I think that the title of this particular article is rather self-explanatory in regards to content, however I’m doing my best to not jump to conclusions quite yet. One thing that I have learned in my time reading the “less-than-popular” news is that from time to time people will jump on a school, company, or other organization for some supposed human rights violation only to discover later that the story was terribly distorted or quotes were taken out of context such that things appeared either much worse or entirely the opposite of what they actually are. While I’m not implying that this is one of those cases, I am saying that there are some questions that have yet to be answered and thus leave it open to become one.
With that in mind, on to the story:
A highschooler in the town of Alice, Texas states that he was removed from the cheerleading team and suspended from school when he was caught on security camera kissing another male student. Needless to say (if you know me at all) this does not surprise me. Contrary to what many may think upon reading that, I do not make that statement simply because we are talking about Texas, as many of the commenters have already done. I make that statement because it seems that for some reason which utterly bipasses my ability to comprehend, this country is completely incapable of just liking all the people who live inside of it. I’m sorry if you feel so little confidence in yourself that you must find someone who has less than you to feel better, but attempting to constantly insult and punish people who haven’t done anything wrong simply because you can makes you even less of a person than you already were…so maybe you should just get a hobby or something to make yourself feel more worthwhile.
As for the rest of the story, I’ll just let you read the actual article, but I do think that this just emphasizes the fact of how utterly bigoted the world is capable of being, even in this day and age, and how completely depressing that it. There are so many people out there who think that they have the intrinsic right to dislike other people for any number of reasons but I have just a couple of things to say to them before I go.
1) They came into this world the same way you did.
2) They will leave this world in the same way you do.
3) They will most likely leave more impact behind than you do, because a loving legacy lasts an eternity, but hatred only lasts a lifetime.
Recently several twitter users and companies (or ‘Brands’) have announce that celebrities, PR firms, and other users with a large fan base no longer need to follow a user before that user can send them a DM. For those who are less than knowledgeable on the more intricate workings of twitter, let me explain.
Twitter allows the use of DMs (or Direct Messages) to send messages to another user that can not be viewed by the public; in other words, a private message. Normally both users must be “following” one another in order for this option to be available, meaning that most large companies on twitter who have a vast following would be unable to make use of it due to the inability to follow all of their millions of followers in return. This new policy change, however, eliminates that hurdle. Now only one party need be following the other for the DM option to become available, for example: Katie is following her lawyer on twitter. Her lawyer makes a post saying that she is “Free all afternoon if anyone would like a quick meeting”. Katie does not wish to let all her friends know that she is currently hiring a lawyer because she is embarrassed. By the old policy, Katie would have to use some other means to respond to her lawyer, however now she can simply send a private message back saying “Can we meet at 3pm?” and no one but her lawyer need know.
That was a long explanation to get to my point (as is par for the course with me), but here we go. As interesting as I found all of this to be, my thought was “What about all those celebrities and companies that don’t want this large influx of private messages as is bound to happen” and then I read this:
With that in mind, Twitter has provided the option of disabling the feature, making the new feature a welcome addition for PR firms and brands looking to interact with their followers.
This is the very last line of the article, and rightly so as it sums things up rather nicely, but what boggles me are the comments that follow.
This sounds really dangerous for celebrities on twitter.
Don’t like the idea - would give another route for spammers to abuse.
I’m not a brand but I’d rather selectively follow people back who I wanted to receive DMs from than have ANYONE be able to send a Direct Message to my account.
Judging by these comments, I am apparently the only human being left on the planet who either A) has the ability to read or B) is capable of maintaining an attention span long enough to encompass a ONE PAGE ARTICLE. So, just a hint for those of you who read half of the first paragraph and then jump to the comments because you NEED to explain how this is a terrible thing; read the whole thing, only then can you avoid the dark side of making yourself the idiot…
17 y.o. Gaby pretended to be pregnant from homecoming to early April during her senior year of high school to collect data for her senior year sociological project in which she dissects the sterotypes thrust upon pregnant teenagers.
