Daily Blend: 05/06/13

Lt. Col. Jeff Krusinski

I’m too bored/lazy/busy reading/excited about tomorrow/tired from “work” to blog much, so here’re some links.

US Air Force officer ^[pictured] in charge of responding to sexual assaults arrested for drunken sexual assault, underlines the US Military’s generally appalling handling of sex crimes.

“Good Riddance: Fox Cancels Long-Running, Drug War-Glorifying, Abuse-Excusing Reality Series COPS”
(via @AndrewKirell; RT: @radleybalko)

Those who slime together, stay together: Anti-Freethought Blogs/Atheism Plus hater encourages Westboro Baptist Church to picket upcoming Women in Secularism conference.
(via Pharyngula)

And finally, how much do you know about science and religion? (I scored in the 15^th and 13^th percentiles, respectively. Which is probably more of an implicit condemnation of the US educational system than anything else.)
(via Bad Astronomy)

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Vox Day: Women should rely on daddy to choose their husbands

Our ol’ pal Theodore “Vox Day” Beale, who’s never encountered a form of misogyny he didn’t take to and spin as a means of preserving (his grotesque ideal of) society, has a suggestion for stripping women of their most basic autonomy:

Who Nose asks a pertinent question:

"If you want to understand why women are not permitted serve in Church leadership, and why human societies do not survive more than a few generations of young women being permitted to choose their own spouses"

It begs the question: Who ought to choose their spouses?

The Church?
The Father?
The Mother?
The State?

The question is further begged: What kind of law would need to be passed to enforce the choosing of a spouse.

Finally, another question is begged: What would you do with the 99% of women who responded to the suggestion or the law with, "F*ck Off"?

1. The Father, with the advice of the Mother.
2. No law is necessary. Simply informing their daughter that a woman who is capable of choosing her own spouse is clearly also capable of paying for her own college education and supporting her own lifestyle decisions will suffice for most parents. If a woman is independent enough to insist on paying her own way in order to pursue a career, she's probably not wife-and-mother material anyhow and would likely end up a reproductive dead end regardless the options she is afforded. We can always hope that instead of children, such a woman will contribute some revolutionary Powerpoint slideshows to society, produce a cure for cancer, or introduce some truly ground-breaking HR policies that will change the world for the better.
3. I would simply wish them the best of fortune in their future endeavors. But the number won't be anywhere nearly that high because women are, first and foremost, the practical sex.

Daily Blend: 04/12/13

Audrie Pott (15)

Understatement of the Day: “It turns out that the Obama administration has not been honest about who the CIA has been targeting with drones in Pakistan.”
(via @ggreenwald)

I just don’t have the patience (or stomach) today to write about the horrific Kermit Gosnell case, other than to affirm how it’s the perfect argument for why abortion should be fully legalized and easily accessible to ensure women never need to resort to such barbarity out of desperation.

Ditto with Vox Day’s predictably pathetic rant about how pro-choicers are all worse than Nazis and so on.

Another teenaged girl ^[pictured] commits suicide to escape persecution resulting from the publicization of her student gang-rape. Now to watch the rape-culture-soaked media fret over those poor arrested rapists. (Again.)
(via Pharyngula)

Appeals court denies Virginia AG Ken Cuccinelli’s petition to bring back anti-sodomy law.
(via Joe. My. God.)

Uruguay becomes latest country to legalize same-sex marriage.

And finally, Cracked presents some popular online myths, revised for accuracy.

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Daily Blend: 04/09/13

Rehtaeh Parsons

Another teenaged rape victim ^[pictured] falls victim to rape culture and takes her own life.

Today in pearl-clutching hilarity: Exposing the top “facilitators” of the US’s “porn pandemic”, including Google Play and the American Library Association! (Also: Bonus video featuring Morality in Media’s resident porn-awareness girl scout.)

Westboro Baptist Church to complete Roger Ebert’s awesome legacy.
(via Joe. My. God.)

