Uppity-Negro.com

. . . like the ADL condemning the San Francisco Bay View for anti-Semitism:

When it objects to comparisons between Israel and apartheid South Africa, particularly when it does so in San Francisco, the ADL is treading on dangerous ground. It was 10 years ago this month that an embarrassed SFPD revealed that one of its officers, Tom Gerard, working together with Roy Bullock, a long-time undercover agent for the ADL, had been spying on the African National Congress, Black South African exiles, and the anti-apartheid movement, for South African intelligence.

Since Bullock had been spying on the apartheid movement for the ADL, as he told SFPD Inspector Ron Roth, doing the same for the South Africans meant little extra work, since much of the information the South Africans wanted he and the ADL already possessed.

As would be expected, the pair were already spying on Palestinian and Arab groups and individuals. But what was revealed in the more than 700 pages of documents released by District Attorney Arlo Smith was that the ADL was keeping files on more than 10,000 individuals* and 600 political groups that ranged across the political and racial spectrum - from the NAACP to the Asian Law Caucus to the San Francisco Labor Council - and that similar operations were being conducted by ADL agents across the United States, making the ADL probably the largest private intelligence gathering operation in the country.

At the time, Bullock had been paid through a cut-out, a Beverly Hills lawyer, who would send him a check every week. The ADL’s response to the “revelation” that their agent was moonlighting for the South Africans was to put him directly on its payroll. At the time, Israel was a close ally of the apartheid regime, selling it weapons, tear gas, water cannons and high tech electronic equipment, and jointly developing atomic weapons, in violation of the international sanctions then in effect.

As they were then and remain today, the ADL’s policies are indistinguishable from those of the Israeli government. When questioned in May 1993 about his organization’s spying on the ANC and the apartheid movement, the ADL’s long-time national director, Abe Foxman, was unapologetic.

“People are very upset about (the files) on the ANC,” he told the Jewish Bulletin. “At the time we exposed the ANC, they were communist. They were violent, they were anti-Semitic, they were pro-PLO, and they were anti-Israel. You’re going to tell me I don’t have the legitimacy to find out who they were consorting with, who their buddies are, who supports whom?”

Yes, that ANC. And yes, these complaints about 'em sound similar to the ones Dick Cheney tossed out during the 2000 election.

Mind you, the paper isn't entirely in the clear here either -- hit the link (he suggested) to see what they said that triggered the nastygram. But there's a Very Good Reason I avoid mentioning the sitch over there very often.

I mean, I've read the comments at Little Green Footballs. Those people, well, they don't frighten me in terms of physical harm, but there's just so much open, not-even-a-bit-ashamed hatred coming from those folks, that I prefer just staying out of it.

I am a bit amused that the right wing blogs have adopted "the rising threat of anti-Semitism in Europe" as a pet topic, given that there's either no, or very little, written about this by the people actually experiencing it. Bit like how they studiously avoid mentioning any Iraqi blogs that don't express infinite gratitude for us liberating them.

Blogging often seems incestuous/echo chamber-y enough as it is, but they seem to have raised it to an art form. A particularly boring one.

Posted by Aaron at 7:42 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

The S-Train, brother of Sidonie, just noticed something:

I completely missed Kim du Toit's essay The Pussification Of The Western Male back in November 2003 and the nuclear explosion of reactions (both positive and mostly negative) to it. Well, I finally did read it and generally had no reaction to it. Neither positive or negative. Obviously he was very passionate about it. But I couldn't get passionate about it. Disturbed, I called Master Kim and had him read it. After he read it, he said it is a "very passionate essay by a good writer". But he had the same passionless reaction to it.

Want to know why? Hit the link and read the entry.

Slightly less behind the times, I just saw (via anil dash's daily links) the essay Ikeaphobia and its discontents:

I must hear some version of this spiel once a month, generally from some self-consciously leftie male between the ages of sixteen and twenty-two desperate to prove his authenticity, present his down-with-the-people, fuck-the-Man bona fides. This despite the fact that Ikea was explicitly founded on the premise of providing well-designed furniture to the masses at affordable prices - a premise that the company still largely delivers on. (If I have a quibble, it's with quality, not price.)

You know what? I'm done with it. If your life is mediocre, I promise you, Ingvar Kamprad didn't make it that way. You did. And if you're so desperate for your own soixante-huit moment that you can sit there with a straight face and tell me that you're being oppressed by flat-packable pine furniture with goofy pseudo-Scandinavian names, I'd advise you to spend a few days working with child slaves in the Sudan, or something.

And they call me snarky.

Want to know why I find the two pieces similar? Link. Hit. Read.

Which might be annoying, but much less so than just linking something without providing either a title or a quote, a practice that I find. . . annoying is too mild a word, actually. The real bloggers do that sort of thing, but I never claimed to be one of them.

I prefer the context-providing Rebecca Blood style (although this may not be the best example of same):

Lakoff's Second Law

Voters vote their identities, not their self-interest.

From The 2004 Edge Annual Question, "WHAT'S YOUR LAW?", featuring answers from such luminaries as Marvin Minsky

Don't just do something. Stand there.

(Um, Elayne, does that sound familiar to you, or is it just me?)

And Steven Pinker

Human sociality is a product of conflicts and confluences of genetic interests. Our relationships with our parents, siblings, spouses, friends, trading partners, allies, rivals, and selves have different forms because they instantiate different patterns of overlap of ultimate interests. History, fiction, news, and gossip are endlessly fascinating because the overlap is never 0% or 100%.

And also some riff-raff like John McWhorter

In a context of widespread literacy, easy communications, and a large class of people with ample leisure time, the social movement that begins by addressing a concrete grievance will, after the grievance has been largely addressed, pass into the hands of persons inclined for individual reasons towards the dramatic and self-righteous, who will manipulate the movement's iconography and passion into a staged indignation difficult for outsiders to square with reality, and with little actively progressive or beneficent intention.

He's subtle, that one. Like a heart attack, or preemptive nuclear strike.

For my own self, I usually hit indy coffee shops (or at least local chains) due to the same hippy impulse that has me buy books at Women & Children First even when I could get 'em cheaper (and in the case of special orders, faster) elsewhere.

Speaking of which, it's warmed up a bit and there's a copy of Joss Whedon's Fray 'round the block with my name on it down there. Later for y'all.

Bonus link, found in the trackback for S-Train's entry, feministe: What I'm Reading Since I'm Not Writing. A title so nice, I wish I'd thought of it first. . .

Extra special bonus found at Elayne's, corsets (well, singular) on display at The Sideshow, which I really should add to the sprawling list since I always manage to forget about it. . .

Posted by Aaron at 5:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Another mixed-bag entry, but I have special dispensation to do that sort of thing. So nyaah.

First off, Michelle sent this earlier this morning: GETUPMOVEON.COM

This is Tanya Jessen's story of how she lost 95lbs,
not through conventional diet and exercise but by playing the video game, Dance Dance Revolution (DDR). Tanya started playing DDR 4 years ago when she was 17 and enjoyed it so much that it became a regular activity. Through sharing her weight loss story, Tanya hopes to tell people that losing weight can be easy and fun by choosing an activity that fits in with your lifestyle. Tanya is working with RedOctane to educate Americans about a fun new way to lose weight while using an Ignition™ Dance Pad.