John Shore, blogger for the Huffington Post, writes a short entry on some of the truths about Jesus that most of the religious world prefers to overlook before concluding that, if Jesus were invited to a gay wedding, he would most definitely go…and would likely bring wine.
Sadly, however, it would appear that the majority of the over 300 commenters seem to have completely skipped the vast middle section of the entry so they can get to the “Jesus would have gone” bit and then proceeded to inform the author how he’s a terrible person and most likely going to hell.
A group of Christian Extremists, listed specifically as Catholic at one point in the article, charged armed guards in a museum in France in a successful attempt to destroy a piece of art known as “Piss Christ” in which artist Andres Serrano submerged a plastic crucifix in a glass of his own urine and then photographed it to make a statement about the use of Christ and Christianity in a for-profit manner, as is so common in the modern age. The group in question has stated that they want to “re-Christianize France” and have since harassed the museum declaring that they want such anti-Christian themed pieces banned from the country.
Once again, we have another group of religious extremists (don’t let any particular group fool you into thinking that only one particular religion or another is capable of extremist stupidity) believing that their personal choice in a deity gives them the right to bring about harm and destruction on other people and their properties without repercussions and who give me yet one more reason to want to buy my own island…
A/N: It has been brought to my attention that, in the following article, I have misused the term “Semantic” in place of the term “Semitic”. Whether this is due to my own inability to think whilst typing this or due to spellchecks ever-constant need to make me look like an idiot, I am not sure however I ask you to overlook this mistake in lieu of understanding the overarching point of the article. Thank you.
The article above explains how, among other things, the Arizona birther law which is currently on the desk of the governor would allow them to use circumcision as proof of citizenship. While this is, in and of itself, a form of insanity that I was hoping never to see in this country (mind you, the only reason for wanting to pass this law is that a large number of people are trying to prove that the current President is NOT a citizen because the law in Hawaii, where he was born, prevents his original birth certificate from being copied or leaving the hospital in which he was born. They have verified it is on record and granted the public access to their “public files” which are what Hawaii uses instead of the actual birth certificate, so there really should be no problem) my actual problem has nothing to do with the fact that they are constantly trying to oust the President and everything to do with the fact that they are lending credence to the idea that certain “types” of people (read religious and white) are more “American” than others as well as to the idea that circumcision is not only a viable choice for a child, but one that should be made.
Now, first off, given the number of religious traditions in this country (not to mention the number of individuals who do not ascribe to a religion) there is a good chance that a male child born to a couple that legally lives here would not want to have their child circumcised as it is traditionally held to be a semantic (Jewish, Christian, Muslim) tradition. So, what this law is subtly intonating is that a REAL American is one of these three religions (most likely they want it to be ONLY Christian, but it’s difficult to narrow it down that far using only a newborns penis). This is infuriating enough on its own, considering that a large population here is not one of the semantic religions, however it’s not the part that really has my panties in a knot, so to speak.
What annoys me the most (actually I suppose annoy isn’t the best term…more like enrage) is the undertone that this bill carries with it that “circumcision is good”. Now, I don’t know what kind of culture most of the individuals who wrote this bill grew up in (I’m guessing overly religious and most likely highly patriarchal) but where I come from we have a tendency to refer to experts on matters that we can’t fully comprehend because we don’t have the proper training or background. In the case of medical issues, such as surgery, we tend to refer to physicians or other members of the medical community. This is where I and my peers should come in…however it seems that the writers of this bill forgot to add this step.
Every day, in almost all of the “first world” countries, circumcision is debunked more and more by the medical community. It is a pointless, painful (there is no anesthetic used for a procedure in which a heated metal blade cuts the most sensitive portion of the human body) procedure which is pushed solely for religious reasons and is, in general, rejected by the medical community at large. People will argue that it “looks cleaner”…well so concrete but I doubt you want me to plow down all the city parks in the name of cleanliness. Some will argue about medical problems that can occur only in the uncircumcised, and there are some, however the incidence of them occurring is almost identical if not less numerous to the incidence of “surgical accidents” that occur during circumcision surgery (and, mind you, the medical problems of those who maintain their foreskin can be fixed with medical intervention almost 100%…you can’t just go find a “new penis” to attach if you fuck up the one the boy has during surgery) Also, I would like to point out that most cases of medical problems involving the foreskin are 100% causally linked to IMPROPER CLEANING REGIMEN. This means that, unless you are planning on being a terrible parent and never telling your child to go take a bath, these problems should not exist in the modern world.