And finally, I break my practice of ignoring such things by pointing out that the US Interior Department’s Instagram gallery is chock-full of fuckin’ awesomeness like this:
(via BuzzFeed)

[source | full size (607×600)]

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Nostalgia Critic examines popular dislike of “princess” archetype

One of my favorite web series is the Nostalgia Critic, wherein Doug Walker of That Guy With The Glasses plays a cynical, often histrionic reviewer of old-timey flicks and assorted media. Lately, the series has added a recurring, bi-weekly opinion segment where the NC talks about some aspect or other of pop culture and its effects on society in general.

Today, he put forth a rather thoughtful look at the much-bemoaned “princess” archetype (especially as popularized by Disney) and the lackluster role model it generally provides to young girls. While I don’t agree with every argument he makes and I think he misses a few logical connections, it’s still an interesting and insightful perspective to consider:

Transcript: (click the [+/-] to open/close →)

[−]

NOSTALGIA CRITIC: Hello! I’m the Nostalgia Critic. I remember it so you don’t have to.

Hey, what’s with the “princess” hate?

Yes, most little girls fantasize about being a princess at some point. With their elegant beauty, kind heart and enchanted surroundings, the princess, for many, is the epitome of femininity. But there’s been a bit of a backlash in the past several years, saying that the “princess” stereotype is a more damaging fantasy than an encouraging one. Even I’ve had my rants on the overuse of it in media.

NC: (to a movie character) You’re not really a princess! You just took the title ’cause it sounds cute!

NC: So, is it just innocent make-believe, or is there really something to get angry about? Well, in order to answer this, we should probably look at what the majority of people take the most offense at. And I guess it’s only the most logical, albeit clichéd, to look at the most famous lineup of princesses: Disney.

Disney has practically reinvented the fairy tale. And seeing how their Princess line is the best-selling licensed entertainment character merchandise, it’s safe to say they have a clear understanding of what makes princesses so popular.

What do they have in common? Well, they’re all pretty; they’re all kind; they all have various clothes and accessories you can buy for them. But naturally, the intrigue in owning one has to come from their personalities formed in the movies, which many consider, from an ethical point of view, not the best role models. “They don’t do anything,” many complain, “they’re just damsels waiting to be rescued and never take responsibility in getting things done for themselves, instead relying on their status and/or beauty to get them what they want. Which, in most cases, is just a man.”

Aaand … sometimes that’s true.

Sleeping Beauty, for example, I still stand by as one of the most forgettable characters in Disney history. Yeah, we all know the iconic image, but her fantasy extends to her doing absolutely nothing while her true love comes to save the day. And what, of course, happens? She does absolutely nothing while her true love comes to save the day. And on top of that, she has nothing else to make her stand out, be unique, or have any specific characteristics. So, yeah, the argument is pretty valid there.

But fuck it, I’m gonna defend the other ladies a little bit. Not that they’re always the best, but there’s^[sic] still good virtues that we can learn from them. Snow White kindness and helpful nature, for example, serves as a second mother for the dwarfs. And anyone that says being a mother doesn’t make a hard-working, responsible woman clearly has never been one. It’s work, and worst about it is that you don’t even get paid for it. So the fact that she can still be pleasant while also teaching the dwarfs responsibility may not be major, but it’s still something.

But, many would argue, it’s one thing for one of them to fall in that category. What about three?

We mentioned Sleeping Beauty before, but Cinderella is often the biggest offender to the “sit back, do nothing and let someone else save the day” routine. Again, to her defense, she’s working her ass off. I mean, like, every second she’s on-screen, she’s doing something. And in the end, she’s rewarded for her hard work and kindness, even in the face of such nastiness.

And if your argument is this is still not a good role model, that it wouldn’t inspire people to go out there and achieve, guess who’s favorite fairy tale this was? Yup – the “D-man” himself who supposedly started this whole controversy: Disney. He said Cinderella was his favorite because he often felt like her: Working as hard as he could every day until destiny finally gave him a chance, and that hard work and kindness can result in a virtuous reward.

But what does that arguably-greatest-businessman-creative-genius-and-heartwarming-icon know? Pfft. Slacker.