Results may vary, I expect. But I ordered a copy of DDR Konamix anyway.

By way of the links at DebWire's blog, I ended up at White Privilege, specifically the entry Dread Scott, Artist:

Among other themes, Scott’s work pointedly addresses various forms of violence faced by people of color with searing critiques of the dominant culture, its hypocrises and contradictions.

Scott’s work, “What is the Proper Way to Display a US Flag?” came under fire this Fall at an exhibition at Nassau County Community College where Nassau County officials attempted, unsuccessfully, to have the exhibit taken down. The College refused.

I vaguely remember said work from the brou-ha-ha which accompanied it at the School of the Art Institute of Chicago back in '89. The previous President Bush called it "disgraceful."

Others were less guarded:

In Russia you would be shot and your family would have to pay for the bullets. But once again what do you expect from a nigger named "Dread Scott"?

Right now a lady is on the ground crying because of what you have done. I feel you did something wrong and I feel you should be put in jail or have something done to you for this. I love my country and it hurts me to know that don't. I hope you feel good about yourself for what you are putting people through. You're an asshole.

And there are a few more reactions in the sidebar at his site.

Not all of them are hysterical. Honest.

Speaking of the School of the Art Institute, which I was a bit ago, someone who shall remain nameless described her stay there as, "a complete waste of fucking time," and offers more details if there's interest.

I'm interested.

And really don't belong in a links list with people who are talented and have interesting things to say, like Carla Speed McNeil and Lea Hernandez, but thanks, Blondy Bear. You're a peach.

And speaking of Modern Tales/Girlamatic, have I mentioned lately how cool Kris Dresen is?

What else? Expect I need to write something about the hyphenless uppitynegro.com site at some point. If for no other reason, because all those little ™s almost look like a challenge. . .

And added Sidonie's Way and Radical Rejection to the sprawling list o'links.

Later, I may put them in alphabetical order, which takes like all of two mouse clicks. . .

Update: I'm a spazz. Also added DebWire and sorted the links and stuff. Bloglines makes all this much simpler than I make it sound, and if it wasn't for the whole not marking recently updated blogs in your links list thing, I'd recommend 'em unconditionally. As it is, there's just that one condition.

Posted by Aaron at 2:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

More or less. If you squint a little. . .

ONE WEEKEND ONLY!
Jan 30/31
Come see your favorite [Chicago] Kings
in a Queerified version of
West Side [Story]! See the showtimes
page for more info.

My sis went last night, and invited me to come with, but it was just Too Damned Cold to venture outside again.

The Drag King Rooftop Karaoke Hootchie Cootchie No Name Show and Musical EXTRAVAGANZA

A rival (Latina) Maria challenges a Natalie Wood wanna-be! Tony and Riff take coke bottles to a whole new level!  Sharks and Jets fight the night away in gender-bending glee! Don't miss the cutest bois in the toughest ballet-dancing gangs

January 30 and 31 Friday at 8 p.m. Saturday at 2 p.m. and 8 p.m. FREE Admission! Wallis Theater in the Theatre and Interpretation Center • Northwestern University 1949 Campus Drive, Evanston, IL 60208 • Featuring performers from: the Chicago Kings, Teatro Luna, and Northwestern University

I'm working at the Chicago campus, so it's not like I could'a hung around waiting for the show to start. Or taken the shuttle to the Evanston campus, since I don't have a pass, since I'm just a temp. . .

Maybe the 2 o'clock this afternoon. If it gets warmer. I don't ask much. Double digits is all.

And this one is no ways advance notice: Stolie performed last night at Gunther Murphy's, in a show mentioned on Ecto, but that I didn't read about until this morning, because I suck. Well, she's also doing a show at College of DuPage next Wednesday, which might be students-only, and then at 400 Bar in Minneapolis next Sunday.

Ok, those last two are advance notice. I can still get away with the title.

Posted by Aaron at 9:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

At some point, I'll actually dig up the blog entry Kim du Toit did on this merchandise a zillion years back. Since this means reading his site, I'm just not nearly drunk enough to deal with it right now. Management apologizes for the inconvenience.

From various sources, so let's say The Seattle Times, Stores pull 'Boys Are Stupid' merchandise:

The T-shirts and pajamas are meant to be funny, with cartoon captions such as "Boys Are Stupid — Throw Rocks At Them." But some protesters, encouraged by a fathers'-rights talk-show host, are not amused and have pressured Bon-Macy's and two other retail chains into dropping the merchandise.

The products in question — an array of girls' clothes and accessories — are manufactured or licensed by David & Goliath, a T-shirt company based in Clearwater, Fla.

[. . .] The graphics have been in use more than two years but only recently came to the attention of Glenn Sacks, a commentator who hosts "His Side," a weekly radio show sympathetic to the fathers'-rights movement and often at odds with feminists. The show airs in Los Angeles and Seattle (11 p.m. Sundays, KKOL, 1300 AM).

At Sacks' urging, listeners and supporters have contacted targeted retailers, urging them to stop selling the David & Goliath products. Seattle-based Bon-Macy's, California-based Tilly's and Claire's Stores, an international chain, say they no longer will carry the contested items.

[. . .] Sacks said reaction to the protest campaign had been largely positive, although some people have suggested he was overreacting.

"I'm sorry if I sound like a humorless zealot, but I just don't see the humor in it," Sacks said. "My 11-year-old son, whatever the joke is, he just doesn't understand it, either."

He contended that many marketers, while wary of offending women and minorities, "have developed a moral blind spot toward disparaging males."

I note that if Mr. Sacks has a daughter, he didn't ask her if she saw the humor in it. And no mention of a wife either. I expect I should look to see if he's married.

I also expect I could see if he had anything to say about those shirts Abercrombie & Fitch were selling a bit ago.

But again, too sober.

"moral blind spot toward disparaging males." Christ. For the longest time, I thought people who said shit like that were just playing to the crowd, that they couldn't possibly actually believe what they were saying.

I've learned better.

I almost wish I hadn't. Hypocrisy I can deal with, but that sort of total ignance. . .

The other thing driving me to drink is how much sense Warren Ellis makes to me in this entry, Microcasting, Message Boards And Social Networks over at Die Puny Humans:

The argument against this is usually that the net was intended to be a free conversation space, and that gating off spaces goes against its intent. Obviously, I don't agree. And further, I think the evolution of the net has outpaced early intents. There are people out there who freely admit that most of their time on the web is spent attempting to fuck up the flow of message boards. Pro trolls, would you believe. For those of us who want the net to effect cultural leverage, I think it's way past time to acknowledge that not everyone has a useful opinion and putting up a message board isn't an invitation that you want to deal with children's shit. If someone wants to sit down with you and your friends, they need to prove in some basic way that they're not going to spill their beer down their fucking shirt fronts.

I have a feeling that you can't talk about social networks without talking about social skills. I have a feeling that maintaining the net as a communications system over the next few years is neither about technology or policy -- it's about basic pub etiquette.

