Photographer Briefly Detained by Police Near BP’s Texas City Refinery

“The Bechdel Test is a simple way to gauge the active presence of female characters in Hollywood films and just how well rounded and complete those roles [...]]]> Here’s a fun game to play at home. See if the movie or television show you’re watching passes the Bechdel Test (sometimes incorrectly identified as the Mo Movie Measure).

“The Bechdel Test is a simple way to gauge the active presence of female characters in Hollywood films and just how well rounded and complete those roles are. It was created by Allison Bechdel in her comic strip Dykes to Watch Out For in 1985. It is astonishing the number of popular movies that can’t pass this simple test. It demonstrates how little women’s complex and interesting lives are underrepresented or non existent in the film industry. We have jobs, creative projects, friendships and struggles among many other things that are actually interesting in our lives… so Hollywood, start writing about it!”

Does the movie you’re watching

1. have at least two women in it with names,
2. who talk to each other,
3. about something besides a man?

If so, then it passes the Bechdel Test.

Image Copyright Alison Bechdel

After helping more than 100 people die, Kevorkian entered prison in 1999 at the age of 71. He was released on parole a couple of years ago after [...]]]> Sanjay Gupta interviews Dr. Jack Kevorkian. For the youngsters in the audience, Kevorkian was big news in the 1990s as he blatantly broke Michigan laws against euthanasia.

After helping more than 100 people die, Kevorkian entered prison in 1999 at the age of 71. He was released on parole a couple of years ago after serving eight years in the penitentiary.

While early on Kevorkian was seen as the courageous face of the right-to-die movement, it became increasingly clear as he went to trial and as information about his past came out, that he was sort of a creepy fellow.

Regardless of Kevorkian’s personal kinks, and questionable history, the right to end your own life remains an important civil rights issue in the United States and across the globe.

“I realized this was what he had building up to for some time. This wasn’t just about assisted suicide; this was about upholding the ability for people to do whatever they wanted to do, without interference from doctors, the states or the federal government.

“That the rights of the masses should not impede on the rights of a few. Someone once told me that was the “gist” of the Ninth Amendment, and it is something that has helped inform Dr. Jack Kevorkian’s thinking and his life.”

An individual named Colin Anthony Dyer was placed under arrest in May 2009. Dyer, 37, faces charges in the case including human trafficking and [...]]]> Initial composition of jury members in a human trafficking criminal trial began Tuesday in Clearwater, Florida, United States. WTVT-TV reported this may be the first such case in the Tampa Bay Area.

An individual named Colin Anthony Dyer was placed under arrest in May 2009. Dyer, 37, faces charges in the case including human trafficking and sexual battery. Accusations against Dyer include human trafficking on one woman, and both sexual battery and human trafficking on another young woman.

Law enforcement officials stated Dyer along with three other individuals restrained women without their permission in a residence in Treasure Island, Florida. According to statements by those investigating the case, Dyer and his associates made these women work as prostitutes.

Other individals that were arrested related to the case included Kenyatta Cornelius, Edward Jones, and Corinna Shaffer. The case involving Dyer is the first of these people to be heard in court at trial.

Law enforcement officials have said that Dyer raped a woman and made her work in the capacity of a prostitute at a strip club called “Vegas Showgirls,” located near St. Petersburg, Florida.

Prior to admitting possible jury members into the courtroom, Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Judge Timothy Peters asked lawyers if a plea bargain deal had been made between the parties. Bryant Camareno, lawyer for Dyer, stated his client did not wish to plead guilty. Lawyers for the government did not give Dyer a formal plea bargain deal offer. Judge Peters queried Dyer regarding his understanding that he could be sentenced to a maximum of 60 years in jail, and Dyer answered in the affirmative.

Police detectives have stated that this might be the first case in Florida dealing with the human trafficking of citizens of the United States.

(via Wikinews)

“A nearly 25-year study concluded that children raised in lesbian households were psychologically well-adjusted and had fewer behavioral problems than their peers.”

peds 2009-3153v1

Florida, of course, prohibits lesbian couples from adopting children. Presumably to [...]]]> If you’re REALLY concerned about raising children right, then hetero couples should not be allowed to be parents. Lesbians do it better.