Now, granted, while I don’t think these characters are that bad, it’s clear to acknowledge that these women were limited to the roles that women were expected to have at the time. In the following years, the princess would be a little more proactive, taking more chances and forming more definitive personalities. But even that can take some flak, too, particularly Arial, the Little Mermaid, who many complain is just a whiny teenager who needs a man to save the day. And while she can at times certainly be her own teenage drama queen, people forget, at the time, she was praised as being much more independent than the past Disney princesses. She traveled, she explored, she broke the rules, she left the house, she had a distinct personality, she was curious.

ROGER EBERT: The character is active. She’s not just a little girl that things happen to. She’s up there, she’s gonna go to the surface, she’s gonna find her prince, she’s gonna take care of business, and so, you can really identify with her.

NC: And on top of that, while the prince does save the day in the end, she saves his life not once, but twice in this movie. Hell, if we wanna get technical about it, I’m surprised more people weren’t pissed off at Jasmine. I mean, yeah, she fights for her independence once and even takes a chance at living her own life, but she quickly returns to the world she said she hated, stays in it, and constantly lets her boyfriend save her.

But nevertheless, the complaints were heard, and the Princess brand over the years has made an effort to try and make their lady more and more independent, having them save the male just as many times as the male saves them, while still keeping true to the kind and moral virtues that – let’s face it, people – are enforced in every Disney character, not just the princesses: Be nice, be kind, be true to your heart. When has that not been a major part of the lesson in a Disney film?

So, after looking them all over, I’m not sure if it’s entirely Disney’s fault for the negative stereotype. Okay, it didn’t always help, but in many respects, it did help. They’re still trying to teach the importance of patience and kindness, which are great virtues for any gender. And Disney is even pushing harder to make their most marketable icons be a symbol of strength and honor, as see in these recent ads:

GIRL: I am a princess. I am brave even when I am scared. I believe compassion makes me strong. Kindness is power.

NC: So, if the virtues that the massive Disney’s promoting isn’t the problem with the princess icon, what is? I’ll admit, something was rubbing me the wrong way for years about girls wanting to be princesses. I just couldn’t put my finger on it. But then, the answer came to me when I saw Bridge to Terabithia, which is a godawful flick, by the way. (Right, note to self: Review Bridge to Terabithia.)

When our main lead brings his little sister into his fantasy world.

SISTER: Is there a king? Are you the king, Jess?

BROTHER: Only if you’re princess.

NC: Wait a minute. Why is he King, and her Princess? Shouldn’t it more logically be King and Queen? In fact, even more recently, in Wreck-It Ralph, why is it when the king is destroyed, again, it’s a princess who rules the land, and not a queen?

In fact, how come in a lot of nostalgic shows and movies I’ve reviewed, even if the original ruler is gone, they still hold the title “Princess”? Yeah, Princess Sally, Princess Lana; hell, even Princess Leia. All their parents are out of commission, and yet, they still hold onto the title of Princess and not Queen. Why does that seem more marketable for some reason?

And that’s when it suddenly hit me. It’s not necessarily the virtues of the princess that piss people off. Maybe it’s the title. Why do so many boys want to be King? Because they want the power and responsibility to control and change things.

DUKE NUKEM: Hail to the King, baby.

NC: Well, then, why do so many girls not want to be Queen, then? In fact, we’re almost anti-Queen, aren’t we? The more research I did, the more I found there aren’t that many fictional queens that are kind, heroic women. They’re usually the villains.

Which brings us back to the question: Why do so many girls prefer Princess to Queen? Well, maybe because being a princess not only indicates you’re younger, which often translates to prettier, but also that you have a position of power with responsibility, but not too much responsibility. “Oh, I’m just holding the spot for the King until he returns. I still have the title of youthful innocent who has power, but not all the power, thus projecting an image of daintiness and elegance who makes everybody cookies instead of an image of strength and determination who makes powerful changes.”

It’s the same thing as calling a grown man a “boy” and a grown woman a “girl”. If you call a grown man a “boy”, they’ll usually be pissed off. Why? Because they want to be seen for strength and responsibility over youthfulness and innocence. Whereas sadly, many women who prefer it the other way around, valuing the youthfulness and innocence over strength and responsibility. Oh, don’t get me wrong; there’s many who don’t, but you all know out there, there’s plenty that do.

