On Queering Parenting and Gender-Neutrality | Social (In)Queery
A very thorough look at the rather sorry state of gender-neutral parenting (or aunting/uncling?) options. My nieces are already old enough to have been thoroughly pickled in princesses and ballerinas, but thankfully the older one is coming to an age when I can think about introducing her to androgynous punk aesthetics — if, you know, I were actually allowed to visit her :(
“Sylvia Rivera kicking ass on stage after some radfems & transphobes tried to refuse her the right to speak at the 1973 Christopher Street Liberation Day rally. Said radfems then had their own march in part protesting trans participation in Pride. A precursor to today’s Dyke March.”
Source: thespiritwas
It is women like Sylvia Rivera and Marsha P. Johnson who started the Stonewall riots and queer liberation. 43 years later, trans women of color, the people who started the movement, are the people maligned and left behind by it.
In Sylvia’s words, “What the FUCK is wrong with you all?”
[[Trigger warning: suicide]]
Sylvia went home that night and attempted suicide.
Marsha Johnson came home and found her in time to save her life.
Sylvia left the movement after that day and didn’t come back for twenty years.
this is incredible, she is incredible, I highly recommend watching it
but I think the addendum re: the effect of this day on sylvia is really important
so often we valorise decontextualised moments of tough, articulate resistance and rage
and the suffering of the people who embodied them is not acknowledged, it’s uncomfortable, it’s not inspiring, we want them to stay tough and cool and stylish forever
which is particularly terrible when I think about how sylvia felt like that because of women like me — women who are now watching this video and feeling inspired and impressed and maybe a bit pleased with ourselves for finally having watched a speech by the famous and really cool to name-drop sylvia rivera
Always reblog.
(via tal9000)
Source: jane-potter
House Republican’s Propose To End 40 Hour Work Week Law
House Republicans have introduced a bill that would end the 40-hour work week, dismantling an important component of the Federal Labor Standards Act (FLSA) of 1938 and hurting middle-class families across the country.
Sponsored by Rep. Martha Roby (AL), the dubiously-titled “Working Families Flexibility Act” (H.R. 1406) would remove the requirement that employers pay a cash premium for overtime work and instead allow them to offer employees compensatory time off. The effect would be an FLSA that is undermined of its only incentive against excessive hours and a cheaper way for employers to demand mandatory overtime.
Eileen Appelbaum, a senior economist with the Center for Economic Policy and Research, says the bill’s major effect would be to hurt workers, “likely increasing overtime hours for those who don’t want them and cutting pay for those who do.”
IAM International President Tom Buffenbarger wrote a letter to Congress encouraging them to vote against the bill.
“Employers can already work within the existing laws to allow workers adjusting work schedules around family needs without changing the 40-hour workweek,” Buffenbarger wrote. “‘Comp time’ proposals let the employer decide whether workers can use any accrued compensatory time. Additionally, nothing would prevent the employer from forcing workers to take time off individually or limiting whether workers can use the compensatory time at all if it is too burdensome to the work-load.”
The bill was referred to committee and could come to a vote in the House as early as next week.
The capitalists sure have become more brazen over the last couple decades.
I’m honestly shocked this didn’t happen sooner. Hell, even the most brazen queers can learn something from Republicans about absolutely not giving a fuck. There’s no way this will pass, but I bet within the next year or two we get a slightly watered down version that gets hailed as a great compromise.
Source: anarcho-queer
No One is Born Gay (or Straight): Here Are 5 Reasons Why
points 2-3 are a good accessible take-down of the idiotic reductionism that seems to pop up every time i read the new york times these days.
kind of reminds me of Tom’s kerfuffle with with that nerd about science.
If you have the preconceived notion that homosexuality is an inherent trait and you start looking for correlations based on that presupposition, like hair swirls or finger lengths, you’re going to come away congratulating yourself on proving those presuppositions to yourself.
Science!
I also don’t understand this mentality that if we see homosexuality and bisexuality as biologically essentialist, that heterosexism is now no longer justified. “Essential traits” are often used as excuses to justify oppression, because you’re “different,” “inferior.”
I like this article. Especially the postscript, and the sentence about regularly taking inventory of the things you believe can’t or won’t change.
Yup
Source: plasmodiocarp
Boston Suspects - Confused Identities and Conflicting Loyalties - NYTimes.com
UGH! NYTimes’ Islamophobia begins in earnest now that both suspects have been caught or killed. As per usual, the NYTimes will look for the source of the violence in these men’s “loyalties” to “foreign religions”, rather than inspecting the conditions obtaining in the United States which empirically seem to generate frequent outbursts of broken individuals who direct seemingly senseless violence at other Americans. For if we’ve learned anything over the past few years, it’s that no one religion or race has a monopoly on violence and extremism …
Here are some choice excerpts and captions:“The case of the Boston suspects echoes that of other young men who, caught between life in America and loyalty to fellow Muslims in a distant homeland, turned to violence.”
“Suspects With Foot in 2 Worlds, Perhaps Echoing Plots of Past”
““I think there’s often a sense of divided loyalties in these cases where Americans turn to violent jihad — are you American first or are you Muslim first? And also of proving yourself as a man of action,” said Brian Fishman, who studies terrorism at the New America Foundation in Washington.”
Ugh ugh ugh ugh ugh. The lesson seems to be: don’t trust people who grew up in the US, but have radical politics and ethnic connections to Muslim countries/cultures (wow, I wonder if that would describe anyone I know…). The whole damn article and everyone interviewed are like, ‘hey, let’s not jump to any conclusions, but in the meantime allow me to jump to some conclusions.’ Needless to say I am really happy I don’t have that scraggly black beard anymore, cuz I would be scared shitless to go outside.
Yesterday, at 7:05pm Eastern Time, Boston Police received a report that suspected terrorist Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was hiding in a boat in Watertown.
At 7:15pm, a drone was heard overheard. Seconds later, an enormous explosion destroyed the boat, as well as 10 nearby homes.
Sources say 46 Watertown residents were casualties of the missile strike, including 7 children.
…
Wouldn’t that be an unconscionable end to this ordeal?
If so, then why are we okay with us doing this in Pakistan?
And if you’re not okay with us doing that, then you don’t get to wave an American flag and chant “USA USA!” when we catch a terrorist.
Why? Because that same flag is painted on the side of the missiles we use to commit our own acts of terror.
MODERN BEAUTY pt.1
We are huge fans of Tilda Swinton, and we love her even more after seen this editorial by W magazine, shot by Tim Walker at Las Pozas in Mexico.
date 17.04.13 time 20:00
(via odofemi)
Source: morningmode
Thoughts from a Marxist, transgender graduate student.
