council of elderly females

"The Heartland Institute"

2009-11-01T02:47:52Z

Subject: [ NNSquad ] Big Tobacco and the Fight Against Net Neutrality: Smoke in the "Heartland"
From: Lauren Weinstein <lauren@vortex.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 20:39:35 -0700
To: nnsquad@nnsquad.org

Big Tobacco and the Fight Against Net Neutrality: Smoke in the "Heartland"

http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000630.html

Greetings. Several years ago, at an Internet issues-related conference, I was pulled aside by an attendee who identified himself as being involved in high level lobbying "inside the Beltway" (Washington D.C. area). He offered me some free advice. In essence it was this:

"You guys are babes in the woods when it comes to the ways of Washington. If you don't learn how to play the game the way the big boys do, you're all going to be plowed under when it comes to the Internet issues that you care about."

He was right of course. Pro-Net-Neutrality Google has been around just more than a decade, but anti-Neutrality telephone companies have been playing the Washington game for a good century of so. And technologists (including myself) often tend to view issues in logical terms. After all, our stock in trade -- literally -- usually depends on logic. So we're not inherently prepared when opposing forces attack with an emotional kick to the groin.

This has all taken on renewed meaning in light of the recent attempts by some elements of the anti-Net Neutrality camp to portray Net Neutrality as some sort of "communist" plot and those persons and organizations who advocate Net Neutrality as Marxist inspired. This is red-baiting in the finest tradition of "Tricky" Dick Nixon, and the rise again of this despicable technique almost a full decade into the 21st century seems both remarkable and nauseating.

But perhaps it's not really surprising, especially in an age of Big Lie politics, particularly among some elements of the Far Right. "Health reform will create death panels!" "Obama wasn't born in the U.S.!" Now add to these false memes, created purposely to sucker in the right-wing political faithful, the new Big Lie: "Net Neutrality is a dangerous government takeover of the Internet and a communist plot by Marxist sympathizers!"

It was this latter nonsense that I was reacting to with my (apparently controversial) video satire that I released a couple of days ago: "Is Net Neutrality a Communist Plot?" ("Declassified DoD Film"): http://lauren.vortex.com/archive/000627.html

But where are the accusations of communism and Marxist activities coming from in the first place? We know that "Mad Man" Glenn Beck (as "Time" called him) has picked up the refrain. But where did it all get started?

One source appears to be the "free market solutions" organization known as "The Heartland Institute." A recent Heartland paper by James G. Lakely, discussing Net Neutrality and the free software movement seems representative ( http://www.heartland.org/publications/policy%20studies/article/26061/ ).

The string "communist" appears in the paper no less than twelve times. Excerpts from that paper have appeared on various religious and right wing-oriented political sites around the Web.

It turns out that The Heartland Institute has been around for about 25 years, but only recently really aimed its guns at Internet issues. The write-up of the company at SourceWatch makes for fascinating reading ( http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heartland_Institute ).

According to SourceWatch, Heartland reportedly opposes the Kyoto Protocol to fight global warming, promotes privatization of public services and the deregulation of health care insurance, and perhaps most interestingly, has also apparently been heavily intertwined with the tobacco industry in various ways, including funding from Philip Morris for a number of years at least (more recently, Heartland's corporate funding has been very secretive and opaque): http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heartland_Institute#Tobacco_ties

I'm certainly not saying that Heartland is doing anything illegal. They're welcome to their opinions, and politics isn't for lightweights.

But I am saying that the attitude of some persons in the pro-Net-Neutrality camp -- that logic and reasoning alone will convince regulators, courts, and legislators of the righteousness of Net Neutrality -- is extremely naive.

To use a dreaded Star Wars analogy, such attitudes are like pulling up in a tiny ship between the Death Star and a target planet, and transmitting "Can't we all just get along?"

The battle for Net Neutrality has now entered the realm of hardball politics at the most extreme levels. It's time to fish or cut bait. Either we play the game the way the Big Boys do, or we'll just be spinning our wheels with endless verbiage that in the end will probably amount to little or nothing.

If we truly care about the future of the Internet and the need for Net Neutrality, playtime is over. The war truly starts now.