Haven't had to play bouncer around here lately, but that's mostly because the trolls and tourists have had very short attention spans, or bigger fish to fry. We'll see how long that lasts.

Oh, and the Weather Pixie in the next entry? Pulling archived info from whenever they shut down the Chicago/Meigs station, apparently. It's like 9 degrees here, without the wind chill factored in. So running out of smokes was a Very Bad Thing Indeed, because there's just no way I'm going back out in that to get more. . .

Update: That Context Thing.

From ifeminists.com > introduction > editorials > They're Only Boys, from the misty past of August 27, 2002:

Think male bashing is confined to the baby boomer, feminist set?

Oh, please. Now our teenage girls are encouraged to wear their anti-boy sentiment. Literally.

Bra burning may be out, but the anti-male movement is most definitely still in.

But instead of doing away with an undergarment in a symbolic break from male oppression, girls can now display their freedom from testosterone-generated evils -- pretty much the root of all that is wicked and unjust -- on the outside via antiboy T-shirts.

Again, that's 2002. Hard to believe, I know.

And (know I'm gonna regret this), from kimdutoit.com: Rant 09/03/2002: Women Bashing Men:

So in the same spirit, I will publish entries submitted by interested readers which demonstrate the opposite side of the coin. Let me start the ball rolling with this one:

• Girls: F. F. F. (Find 'em, fuck 'em, forget 'em)

Let's see who has the best sense of humor. Oh, and one last thing: Girls, don't throw rocks at us, unless you want to get Big Owies. We throw better and harder than you do.

I was a hell of a lot kinder or something in 2002. I look at this now, and really don't see how I can work with this material.

Update: Apropos of that "wary of offending women" shit, from the Business 2.0 101 Dumbest Moments in Business for 2003,

10 - In November, Chrysler announces that it will sponsor the Lingerie Bowl, a football game to be played by female models airing as a pay-per-view special during halftime of the Super Bowl. After the carmaker comes under fire for the sexist nature of the event, CEO Dieter Zetsche quickly distances himself from the spectacle, claiming he had no knowledge that it was in the works. The company reportedly pressures the event's producers to change the players' uniforms, demanding that participants wear sports bras and volleyball shorts; then, a week later, it drops the event altogether.

Perhaps this is some unique definition of "wary" that I wasn't previously aware of.

Link to the Lingerie Bowl added, because driving up their traffic is obvously a Good Thing, right?

Posted by Aaron at 6:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (0)

Suppose it was spam, or someone really did think I'd be interested, but seeing as it didn't have a virus attached (not that launching a DDos at SCO strikes me as a bad thing, really - apologies to Bruce Perens) - FYI, Filipino Art.net describe themselves as, "showcas[ing] the best of Filipino Visual Arts." So, if that's the sort of thing you're looking for, there it is.

And yes, this is the pre-coffee syntax. I ran out, and it's too effin' cold to go anywhere to get more.

I'd illustrate using a Weather Pixie, but mine died of exposure, poor thing. . .

Update: Meh.

Mind you, that's for Chicago/Meigs. Which, as we all know, ain't actually there no more. Thank you, Mayor Daley, may I have another?

Update: And here's the actual weather, from O'Hare. Which as far as I know is still there, but I haven't checked the local news today. . .

Supposed to be in the mid to upper 20s this weekend. Woo hoo.

Posted by Aaron at 6:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

This grew out of a reply to something Neo said on her LiveJournal, but I realized it was getting way far afield, and probably wasn't gonna go over too well.

So, it goes here, where everything is far afield, and I don't have to give a flying fuck how it goes over.

Short version, she mentioned a review of The L Word over at AfterEllen.com, which said in part:

The L Word has also given voice to something that the straight world may not be aware of. My friend Cynthia explained, “What really turned me on about this show is [that]…of the friendship group and the scenes where it’s the core characters, it’s all gay. I’ve had straight people in the office…[who] didn’t believe that I could have an entirely dyke universe.”

Which led to a discussion of the desirability of such a thing. More or less. Like I said, I'm going afie-- fuckit, the point is, I read this as having a space where the consensus reality is different from your mainstream, het, white, middle-class boring bullshit that takes up most of the space in the media (and politics, and pretty much everything else) in this country.

And, you know, I think that's a good thing. Not as a constant, obviously -- I don't think there's anything more damaging to a healthy psyche than spending all your time with like-minded people -- but sometimes it's nice to not have to justify things, or explain them, to folks who might mean well, but at a certain level Just Don't Get It.

An example: back when that wretched fucking Joe Boxer discussion was going on, a white acquaintance decided to speculate as to what was wrong with George and Jason and, by extension, me, for having a few issues with the thing.

What I should have said was, "Cracka, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about, shut the fuck up."

Instead, I smiled and nodded.

Zero Four, I've decided, is the year of no longer smiling and nodding.

Another example: Based on my dealings with the guy, I think Grey Miller of Madison, Wisconsin, is a racist, arrogant prick. Any people of color who know him and disagree with this opinion, feel free to try to convince me that I'm wrong.

White folks can sit this one out, as they have nothing worthwhile to contribute to the discussion.

Let me rephrase that: when it comes to discussing whether a particular person or statement or, say, mock propaganda poster is racist, although you may be well-meaning, know lots of black people, blah de fucking blah, since you don't have to experience this every day the good lord sends, cracka, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about, shut the fuck up.

Clear enough?

Another example: it's never even crossed my mind when someone talks about expereincing sexism or homophobia to explain to that person, slowly, and using very small words, and making sure to use their name in every other sentence, that what happened wasn't really sexism/homophobia/discrimination. Not having dealt with these my own self, I don't think I can examine the situation objectively and offer a unique perspective that those who do are incapable of seeing. I figure I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about, and shut the fuck up.

There's no shame in not knowing what the fuck you're talking about. Just in not realizing that you don't, and not shutting the fuck up.

Am I. . . am I getting through to you at all here?

Yes, I know people who expereince these things. Yes, I've sometimes been with them when one or another form of discrimination takes place. Yes, I get pissed about that shit. But, not expereincing it myself, I realize that at a certain level I Just Don't Get It, and never will. I can try to draw comparisons to my own expereinces, but those ain't gonna be exact.

And again I sez, fuckit. I don't think I can explain this any better, but if you're still confused, try asking for clarification. Politely. If you're just pissed off about what you just read and need to vent, this ain't the place, and I ain't the one. So if you ever want to post here again, take a deep breath, count back from ten, and shut the fuck up.

Posted by Aaron at 7:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBacks (1)

Brought to me by way of Ecto, the Fuzzy Blue Mailing List:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: A New Day for the Email List.
From: Rasputina <list@rasputina.com>
Date: Wed, January 28, 2004 2:21 pm

Hello!
We believe that our email list problems may be over!
News to know:
Our new album, "Frustration Plantation" is coming out March 16.

We will be touring, starting in April.

There will be much more news about listening parties, street teams, etc.

The merchantile section of Rasputina.com now takes credit cards through Paypal. www.rasputina.com/merch01.html

If you would like to be included in our regional mailings, please unsubscribe, then re-subscribe, adding that information.

