[syndicated profile] perry_street_feed

Posted by Iris Vander Pluym

Once again, it has come to my attention that people who write misogynist shit are not universally mocked for dehumanizing women and girls. No, I’m not talking about Richard fucking Dawkins—although no one would be surprised at anything embarrassingly ill-informed and sexist emanating from him. Today I’m talking about Christian clergy who opine thusly:

2 Reasons Why My Daughter Will Not Go to College
by Pastor Karl Heitman

Meet Annalise. She is my only little princess…She’s five years old and, like every loving father, I’ll be forced to give her away one day. Until then, my wife and I have the immense opportunity to train her and prepare her to be a woman of God. More specifically, we have the mandate to prepare her to be a wife and mother. To be honest, I have a deep concern for her because of the feministic culture we live in. Let’s face it; feminism has so influenced American culture that it has infiltrated the Christian culture just as much in more subtle ways. The average Christian woman is not trained from the home, nor encouraged, to find a husband as an alternative to going to college and starting a career.

Wait, feminists cannot be wives and mothers? That’s news to me—and my mom, my sister and many friends. And probably to Angelina Jolie.

Of course college is not for every woman, nor is ambitious careerism—the same goes for men. But neither is marriage and/or having children for everyone. In any case, none of these things are mutually exclusive. But please—go on, pastor:

When I even suggest the possibility of not sending my daughter to college, I almost always get the stink eye.

Good. She’s five fucking years old, and presumably does not yet know—as my remarkable sister did at that age—how she wants to live her life. (<—Emphasis on her life.)

This grieves me because we have allowed the culture to sear our conscience to the point where the plain reading of Scripture is scoffed at by professing Christians.

And thank the fuckin’ Lard “the plain reading of scripture is scoffed at by professing Christians”! Otherwise they’d be stoning disobedient children to death (and gay men, rape victims and people who do yard work on Sundays). And banning the wearing of cotton-wool blends, eating pork or shellfish, and taking oaths (like the pledge of allegiance). So, you ignore all sorts of morally grotesque and bizarre biblical rules that you’ve conveniently decided should not apply to you. But all that misogynist shit? Well, all that definitely applies to the wimmenz:

This is why I have a drive to see our churches be more passionate about Titus 2 than conforming to the cultural expectation of women being independent of man. Thankfully this doesn’t pertain to all single truly converted ladies. I have met a few women from godly families who have been trained to be “managers of the home” (Titus 2:4-5).

Hey, why don’t we take a closer look at what this Titus-writin’ d00d had to say in his second chapter, shall we?

Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things (Titus 2:9).

Uh-oh. That’s right, slaves: obey your masters! And please them well in all things. This is only right and godly.

What a horror show. Okay, maybe that was just a helpful suggestion?

These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. (Titus 2:15).

I guess not. Well, I have to assume the good pastor is 100% on board with slavery. Most of Titus 2 is about men tightly controlling women’s lives—and he is certainly 100% on board with that.

I’m calling all Christians to stop, pause, and ask, “Have I bought into the cultural expectations imposed on our young women of the faith? Are we, in practice, setting up our young women to function in a role they weren’t designed to?” To put it another way, is it wise to expect young women to go to a university and pursue a career?

Why, that sounds like a hypothesis that can actually be tested by investigating the real world! Let’s see…what do you know, lookie here:

Companies With Female CEOs Beat The Stock Market.
Covert, B., Think Progress (Jul. 2014).

Female CEOs at the country’s biggest companies oversee financial results, on average, that beat the stock market, according to Fortune Magazine’s analysis of data from Factset Research Systems.

Fortune 1000 companies with a woman in the top role saw an average return of 103.4 percent over the women’s tenures, compared to an average 69.5 percent return for the S&P 500 stock index over the same periods.

The companies with female CEOs also seem to generate an outsized amount of revenue compared to others…

Other studies have found that companies run by women outperform others. Hedge funds run by women had a 6 percent return between 2007 and 2013, beating both a global hedge fund index at the stock market.

Numerous studies have also found that companies with women on their boards of directors perform better than male-only ones.

Gosh, pastor, are we, in practice, setting up our young men to function in a role they weren’t designed to? To put it another way, is it wise to expect young men to go to a university and pursue a career?