“A nearly 25-year study concluded that children raised in lesbian households were psychologically well-adjusted and had fewer behavioral problems than their peers.”

Florida, of course, prohibits lesbian couples from adopting children. Presumably to keep the population dumb and dysfunctional so they’ll continue to think that paying out $120,000 in tax dollars to “secretly” gay quacks like George Rekers to testify that gays are bad parents (based on gut feelings rather than scientific research) is pretty good use of tax-payer dollars.

I think it’s apocryphal, but Mark Twain is supposed to have once said that [...]]]> One of the cornerstones of liberalism is freedom of speech. Censorship is anathema to the liberal mind. Freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the freedom to mock the powerful, even God, is a sign that you live in a free nation.

I think it’s apocryphal, but Mark Twain is supposed to have once said that a person who does not read is no better off than a person who cannot read. Along those same lines, a press that does not exercise its freedom is no better off than a press which is censored.

Why is it that none of our news organizations are reprinting the image of Muhammad that South Park used without controversy in 2001, but was censored in their recent 200th episode? (And, if you’ve seen a news organization use the image reprinted below, please let me know.)

The Prophet Muhammad

Once upon a time there was a brand named Smuckers.

Smuckers didn’t like gay people (or men who act too “feminine”), and so it made up a lie about the importance of “family values” (or something vague and disingenuous and meaningless like that) and used that lie to [...]]]> (This week we have a guest post from JBisMe.)

Once upon a time there was a brand named Smuckers.

Smuckers didn’t like gay people (or men who act too “feminine”), and so it made up a lie about the importance of “family values” (or something vague and disingenuous and meaningless like that) and used that lie to justify its unkind actions toward a certain incomparably gifted and adorable figure skater. This story will take us from Mississippi to Wyoming to Canada and back, full of details and scandal and unitards(!) and even a moral at the end, I promise.

But before you read the story, you might need to know a little bit about a man named Dan Savage. Dan Savage is a writer, sex-advice columnist, editor, journalist, and occasional media pundit. Several years ago, in response to ridiculously homophobic comments made by then Senator Rick Santorum, Dan decided to exact his revenge by inviting his readers to submit fun, new definitions for the word “santorum.” The winning definition can be found here, although I must warn you not to follow this link if you are the squeamish sort, or are bothered by things poo-related. So anyway, inspired by Dan, I have created a fun, new definition for the word “smuckers.” Read on, and you will learn all of this and more!

Our story began when I learned, in the space of a few short weeks, about three separate instances of anti-gay discrimination that share a common theme. I know this particular brand of anti-gay discrimination isn’t new, but perhaps, as many Americans become more tolerant of non-heterosexuality, this brand of anti-gay discrimination is becoming more common? As a sort of last-ditch effort on the part of the desperate to exert some control over others? Anyway, this brand of discrimination is not overtly aggressive or explicitly insulting. It’s often even accompanied by statements of acceptance (e.g., “I don’t hate homo-sex-uals”), and it is usually masked behind seemingly pro-social statement about the importance of love and family and “this is in everyone’s best interests.” What it always involves is some group or body or organization that has some sort of power (age or money or authority) over specific individuals, and it uses that power in a bullying kind of way to suppress people’s rights to live and behave how they want to, and to date/have sex with/fall in love with who they want to. And the backlash against the specific “offending” (read: gay) individuals then spills over onto other people, so that the powerful group or organization ends up punishing a much larger group of people than simply the specific individual or individuals who first evoked its ire by being so dirty, dirty gay.

Here are the cases that share this theme:

1. 18-year-old high school senior, Constance McMillen, asked officials at Itawamba County Agricultural High School in Fulton, Mississippi if she could bring her girlfriend to the senior prom as her date. Constance’s principal said no, on the basis that it blah blah blah (insert vague, meaningless blather here). When the Mississippi ACLU sent a letter to the school board on Constance’s behalf, the school responded by canceling the senior prom altogether rather than changing their “no same-sex prom dates” policy. (Oddly, the school board also has a “no female persons shall wear tuxedos at prom” policy. Constance has to sue for the right to wear a tuxedo to her prom. Is it just me, or is this downright creepy? I can’t help but wonder if the school board’s policy on prom clothing extends to underwear as well. Do they require all female persons to wear a certain type of underpant? Possibly so. This would explain the “no tuxedos” policy, as the only way to enforce the underpant policy is to make all of the young ladies pull up their skirts and show their underpants. Tuxedo pants would just make it too darn hard to check out the girls’ underpants!) [ed note: In the comments Ravyn points to the story of a principal asking female students at a dance "What kind of underwear do you have on?" Thanks, Ravyn.]