So then, here we have a bill who’s sole purpose is to promote an outdated religious tradition in a secular government while (hopefully) proving that the president is not a citizen so that he can be removed from office and an old white man can take his place and run things like they should be run (by cutting taxes for the rich and stealing from the poor)…sounds like a perfect bill to me…maybe some people should go sign a petition or something…
A senator in Tennessee has introduced a bill to the state education board which would prevent all teachers and school staff in all elementary and middle schools in the state of Tennessee from discussing or so much as mentioning anything to do with alternate sexual identities (LGBTQ). This would, in effect, prevent counselors from being able to speak with students confused about their sexuality, prevent teachers from answering questions on such topics as the scientific basis of sexuality or laws which discriminate along sexuality lines, and possibly cause for the omition of certain historical facts all in the name of “not saying gay”. Ultimately, this bill is nothing more than a way to subconciously enforce a bigoted world view on children who are too young to understand that hatred is not their only choice.
The link above leads to a more complete description of the bill as well as a petition which can be signed electronically demanding that the bill be brought to a halt.
A christian organization is utterly outraged by a recent J. Crew (a clothing manufacturer) add in which a woman is seen with her male child who has his toe nails painted pink. The angered party claims that they are using this poor child to push contraversial, transgender politics; the rest of the world thinks they are baulking to make their own contraversy. I think the biy likes pink, I like penguins…moving on…
In January of 2009, in peak hour traffic, a man in a 4WD (SUV) pulled over on Melbourne’s infamous West Gate Bridge, and hurled his tiny daughter (age 4), to her death while her two brothers sat on in stunned horror, before he got back in his car, and drove away.
This week, the man, Arthur Freeman, was sentenced to 30 years in prison for this act of cruelty.
Today, one of Australia’s most well-known television and sporting personalities announced his sympathies for Freeman. While, he didn’t endorse the act, he did state, “I feel sorry for Arthur Freeman,” … “…you have to think about what would drive that man to do that and you’ve gotta have some compassion, not for what he’s done, but what the thought process would be going on in that man’s mind,”
No. And perhaps this makes me callous, but, just… NO. There is nothing in this world that is so bad, so devastatingly soul destroying, that should lead a person to act out in this way.
Sam Newman, where the hell is your sympathy for the bystanders who witnessed this act? Your sympathy for the little brother who pleaded with his father to go back, because he knew his baby sister couldn’t swim?
Diane Latiker, mother of 8 and grandmother of 13, opened the doors to her own home in 2003 to any young person who felt the need to come there. Since then, she has changed the lives of over 1,500 children, teenagers, and young adults; getting them off of the streets and into schools, jobs, and a life worth living.
Starting out of a single room in her own house, at one point Diane had as many as 75 kids living in three rooms under her roof and up to six gangs in her house at the same time, all of whom respected her and her mission enough to mark it as a safe place where no inter-gang violence would happen.
Telling the kids that her door is open “24 hours a day, seven days a week. They could come over for food, or homework help, or just to talk about their hopes, dreams and fears.” Diane has changed the lives of thousands of kids such as Maurice Gilchrist, 15, who joined a gang at twelve and states that without this program he would likely be in prison, in the hospital, or dead. In regards to Diane, he says, "Miss Diane, she changed my life. I love her for that."
I only have one thing to say to anyone reading this article…if you don’t cry, there is something very, very wrong with you…
Another law suit has been filed on the grounds of gender discrimination, this time against Virgina Tech, but that’s not what makes me stare in wonder at this article. No, what boggles my mind are some of the comments it has received and the overall reaction of the populous. This boggles me because many of the readers, even some of the women, are saying that employers HAVE THE RIGHT to discriminate against women as they cause loss of work time due to pregnancy and menses…wait…what?