Yours Sincerely,
Rasputina

Why yes, I am going to manage to miss them if they play Chicago, because I suck.

Posted by Aaron at 7:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Pink Tank?

Pink Hello, Kitty Laptop?

Has the whole galaxy gone crazy?

Seeking refuge at Common Dreams, I saw a new(ish) piece from the Noamstar, What a Fair Trial for Saddam Would Entail:

In 1990, the United Nations imposed economic sanctions on Iraq, administered mainly by the United States and Britain. These sanctions, which continued through president Clinton and into Bush II, are perhaps the sorriest legacy of U.S. policy toward Iraq.

No Westerners know Iraq better than Denis Halliday and Hans von Sponeck, who served successively as U.N. humanitarian co-ordinators there from 1997 to 2000. Both resigned in protest of the sanctions, which Halliday has characterized as "genocidal."

As they and others pointed out for years, the sanctions devastated the Iraqi population while strengthening Saddam and his clique, increasing the people's dependency on the tyrant for their survival.

As usual, he's saying entirely the wrong things, which is probably why the piece originally appeared in the Toronto Star rather than the US press. Which is free and independent and liberal and shit.

There's also a full transcript of Arundhati Roy's The New American Century, which I quoted a bit of a few days back:

Unlike in the old days, the New Imperialist doesn't need to trudge around the tropics risking malaria or diarrhea or early death. New Imperialism can be conducted on e-mail. The vulgar, hands-on racism of Old Imperialism is outdated. The cornerstone of New Imperialism is New Racism.

The best allegory for New Racism is the tradition of "turkey pardoning" in the United States. Every year since 1947, the National Turkey Federation has presented the US President with a turkey for Thanksgiving. Every year, in a show of ceremonial magnanimity, the President spares that particular bird (and eats another one). After receiving the presidential pardon, the Chosen One is sent to Frying Pan Park in Virginia to live out its natural life. The rest of the 50 million turkeys raised for Thanksgiving are slaughtered and eaten on Thanksgiving Day. ConAgra Foods, the company that has won the Presidential Turkey contract, says it trains the lucky birds to be sociable, to interact with dignitaries, school children and the press. (Soon they'll even speak English!)

That's how New Racism in the corporate era works. A few carefully bred turkeys--the local elites of various countries, a community of wealthy immigrants, investment bankers, the occasional Colin Powell or Condoleezza Rice, some singers, some writers (like myself)--are given absolution and a pass to Frying Pan Park. The remaining millions lose their jobs, are evicted from their homes, have their water and electricity connections cut, and die of AIDS. Basically they're for the pot. But the Fortunate Fowls in Frying Pan Park are doing fine.

She's saying the wrong things as well. Honestly.

If you'd rather seek refuge from my refuge, there's always the Hello, Kitty sections at the Sanrio Store. There are Valentine's Day Cards, for a start.

However, neither they nor Early to Bed appear to have. . . er, never mind.

Apropos of nothing, put Stephen Downe's referral script back on the page, with a bit of CSS pixie dust from Mandarin Design. It may look wacky. I'm working on it. Eventually.

Posted by Aaron at 6:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

From his Bad Signal mailing list:

Perhaps interestingly, and showing this message is eating its own tail, bloggers like Glenn "Instapundit" Reynolds live or die on user donations sent via PayPal. I just wonder if people really use words like "pundit" in real life without vomiting.

I just wonder if these people have real lives. And am quite relieved that the UppityNegroPundit redirect seems to have expired. Really, goneaway, it's cool, no need to reinstate that. Honest.

If you think Britney Spears is sexy, you're a probable paedophile who masturbates over the imagined sound of Minnie Mouse having an orgasm.

Hullo, Oliver.

Want to know more? See Four Questions for Warren Ellis, a mini-interview at Bookslut by America's sweetheart Karin Kross:

Is there any movie, book, or comic (or one of each) you've seen or read this year that you wish you hadn't? What would you prefer to have seen, read, or done in their place?

Most of them. And I would rather have been forced to depilate a raging tiger with a toothbrush while trapped in a phone box with the bastard. 2003 was a real cultural dead zone, the likes of which I hope we do not see again in a hurry.

And you can pick up the Ellis-penned, Tom Baker voice-acted Hostile Waters: Antaeus Rising videogame (for Windows only, alas) fairly cheap these days.

2032. The entire world is at peace for the first time. Together, the human race is moving to become a world civilization. Together, we are becoming great. Until the bombings start. A cabal of Old World magnates -- the now powerless financiers, the despots and Presidents, the death-loving military men -- are working together to destabilize the planet and return it to its fractured, hate-ridden war economy past. The past they understand, as opposed to the future they fear.

A demo is (supposedly) available from either of those previous links; I'm in Linux, on dialup, and didn't bother trying -- it's 113 MB, after all.

Posted by Aaron at 6:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

. . . that one day I'll be a real grown-up like Priest:

If I had it to do over again, I never would have accepted the appointment as editor of the Spider-Man franchise. I made a lot of mistakes. I hurt a lot of people. I lost a lot of friends. It's a difficult thing for me to discuss. We'd all like to be heroes of our own stories, and it's hard to tell the story of when you were a chimp. I spent two and a half years of my life being an incredible chimp, paralyzed by my own chimp-ness and chimposity, and wholly convinced that, if I lost my job at Marvel, the world would end. Well, I did and it didn't. And now, nearly two decades later, I have some maturity and experience under my belt. Not that I'm any less of a chimp at 40 then I was at 22, but I have the perspective and, yes, the wisdom now to be horrified by the choices I made.

I'm not being sarcastic here, hard as that might be to believe. I'm six years shy of 40, and no doubt still have a lot of perspective and wisdom to pick up -- when you stop doing that, I figure, you're just using other folks' air for no good reason -- but there's still that horrified by early choices thing.

I almost envy the people who take the easier route, steadfastly maintaining that they've never done anything wrong in their lives. Don't think I present myself as the "hero" when I write about personal stuff here; more often than not I give other people all the good lines, if nothing else. I'd also like to think I've avoided the opposite route, presenting myself as the perpetual victim. That dualism thing again; nasty shit, ain't it?

No, this entry has no point. Except, you should read Priest's site, even if you're not into comics, because he's a real grown-up and those seem to be in short supply right now.

And desperately needed.

Posted by Aaron at 7:55 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

I like to give credit (for links) where credit is due, but have no idea where I first saw Piled Higher and Deeper, a grad student comic strip by Jorge Cham. Pretty sure it wasn't at Comics Sherpa, I never use that thing. . .

Realized at one point yesterday that I'd mentioned The Dark Crystal, a children's film, and in the same entry linked to an interview at a porn site.

I'd feel worse about this, if Michele hadn't trackbacked (that's. . . not a word, is it?) to that entry in one where she mentions Neopets, a site/activity for children. . . and also linked to the same interview at the porn site.

Unlike her, I don't have any children for DCFS to take away, though.