Now, why this is is a whole other argument. Is it society over nature, nature over society, a combination of both; it’s a whole other issue. And I’m also not forgetting that prince and princess are not made-up titles; they really exist. It’s not titles we created to keep people in certain roles; they’re actual royal positions.

But what is obvious is that a reinforcement seems to be that princesses are young, beautiful and try to live in an innocent world free from conflict. And if one does arrive, it’s somebody else’s job to take care of it. With that said, no matter how tough, action-packed or honorable you make your heroine, by keeping your “princess” title a very popular title, it’s still reinforcing that youth and the need not to take responsibility are the best virtues.

And don’t get me wrong; I know men and women are different. I know, instinctually, we’re gonna have a different emphasis on different values; men are from Mars, women from Venus; etc., etc. But the world is changing more and more every day, and we’re seeing much more variety in our female characters than we have in the past. So, maybe it’s time to really look at the changes happening around us and see which virtues we really want to enforce. And, at least, making it very clear that there’s a definite option that any female can be as powerful as she wants to be. And that second place, or being under somebody else’s wing, is not the furthest you can go.

Because, let’s face it, guys: With so many female characters that are good, strong, interesting, funny, entertaining, intelligent, responsible and just as compelling as male characters, perhaps it’s time for the princess in so many people to stop living in fairy tales and look at the reality that is unfolding around us.

I’m the Nostalgia Critic. I remember it so you don’t have to.

(I have got to start writing shorter summaries …)

I would personally take it a few steps further than he dared to and posit that one reason for the historical popularity of the “princess” role model, particularly instead of the much more logical role of “queen”, is that it’s essentially another subtle manifestation of that ol’ bugaboo, the patriarchy. It only makes sense for a society that’s long been geared towards emphasizing male dominance in most fields (especially leadership) to depreciate the value and contributions of women in society at large. This would also help explain the long-running trope of the “evil queen”, given the precious few good queen characters that exist in our culture. (I can’t even think of any off the top of my head, though that may well just be my own ignorance showing.)

Daily Blend: 03/20/13

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX)

Happy tenth anniversary to the clusterfuck in Iraq and the spoon-fed lies that got the US populace to go along with it.

Another underage victim blamed for being raped by football players. Some people are just fucking sick.

Why is it that so many of those in charge of laws pertaining to computers and the Internet are absolute morons about computers and the Internet? (Though, to be fair, Rep. Gohmert (R-TX) ^[pictured] is usually wrong about everything.)

Another day, another blatantly dishonest global-warming-denying article from a renowned crank in a Daily Mail-associated tabloid.

I’m really embarrassed by fellow progressives’ penchant for nanny statism at times. Is it really that hard to commit to the ideal of personal freedom even if it means allowing people to make unhealthy choices?

Faithlessness is healthy and growing in Canada.

More of that Christian Love^TM, this time in Nova Scotia, Canada.

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Vox Day: Indian rapes the fault of feminism and too many men

Vox Day

Here’s Theodore “Vox Day” Beale’s predictably charming take on reports that sexual crime appears to be getting worse in India. Guess who gets the blame (if not the actual criminals, of course):

Note that the problem in India is actually getting considerably worse despite the advance of sexual equality in Indian society that the feminists believe will solve everything. As we've learned to expect, feminism wreaks societal devastation even in the process of supposedly offering a means of improvement. In this case, it is the pro-abortion position that is leading to more rapes in India.

"According to the decennial Indian census, the sex ratio in the 0-6 age group in India went from 104.0 males per 100 females in 1981, to 105.8 in 1991, to 107.8 in 2001, to 109.4 in 2011. The ratio is significantly higher in certain states such as Punjab and Haryana (126.1 and 122.0, as of 2001)."

Damn those evil Westerners and their pro-women, abortion-promulgating ways!

I am curious to know, though, if Vox has any mechanism to propose – any at all – that would explain how or why a barely perceptible increase in men over the last few decades should excuse, justify, or even explain coherently, the sudden spike in sexual violence against women. Do they all just release excess testosterone into the air, which combines with greenhouse gases to drive male libidos upwards whilst ratcheting down their moral standards?