I am aware that the ignorant people of this world seem to be under the belief that medical issues are no excuse for not raking in the dough, however you would think that the conservative right would at least be ok with pregnancy, I mean, they are the ones currently fighting tooth and nail against abortion right now so they must LOVE babies. Oh wait, they’re fighting against abortion because they want to keep women at home and repressed, not for any moral reason…so I guess blaming pregnancy for women’s lower pay and lower chances to get a job fit right in with that plan.
However, for all those who actually believe this ideology for why women deserve less in the workplace, I would like to point something out to you. In all of my years working in various areas, including some where I maintain a position of some power, I have never, that’s right never, chosen to work with a male over a female. This is not because I am biased in the other direction (though I won’t deny that I likely am) but instead because when I enter a new job I examine each of my coworkers as if I were the one hiring them and, low and behold, it is always the women who are actually doing more work yet never seem to be complaining about it. I will admit that argument that men take less sick days because they don’t have menses and can’t get pregnant is true, however when women, on a normal day, do twice the work of their male counterparts for half the pay I begin to wonder exactly who is holding “the company” back. As a medical professional, I am aware that the majority of receptionists and nurses are female, this is partly because females tend to flock towards these jobs more than males, however I also believe that it’s partially due to the fact that doctors and hospitals are aware that women are able to deal with a frustrated, angry, upset, depressed, concerned, hopeless patient with ease whereas I have seen men in utterly ballistic fits of rage due to single telephone calls. Men have a higher propensity to show up late, leave early, and ignore company policy because they simply think they have the right to do so “every now and again” and I know this because I AM ONE.
So I am forced to wonder, is pregnancy and menses as a possible (but not always probable) loss of work time really a valid reason to discriminate against women when men tend to waste far more time while on the clock? I seriously doubt so…
The supreme court of Arkansas has recently overturned a ban, put in place in 2008, on homosexual couples ability to adopt or foster children. While I think the majority of the article can be summed up in the title alone, there is one thing that I would like to point out for those who will actually read the article.
I am hoping that I’m not the only one to notice this, but as most people tend to read only what they want to I find it pertinent to point this out. The first set of interviews are with the ACLU and other members of the side against the ban in which they state facts, refer to experts, and indicate past cases to which this is pertinent in order to build a case (even in just these few lines) for why this ban is not only pointless, but harmful to both the adults and the children involved. But then, in just a few sentences, we are given the opinion of those defending the ban who fail utterly to sound like logical adults, pointing out that this is “Judicial tyranny” and that a bare majority two years ago agreed with this ban so it obviously must be in the right.
First, I know I am a scientist and a doctor, but I general find that people like to be given concrete facts on a matter before making a decision, not vague points of view flaunted as fact. Second, and in my mind more importantly, it seems that every time a conservative or religious group is denied their ability to legally be bigoted they demand that it is “Judicial tyranny” and that the judicial ruling should be overturned until more suitable judges (in other words, judges that agree with them) can be found. Am I the only person who recalls that the point of having a judicial branch to our government is to prevent the abuse of power in all other branches? Including, but not limited to, the ability to overturn the ruling of the majority when that majority is found to be infringing upon the rights of a minority?
I know that, at least for the most part, I am simply preaching to the choir here and that everyone reading this will either have already know this, already agreed with this, or will do so shortly after having read it, but I still feel like, just in case, I should get the info out there.
This is Tyrror from TehPainfulTruth and sometimes…the truth hurts…
Seriously, what is the world coming to, when children can no longer be children? Not only was the baby (and parent) in question, not breaking any rules or regulations for riding on a public mode of transportation, but a 13 month-old doesn’t understand the concept of keeping quiet, and the bus driver in question is demonstrating a serious lack in judgment as well as an ignorance and failure in her position for duty-of-care.
