is. Not only that one man's (relative) compassion for his charges, but the fact that, when his employer, a major institution, became aware that he was effectively committing several felonies (grand theft and, technically, trafficking in stolen goods AND doing so across state lines, which raises both of the above to the level of federal felonies), they basically just shrugged and let him do it.
As for the Coulston Foundation itself, the company that they were going to have to give the chimps to ... OK. Whatever the ethics of animal-based research, it's never going to be painless to the animal. It's never going to be neat and clean or any of the things we might otherwise desire. That said ... do you know how badly you have to be treating research animals to get forced into a consent decree with the USDA? I mean, the USDA oversees slaughterhouses, for heavens sake. Compassionate care is not their main concern. And even having managed to achieve this badge of dubious distinction, the government allowed--AIDED--Coulston in worming out of its terms. Technically, they don't own the chimps any more, no. But since they're still with Coulston, and the USDA and NIH presumably don't really care that much about this (else why would the animals still be there?) and now we have George II Fraudulency and his "anything for my corporate sponsors" presidency ... it's not likely that anything is going to change down there, is it? (Note: I'm not saying that Coulston contributed to George's campaign ... although I would be mildly surprised if he hadn't. I am saying that the corporatist slant of this administration has already produced extremely lax enforcement of health and environmental laws that directly affect humans, so what chance do research animals have?)
@ 12:40 PM CST [Link]
... the clusters with the greatest access to the Internet are still home to early-adopting, upscale Americans. But the cluster whose surfers spend the most time online at home left some analysts agog: Mid-City Mix, a working-class, African American lifestyle whose residents like to chat, exchange e-mail, and hang out at entertainment and sweepstakes sites.
So apparently ... I'm in a national majority in something.
Excuse me, but I'm going to have to go have a little liedown while I digest that rather peculiar fact ....
@ 11:41 AM CST [Link]
Quick: What do the following two recent news stories have in common? 1. Cincinnati race riots. 2. Pool of minority journalists shrinks. Answer: You might not have the first if the second weren't a problem. At the least, you might have heard more about the blatant police brutality that provoked the Cincinnati outrage, or the Los Angeles riot in 1992, or even Watts back in August 1965. Those details might actually be news fit to print if newsrooms weren't so damned white.
It is ... beyond a stretch to say that more minority journalists would have prevented the Cincinnati race riots. However, it's not much of a stretch to say that if you had more minority journalists, you might get, for example, stories in newspapers or magazines outside Cincinnati discussing the issue. I'd actually heard about Cincinnati's problems a while ago ... from the Chicago Reporter, which makes a point of concerning itself with issues of interest to minorities. Not exactly a national news source, eh?
@ 11:15 AM CST [Link]
"Filling the gap left by the Arsenio 'Whoop,'" said Savan, "'Whasssuup' refreshes a viewer's sense of irony and multicultural savvy." Savan said the ads suggest that Bud "can make cool black men out of repressed white males." Bud's appropriation of this slang term "flatters white people that they can get in touch with their inner black men -- but not their outer, because it stands in for knowing any real black people." Savan revealed these amusing ads to be loaded with ideological (read: racist) freight.
YES! THANK YOU! I have disliked these ads from the beginning!
And since when was being a black man all that cool, anyway? I mean, if it was all that cool, then, wouldn't things be rather different around here?
@ 11:08 AM CST [Link]
It will be interesting to see what the Court of Appeals does with this. If they do as law and precedent would indicate, they should reverse the district court with a particularly scathing opinion for ignoring some remarkably plainly stated case law.
Then again, the district court should have dismissed the case with a remarkably scathing opinion at the trial level. So somehow, I rather doubt that it will disappear all that easily.
@ 05:05 PM CST [Link]
Each night, I relay some of the best lines from work. My boyfriend is stunned. [...] I tell my boyfriend that his very hot, 27-year-old, large-breasted boss gets hit on as much as I do. He says I am wrong. He says he sees her at work all the time and that never happens. Then we have a fight. I tell my boyfriend that of course men don't harass women in front of other men. After all, it's illegal. Men are not stupid.
Well, clearly some of us are. What yutz thinks he can get away with saying stuff like that, in this day and age? (And her boyfriend is dumb; whether or not they say it in front of him, nobody is likely to say it TO him; that doesn't happen that often, so it may be happening and he's conditioned simply not to see it.)
Although I am not sure about the laws, I have a feeling that you can't complain about sexual harassment unless you've warned the person that you don't appreciate the comments. So that afternoon when he said, "I want to hug you, but it would be illegal," I said, "You're right."
Ma'am, that's NOT a warning. That's simply agreement. It says nothing about whether or not you like or dislike his comments. If the law requires a warning, I would think that the warning MUST be explicit: "I don't appreciate your making comments like that to me. Please stop." If comments persist, go to your supervisor or that individual's supervisor. No matter what, you need to say something more than "you're right".
All that said, I think her plan is completely wrongheaded. After all, if it works out the way she thinks it will, nobody else in the company will know why she was allowed to switch departments; all they'll see is a sign of privilege that they can't understand. (And what makes her think another department will be better? It will be another supervisor, maybe work she prefers, but it's still the same company, the same corporate culture that lets men think it's proper to say "Big testicles" and grab their crotch at her.) The other advantage, if that's the right word, to a lawsuit or legal or FORMAL complaint is that it will force the company to deal with these people in some way. If she just somehow switches departments in a very low-key way, she leaves the problem behind for someone else to deal with. Since people are, in fact, saying the things they are, it's clear that management either will not deal with them, or doesn't know it has to, and either way, just fleeing the situation won't make it stop for others.
THAT said ... she doesn't actually have many options, does she?
@ 03:29 PM CST [Link]
It's like a weird little rite of passage or something. Every 18-24 months, the great wide world rediscovers fanfiction. Although this is the first one in a while I've seen without the "Oh, my god, there's SLASH!" section in it.
@ 01:40 PM CST [Link]
To Mr. Swenson, "Native Son" represented the entirety of black experience, a story of unexpurgated violence and tragedy. How did he see me then, brimming as I was at 15, with the expectation of having it all? A mutation probably. Doomed to be a genetic blip on a black screen. As my Advanced Placement modern European history teacher predicted, "Keep getting those A's my dear, and you'll never get married."
@ 01:09 PM CST [Link]
@ 12:37 PM CST [Link]
You know, they're probably right when they say that the political dialogue (if that's the word for it) inhibits real research in these areas. That said, it strikes me that not one of these differences between children raised by gay parents and children raised by straight parents is a bad thing. (Although it is curious that girls turn out to be more "sexually adventurous" and boys turn out to be more "chaste".)
@ 12:29 PM CST [Link]
I keep thinking that somehow none of this is true. That my mind, in some sort of monstrous practical joke, has imagined all this. This can't have happened, I think. Not to someone I know. Not to someone who was so alive.
@ 12:23 PM CST [Link]
Copyright © 2001, Iain Jackson, after-words.org
[Archives: 2001 and after]
Archives before February 5, 2001
Search entries:
12/19/2001: vive la france
12/19/2001: princess, redux
12/19/2001: yemen and rumsfeld
12/18/2001: you're NOT in the army now
12/18/2001: interesting donation
12/18/2001: shame on winn dixie, indeed
12/18/2001: saudi princess
12/17/2001: new resolve
12/17/2001: a victim of the attack ... yeah, right
12/17/2001: polluters ho!