Or better yet, why do some people insist on twisting all sense and reason in order to blame biology for what is inherently a behavioral problem caused by a culture wrought with regressive sexual attitudes resulting from lacking education and insufficient law enforcement?

But leave it to Vox to find the silver lining:

The world is quite fortunate that India's excess male population appears to be inclined to occupy itself in pursuit of gang rape, considering that the more customary outlet is foreign invasion.

Yes, a (presumably, if not always evidently) thinking and feeling human being actually wrote that. The mind boggles.

You know, I have a hypothesis for why so few of Vox’s critics bother to refute him anymore – they’re just too goddamned embarrassed to share the same taxonomic classification as this glorified neanderthal to be able to stomach his revolting spiel for any amount of time. (Lucky for SIWOTI-afflicted masochists like yours truly, I suppose.)

Daily Blend: 03/17/13

Card. Wilfrid Napier

Predictably, the Canadian Government’s decision to lay off all non-Christian prison chaplains has already resulted in a lawsuit.

Public Shaming offers these handy guides on how to thoroughly void your Decent Human Being card.
(via @MotherJones)

In the category of “a first for everything”, I defend a clergyman’s ^[pictured] remarks about pedophilia from someone who apparently can’t distinguish between a sexual paraphilia and the actual act of child abuse.

And finally, here’s another month’s worth of refutations to the claim that religious people are more moral:
(via Friendly Atheist)

Highlights: (click the [+/-] to open/close →)

[−]

African woman says that “everything bad should be done to” gays, including imprisonment and execution;

Former pastor Haden Conrad accused of soliciting sex with a 14-year-old girl;

Metro News: “Six new sex abuse charges for retired Catholic priest”;

Rev. Donald R. Jung accused of molesting his 9-year-old granddaughter;

Birmingham Mail: “Solihull priest Ted Simpson arrested over child sex accusations”;

Baltimore, CO Deacon William Albaugh busted for child porn possession;

The Irish Times: “Report finds Dutch religious abused ‘tens of thousands’ of girls”;

Archdioceses of New Orleans & Lake Charles, LA sued for allegedly harboring accused child-raping priest Mark Anthony Broussard;

The Times: “Papal frontrunner Cardinal Peter Turkson links sex abuse to homosexuality”;

Manitoba, CA school administration & local churches oppose anti-bullying law meant to stop anti-gay discrimination;

The Advocate: “Florist Tells Longtime Gay Customer That Jesus Won't Let Her Do His Wedding”;

Gay Star News: “Brazil elects racist, anti-gay pastor to be human rights boss”;

Kansas City Atheist Coalition blocked from participating in Saint Patrick’s Day parade;

The Raw Story: “Atheist cop sues after being demoted to car washer for refusing to pray”;

North Carolina considers forcing Bible study classes on public-high-schoolers;

The Telegraph: “Church school pupils will need baptism certificate to board school bus”;

Montana’s Pinehaven Christian Children’s Ranch accused of physically abusing troubled children;

Deccan Chronicle: “Attackers hack hand off 7-yr-old Tanzania albino boy for witchcraft”;

Fifteen-year-old Maldives rape victim sentenced to 100 lashes for consensual premarital sex;

Osun Defender: “Father ties, locks up six-year-old daughter for witchcraft”;

UN cancels humanitarian marathon after Hamas bans women from racing;

Toronto Star: “Muslims storm church in Egypt looking for woman suspected of converting to Christianity”;

Middle-Eastern Islamists riot, demand execution of bloggers accused of blasphemy;

The Independent: Pakistani mob torches Christian homes in Lahore over prophet Mohamed 'blasphemy';

Iran bans Buddha statues as “symbols of cultural invasion”;

Bella Naija: “Nigerian Nurse who Caused Baby’s Death after Botched Home Circumcision in the UK Walks Free from Court”;

Miami, FL imam accused by US Gov’t of funneling $50,000 to Taliban;

Global Post: “Cairo court affirms death for 7 Copts over anti-Islam film”; and

11 extremists stopped “weeks or days” before building bombs for “another 9/11”.