--Lauren--
Lauren Weinstein
lauren@vortex.com
Tel: +1 (818) 225-2800
http://www.pfir.org/lauren
Co-Founder, PFIR
- People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
Co-Founder, NNSquad
- Network Neutrality Squad - http://www.nnsquad.org
Founder, GCTIP - Global Coalition
for Transparent Internet Performance - http://www.gctip.org
Founder, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Lauren's Blog: http://lauren.vortex.com
Twitter: https://twitter.com/laurenweinstein

i has 13 google wave invites

2009-10-30T19:56:23Z

so far me and chris have been using it like how instant messaging should have been a long time ago ... with drag and drop pictures/files/videos/anything , and you can see each other typing, and bla bla bla, ... its like what picasa hello was but better ...

also its for a bunch of other stuff i guess

3 google voice invites

2009-10-17T14:28:33Z

1Mb Broadband Access Becomes Legal Right

2009-10-15T03:48:22Z

1Mb Broadband Access Becomes Legal Right | News | YLE Uutiset | yle.fi via kwout

ambient connectivity

2009-10-02T18:51:33Z

Ambient Connectivity: An Introduction via kwout

Samantha's Iphone & Assuring Scarcity

2009-10-02T17:40:04Z

Subject: [ NNSquad ] Re: Wireless data a blessing (or curse) for carriers (what about "us"?) again
From: "Bob Frankston" <bob19-0501@bobf.frankston.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2009 10:00:04 -0400
To: "'Lauren Weinstein'" <lauren@vortex.com>, <nnsquad@nnsquad.org>

This is yet another example of the dynamic in http://frankston.com/?n=AssuringScarcity playing out. They told us they would do it, the told us they are doing it, and we see them doing it. (“them” being the “wireless” industry).

"We have had to be careful not to invest too much -- because the only thing that would happen if we did would be to increase in data traffic without an increase in our profits," he said

What about our “profits” in the economy, health, safety etc etc etc? And to add injury to injury they could invest far less and get more if they didn’t choose the highest cost (often self-dealing) approaches – but they have to do so so they could appear to spend a lot while still giving us so little.

This makes it very clear why the telecom industry is a problematic hangover from when we sold off our right to communicate to third parties because we thought it was our only option. It’s a repeat of the old modem crisis when they had to be banned lest they destroy the wired phone network. And again http://rmf.vc/?n=4GAgain.

I understand the desire for incremental neutrality rules but how many times do we need to go through the same thing again and again before it becomes obvious that we’re mired in repeating past mistakes again and again. At what point do we take responsibility and move ahead?

Can we shift from fighting over the dregs of telecom to looking towards ambient connectivity (http://rmf.vc/?n=IAC)?

tweeeeeek @ 2009-10-02T10:25:00

2009-10-02T15:25:05Z

ANYONE HAVE CYMBALTA? and/or wellbutrin, for cheap or free to last me until the 16th?

Psychologists "rescue" Isreali women from having Arab boyfriends

2009-10-01T19:20:42Z

Israel's Fear of Jewish Girls Dating Arabs; Team of Psychologists to "Rescue" Women | World | AlterNet via kwout

tweeeeeek @ 2009-09-05T00:38:00

2009-09-05T04:38:14Z

tweeeeeek @ 2009-09-04T05:47:00

2009-09-04T10:47:10Z

naptime ... making go beep-beeps; (Beep boop bop boop beep.) http://is.gd/2S8py

puppy faggot

2009-09-02T12:35:52Z

(08:33:06 AM) Samantha Bo Chicago: my old roommate had this elaborate idea about naming her dog faggot someday.
(08:33:11 AM) operative me: hahahahhaa
(08:33:14 AM) operative me: tahts such a good idea

terrorists should target insurance companies

2009-08-27T20:39:01Z

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/politics/142222/%5Bvideo%5D_right-wing_senator_to_desperate_wife_of_brain_patient%3A_gov%27t_is_not_the_solution/

... i haven't heard anything about any insurance companies stepping up to say something like, "okay, we're sorry, we'll be good from now on, we'll keep our promises, etc ..."

so, like, either (1) profit-hunger, at least in this case, has no self-preservation instinct... or (2) the insurance companies aren't scared ... and that scares me ...

congress is so bought & paid for, it's been said a thousand times, and like, its a joke already. kind of like how prison rape is a joke.

nickelodeon said kokopelli was the king of fellatio

2009-08-05T10:54:41Z

tweeeeeek @ 2009-08-04T17:16:00

2009-08-04T21:16:39Z

Orange County college student arrested, charged with modifying video game consoles - WHNT via kwout