Powerful group: Principal and school board

Dirty, dirty gay count: 2 (Constance and her girlfriend)

Punishment count: All of the students who were planning to attend the senior prom. Most likely more than 2.

2. Until recently, two schools in Wheatland, Wyoming, participated in a program by the Anti-Defamation League called “No Place for Hate.” The goal of the program is “to teach young people about tolerance and respecting differences.” As part of the program, the schools display banners that read “No Place for Hate” and, in smaller print, list the names of three groups that sponsor the program: Qwest, the David and Laura Merage Foundation, and the Gay and Lesbian Fund for Colorado. Balking at the presence of the words “gay” and “lesbian” on the banners, school trustees ultimately voted to remove the banners at Wheatland High and West Elementary on the basis that the banners “push a pro-gay marriage agenda.” The District Superintendant, Stuart Nelson, claimed that although the banners were removed, the No Place for Hate program would still be allowed to continue in the two schools. To which Bruce DeBoskey, the regional director for the Anti-Defamation League, replied “Dude, really? Are you serious? Um…” Okay, he didn’t really say that. What he did say was that the two schools would actually not be allowed to participate in the program unless they were going to honor the ideals of the program to its fullest intent. So now Wheatland High and West Elementary are proud members of the “This Is Most Definitely a Place for Hate” program, which is sponsored, probably, by Smuckers (see case #3 below).

Powerful group: 4 school trustees who voted to remove the banners

Dirty, dirty gay count: Hmm, this one is difficult to count, since the dirty, dirty gay was actually a printed logo. Let’s go with 2, the words “gay” and “lesbian.”

Punishment count: All of the students who valued the “No Place for Hate” program and requested that the banners be replaced (request denied). Also, all of the kids who get bullied in those two schools and who might not have gotten bullied if the “No Place for Hate” program had been retained. Most likely more than 2.

3. In response to a recent online poll asking skating fans “Who would you like to see guest star with ‘Stars on Ice’?,” voters selected figure skater Johnny Weir, the three time National Champion and two time Olympian who has a reputation for being “flashy,” “fun,” and “entertaining” (for instance, Johnny designs his own glittery skating costumes, stars in his own reality TV show, and skates to non-traditional tunes such as Lady Gaga’s “Poker Face”; see picture below). Despite Johnny’s popularity with skating fans, however, sponsors of the “Stars on Ice” show, which include Smuckers and IMG Entertainment, will not invite him to participate because they claim that he is “not family friendly” enough. It is possible that this jab at Johnny’s character is not about homophobia. After all, Johnny himself has made no public declarations of his sexual orientation, claiming that what he does sexually, and with whom he does it, are private details and irrelevant to his athletic career. So Smuckers either assumes that Johnny is gay and dislikes him on the basis of this assumption, or they merely object to the fact that he violates gender roles. And this is odd for the very glaringly obvious reason that all male figure skaters violate gender roles, in that “wearing a spandex unitard and ballet dancing on ice to classical music” are behaviors that are stereotypically feminine, not masculine (trust me on this; I study gender roles for a living). Another odd thing about Smuckers’ “not family friendly” statement is that, from all of the evidence we can glean about Johnny, he is actually quite “friendly” with and to his family. His mother and aunt often travel with him to skating competitions and shows, and he helps support his family financially given that his father is unable to work for medical reasons. So there is no discernible way in which Johnny Weir is “not family friendly,” or at least any less “family friendly” than any other gender role violating male figure skater, and yet these were the words that a representative used to explain Smuckers’ refusal to invite Johnny to skate in their show. Strange, because according to Smuckers’ website, “honesty” is one of their Basic Beliefs and a guiding principle in their organization. So why do I feel like I’m being lied to?