There's a review of the new DC DVD over at PopMatters, by the bye:

Crystal's ability to inspire terror is indicative of its creators' amazing craftsmanship. Jim Henson and Frank Oz, of the Muppets, with the help of artist Brian Froud (credited here as a "conceptual designer"), created a live-action fantasy world without any human characters. Instead, this world is populated by the hobbit/elf-like Gelfings; the numerous birdish Skesis; the gently lumbering Mystics; and assorted creatures more menacing than not. Amazingly, all of these characters are puppets, often elaborate. Only the occasional human stunt double can be glimpsed. These technical specs alone make Crystal a rare cinematic achievement, a feature-length puppet show.

If I was feeling all feminist analysis, I'd mention that Kira does most of the heavy lifting in the film, which is why she's later promoted to Major in the Bajoran. . . ok, if you even started laughing at that, you're a geek.

What else? Looking over papers at the temp job at Northwestern gave me a few ideas for entries, like the one on Self-Esteem and External Validation. Half-formed notion about linking/traffic as providing the latter, and feeding into the former, for people maintaining blogs, but like I said, half-formed.

Title inspired by an entry at Mac-a-ronies "describing ways bloggers can produce more reliable and credible weglogs," which is actually taken from an entry at Radical Rejection, which was itself inspired from an entry at. . . oh, you get the idea. One of 'em I strongly disagree with is:

Title - Every entry should have a title that is descriptive and topically singular. Its the easiest way to distinguish an informative weblog from an online journal. If mulitiple topics are covered in the majority of posts, then the web log probably isn't a reliable source for information. An exception would be a "what i've been reading" entry that is identified as more of a bibliography than a commentary. But, in general, posts that cover multiple topics leave the reader prone to confusion and allow the writer to make off-the-wall connections by jumping topics.

I'm all about the off-the-wall connections. Reader confusion is assumed.

All of which might, possibly, have something to do with the Technorati beta, or maybe The Truth Laid Bear: Weblog Traffic Rankings. Or not. Half-formed, remember?

The latter depends on Sitemeter for stats, so a blog that doesn't use their system (or doesn't make the stats public?) isn't included. As of this writing, Daily Kos has passed Instapundit, and I vaguely remember someone writing about this, but again, have no idea where that was.

Bringing us full circle -- my memory sucks.

Posted by Aaron at 1:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The post office opens at 8:30 on Saturdays, so even if you're horrbly, utterly, suck-tastically late sending a cheque and button to Karin for the Dark Crystal she mailed to you several weeks ago, there's no point dashing through the snow any earlier than that.

Oh, and hon? Could you be a perfect dear and not cash that until, um, direct-deposit on the paycheck should hit Thursday, so let's say Thursday? Thanks, you rawk. And thanks again for the DVD.

And thanks to Jason for the DVDs he bought off my Yeah-I-Wish List. That plus the other birthday loot means I may never have to rent anything again.

Except Firefly. And Invader Zim, which I noticed at Michele's place is due out May 11th.

There's an interview with show creator Jhonen Vasquez over at, of all places, Suicide Girls. Actually, they've got quite a few good interviews there, including Xeni Jardin chatting with Susannah Breslin.

Plus, you know, that whole alternaporn thing; previous link to a suggested definition at the VegPorn LiveJournal.

Which reminds me, Jason, any idea why we's linked at Dave Reader?

Posted by Aaron at 9:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (1)

Am pretty much ignoring Bush's new marriage initiative, as I do most stupid things that I hear about. But it did remind me of something the youngsters may not even have heard of, from the last time the Republicans decided to impose their wisdom on the lower classes and lesser races: ACLU: Norplant: A New Contraceptive with the Potential for Abuse, from the distant past of a decade ago, 1994:

Norplant is a new contraceptive that became commercially available in the United States in February, 1991, after its approval by the Food and Drug Administration. Norplant consists of six matchstick-size silicone capsules that are inserted in a woman's upper arm. The capsules release small amounts of progestin over five years and must be inserted and removed by a trained medical professional.

[. . .] But this new method of birth control has also been a vehicle for infringing on the reproductive autonomy of women. Almost immediately after the FDA approved Norplant at the end of 1990, judges and legislators attempted to mandate its use by certain individual women or groups of women. Because it works automatically, is easily monitored, and cannot be removed without medical assistance, Norplant can be used more readily than other contraceptives to control women's reproduction.

[. . .] In several states, judges have given women convicted of child abuse or drug use during pregnancy a "choice" between using Norplant or serving time in jail. In 1991, 1992, and 1993, legislators in more than a dozen states introduced measures that, had they passed, would have coerced women to use Norplant. Some of these bills would have offered financial incentives to women on welfare to induce them to use Norplant. Other legislation would have required women receiving public assistance either to use Norplant or lose their benefits. Some bills would have forced women convicted of child abuse or drug use during pregnancy to have Norplant implanted.

Since I'm about to pass out, and am too disgusted to think about it, I'm not checking to see if this is still a going concern. That it was even floated as a trial balloon says entirely too much.

Because in my opinion, there's a few things you just don't even consider. You don't discuss the cost/benefit analysis. You don't calmly speculate about possibilities. Some things are just too fucking horrifying for sane people to rationally discuss. And forced sterilization is pretty high on that list.

Because the people calmly speculating about this weren't talking about the good, white women who outnumber the women of color on the welfare rolls, oh no.

Race, Reproduction and the Meaning of Liberty:

The policies affecting these women–prosecuting pregnant substance abusers, pressuring women to use and keep in Norplant, and welfare family caps–all have two central features in common. They are designed to influence reproductive decision making; more specifically, they are designed to deter certain women from having children. And they affect poor women and a disproportionate number of Black and Latina women. The vast majority of women who have been prosecuted for drug use during pregnancy are poor Black women who smoked crack, even though this health problem cuts across racial and economic lines. Of the four dozen women arrested in South Carolina, all but one were Black. (And the nurse noted on the chart of the sole white woman arrested that her boyfriend was Black.)

Only two days after the FDA approved Norplant, the Philadelphia Inquirer published a controversial editorial, "Poverty and Norplant: Can Contraception Reduce the Underclass?" The editorial linked two recent news items: one announced the approval of Norplant; the other reported research findings that half of Black children live in poverty. It then went on to propose Norplant as a solution to inner-city poverty, arguing that the main reason why more Black children are living in poverty is that the people having the most children are the ones least capable of supporting them. The Inquirer was forced to print an apology when Black leaders across the country expressed their outrage at the editorial’s racist and eugenic overtones. But many journalists and pundits came to the Inquirer’s defense. As the Richmond Times-Dispatch put it, Norplant offers society yet another way to curb the expansion of an underclass, most of whose members face futures of disorder and deprivation.

That article, by Dorothy Roberts, is worth a read. As is my wont, I cherry-picked an excerpt to demonstrate my point. It gets worse.