FurdLog » A New Google Metric In The Making via kwout

tweeeeeek @ 2009-08-04T05:19:00

2009-08-04T09:19:43Z

FCC Opens Investigation on iPhone App Discrimination | Electronic Frontier Foundation via kwout

Google Public Policy Blog: Civil rights leaders call for equal access to knowledge through digitized books via kwout

FCC probes Google Voice rejection, AT&T denies involvement - Ars Technica via kwout

speakin tounges

2009-07-29T01:21:58Z

google voice tries to use their robots to transcribe your voicemail to you as text. i love how, even though it fucks the entire thing up, yous till get a jist of the message. you just get it from a

a googelian interpretation of brett jan

2009-07-27T18:58:48Z

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: aha, ahadly ha
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 14:55:23 -0400
From: Tristan Lear <trissypissy@gmail.com>
To: brett jan <brettrjan@yahoo.com>

ha ha my phone battery died exactly when you were about to initiate our 3way with ben

third wave feminism & the secret life of the american teenager

2009-07-26T02:06:40Z

My little sister loves the show "The Secret Life of the American Teenager." I hate the show but felt too lazy to articulate why, especially to my mom (who hates the show I think for the opposite reason, she says "It's always talking about sex")

I looked up feminism "the secret life of the american teenager." Someone referenced "second-wave feminism."

So I went to Wikipedia's feminism and learned about the different waves of feminism:

Main article: Third-wave feminism

Third-wave feminism began in the early 1990s, arising as a response to perceived failures of the second wave and also as a response to the backlash against initiatives and movements created by the second wave. Third-wave feminism seeks to challenge or avoid what it deems the second wave's essentialist definitions of femininity, which (according to them) over-emphasize the experiences of upper middle-class white women.

A post-structuralist interpretation of gender and sexuality is central to much of the third wave's ideology. Third-wave feminists often focus on "micro-politics" and challenge the second wave's paradigm as to what is, or is not, good for females.^[24]^[36]^[37]^[38] The third wave has its origins in the mid-1980s. Feminist leaders rooted in the second wave like Gloria Anzaldua, bell hooks, Chela Sandoval, Cherrie Moraga, Audre Lorde, Maxine Hong Kingston, and many other black feminists, sought to negotiate a space within feminist thought for consideration of race-related subjectivities.^[15]^[37]^[39]

Third-wave feminism also contains internal debates between difference feminists such as the psychologist Carol Gilligan (who believes that there are important differences between the sexes) and those who believe that there are no inherent differences between the sexes and contend that gender roles are due to social conditioning.^[40]

Main article: Third-wave feminism

Post-structural and postmodern feminism

For more details on this topic, see Postmodern feminism.

Post-structural feminism, also referred to as French feminism, uses the insights of various epistemological movements, including psychoanalysis, linguistics, political theory (Marxist and post-Marxist theory), race theory, literary theory, and other intellectual currents for feminist concerns.^[106] Many post-structural feminists maintain that difference is one of the most powerful tools that females possess in their struggle with patriarchal domination, and that to equate the feminist movement only with equality is to deny women a plethora of options because equality is still defined from the masculine or patriarchal perspective.^[106]^[107]

Judith Butler at a lecture at the University of Hamburg.

Postmodern feminism is an approach to feminist theory that incorporates postmodern and post-structuralist theory. The largest departure from other branches of feminism is the argument that gender is constructed through language.^[21] The most notable proponent of this argument is Judith Butler. In her 1990 book, Gender Trouble, she draws on and critiques the work of Simone de Beauvoir, Michel Foucault and Jacques Lacan. Butler criticizes the distinction drawn by previous feminisms between biological sex and socially constructed gender. She says that this does not allow for a sufficient criticism of essentialism. For Butler "woman" is a debatable category, complicated by class, ethnicity, sexuality, and other facets of identity. She states that gender is performative. This argument leads to the conclusion that there is no single cause for women's subordination and no single approach towards dealing with the issue.^[21]

Donna Haraway, author of A Cyborg Manifesto, with her dog Cayenne.