Pastor…? Hello…?

I have come up with two reasons why my daughter won’t go to college:

1. My daughter won’t go to college if…her motive is wrong. For starters, I’m NOT opposed to my daughter getting a higher Christian (emphasis on Christian) education given that her heart is right (i.e., she does not want to get a degree just so that she can be independent of a man; see 1 Cor 11:9).

Corinthians, huh? Then I am sure the pastor is equally dedicated to a similar crusade to ensure Christians never sue each other (see 1 Cor 6). Right?

Many remain untaught about the role of women from a biblical perspective.

Hahaha. I wish.

A woman was created to fill the role of a helper and a companion, specifically to a husband. That’s why God created Eve (Gen 2:18).

How convenient. For you.

Until that happens, nowhere in Scripture does it command fathers to release their daughter into the world and demand that she learn how to fend for herself.

Since you won’t “release” your hostage daughter, Annalise will have to plan and execute her escape all by herself.  :(

Paul says twice in two different letters that a woman’s primary place of business is in the home (1 Tim 5:14; Tit 2:4). This role is precious and sacred, but the church has bought into the idea that to be a stay-at-home wife/mommy is second class and it’s despised…even in most churches.

WTF. That is an appalling view churches have toward women who choose (<—*ahem*) to dedicate themselves to their marriages, their homes and/or raising children. Even the evil feminists don’t do that. Perhaps—and I’m just thinkin’ out loud here—churches have bought into the idea that all women are second class citizens, because that’s what the fucking bible teaches.

Christian women are indeed pursuing the same things as unbelieving women: independence from a man.

Something is wrong with men who feel compelled to have women be utterly dependent upon them. Treating a grown woman like a helpless child is not just degrading and infantilizing, it raises more than one red flag for abuse.

Eve acted outside the authority and protection of Adam and, well, you know where that led to.

Indeed. If women are not kept at home and tightly monitored and controlled by men, THEY WILL TOTALLY RUIN EVERYTHING!!!11!!!

(Unlike men, who’ve been doing such a bangup job of things themselves.)

2. My daughter won’t go to college if…I can’t afford it.

Hopefully when Annalise finally escapes from you controlling assholes she moves to Germany. I will personally buy her a one-way ticket.

The blame for the church’s cultural compromises fall squarely on the shoulders of church leaders and fathers.

Well, better buckle down, men. Gotta keep women in line!

I pledged to myself that I will not sacrifice my daughter on the altar of men by sending her out of my home, care, and protection at age 18 just so that she can get a degree and achieve some worldly status…Now, I have a beautiful wife and precious little girl. It’s neither her burden nor her role to work outside the home in order to provide for me. The gifts God has given her are employed every single hour in her service to her husband, her children, and her church. Her job is 24 hours and I thank her often for it.

Thanks, honey, for your 24/7 unpaid labor as my servant.

The bottom line is this: the Bible does not command women to leave home at a young, vulnerable age, get a formal education, get a reputable job, and then have a family when she feels like it.

Only men should leave home at a young, vulnerable age, get a formal education, get a reputable job, and then have a family when they feel like it. See, it’s godly when they do it. What could possibly go wrong for Annalise?

One the other hand, the Bible reveals that it is God’s will for women to get married, raise godly children, and keep the home. It’s a high calling.

Yet strangely, this “high calling” pays nothing, discourages education, severely limits opportunities, encourages domination and abuse, and leaves women utterly dependent upon and subservient to a d00d.

If this is not sacrificing your daughter “on the alter of men,” then nothing is.


Wow, day 2

Oct. 1st, 2014 12:52 pm
discord26: (Default)
[personal profile] discord26

 

I’m still back. Let’s see what I can talk about.

    Has anyone seen The Roosevelts? I’m slowly making my way through the series. I was doing well for the first three episodes. I’m now stuck on episode four. Franklin gets Polio.  My problem is not the series but trying to work it in with the start of the new Fall season. There is so much to watch.