But don't take her -- or my -- word for it. Have a look at The Impact of Norplant on Minority Women:

The problem with judicial and legislative enticement of Norplant implants is the decision is not voluntary. As was seen in the [California case of People v. Johnson], the defendant had the option of seven years in prison or one year in prison and Norplant implants. This is not much of an option. Likewise when the state offers increased welfare benefits for Norplant use, the recipient does not have much of an option. Many of the recipients need the extra money to provide for themselves and their family. The choice to "voluntarily" submit to Norplant is their only other option beside starving. For these reasons a woman’s choice is coerced into accepting Norplant. Thus the state is effectively sterilizing these women. Most of the following annotations provide insight on how this coercion effects poor African American women.

Or maybe Norplant and the Dark Side of the Law:

Black, Asian and Hispanic women comprised a disproportionate number (86 percent) of the forced surgery victims mentioned previously. Opponents of mandatory Norplant legislation claim that it, too, will result in discrimination.

[. . .] While white and black women tested positive for drugs at equal rates, black women were reported to authorities ten times more often. Poor women have likewise been reported at much higher rates than their middle-class counterparts.

Opponents of [Washington senate bill 5278] also suggest that mandatory Norplant legislation is itself discriminatory-along gender lines. Lonnie Johns-Brown of the National Organization for Women suggests that the bill ignores the fetal effects of paternal drug use. While Patterson agrees that "it may seem like a biological injustice" to target women, she believes it boils down to a "biological reality" in which mothers "expose infants to their blood stream." Johns-Brown and others counter with the fact that fathers are very often supplying addicted mothers with drugs throughout their pregnancies.

But, you know, other than the racial and gender discrimination, it was a great idea, really.

I'm sure this new marriage promotion thing is founded on the same principles, and will go over just as well.

One last point, from that ACLU link up there:

Dr. Sheldon Segal, the originator of Norplant, has stated: "I am totally and unalterably opposed to the use of Norplant for any coercive or involuntary purpose. It was developed to improve reproductive freedom, not to restrict it. My colleagues and I worked on this innovation for decades because we respect human dignity and believe that women should be able to have the number of children they want, when they want to have them. Not just educated and well-to-do women, but all women."

A Google News search did bring up a recent link to National Review Online, but since I'd like to maintain some faith in humanity, I'll just not click that. Anyone feeling braver wants to hit it and sum it up in comments, feel free.

Posted by Aaron at 7:54 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (4)

Hi.

Not ignoring the site, have a new temp assignment (started yesterday) without 'net access. It's at Northwestern's downtown Chicago campus, so there's probably WiFi networks out the ass I could access, if I felt like dragging the laptop with me. Maybe next week.

Also went to the Field Museum's Chinese New Year celebration last night with Redpac, which is why I didn't update then either.

Not sure how much detail I should go into about the assignment -- not that it matters, Google Aaron Hawkins and this place pops up either at the top or darn close -- right now it involves clearing out old files. Most of which have titles like the one of this entry. Some of 'em look fascinating, others (from the med school) look like word salad. And I've only seen one from the linguistics department; guess they're like the one at UIUC, keeping a low profile so the administration doesn't say, "Wait, we have a linguistics department? What the fuck? Shut that bad boy down and use the savings to buy the football team some new uniforms!"

Which is silly. You can't buy a whole team uniforms on a linguistics department budget. Replacement shoes for two or three players, tops.

There was an exhibit on shoes at the Field Museum. They had some for Chinese women who had had their feet bound. Um, ick.

And also one on Africa, including the slave trade and the diaspora. I'd forgotten that a black man invented the xylophone.

And no doubt will again.

And I'm out.

Posted by Aaron at 6:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

mozdev.org - themes: themes/ohcanada!

Available for Mozilla, Netscape 7 and Firebird, it features a maple leaf for the default favicon (and I keep meaning to make one), and waving Canadian flag as the throbber.

Keep telling Redpac that if I go to a Wolves game where they play a Canadian team, I'll actually stand up for "O Canada." My failure to do so for the US anthem has been noted, but ain't nobody got the nerve to say shit. And that's as it should be.

Any questions? Comments? Cuss words?

Lyrics?

O Canada!
Our home and native land!
True patriot love in all thy sons command.

With glowing hearts we see thee rise,
The True North strong and free!

From far and wide,
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.

God keep our land glorious and free!
O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.

O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.

Guess I should memorize this, huh?

Update: I'd embed this, but that tends to make lesser browsers crash and burn: O Canada (Real Audio), shamelessly stolen from previous link.

Posted by Aaron at 7:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBacks (0)

Right then, Michele finally noticed the Freepers getting their hate on with Margaret Cho.

Most of the emails are filled with horrible grammar and more spelling errors than a first grade essay contest. Things like this is why the right is often considered to be hateful, racist, ignorant trolls.

"considered"?

Any road up, this leads to. . . complaints about the Democratic Underground boards. And a few missives about Margaret and the Dixie Chicks crying about being attacked, which I don't seem to remember being the case.

Oh, and more white people sitting around chatting about how the left is/are the real racists, and wild speculation as to why people of color seem incapable of thinking for themselves. Because if we could, of course we'd become conservatives.

There are also some additional attacks on Margaret, but because this is the second wave, they're kindler, gentler attacks. Not as openly racist, no actual death threats that I noticed. . . this is the face of compassionate conservatism.

The CCC rather than the KKK, basically.

See the trackbacks for yet more. . . something. I'd link these myself, but that might lead to those people coming here. And, worse, saying stupid things. Again.

I realize that Blogs Aren't a Safe Space, but there has to be some happy middle ground between all-out flame-fests and having a closed, gated community.

Which is why I'm not looking forward to the comment registration feature in the next MT release, or at least don't think I'll be turning it on.

Really need to come back and edit this. . . from that previous link:

One thing that we're missing as disconnected souls reading each other's words is a shared social structure where we can intuitively understand when to critique and when to support. The blog world too easily lends itself to a forum for attacking each other, purportedly to critique ideas. How often are anonymous critiques truly constructive? How easy is it to tear apart someone you don't know? Stanley Milgram learned that ages ago... if you feel like your responsibility is to critique, you can do so infinitely, regardless of how another might feel. And the further removed you are from witnessing the horrific reactions, the more you can continue on. Sometimes, i think we're all a bit sadistic.

Except that this does seem like a safe space, with the exception of tourist season, and even that hasn't been particularly bad -- or interesting, really -- this time around.

Yep, definitely come back and edit.

Posted by Aaron at 4:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (1)

Posted by Aaron at 11:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

Billy Bragg, still relevant:

Help save the youth of America
Help save the youth of the world
Help save the boys in uniform
Their mothers and their faithful girls

Listen to the voice of the soldier
Down in the killing zone
Talking about the cost of living
And the price of bringing him home

They're already shipping the body bags
Down by the Rio Grande
But you can fight for democracy at home
And not in some foreign land

Posted by Aaron at 9:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Because I trust that people are capable of acting like adults, particularly today:

URL: http://www.uppity-negro.com/cgi-uppity-negro/mt.cgi

User: guest

Pass: guest

Suggested topic: The state of race relations in the United States. Or the blogosphere. Or your city. Or on the planet. Fuckit, knock yourself out.

That, and it ain't like I can't delete anything I find annoying.

A spin-off of Free-For-All Friday, or something. Hit the link, and the mike is yours. Within reason, of course. Don't disappoint me.