In A Cyborg Manifesto Donna Haraway criticizes traditional notions of feminism, particularly its emphasis on identity, rather than affinity. She uses the metaphor of a cyborg in order to construct a postmodern feminism that moves beyond dualisms and the limitations of traditional gender, feminism, and politics.^[108] Haraway's cyborg is an attempt to break away from Oedipal narratives and Christian origin-myths like Genesis. She writes: "The cyborg does not dream of community on the model of the organic family, this time without the oedipal project. The cyborg would not recognize the Garden of Eden; it is not made of mud and cannot dream of returning to dust."^[108]

A major branch in postmodern feminist thought has emerged from the contemporary psychoanalytic French feminism. Other postmodern feminist works highlight stereotypical gender roles, only to portray them as parodies of the original beliefs. The history of feminism is not important in these writings—only what is going to be done about it. The history is dismissed and used to depict how ridiculous past beliefs were. Modern feminist theory has been extensively criticized as being predominantly, though not exclusively, associated with Western middle class academia. Mary Joe Frug, a postmodernist feminist, criticized mainstream feminism as being too narrowly focused and inattentive to related issues of race and class.^[109]

edit] Ecofeminism

Janet Biehl is one of the premier authors on social ecology

Main article: Ecofeminism

Ecofeminism links ecology with feminism. Ecofeminists see the domination of women as stemming from the same ideologies that bring about the domination of the environment. Patriarchal systems, where men own and control the land, are seen as responsible for the oppression of women and destruction of the natural environment. Ecofeminists argue that the men in power control the land, and therefore they are able to exploit it for their own profit and success. Ecofeminists argue that in this situation, women are exploited by men in power for their own profit, success, and pleasure. Ecofeminists argue that women and the environment are both exploited as passive pawns in the race to domination. Ecofeminists argue that those people in power are able to take advantage of them distinctly because they are seen as passive and rather helpless. Ecofeminism connects the exploitation and domination of women with that of the environment. As a way of repairing social and ecological injustices, ecofeminists feel that women must work towards creating a healthy environment and ending the destruction of the lands that most women rely on to provide for their families.^[110]

Ecofeminism argues that there is a connection between women and nature that comes from their shared history of oppression by a patriarchal Western society. Vandana Shiva claims that women have a special connection to the environment through their daily interactions with it that has been ignored. She says that "women in subsistence economies, producing and reproducing wealth in partnership with nature, have been experts in their own right of holistic and ecological knowledge of nature’s processes. But these alternative modes of knowing, which are oriented to the social benefits and sustenance needs are not recognized by the capitalist reductionist paradigm, because it fails to perceive the interconnectedness of nature, or the connection of women’s lives, work and knowledge with the creation of wealth.”^[111]

However, feminist and social ecologist Janet Biehl has criticized ecofeminism for focusing too much on a mystical connection between women and nature and not enough on the actual conditions of women.^[112]

Berkeley Marine Corps Recruiting Center controversy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Code Pink demonstrators in front of Berkeley City Hall on February 12, 2008.

The Berkeley Marine Corps Recruiting Center Controversy began in September 2007 when a small group of protesters from Code Pink began periodically protesting in front of a United States Marine Corps Officer Selection Office located in Downtown Berkeley, California at 64 Shattuck Avenue by standing in front of the office holding banners and placing signs.^[1]^[2] The recruiting center had been located in Berkeley since January 2007. The protesting has continued to the present. On October 17, 2007, the group Move America Forward held a counter protest.

On January 29, 2008, the Berkeley City Council passed a series of motions concerning the recruiting center. The most controversial motions ordered the city clerk to draft a letter calling the Berkeley Marines "unwelcome intruders" and another motion gave Code Pink a parking permit on Wednesdays and a noise permit. The motions drew national media coverage. Some veterans groups and conservatives were angered by the motions. National and state laws were drafted to remove funding for Berkeley. The Berkeley City Council changed the wording in the letter February 13, 2008 to remove the most controversial wording and communicate support for the troops but opposition to the war. On the previous day, 2000 protesters at its peak gathered outside city hall to protest against and in support of the motion. The national media coverage of the matter significantly declined following Berkeley's amended language. Legislation backed by Republican members of Congress concerning removing earmarks continued through the legislative process, though with little chance of passing, and Move America Forward launched a new advertisement criticizing the Berkeley City Council. Code Pink continues to collect signatures to put a measure on the ballot to remove the recruiting center.