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Daily Blend: Friday, February 22, 2013

Diana Medley

Ontario top appeals court rules it just fine if police want to snoop around a suspect’s cellphone – so long as there’s no password, or then they have to ask permission.

Indiana Republicans agree: One government-sanctioned rape by medically pointless transvaginal ultrasound just isn’t enough for women seeking an abortion.
(via @jennifurret)

I’m not sure what’s remotely surprising about a study that links childhood bullying to psychological disorders in adults (except to those “it’s normal/harmless for kids to pick on each other” assholes).
(via RT: @jennifurret)

Sullivan, Indiana teacher ^[pictured] suspended over anti-gay remarks, universally suspected of being special educator Dianne “gays have no purpose in life and I don’t understand it” Medley.
(via Friendly Atheist)

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Daily Blend: Wednesday, February 20, 2013

Bob Beckel

Canadian free speech ombudsman asked to investigate whether federal scientists are being unfairly muzzled by the government. (Y’know, as opposed to fairly muzzling them.)

Make a Counter-Strike map of a real Montréal metro station, get threatened with a $50,000 fine because it might, like, scare people or something.

In shocking news to all, a new study reveals that religion isn’t actually a very good deterrent against criminal behavior.
(via Friendly Atheist)

Fox News token liberal Bob Beckel ^[pictured]: “When was the last time you heard about a rape on campus?” Hmm, let’s see.

And finally, Cardinal Roger Mahoney, “humiliated” by God after he was caught shielding child-molesting priests from justice, is “asking God to bless and forgive” … his critics. Quoth Ed Brayton: You should be in prison, you sick bastard.

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Daily Blend: Thursday, February 14, 2013

Dr. Callan Bentley

Information is Beautiful reveals the horrible state of rape prosecution in the UK, where only 1.5% of all estimated rapes end with a conviction.

Illinois Senate votes to approve same-sex marriage, sends bill to Democrat-controlled House where passage is virtually guaranteed.

Florence, AZ high-schooler suspended for using photo of a gun as desktop wallpaper on his school-issued laptop.
(via @radleybalko)

And finally, geology professor Callan Bentley ^[pictured] graciously provides an ID/Creationist with a head-spinning scientific smackdown.
(via @BadAstronomer)

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Chart: The MRA worldview revealed

What’s the one thing better than watching bigoted jackholes shoot themselves in the foot? Watching them do it without even realizing it – and bonus points if there’s a clear and revealing little graphic involved:

David Futrelle dubs it a “terrible chart”. Here, I must honestly disagree; this is a terrific chart in how it plainly (and quite accurately) lays out just where these sickly little creatures’ priorities lie. I recommending sharing this far and wide, if only to further disillusion any remaining fence-sitters about the real, modern-day connotations of the so-called Men’s Rights Movement.

New Mexico Republican wants to criminalize rape abortions

Rep. Cathrynn Brown (R-NM)

The only thing Republicans seem to love more than posturing about rape babies is using them as an excuse to strip away disenfranchised women’s right to bodily autonomy:

A Republican lawmaker in New Mexico introduced a bill on Wednesday that would legally require victims of rape to carry their pregnancies to term in order to use the fetus as evidence for a sexual assault trial.

House Bill 206, introduced by state Rep. Cathrynn Brown (R), would charge a rape victim who ended her pregnancy with a third-degree felony for "tampering with evidence."

“Tampering with evidence shall include procuring or facilitating an abortion, or compelling or coercing another to obtain an abortion, of a fetus that is the result of criminal sexual penetration or incest with the intent to destroy evidence of the crime," the bill says.

Third-degree felonies in New Mexico carry a sentence of up to three years in prison.

It’s also intended as yet another penalty against sex offenders:

Brown said in a statement Thursday that she introduced the bill with the goal of punishing the person who commits incest or rape and then procures or facilitates an abortion to destroy the evidence of the crime.