Powerful group: The J.M. Smucker Company

Dirty, dirty gay count: 1 (Johnny, who may or may not be gay, but who will play the role of the dirty, dirty gay in today’s episode of “Go Smuck Yourself”).

Punishment count: There’s Johnny himself, who has said that he would have liked to be in the “Stars on Ice” program, and then there are all of the skating fans who voted for Johnny as their most wanted guest star. I have no idea how many people voted, but I’m assuming it was more than 1.

You see what I mean? It’s no longer fashionable or acceptable to go up to the nearest gay man or lesbian (or bisexual or transgender person) and kick them in the crotch or punch them or pull their hair. And since they can’t use these direct, explicit, in-your-face kind of anti-gay discrimination tactics (which, come on, they’re just itching to do), these groups and authority figures and corporations fall back on the only kind of anti-gay punishment they have at their disposal: They deny something valuable or desirable to the larger group as a way of getting indirectly at the dirty, dirty gay.

And this, my friends, is what it means to get “smuckered.” To get smuckered is to experience an unfortunate or painful outcome – to have something desired taken away, or to be denied an opportunity that you want and deserve – at the hands of some more-powerful-than-yourself institution whose ultimate goal is to reduce the rights of non-heterosexual persons. As I hope I’ve demonstrated, you don’t have to be gay to get smuckered. Constance McMillen got smuckered, but so did all of the non-gay students at her high school who had been looking forward to their senior prom. Lots of kids in Wheatland, Wyoming got smuckered real good by their own school trustees. And Johnny Weir – talented, sweet, family-loving, maybe-or-maybe-not-gay Johnny Weir – got smuckered right up the ol’ salad shooter by America’s favorite makers of jellies, jams, and condiments! He got smuckered by the very masters of the smuck.

We have reached the end of the story. I promised you a moral, didn’t I? Hmm. I’m feeling a tad cynical and sad right now, so happy moral conjuring is difficult. But I suppose, if I have to come up with a moral, it is this: Love yourself. Be good to others. Stand up for your own, and for other people’s, rights. If you have kids, teach them to be themselves and to stand up for their rights (Constance McMillen is a great example of what can result from good parenting. Have you seen this kid defend herself? Holy mother of god, she is awesome).

And most importantly, don’t let the smuckers get you down.

***

Smucker: noun. A powerful entity that uses bullying tactics such as over-punishing (punishing groups instead of individuals) as a means of suppressing the rights of relatively less powerful non-heterosexuals: “Can you believe that smucker canceled our senior prom, all because Constance wanted to attend with her girlfriend?”

Smucker: verb. To use bullying tactics such as over-punishing as a means of suppressing the rights of relatively less powerful non-heterosexuals: “If the Anti-Defamation League insists on pushing their pro-gay-marriage agenda in our schools, we’re just going to have to smucker them!”

Smuckered: verb past perfect. To have been on the receiving end of a smucking: “Well, Johnny, it certainly looks like you have been smuckered!”

(Author’s note: If you like my definitions, please feel free to spread the word!)

What does CBS stand for? Watch the video to find out. Or, check out the Women’s Media Center to learn more.

Here’s more about the raging grannies from Wikipedia.

“Following the recent Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission to allow unlimited corporate funding of federal campaigns, Murray Hill Inc. today announced it was filing to run for U.S. Congress.”

Activist [...]]]> Murray Hill, Inc. is running for Congress. Here’s their press release. Here’s a Salon article. Below is their first campaign commercial.

“Following the recent Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission to allow unlimited corporate funding of federal campaigns, Murray Hill Inc. today announced it was filing to run for U.S. Congress.”

Activist judges suck when they find a right to privacy in the Constitution, but when good-hearted conservatives discover within the Constitution that corporations are people and that money is speech, why that’s just old-fashioned common sense, not legislating from the bench.

“Murray Hill Inc. plans on filing to run in the Republican primary in Maryland’s 8th Congressional District. Campaign Manager William Klein promises an aggressive, historic campaign that “puts people second” or even third.”