    P was getting ahead of me on watching the series because he’s retired and has time. At one point he wanted me to skip ahead to the final episode just to watch a couple of minutes. FDR had a secretary named Missy LeHand who had a stroke in 1944. She went home to Somerville, Massachusetts. I live in Somerville. She actually lived not far from where I lived when I was a child except she died waay before I was born.  Anyway, they had this picture to represent Somerville. P and I looked at each other and said in unison, “Where the heck is that?”

      The picture was of what looked like a square with a theater called the University Theatre. It had trolley tracks all over the place. The problem was that Missy was living near Davis Square in Somerville. That is the home of the Somerville Theatre. It has always been the Somerville Theatre. They used to put on shows with people like Tallulah Bankhead in the teens and twenties. Later it was a movie theatre.  U2 played a concert there a couple of years ago.  I used to live across from it the first five years of my life. P kept freezing the picture trying to pick out landmarks because everything did not look right.

Why didn’t things look right? It was because it was not Somerville. It was Cambridge…possibly Harvard Square. Btw, I am not the only one who asked where that was. I go to Weight Watchers and the woman I go with is in her late 70’s and grew up in Somerville  . She was watching and her daughters called her up asking the same question.

Hopefully, I will finish watching this series before Spring…just kidding. I’m almost done with episode four and the weekend is coming….

I love Past Me

Oct. 1st, 2014 10:03 am
zulu: Karen Gillam from Dr. Who, wearing a saucy top hat (Default)
[personal profile] zulu
Past Me is so thoughtful. Last week, I realized I really needed to get ahold of The Handmaid's Tale because I was teaching it starting this Monday. That very day, I found an email from the library saying my hold had arrived. Past Me had put the book on hold and I didn't have to scramble!

This morning, I came into my office after teaching and wanted tea, but I didn't know if I had any cream in the fridge. Then I opened it and--Past Me had provided!

All of which means that Present Me has to work hard to please Future Me, but the benefits really are worth it.

I think I am a little absent-minded these days, in that I forget what Past Me has or hasn't done, but the result is that when Past Me did something awesome, I appreciate it all the more because it feels like someone else really detail-oriented and thoughtful is looking out for me.

Thanks, Past Me!

So

Oct. 1st, 2014 10:29 am
telophase: (Default)
[personal profile] telophase
Two glasses of red wine = two days of migraine. Whee.

Earlier this weekend, before I drank the fatal two glasses of red wine, Toby and I went to see The Equalizer. Verdict: it is exactly what it says on the box. Which isn't to say that's a bad thing! It also has one of the most epic slow-motion walking-away-from-an-explosion scenes that I've seen in a long time, and Toby's and my laughing uncontrollably during that bit was more a recognition of This Is the Way It Should Be, rather than a demerit. The Escapist calls it a "near-perfect dad movie," and that pretty much nails it on the head.

Other than that, I have spent the past two days sleeping during the day and remaining awake at night because of said sleeping during the day. I am at work today, and my goal is mostly to not sleep during the day so I can sleep at the proper time tonight.

Blarg.
github: shadowy octopus with the head of a robot, emblazoned with the Dreamwidth swirl (Default)
[personal profile] github in [site community profile] changelog
Branch: refs/heads/develop
Home: https://github.com/dreamwidth/dw-free
Commit: 6cccfdcb224250026bbeb2acbf3ecebc2b5f800f
https://github.com/dreamwidth/dw-free/commit/6cccfdcb224250026bbeb2acbf3ecebc2b5f800f
Author: Pau Amma <pauamma@dreamwidth.org>
Date: 2014-10-01 (Wed, 01 Oct 2014)

Changed paths:
M bin/upgrading/update-db-general.pl
A cgi-bin/DW/Console/Command/RevokeRenameToken.pm
M cgi-bin/DW/Controller/Rename.pm
M cgi-bin/DW/Hooks/PrivList.pm
M cgi-bin/DW/RenameToken.pm
M cgi-bin/DW/User/Rename.pm

Log Message:
-----------
Implement console command to revoke rename token.