“New Mexico needs to strengthen its laws to deter sex offenders,” said Brown. “By adding this law in New Mexico, we can help to protect women across our state.”

Imagine the repercussions if it were made law that a legislator must first present compelling evidence that a certain offense is actually taking place in the real world (as opposed to within the confines of their fevered authoritarian mind) before they were allowed to present harsher restrictions on the rights of the supposed victims under the guise of “protecting” them.

Wouldn’t that be something?

(via @BuzzFeedAndrew)

Daily Blend: Wednesday, January 16, 2013

Pres. Barack Obama

Sorry for the repeated link dumps, only there’s this awesome story I just … must … finish …

President Obama ^[pictured] finally proposes some basic, obvious, commonsensical gun control regulations.
(via Pharyngula)

… Which, of course, means he’s out to disarm Americans to make it easier for the government to kill them all! (Seriously, Vox, take a toke.)

California lawmakers present bill to fix ridiculous legal loophole used to exculpate rapists posing as someone’s partner.

Radley Balko has a great write-up about the inordinate and dangerous amount of power and immunity granted to U.S. prosecutors.

And finally, I don’t agree with everything in it, but Robert Brockway at Cracked has an interesting piece about the U.S.’s culture of glorified violence and the role of videogames as a symptom.

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Daily Blend: Friday, January 11, 2013

NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg

The War on (certain people who use certain kinds of) Drugs gets even worse, thanks to NYC Mayor Bloomberg’s ^[pictured] nanny-statist bullshit. Only politicians have ego to think they can dictate medical policy better than actual doctors.

The fact that he actually said something like, “[S]upposing it is really true so you didn’t get enough painkillers and you did have to suffer a little bit. The other side of the coin is people are dying and there’s nothing perfect,” really tells you all you need to know about the man.
(via @radleybalko)

At least some Republicans still haven’t learned to STFU about rape.
(via @BuzzFeedAndrew)

Salon’s Alex Seitz-Wald effectively destroys the Right’s myth that gun-toting commoners somehow prevent militarized takeovers.
(via RT: @mmfa)

And finally, here’s today’s edition of “I want a dog, dammit”:
(via @MelanieKV; RT: @ggreenwald)

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Daily Blend: Wednesday, January 09, 2013

Vox Day

Quick notes: I made a few minor changes to the commenting rules and revamped the Dungeon. That is all.

Another ACLU win: Federal judge rules key part of NYPD’s “stop and frisk” unconstitutional, orders them to stop immediately.
(via @ACLU_NorCal; RT: @radleybalko)

Ohio’s Jackson Middle School administrators are willing to waste a whole lot of money losing in court rather than comply with the law.

Vox Day ^[pictured]: Sloppy thinker, lazy photoshopper, and all-around terrible person. (Originally planned to devote a full post, but then I realized I just don’t care anymore.)

Public Policy Polling: “While the Democrats in Congress aren't popular (-12 at 38/50) their approval rating is a net 48 points better than their Republican counterparts (-60 at 15/75).”
(via @BuzzFeedAndrews)

And finally, just in case you thought the Freethought Blogs/A+ haters couldn’t get any more pathetic.
(via @DaylightAtheism; RT: @pzmyers)

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

A brutally apt comparison

Another simile: They both start off with the illusion of consent and promises of fulfillment, until …

I don’t know about you, but I can’t see that without being reminded of the late, great George Carlin:

Transcript: (click the [+/-] to open/close →)

[−]

GEORGE CARLIN: Think about it: Religion has actually convinced people that there’s an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do every minute of every day! And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do! And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish where he will send you to live and and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever ’til the end of time!

But he loves you!

He loves you, and he needs money! He always needs money! He’s all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, all-wise; somehow, just can’t handle money.

(via UzzaNotes)

Daily Blend: Thursday, January 03, 2013

Dr. Oz

House Republicans actually manage to kill the Violence Against Women Act because it was “too supportive of immigrants, the LGBT community, and Native Americans”. I’m seriously starting to wonder whether they just love playing the bad guys at this point.
(via @BuzzFeedAndrew)

Not unrelatedly: Welcome to Steubenville, Ohio, where the violent gang-rape of a drugged 16-year-old girl by football players is totally hilarious. (But remember: There is no such thing as rape culture! It’s just a myth from fugly fascist feminists who hate teh menz.)