And yes, I decided againsn't combining this with Talk Like a ****** Day. Soon. Honest.

Wondered a bit about doing this now, what with tourist season upon us, but then decided that perhaps that was the best time. And when you come right down to it, what's the worst someone could do? Call me a big whiny baby?

Been there, done that, not impressed.

Update: Added the suggested topic. Couldn't hurt, might help.

Posted by Aaron at 9:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (2)

Had been wondering about the silence on the right about the Freeper attacks on Margaret Cho, and now I know that they were too busy taking umbrage at WhiteHouse.org about this poster:

There's just teeny-tiny little problem.

I sort-of laughed my ass off when I saw it. And, I'm not sure, but I think they're taking umbrage on my behalf.

Which is terribly thoughtful of them, but really, if I need your help. . . no, things could never get that bad.

Posts and comments at/from Dawn Olsen (yes, the irony meter goes off the scale), Outside the Beltway, One Fine Jay, the evangelical outpost, North Georgia Dogma and Matthew J. Stinson. And possibly others. That's more than enough to keep you in stitches for the rest of the day, though.

There's also a comment in one of those -- please don't make me wade in there again -- from La Shawn Barber. Luckily, I caught myself before sending the email congratulations for a brilliant piece of satire, when I realized that no, she's serious.

But worth noting as, near as I can tell, the only actual person of color commenting on the thing at any of those sites.

Which reminds me that I'd meant to link Misbehaving.net's discussion why are bloggers mostly straight white men?. And have now done so. My work here is done.

Except the being offended part. Um, anyone here find this offensive or racist or something? Don't be shy, now.

Update: Oh, right, forgot.

In the early days of poststructuralist cyberculture research, people believed that the digital world would finally relieve people of the identities that are written on the body: sex, age, race, etc. People could be whoever they wanted to be. Many people, including myself, took issue with this belief. Amy Bruckman did something about it. Along with Josh Berman, she invented The Turing Game. In this project, people were assigned an identity that they were to perform. Everyone could ask each other questions to try to figure out who was "real" and who was "fake." The results were astonishing. People are *really* good at identifying others' identities when they are trying to.

From misbehaving.net: The Turing Game (Amy Bruckman), which entry follows the previous one linked at misbehaving. I'd rather hoped people would follow the bouncing ball of logic and links and I wouldn't have to deal with. . . whatever point Joe Carter is trying to make in comments.

I'd ask for clarification, but have decided to go into NegroPanopticon mode for the rest of the day.

Posted by Aaron at 12:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (27) | TrackBacks (4)

Expect I'll be visiting the right wing sites to see how they cover these two stories. I can make an educated guess, though.

Roy hopes Saddam's fate for Bush

Writer Arundhati Roy, who wants an ongoing anti-globalisation conference to launch a campaign to shut down US companies, said Sunday she hoped President George W Bush would share the fate of the captured Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.

"If Saddam Hussein deserves to be humiliated and have his fillings counted and his hair checked for lice on primetime TV, then so does George Bush," Roy told about 100 people at a leftist convention on the sidelines of the World Social Forum.

"Saddam Hussein surely ought to be tried for crimes against humanity. But so should all his accomplices in the US and Europe," she said.

"To applaud the US army's capture of Saddam Hussein and therefore justify its invasion and occupation of Iraq is like deifying Jack the Ripper for disembowelling the Boston Strangler," Roy said.

Doubt that's going to go over too well.

Meanwhile, over in Europe: Israeli Ambassador Kicked Out of Swedish Museum After Vandalizing Art

The art installation, called Snow White and located in the museum's courtyard, featured a basin filled with red water, designed to look like blood.

A sailboat with the name Snow White floated on the water, and placed like a sail was a photo of a smiling Hanadi Jaradat, the female lawyer who blew herself up in the Haifa suicide bombing attack in October which killed 21 Israelis.

"For me it was intolerable and an insult to the families of the victims. As ambassador to Israel I could not remain indifferent to such an obscene misrepresentation of reality," the ambassador told Swedish news agency TT.

According to museum director Kristian Berg, the ambassador went berserk in front of the 400 specially-invited guests when he saw the piece.

"He pulled out the plugs and threw one of the spotlights into the fountain which caused the entire installation to short-circuit and made it totally life-threatening," he told TT.

Life-threatening? Well, I'm sure the ambassador will be sternly rebuked for this display of. . .

Sharon praises art vandalism

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has praised the Israeli ambassador to Sweden for vandalising a Stockholm art exhibit about Palestinian suicide bombers, saying the "entire government stands behind him".

[. . .] Sharon expressed unreserved support for the ambassador's action.

"I called our ambassador in Sweden Zvi Mazel last night and thanked him for his strength in dealing with increasing anti-Semitism, and told him that the entire government stands behind him," he told a cabinet meeting.

"I think Ambassador Mazel behaved in an appropriate way," he added. "I think the phenomenon (of anti-Semitism) is so serious that it would have been forbidden not to have acted on the spot.

Dror Feiler, the Israeli-born artist who created Snow White and the Madness of Truth, said it was supposed to call attention to how weak, lonely people can be capable of horrible things.

Israeli-born anti-Semites are the worst kind, you know.

Back in the previous article:

One of the two artists who created the work, Israeli-born Dror Feiler, told AFP the ambassador was "totally unreasonable and undiplomatic" and would not listen to his explanations.

"He said he was ashamed that I was a Jew," Feiler said. "We see this as an offensive assault on our right to express our thoughts and feelings."

The other artist, Feiler's Swedish wife Gunilla Skoeld Feiler, told daily Expressen that the work was "not a glorification of the suicide bomber."

"I wanted to show how incomprehensible it is that a mother-of-two, who is a lawyer no less, can do such a thing," she said.

"When I saw her picture in the paper, I thought she looked like Snow White, that's why I gave that name to the piece," she added.

Well, see, there's the problem. That's practically treating her like a human being, when everyone knows the Paleostinians are subhuman savages, etc., etc. Oh, that reminds me, in that thread at Tacitus' place, someone did write:

This quote:

"When I heard Bush was coming here I couldn't believe it. I was outraged and disgusted, and I just think it's a photo op. It's so transparent," said Kathy Nicholas, a flight attendant from Atlanta, who was among hundreds of local supporters protesting Bush before his appearance at the tomb of the civil rights leader.

From:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,108508,00.html

Looked to me as a faint echo of the Palestinian repsonse to Sharon's visit to the temple mount. I wonder how similar are the sensibilities.

I wonder what the fuck he's talking about, but that's me.

Ah. And the art destruction story has already spawned a thread at Little Green Footballs. Eh, Static Shock doesn't start for another few hours -- and why it's premiering on Sunday here in Chicago is (Batman) beyond me -- so where's the harm in having a quick look?

Update: Oh, right. Because they're horrific racist morons over there. How could I forget?

As usual, the more I look at this, the more I'm reminded of why I avoid the political stuff lately. From Haaretz: Swedish envoy: artwork exhibited in Stockholm 'in bad taste':

[Sweden's ambassador to Israel Robert Rydvberg] said that the artwork was not a justification of suicide bombers. "The piece is about a Palestinian woman having murdered innocent civilians. It mentions the names of the tragic Israeli victims in Haifa. It is not a justification of suicide bombings. It is in my view an example of bad taste, but I think the whole issue has been blown out of proportion."