Fixes #826

- Introduce new field, status, in rename table (U-nused, A-pplied, R-evoked)
- Add methods to DW::RenameToken to revoke, test for revokedness
- Change implementation of ->apply and ->applied to use status
- Call ->revoked wherever needed (just about everywhere ->applied is called)
- New module DW::Console::Command::RevokeRenameToken implements console
command revoke_rename_token


Commit: 27101d3d43a00e768a5e75e7959702d9e687dbd2
https://github.com/dreamwidth/dw-free/commit/27101d3d43a00e768a5e75e7959702d9e687dbd2
Author: Afuna <afuna@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: 2014-10-01 (Wed, 01 Oct 2014)

Changed paths:
M bin/upgrading/update-db-general.pl
A cgi-bin/DW/Console/Command/RevokeRenameToken.pm
M cgi-bin/DW/Controller/Rename.pm
M cgi-bin/DW/Hooks/PrivList.pm
M cgi-bin/DW/RenameToken.pm
M cgi-bin/DW/User/Rename.pm

Log Message:
-----------
Merge pull request #962 from pauamma/bug826-revoke-rename-token

Implement console command to revoke rename token.


Compare: https://github.com/dreamwidth/dw-free/compare/eb5228d7fce6...27101d3d43a0

bringing family to Atlantis

Oct. 1st, 2014 03:15 pm
[syndicated profile] sga_storyfinders_feed

Posted by timepiece

I don't remember enough about this fic to do a decent search. But, it has a lot of people on Atlantis, and their relatives, just getting a "bad feeling". And then it intensifies, and they start rescuing. Someone (Chuck?) has custody of a high-school aged brother, and they rescue him just in time (like, though the window of a locked bedroom) from possessed/taken-over relatives, right before they were going to implant something in him. And John rescues his nieces from a possessed mom, and then gets his brother. The mom is the either killed or arrested, and then Marines pack up the girls' stuff, and somebody has a daughter and knows exactly what's important to take (the toys in the bed, not the ones on the shelf). And then everyone is taken to Atlantis, because Earth is being lost to whoever the bad guys are.

Help?

I Don’t Know Who Was In My Room

Oct. 1st, 2014 02:30 pm
[syndicated profile] radishreviews_feed

Posted by Natalie Luhrs

This is a post about a con, but it’s more than that. It’s about agency and decision-making, and things that happen sometimes, which means it’s about life in general, and conventions in general.

I’ve been trying to write about this year’s Readercon for a while now and have been running into a wall.

For the most part, Readercon was wonderful. I flew for the first time in years and it was a better than expected experience. I saw old friends and met new ones and went to great panels and I think I was pretty okay on my panels, too. There was good food and drink consumed and there was swimming and there was the butt panel which was the best thing, I hadn’t laughed so hard in such a long time.

But this other thing also happened, see. This thing which has ended up overshadowing the entire convention for me and I have been upset and sad about it ever since. And I’ve been wrestling with whether or not I should write about it publicly. If it’s worth it.

The conclusion that I came to is yes: I need to talk about this, in public, so I can move on.

Here’s the summary: A party was held in my hotel room without my consent.

I know, I know. How does that even happen?

Well, how it happens is that you talk in public about having a small makeup party with a couple of friends–one of whom is sharing your hotel room–on Twitter and an acquaintance invites herself (screencap) and then gets really pushy about making it happen once the convention starts.

Then when it does happen, it turns out that you leave to spend time with another friend and when you come back a few hours later your room is empty but it’s obvious a whole bunch of people had been in there, because there are used glasses, food, and discarded clothing scattered about the room. More than could be generated by the three people who were in the room when I left and the only people I expected to be in the room while I was absent.

A room, that while on the party floor, was not ever intended to have a party in it. For look: my dirty laundry was piled on my suitcase. My pajamas were on the bed. My jewelry box and laptop computer were on the desk, unsecured. I am so lucky that none of those items went missing.

I don’t know who was in my room.

But surely, my roommate must have consented to this, right? Not explicitly. And the thing is this: I was the person paying the hotel for the room. My credit card was the one on file and if there had been damages to the room, I would have been the person on the hook. Not my roommate. Not the person who decided to invite a whole bunch of people into our room.

The absence of no is not yes.

I asked my roommate what happened the following morning. And they told me that there was a knock on the door, the acquaintance — Shira Lipkin — opened it, asked if the people knocking could come in–my roommate assented, not knowing how many people there were–and then apparently there was a crowd of people in the room. There is tremendous pressure on us in social situations to go along to get along and there’s a scale issue at play here.