The bus driver in question is employed to provide a public service, and in doing so, has a duty-of-care to see that the passengers of the bus reach their destination safely. If she had succeeded in kicking the mum and her baby off the bus sooner, and then the mum and baby had come to harm…
In a world where most news makes you want to punch something, its good to know that the next generation may have more hope due than we give then credit for. 13 year old Noah, online music blogger with over 80,000 subscribers, has decided to hold an indie music confer of which all proceeds go to The Trevor Project and the It Gets Better project, both of which support lgbt youth during times of social thoughts. Check the link for more details…
It’s amazing what has no place in a debate about abortion. Women, their health (both mental and physical), the health of the foetus, and now, in a debate about medical procedures, it would seem that it is no longer appropriate to use the correct terminology for the portions of anatomy affected by pregnancy and abortion. I half expect these politicians to cover their ears and go ‘lalalalala I can’t hear you!’… Oh… wait….
A woman who was groped unwillingly by a police officer was ignored by police once she reported the incident and began to record the officers who refused to handle her case for which she was arrested on charges of “eavesdropping”, a charge which can lead to 15 years in prison. The kicker, this was 6 months ago and her case, either of them, had yet to be tried.
Just when you think Australia may be stepping towards the light and embracing change - hey! We have a FEMALE Prime Minister now… *and* a FEMALE Governor General! - our “esteemed" Prime Minister, Ms Julia Gillard has claimed that she cannot condone same-sex marriages to take place within Australia as it goes against her "traditional up-bringing".
Dear Ms. Gillard,
Please allow me to point out just how you’ve let Tradition dictate your life so far.
You are not married and currently live in a de-facto relationship. Tradition does not recognise this as being married, in fact, it is considered living in sin.
You also claim to be an Atheist, and, whilst I have no qualms over your religious beliefs or non-beliefs, I’d like to point out, that Tradition would see you arrested, tried and charged with heresy.
And finally, Ms. Gillard, if the world allowed Tradition to apply over reason, you would not currently be in the position you find yourself in.
So, in saying that….
Pull your damn head out of your arse and stop trying to justify your homophobia as being ‘Tradition’, when so far, all you have done until now, is defy it.
A minority of residents in am historic area of of New York City have sued the city over implementation of a bike path because it “decreases the historic nature of the area”. The vast majority of residents prefer the safety inferred by the path.
An article that describes some of the more recent occurences with the union busting bill in wisconsin pushed through (in what may have been an illegal move) by republicans before looking at some off the copycat bills in other states
Two members of the kansas senate, both democrat and republican, what too keep a law on the books that classifies homosexual relationships as a crime regardless of prior forme court rulings starting that such laws can not be upheld by any state of the union.
Republicans (yes republicans) from New Hampshire propose a change to the definition of marriage, making all “marriages” a solely religious affair while all government based marriages (those providing legal benefits) would be redefined as “unions”. This would place both heterosexual and homosexual marriages on an equal playing field legally and follow the advice of gay rights activists from years ago who claimed that marriages should be left for individual churches to sort out and the government should call them something else to prevent religious based anger.
Two gay men who have been together for 40 years sent out the linked video to the California government along with a written statement asking them to lift the ban on gay marriage until the supreme court makes a call, which may be in the very distant future. Their reason? One of them has been diagnosed with rapidly progressing Alzheimer’s disease. In a quote from their written statement,
“If the California Supreme Court is going to take its time,” Ed says, “then we deserve the dignity of marriage…before I can’t remember what marriage is.”
I have come to the realization that my main reason for not posting on my main blog (TehPainfulTruth over at Insanejournal) is due to the fact that I expect my entries there to be very lengthy while still maintaining their entertainment and informative value. That is very hard to do given the short amount of time I have to myself every day so I have done two things to hopefully solve this problem. First and foremost, I have decided to move my news rantings to tumblr (where I feel, by its very nature, my posts are meant to be short and thus less time consuming). Second, I have opened this account to several news savvy friends who shall be (hopefully) aiding me in my attempt to keep the world well informed and full of cursing.