Which doesn't quite match the headline, but it's hard to fit all them words in.

[Israel's ambassador to Sweden Zvi Mazel] was unrepentant about damaging the "Snow White and the Madness of Truth" exhibit at Stockholm's Historical Museum. "My wife and I stood there and began to tremble," he said on the Ynet site. "There was the terrorist, wearing perfect makeup and sailing placidly along the rivers of blood of my brothers and the families that were murdered."

The envoy told Haaretz that his protest was not spontaneous; he had planned the act after learning about the exhibit in the local press. He said he could not understand how an exhibition devoted to preventing genocide can feature a work that casts the murderer of 22 Israelis as Snow White. "In my eyes, that's not art; it's abominable," he said.

So, that's premeditated destruction of a work of art. By an ambassador. Is it possible to satirize something like this?

The exhibit is the work of an Israeli expatriate musician and artist, Dror Feiler, who has been active in "Jews for Israeli-Palestinian peace," a Stockholm-based group opposed to Israeli activities in the territories. As background music to his exhibit, the Tel Aviv-born Feiler mixed music from Bach's 199 Cantata "My Heart Swims in Blood." Feiler castigated Mazel's action as vandalism.

"At last, he managed to render something which caused a political outcry - that's what is called artistic terror," Buki Greenberg, a friend of Feiler's and fellow musician-artist, said Saturday.

Feiler told Army Radio Sunday morning that his artwork was misunderstood. "The display itself is against violence. It can be summed up by a biblical quote: 'He who spills human blood shall have his own blood spilled by man,' and this is exactly what we need to put an end to. The Israeli ambassador caused diplomatic and political damage to Israel, and since he is an intellectual midget, his actions were similar to those of a stall owner in a third world country," Feiler said.

Historical Museum Director Kristian Berg said that the exhibit will remain on display. "You can have your own view of what this piece of art is all about, but using violence is never, ever allowed, and it is never allowed to try to silence the artist," he said.

In recent months, Israel's Foreign Ministry has invested considerable effort to ensure that the Israeli-Palestinian dispute is kept off the agenda of the genocide conference. "The goal has been to prevent the Durbanization of this conference," a top Foreign Ministry official said Saturday, referring to the eruption of anti-Israeli protests at the 2001 human rights conference in the South African city.

I mean, I can't, but perhaps others are more imaginative.

No one, with the possible exception of Kristian Berg, comes out looking good on this one. The artist was trying to provoke a reaction -- possibly a discussion, but that quote from his friend ain't encouraging -- and the ambassador was only too happy to oblige.

Lost in all this, of course, is the perfectly reasonable question of why a "mother-of-two, who is a lawyer" would choose to kill herself and twenty-two others.

OccupationalHazard.org 10.15.03: Ticking bomb - Vered Levy-Barzilai - Ha'aretz

Four months ago, Hanadi Jaradat stood over the freshly dug grave of her brother Fadi and vowed to avenge his death. "Your blood will not have been shed in vain," she is quoted as saying by the Jordanian daily Al-Arab al-Yum. "The murderer will yet pay the price and we will not be the only ones who are crying." Weeping bitterly, she added: "If our nation cannot realize its dream and the goals of the victims, and live in freedom and dignity, then let the whole world be erased."

But why ask questions you already know the answers to?

Posted by Aaron at 8:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (23) | TrackBacks (4)

Well, I hope not, or I don't come out looking so good.

Free For All Monday tomorrow, and if anyone else is looking for an opportunity to post unsigned attacks, please have a look at anonymous proxies before you post. Otherwise, I'll just put up your IP address, which in the seriously fucked-up mindset of some will make me the Bad Guy.

That I don't buy into the concepts of enemies or Good Guys or Bad Guys counts for nothing, apparently.

And I'm still waiting for the person who posted that to step forward. Or for someone who knows who did it to let me know who it was.

Not holding my breath waiting, true.

Apropos of nothing, PopMatters has a review of Milllennium Actress:

In a class on the personal essay, my teacher had assigned a pair of readings. The first piece was a criticism of memoirist Vivian Gornick, who had admitted to "composing" parts of her memoir, Fierce Attachments. The second was Gornick's response, in which she maintained that it was sometimes necessary to sacrifice absolute fidelity in order to communicate a greater, underlying truth. It bothered me that Gornick had played fast and loose with details of time, place, personality, and dialogue. Shouldn't a writer who claimed to be writing from personal experience remain faithful to the "truth," even if it was only the truth as she happened to perceive it on any given day?

To my surprise, not one of the other students in the class took issue with Gornick's creative license. They all asserted that it was perfectly okay to use composite characters, compress timelines, and simply "make stuff up." Oddly, I found myself siding with Jonathan Yardley of the Washington Post, who wrote, "There's a word for that: fiction."

I wasn't sure why I was being so curmudgeonly. In graduate school, we tossed phrases like "social construction" and "subject formation" around like rag dolls. History is told by the winners; race, gender and sexuality are arbitrary markers along the continuum of human variation; individuality is merely a by-product of language. But this time I was the dumb bunny, the thickheaded literalist in search of "truth" and "reality." Despite my excellent education to the contrary, it bothered me that someone could write a personal essay about something that wasn't entirely true. It was acceptable to misremember, to have forgotten a detail -- such is the purview of the "personal" -- but to alter time willfully, or make up a conversation? It just didn't seem right.

There are bits of it that even mention the film. Quite favorably, in fact.

And it's possible to disagree without being disagreeable -- Neo ain't care for it nearly as much as I did, yet somehow things never came to blows. Go figure.

Posted by Aaron at 7:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

Which is why I'm not linking this tomorrow, on MLK Day: American Renaissance: The Decline of National Review.

Subtitle: "NR was once a voice for whites."

[T]he National Review of the 1950s, 60s and even 70s spoke up for white people far more vigorously than Pat Buchanan would ever dare to today. The early National Review heaped criticism on the civil rights movement, Brown v. Board of Education, and people like Adam Clayton Powell and Martin Luther King, whom it considered race hustlers. Some of the greatest names in American conservatism–Russell Kirk, Willmore Kendall, James Kilpatrick, Richard Weaver, and a young Bill Buckley–wrote articles defending the white South and white South Africans in the days of segregation and apartheid. NR attacked the 1965 immigration bill that opened America up to Third-World immigration, and wrote frankly about racial differences in IQ.

[. . .] A famous example of the early NR stance on race was an unsigned editorial of August 24, 1957, titled “Why the South Must Prevail.” It was almost certainly written by Mr. Buckley, since he uses similar language in his book Up From Liberalism. The editorial argued against giving blacks the vote because it would undermine civilization in the South:

“The central question that emerges . . . is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not prevail numerically? The sobering answer is Yes–the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race. It is not easy, and it is unpleasant, to adduce statistics evidencing the cultural superiority of White over Negro: but it is a fact that obtrudes, one that canno