Many people who engage in predatory behavior claim to be socially awkward or otherwise vulnerable while, at the same time, they exploit these social pressures to gain advantage. They test boundaries and every time they successfully violate one, they push further.

This is what Shira did by inviting herself to a private gathering and then pressuring both me and my roommate to make sure that the private gathering happened.

I know that people had a good time–I’ve talked to a few people who were in attendance, enough to know that a good time was had. And I feel terrible about taking that away from them. However, their good time was had without my knowledge in my room.

I’ve been blaming myself for this, as well–if only I’d had a discussion with my roommate about private space staying private, if only I’d said no to Shira when she invited herself, if only I hadn’t gone off to spend time with another friend, if only I had come back to the room earlier…

But ultimately, Shira did this. She is the one who made the decisions that lead to a party happening in my room–not me and not my roommate.

The absence of no is not yes.

I want to emphasize, again, that explicit consent for a party in room 620 was not received from either of the people who were actually staying in that room from the person who chose to “shift an entire party” (screencap) from its originating room.

Where do you draw the line? How many random people are okay to invite over to someone else’s room?  If it were just two or three people, I wouldn’t be writing this post and I wouldn’t have filed a report. I would have chalked it up as a learning experience and left it.

But I’ve been told that the door was propped open and that Shira was in the halls inviting people to come get their makeup done and generally behaving as if it were her party. So this was not a private party out of control: my room was turned into a public space.

Additionally, there was alcohol brought to the room (screencap)–which added another level of potential liability to the situation.

And I don’t know who was in my room.

Sunday afternoon and evening, I started looking at social media and became more upset. Shira wrote about the party as if it took place in her room (screencap). There were tweets about shifting an entire other party into the “sparkle party room”–a party of military SF writers that she either convinced (screencap) or pressured (screencap) into having their makeup done.

I was–and am–upset by what happened. After discussing this with trusted friends, I decided to file a formal complaint with Readercon’s Safety Committee.  I feel very comfortable with the process so far and I expect and hope that the main outcome will be clarification that their code of conduct applies to room parties as well as to the convention itself.

I have asked is that I not be put on programming with her in the future–should I be on future programming at Readercon, never a guarantee–and I am willing to take responsibility for this during program sign-ups.  This is also something I will take responsibility for at all conventions where we will both be on programming (such as at Capclave next week).

But as I implied at the start of this post, getting to this point has been a process.

Folks reading this may be tempted to cast some blame on my roommate: I want to make it very clear that I do not. They didn’t invite themselves to a private gathering. They didn’t invite a significant number of people into the room. They were placed in a position where, if it had occurred to them to ask people to leave–after being invited so authoritatively by Shira–they had no idea how people would react. As far as I am concerned, Shira trampled everyone’s boundaries here–including those of the people she invited to the party.

I chose to make a report to Readercon’s Safety Committee and make this public because of that boundary violation. Personal space is not just one’s current physical presence. It is also where one lives, even if it is just a hotel room for a weekend. Shira invited herself into a space she was not entitled to and claimed it as her own.

We’re learning to recognize and speak out against about people invading someone’s immediate personal space with unwanted touching or attention in public areas. We need to be equally aware that private physical spaces should be protected as well.

Ultimately, what it comes down to is this: responsible adults know to get permission before throwing parties in other peoples’ rooms. Shira Lipkin didn’t.

And I still don’t know who was in my room.

ursamajor: people on the beach watching the ocean (Default)
[personal profile] ursamajor
post-tags: instagram, crosspost I know @dunkindonuts had good intentions but this smiley face is kinda creeping me out.

Who’s the punchline, here?

Oct. 1st, 2014 01:30 pm
[syndicated profile] thinkingtoomuch_feed

Posted by Sigrid Ellis

So, there’s an ad for an iPhone trade-in.

If you haven’t seen it, the gist of the ad is as follows:

Guy sees an ad saying he can trade in his iPhone for the new one. His current phone wakes up and asks him what’s going on. Guy denies anything is happening. He walks to his car, his phone asks him if it can plot a route for him. He says he can handle it himself. The phone plays “Just the Two of Us” while they are in the car. As he walks into the store to make the trade, the phone tries to get his attention again, and he switches it off.