Atheist organizer Michael Nugent dismantles Thunderf00t’s latest appallingly dishonest anti-feminist video. The man has devolved into a sad parody of himself.
(via @mikenugent; RT: @pzmyers)

Meanwhile, here are the 14 kinds of sexist commenters who invariably pop up under any remotely pro-women post. (#15: Slimeballs who think spewing semi-coherent vitriol is akin to presenting a rational argument that deserves to be addressed.)
(via Pharyngula)

And finally, in case you were wondering, yes, Dr. Oz ^[pictured] is still a ginormous quack, despite all his fancy credentials.
(via @BadAstronomer)

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.

Guest | Why my friend no longer calls himself a feminist

The following is a guest post by a friend who asked to remain anonymous. He wished to explain why he no longer wants to be known as a feminist despite his continued support for women’s rights as a result of the small but disproportionately vocal misandrist fringe. I’ve touched on the matter of these rabid kooks previously, and while they in no way represent the feminist movement as a whole, they generate enough noise and division to successfully chase away any number of potential allies who wish to avoid getting tarred with the same brush. I find this unspeakably disheartening and infuriating, which is why I’m publishing the following testimonial.

Edit: 11/30/12 5:55 PM ET – To be clear (and to elucidate some apparent confusion in the comments), I – your humble blogmeister, Joé – do not endorse the idea of abandoning the mantle of feminism over the actions of fringers. I’ve repeatedly written to the contrary in the past: that if you truly believe in something, then you should stick with it and change it for the better. I published my friend’s testimonial because I thought it was an interesting viewpoint, even if I don’t agree with his decision to drop support for the feminist movement, and because it’s always important to take note of the damages caused by the rabid ones in our midst in order to assess the health and direction of the overall movement. That is all.

Edit #2: 11/30/12 8:55 PM ET – To clarify another misunderstanding (especially at the Atheism Plus Forum): As clearly (and repeatedly) stated, my anonymous friend – I’ll call him AF from now on – remains committed to supporting equality and justice for women, whatever those keen on interpreting his account in the least charitable light may think. He’s just no longer adopting the “feminist” label. This is irrelevant to his beliefs and actions concerning women’s rights, just as one can reject the “Atheism Plus” label (say, in favor of “secular humanism”) while remaining a staunch ally on matters of social justice. Any accusations of AF merely being in it for the kudos aren’t only baseless, they’re outright ridiculous and serve only to embarrass the accuser. Now, I tire of defending AF from such silly diversions in his absence, so enough of that.

---

I have always considered myself to hold progressive values, and as such, I have always supported Women's Rights, in-so-much as I have always seen these views as more “common sense” than anything else.

As such, I have always considered myself to be a Feminist. Yet, over the few years that I have decided to share these views, I have been told, in essence, the same thing again and again.

That I am not welcome here.

I have been assured, by many people, that these events are part of a fringe group, and that this is not an everyday occurrence within the Feminist movement, yet it does not explain why I run into these people everywhere I go.

I have always held to the belief that educating myself on any subject was important. As such, when I chose classes for my second semester at college, in order to fill the “Tolerance and Intolerance” requirement, I chose a course from the Women's Studies major.

This was, apparently, a mistake.

Daily Blend: Tuesday, November 27, 2012

Random polar-bear-cub-in-a-basket pic of the day [source | full size (510×360)]

Another Catholic institution, this time a Montréal, Canada school for deaf boys, sued for repeated child molestation that lasted decades. Makes me prouder than ever of the Quiet Revolution.
(via My Secret Atheist Blog)

U.S. Supreme Court upholds the right to record on-duty police officers in Chicago, IL.

PZ Myers tears into an anti-Atheism Plus douchebag for misrepresenting scientific research to defend vaginal douching.

And finally, Ed Brayton takes apart that stupid Fox News column about a supposed “war on men” where “women aren’t women anymore”.

If you have any story suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments or send them in.