City Council response

On January 29, 2008 the Berkeley City Council passed two motions regarding the controversy.^[10] The first motion, passed 8-1, gave anti-war protesters Code Pink a reserved parking space in front of the recruitment and waiving the normally required noise permits so they could operate their loud speaker. Since passing this motion, Code Pink has had an almost daily presence outside the recruiting office.^[10]^[11]

The Berkeley City Council 6-3, passed a motion to have the city clerk write a letter to the U.S. Marine Corps to inform them that they were "uninvited and unwelcome intruders" in the city of Berkeley.^[12]^[13]^[11] The motion stated that the United States had a history of "launching illegal, immoral and unprovoked wars of aggression" and that "military recruiters are salespeople known to lie to and seduce minors and young adults into contracting themselves into military service with false promises regarding jobs, job training, education and other benefits."^[14] The Berkeley City Council also asked the city attorney to investigate the possibility of fining the Marines for violating the city's ordinance requiring equal-opportunity hiring without regard to sexual orientation because of the military's don't ask, don't tell policy.^[14]^[10]

The Beauty Myth

In the early 1990s, Wolf garnered international public notoriety as a spokesperson of third-wave feminism^[11]^[12] as a result of the tremendous success of her first book The Beauty Myth, which became an international bestseller.^[13] In the book, she argues that "beauty" as a normative value is entirely socially constructed, and that the patriarchy determines the content of that construction with the goal of reproducing its own hegemony. Wolf posits the idea of an "iron-maiden," an intrinsically unattainable standard that is then used to punish women physically and psychologically for their failure to achieve and conform to it. Wolf criticized the fashion and beauty industries as exploitative of women, but claimed the beauty myth extended into all areas of human functioning. Wolf writes that women should have "the choice to do whatever we want with our faces and bodies without being punished by an ideology that is using attitudes, economic pressure, and even legal judgments regarding women's appearance to undermine us psychologically and politically." Wolf argues that women were under assault by the "beauty myth" in five areas: work, religion, sex, violence, and hunger. Ultimately, Wolf argues for a relaxation of normative standards of beauty.^[14]

In her introduction, Wolf positioned her argument against the concerns of second-wave feminists and offered the following analysis:

“

The more legal and material hindrances women have broken through, the more strictly and heavily and cruelly images of female beauty have come to weigh upon us...During the past decade, women breached the power structure; meanwhile, eating disorders rose exponentially and cosmetic surgery became the fastest-growing specialty...pornography became the main media category, ahead of legitimate films and records combined, and thirty-three thousand American women told researchers that they would rather lose ten to fifteen pounds than achieve any other goal...More women have more money and power and scope and legal recognition than we have ever had before; but in terms of how we feel about ourselves physically, we may actually be worse off than our unliberated grandmothers.^[15]

”

The Beauty Myth · Beauty

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

The Beauty Myth, published in 1991, is a book by Naomi Wolf. It examines beauty as a demand and as a judgment upon women. Subtitled How Images of Beauty Are Used Against Women, Wolf examines how modern conceptions of women's beauty impact the spheres of employment, culture, religion, sexuality, eating disorders, and cosmetic surgery.

Wolf argues that women in Western culture are damaged by the pressure to conform to an idealized concept of female beauty—the Iron Maiden throughout modern society, from Victorian Times to today. She argues that the beauty myth is political, a way of maintaining the patriarchal system. It allows women to enter the labour force, but under controlled conditions. She also claims that this system keeps women under control by the weight of their own insecurities. The beauty myth is sometimes viewed as succeeding The Feminine Mystique, which relegated women to the position of housewife, as the social guard over women. In this sense, Wolf claims that public interest in a woman's virginity has been replaced by public interest in the shape of her body.

It was republished in 2002 with a new introduction by Wolf.

Christina Hoff Sommers criticized Wolf for publishing the claim that 150,000 women were dying every year from anorexia.^[1] Sommers claimed that the actual number is closer to 100, a figure which others, such as Jennifer Baumgardner and Amy Richards, claimed to be much too low. In the same interview, Sommers stated that Wolf had retracted the figure.

Wikipedia on sex-positive feminism

a full pdf of The Ethical Slut: http://happybadger.com/t/ethicalslut.pdf

Sex-positive movement

Main article: Sex-positive feminism

Sex-positive feminism is a movement that was formed in order to address issues of women's sexual pleasure, freedom of expression, sex work, and inclusive gender identities. Ellen Willis' 1981 essay, "Lust Horizons: Is the Women's Movement Pro-Sex?" is the origin of the term, "pro-sex feminism"; the more commonly-used variant, "sex positive feminism" arose soon after.^[159]

Although some sex-positive feminists, such as Betty Dodson, were active in the early 1970s, much of sex-positive feminism largely began in the late 1970s and 1980s as a response to the increasing emphasis in radical feminism on anti-pornography activism.

Sex-positive feminists are also strongly opposed to radical feminist calls for legislation against pornography, a strategy they decried as censorship, and something that could, they argued, be used by social conservatives to censor the sexual expression of women, gay people, and other sexual minorities. The initial period of intense debate and acrimony between sex-positive and anti-pornography feminists during the early 1980s is often referred to as the Feminist Sex Wars. Other sex-positive feminists became involved not in opposition to other feminists, but in direct response to what they saw as patriarchal control of sexuality.^{[citation needed]}

Scientific discourse

Some feminists are critical of traditional scientific discourse, arguing that the field has historically been biased towards a masculine perspective.^[12] Evelyn Fox Keller argues that the rhetoric of science reflects a masculine perspective, and she questions the idea of scientific objectivity.

Many feminist scholars rely on qualitative research methods that emphasize women’s subjective, individual experiences. According to communication scholars Thomas R. Lindlof and Bryan C. Taylor, incorporating a feminist approach to qualitative research involves treating research participants as equals who are just as much an authority as the researcher. Objectivity is eschewed in favor of open self-reflexivity and the agenda of helping women. Also part of the feminist research agenda is uncovering ways that power inequities are created and/or reinforced in society and/or in scientific and academic institutions. Lindlof and Taylor also explain that a feminist approach to research often involves nontraditional forms of presentation. .^[163]

Primatologist Sarah Blaffer Hrdy notes the prevalence of masculine-coined stereotypes and theories, such as the non-sexual female, despite "the accumulation of abundant openly available evidence contradicting it".^[168] Some natural and social scientists have examined feminist ideas using scientific methods.

Feminist Sex Wars · Sexuality

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

This article is about Feminist Sex Wars. For the adult movie, see Porn Wars. For the Frank Zappa song of the same name, see Frank Zappa Meets the Mothers of Prevention.

The Feminist Sex Wars and Lesbian Sex Wars, or simply the Sex Wars or Porn Wars, were the acrimonious debates within the feminist movement and lesbian community in the late 1970s through the 1980s around the issues of feminist strategies regarding sexuality, sexual representation, pornography, sadomasochism, the role of transwomen in the lesbian community, and other sexual issues. The debate pitted anti-pornography feminism against sex-positive feminism, and the feminist movement ended up deeply divided as a result.^[1]^[2]^[3]^[4]^[5]

The Feminist Sex Wars are sometimes viewed as part of the division that helped end the second-wave feminist era.

Recently I argued with a douchebag on Crystal's facebook. In it I referred to myself as a "feminist." (he told me that I probably had a bad relationship with my father and I said that my relationship with him was great and that 'he was a feminist too.'"

I think people that make a stink about men identifying as feminists because "they can't fully understand the plight of women" do that thing that I hate that academics always do: they universalize or inflate claims in order to oppose something.

Of course I can't understand from a women's point of view. For example, in western religions class Heather noticed that our teacher (incidentally, female) always used male pronouns to describe positions of authority. I didn't notice this until Heather pointed it out.

I should still be able to refer to myself as a feminist while telling a douchebag to fuck off on facebook. Categories are pretend.

Speaking of fuck off, Bridgette just reminded me of this one time we were on mescaline in bowling green, and i was yelling at the cops and telling them to fuck off! I don't even remember this, except I just remembered it a little. I'm so proud of myself!

Pro-feminism compared to feminism

Some feminists and pro-feminists believe that it is inappropriate for men to call themselves "feminists". This argument takes a variety of forms, including the following: Feminism is a movement and a body of ideas developed by, for, and about women. Men can never fully know what it is like to be a woman. By calling themselves feminists, men could preempt and take over the feminist movement, thus stifling women's concerns and voices.^{[citation needed]} There is also internal disagreement within this "movement", for example with pro-feminist me-wing and socialist movements, anti-racist struggles, and so on. Those who claim that "feminist" can apply equally to men and women often point out that the arguments made by advocates of the term "pro-feminist" are based in notions of biological determinism and essentialism, and are actually contrary to feminist principles. A clear distinction between "feminist" and "pro-feminist" is also troubled by transsexual and transgender people, whose bodies and performance of a gendered body (in the sense that Judith Butler defines performance) make even the most basic biological distinction between categories of men and women a difficult task.

Pro-feminists claim to be anti-sexist, and anti-patriarchal, but they argue that they are not anti-male. Some pro-feminist men believe that men have potential for good and believe that there is a potential for "backlash" within the men's movement, a potential for the movement to turn towards the defence of what they see as men's privilege and position, and some would say that this has already occurred.^[7] While all pro-feminist men assume that men must act to dismantle gender injustice, some argue that a men's movement is not the way to do this.^[8] They advocate instead that pro-feminists build alliances and coalitions with other progressive groups and movements (such as feminism, gay and lesbian liberation, left-wing and socialist movements, anti-racist struggles, and so on).

Atheist feminism asserts the equality of men and women in a faithless society. It cites organized religion as a main source of female oppression, gender inequality, and overall suppression of sexual freedom and basic human rights. For atheist feminists, joining a faith is a submission to patriarchy and an acceptance of the anti-female actions condoned by the organized religions.

Principles of Feminist Therapy

1) Egalitarian relationships (a relationship which is based on equals) between therapist and client are key in therapy, utilizing the therapist’s psychological knowledge and the client’s knowledge of herself. The inherent power differentials between therapist and client are addressed, and the client must realize that the therapist is not giving her power, but power comes from within herself. This relationship provides a model for women to take responsibility in making all of their relationships egalitarian.Feminist therapists focus on embracing the client’s strengths rather than fixing their weaknesses and accept and validate the client’s feelings.^[6]

2) Feminist Therapy Theory is always being revised and added to as social contexts change and the discourse develops. The client’s well-being is the leading principle in all aspects of therapy.^[7]

3) The therapist always retains accountability.^[8]

4) The feminist therapy model is non-victim blaming.^[9]

5) The client’s well-being is the leading principle in all aspects of therapy.^[10]

edit] Feminist Therapists' Responsibilities

1) Feminist Therapists must integrate feminist analysis in all spheres of their work.^[11]

2) Feminist Therapists must recognize the client’s socioeconomic and political circumstances, especially with issues in access to mental health care.^[12]

3) Feminist therapists must be actively involved in ending oppression, empowering women and girls, respecting differences, and social change.^[13]

4) Feminist Therapists must be aware of their own situated experience (their own socioeconomic and political situations as well as sex, gender, race, sexuality, etc.) and is constantly self-evaluating and remedying their own biases and oppressive actions. As well as must be learning about other dominant and non-dominant cultural and ethnic experiences.^[14]

5) A feminist therapist must accept and validate their client’s experiences and feelings.^[15]

Radical feminism is a "current"^[1] within feminism that focuses on the theory of patriarchy as a system of power that organizes society into a complex of relationships producing what radical feminists claim is a "male supremacy"^[1] that oppresses women. Radical feminism aims to challenge and to overthrow patriarchy by opposing standard gender roles and what they see as male oppression of women, and calls for a radical reordering of society. Early radical feminism, arising within second-wave feminism in the 1960s,^[2] typically viewed patriarchy as a "transhistorical phenomenon"^[3] prior to or deeper than other sources of oppression, "not only the oldest and most universal form of domination but the primary form" and the model for all others.^[4] Later politics derived from radical feminism ranged from cultural feminism^[1] to more syncretic politics that placed issues of class, economics, etc. on a par with patriarchy as sources of oppression.^[5]

The term radical in radical feminism (from Latin rādīx, rādīc-, root) is used as an adjective meaning of or pertaining to the root or going to the root. Radical feminists locate the root cause of women's oppression in patriarchal gender relations, as opposed to legal systems (liberal feminism) or class conflict (socialist feminism and Marxist feminism).

The term militant feminism is a pejorative term which is often applied to radical feminism, but also to other currents within feminism.

tweeeeeek @ 2009-07-25T16:52:00

2009-07-25T20:52:46Z

http://www.google.com/search?q=dont+talk+to+cops

tweeeeeek @ 2009-07-25T16:44:00

2009-07-25T20:44:42Z

insurance companies get 31 percent of the money spent on health care

2009-07-25T20:19:25Z

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Urgent: The Single Payer Moment Is NOW, If Only We Will Speak Out
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2006 01:25:33 -0800
From: The Pen <activist.thepen@gmail.com>
To: lilt@bex.net

We have a new "Single Payer Health Care" cap to mobilize the final
push for real health care reform. But first ...

Last night at his prime time health care news conference, President
Obama finally admitted what we have known all along.

"I want to cover everybody. Now, the truth is that unless you have a
-- what's called a single-payer system, in which everybody's
automatically covered, then you're probably not going to reach every
single individual."

There it is folks. Only single payer can fix the ills with our health
care system. He also talked about the critical importance of
"eliminating waste". Only single payer effectively does that, by
cutting out the massive overhead waste (31%) by paper churning
insurance industry bureaucrats, who line their own pockets to provide
LESS health care with the available resources.

Single Payer Action Page: http://www.peaceteam.net/action/pnum998.php

This is the single payer moment. We have enough Democrats alone to
pass it. So why hasn't it been signed into law yet?

Why not a single payer system? Because the big insurance and drug
companies don't want that? Oh, really?? What about what we the people
want? What about what would be best for America? We need to tell our
members of Congress what we want, keep telling them, and remind them
that we told them.

So please submit the action page above. And when do you will have an
opportunity from the return page to get one of the NEW "Single Payer
Health Care" caps, touting the concept with the PEOPLE's talking
points, that it is the "economical and efficient" way to go.

It is time for us to seize control of the media marketing of
political policy. And with this new cap you can spread the meme that
single payer is not a "risky experiment" or "socialized medicine" or
"rationing care" or any of the other cheap shot smears that the right
wing has tried to pass off lately as a policy debate. No, the words
that need to come out of our mouth are "economical and efficient" and
then all will know what single payer is REALLY about.

from: http://mitpress.typepad.com/mitpresslog/2009/06/the-revolution-will-be-read-out-loud.html

2009-07-24T16:13:14Z

The Revolution will be Read Out Loud

This past Sunday, an unusual prank happened at the Union Square Barnes & Noble in New York: a large crowd arrived for a book signing and reading that the bookstore had not scheduled. The Coming Insurrection was the text. The New York Times picked up the story:

By 5 o’clock a crowd of more than 100 had gathered. Their purpose: to celebrate the publication of an English translation of a book called “The Coming Insurrection,” which was written two years ago by an anonymous group of French authors who call themselves the Invisible Committee. More recently, the volume has been at the center of an unusual criminal investigation in France that has become something of a cause célèbre among leftists and civil libertarians.

The book, which predicts the imminent collapse of capitalist culture, was inspired by disruptive demonstrations that took place over the last few years in France and Greece. It was influenced stylistically by Guy Debord, a French writer and filmmaker who was a leader of the Situationist International, a group of intellectuals and artists who encouraged the Paris protests of 1968.

In keeping with the anarchistic spirit of the text, the bookstore event was organized without the knowledge or permission of Barnes & Noble. The gathering was intended partly as a show of solidarity with nine young people — including one suspected of writing “The Coming Insurrection” —whom in November the French police accused of forming a dangerous “ultraleftist” group and sabotaging train lines.

The Coming Insurrection has been published by Semiotext(e). Semiotext(e) editor Hedi El Kholti was interviewed for the article:

Semiotext(e), a Los Angeles publisher that specializes in works by French theorists like Jean Baudrillard and Michel Foucault, published an English-language edition of the book at the end of last month with a print run of 3,000. Hedi El Kholti, an editor at Semiotext(e), said that the book’s winding up as a key part of a controversial case added to the historical value of its message.“Everyone is dancing around this notion that publishing a book can take you to jail,” he said recently by telephone. “That a book is an element that can involve you in a trial.”

June 16, 2009 in Current Affairs | Permalink

tweeeeeek @ 2009-07-10T11:42:00

2009-07-10T15:42:48Z

Internet Evolution - The Big Report - Big Entertainment Wants to Party Like It's 1996 via kwout

we're repainting my room in the best color it will be treehouse / office / etc

2009-06-23T20:18:35Z

The Neurocritic: The Cognitive Dissonance of Zealous Republicans via kwout

wtf

2009-06-22T08:33:16Z