Funny, huh? The phone, see, is acting like a person! It doesn’t want to be … what, exactly? It doesn’t want to be abandoned? Broken up with? Sold? … Killed?

Throughout this commercial, the phone speaks in a woman’s voice. It’s the Siri voice, of course. It’s an iPhone.

The effect, unintentional or deliberate, is of a woman trying to get the man who controls her to … what, exactly? To tell her the truth? To keep her? To spare her life?

Sure, sure, it’s supposed to be funny because it’s just a PHONE, right? It’s funny because it’s a PHONE begging for its life.

It’s funny because we’re comparing something trivial to something way too important, right? We’re comparing trading in a phone to … emotional abuse, overcontrolling men lying to and manipulating women, possibly domestic violence and murder.

Because that’s funny.

Or, not. Really. At all.

Even the kindest interpretation of the metaphor is lousy. In the best, kindest metaphor, the guy is in a relationship with a needy, clingy, desperate woman whom he no longer desires because something better has come along, and instead of breaking off the relationship cleanly the man lies and hides his intentions from an increasingly-desperate partner, until he ultimately runs away without explanation.

Because, I don’t know, crazy bitches are clingy monsters? Is that the funny part? Is the funny part that women don’t deserve honesty? Or is it that new women are always better than established relationships? Or perhaps the lying to your partner is the funny part of this metaphor?

In the most sinister version of the metaphor, the man sees a woman he wants more, lies to his partner who he controls so utterly that she can’t get away from him and must merely attempt to placate him, and then kills her to shut her up before he goes to meet the new woman.

Funny, funny commercial, comparing a new phone to a new relationship. Comparing leaving an old phone to leaving an old relationship. Comparing the phone to a woman. Comparing the phone to a woman one no longer desires. Comparing the phone to a woman who is afraid of being left. Comparing the phone to a woman who is lied to. Comparing the phone to a woman who is lied to, taken to a place where she will be abandoned, and then silenced.

Funny, funny commercial.

Endemic, entrenched, relentless, unavoidable cultural misogyny. It’s in everything. It’s everywhere.

.
.


Wednesday Videos Are Cool

Oct. 1st, 2014 01:00 pm
[syndicated profile] geekgirlinlove_feed

Posted by Carrie Sessarego

I’m home from Convolution.  I love conventions because I love being with people who get me and my weird obsessions.  Somehow I turned into a professional geek – something I could not possibly have dreamed was possible back in high school when I went to my first Star Trek Convention.  Here’s a video by the […]

Today's Surprise

Oct. 1st, 2014 09:35 am
malkingrey: (Default)
[personal profile] malkingrey
It doesn't even rate as a pop-up target, really, far less a snake-in-a-can, just a moment of mild startlement before coffee: While doing my usual morning on-line check of the Madhouse Manor bank accounts to make certain nothing untoward happened to them in the night, I discovered that our bank has apparently gone to electronic statement delivery as the default, because they're now charging a $2 "paper statement fee" in addition to whatever other service charges may be incurred.

Ours is a small local bank (it only has three branches, so far as I know of, and the first one was opened mainly to make certain that the bank didn't fall into some sort of vulnerability that banks with no branches apparently fall into as far as takeovers go), and it's actually quite responsive and sensitive to its customers' needs, so this is probably an indicator of exactly how ubiquitous e-mail has become. Given that when we first moved up here, there was no internet unless you wanted to use a long-distance dial-up node -- which we did, because we needed it -- this is a major change, on a par with telephones going from being a luxury item to an assumed presence in a household.

At any rate, I'm probably going to officially opt for electronic delivery . . . all the paper statements do is clutter up my desk drawers, and I can already access them on-line if I need a paper one for some purpose or other.

(This is where readers in the Big City will now chime in to tell me that their banks have been charging for paper statements for years. Yeah, well, we're a small town; we're kinda slow sometimes.)

Profile

solarcat: (Default)
solarcat

April 2013

S M T W T F S
  123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930    

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 1st, 2014 06:15 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios