Pandagon
Atheists in the house, throw your hands in the air, 'cause you count now
Agnostics, non-religious and openly anti-religious people, too. Hey, I can't be the only person who had a "holy shit" moment when Obama recognized non-believers in his inaugural speech. Nor can I be the only one bracing myself for the wingnut outrage, since there's so much effort dedicated to vilifying atheists as the ultimate cancer eating away at our supposedly secular nation. Or maybe not. Perhaps even the most hardened wingnuts will realize that Obama included non-believers in the spirit of inclusiveness he's been trying to foster in his speeches for awhile now. I've really appreciated the way he pointedly includes "gay or straight" and "disabled or not" amongst other phrases that really draw attention not just to the diversity of this country, but to the diversity of oppression that must be overcome. Until he singled out non-believers in his growing list of People Who Count, though, I hadn't thought a whole lot about how much it sucks to be pointedly ignored by our politicians. Maybe in my brain I had thought that the ChristianMuslimJew list wasn't so much exclusionary as merely listing. After all, why include atheists and other non-believers, when the point is to not have an affiliation that requires a label? But by listing non-believers, Obama tacitly argued that the non-inclusion of non-believers in the past was a deliberate exclusion he clearly means to reject.
One might safely infer that the sudden shift towards more aggressive, activist-oriented atheism and skepticism has been working. Which of course is why it's so strongly resisted. Complaints about big meanie atheism from Richard Dawkins or Bill Maher are stemming mostly from a fear that big meanie atheism is effective. I think that among secularists, the issue of raising non-believer visibility has been a troubling one, because we don't necessarily see the purpose of it. After all, our government institutions should be secular as a matter of principle, and for the benefit of believers as well as non-believers. So, why should we have to raise atheist visibility?
But politics isn't just a matter of rational arguments. If people contextualize this country as being one that has multiple faiths but not that many faithless, people are going to have a hard time seeing the harm and unfairness of all this god talk coming from government institutions and other issues like faith-based funding. People aren't going to see the harm so long as all references to god and faith are generic enough. But if you can point to a group of people who are still being excluded, no matter how generic the references, then people might have a better idea why the only fair solution to the issue of religious diversity is to keep religion private and make government spaces secular. "Under god" in the Pledge, for instance, may not seem a big deal if you assume that everyone in the room believes in some kind of god. But it's obviously exclusionary if there's atheists in the room.
That's why the inclusion of non-believers in the inaugural speech is such a big honking deal. Acknowledging atheists as equal citizens to the faithful has a ton of policy implications, ranging from small things like the Pledge to bigger issues, like the right to use birth control and abortion. This little thing could end up sending a signal with bigger implications down the road.
The Meaning
My high school did an awards ceremony every year, and there was a section that focused on graduating seniors. Part of the tradition was that the scholarships each senior received were listed in order, with the top scholarship-getter having theirs listed and then the total value of the scholarships announced. My junior year, there was a graduating senior, a black girl, who was the top scholarship recipient by far. The auditorium, predominantly white, filled with near-deafening applause for her. Afterwards, my mother and I were grabbing dinner, and she remarked that she wanted me to be in that spot the next year.
I was.
What Obama's inauguration means today isn't just a great step forward for him, or even a great step forward for African-Americans, although it is both of those things. It's a signal that we all can persevere, that although structural obstacles exist, they are not insurmountable. There are hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people standing on the Mall today, and at noon today, a signal will be sent to them and to every person on Earth that those obstacles can be broken down, and that progress will be made by understanding how they fell and building upon the progress made in destroying them.
The term "leader" is often a misnomer; leaders are almost always following in the footsteps of others who sacrificed and trod before them. Great leaders understand where and how to follow, and how to bring others along as they build on the work of those who came before them. What I hope and what I think will make Obama a great leader is that he understands this and comprehends that he labors in the shadows of others; he builds rather than destroys.
Let's just hope he can build. And that he inspires a generation of Americans to do the same.
Yes we can
I saw this video at Ezra's and started to choke up, like the giant nerd that I am. The idea of America has seemed so unlikely for so long that I thought it was most likely dead for me, but turns out that my hopes could surface once again with the mere application of a folk song that expresses the best of our national character, instead of the worst that's been given license to run a path of destruction for the past 8 years. A friend of mine said that she knew the minute that they certified Bush's election that we would be at war within a couple of years, but I doubt even the most prescient of us could have predicted that we'd see a major American city all but wiped off the map under his watch. We've lost so much. In fact, I'm choking up again thinking about it, and not in a good way.
Eight years is a long time. My memories of the debacle of the ballot count of 2000 are all mixed up with my memories of my first major adult relationship finally falling apart years after it really should have been put to bed, and so it's a doubly painful memory for me. Sorting CDS and thinking about hanging chads. Packing the car and thinking about the Florida riots. Putting on a Clash CD so that I could go another hour of late night driving and wondering if the right to choose would be gone soon. Hanging up the phone angrily and thinking about if we were facing a potential economic catastrophe. Being happy to be back home in Texas, but being ashamed that Bush was from Texas. Spending time with friends who I feared I'd left behind for good while worrying that we were too late to fight global warming. There was, in the months of the year 2000 turning into the year 2001, a sense of dread hanging over everything. And so when a friend called me on the morning of September 11, 2001 and told me that a plane had hit the WTC, I was not actually that surprised. I was still on the phone with her, turning on the TV when the second plane hit. And somehow, I still wasn't surprised. I didn't expect disaster to come in this form, but somehow I expected disaster.
In retrospect, it was a fucked up thing to think. Unlike the war or the tanked economy, which were in our future, the events of 9/11 were not Bush's fault. I mean, there were competence issues that came out later, but unless you're a crazed 9/11 Truther, you can't really lay this one on his feet. And really, I think that the ransacking of the country that happened in the years after that did in fact put the tragedy firmly in the past for everyone but a few wingnuts who will cherish the trauma forever, because it makes them feel like victims, which is their comfort zone. Bush still had many years to show us what willful destruction he could rain on this country.
Eight years, looking back, is a giant chunk of my life. The Bush administration ate up my 20s, which means that the country spiraled down the drain and lost its way as I really found myself and built my life. It's enough to make one superstitiously wary of a better administration, if you're prone to that sort of thinking, which I'm not. In trying to wrap my head around the past 8 years, all my memories are grounded irretrievably from domestic settings. New Year's Eve 2000: a Man Or Astroman? show at Emo's where the sense grew in the room that this was somehow the last night of some kind of era, and you should party like it. I remember the build-up to the war as a series of TV viewings from a secondhand couch while wearing boxer shorts and wrapped up in a fuzzy blanket. Fights with my then-boyfriend about whether or not there were WMDs in Iraq. (My stance: "Bush is lying." His: "There's bound to be something." We were both completely against the war, so I fail to remember why there was fighting.) The quiet, dark room around me as I started to put together my first blog to talk about these issues, with cats sitting curiously in the windowsills next to me. Going to bed at my one owned home Mouse Manor when I though Kerry had won. Going to work at UT where people were crying quietly at their desks when it was certain he'd lost. Watching Katrina approaching New Orleans while sitting in my gun metal blue office at Mouse Manor. Unpacking my things post-break-up in my new apartment and getting a panicked phone call from my mother, who was worried that Hurricane Rita would somehow be a problem for me in my new place. Having a cute boy drunkenly telling me about getting arrested at the 2004 RNC. Going to Amsterdam and having Dutch people give me pitying looks when I said I was from Texas. Having to abandon a trip to go see Obama speak in 2007 because the landlord wouldn't let me break a lease to move in with my new boyfriend. Selling my truck after paying $50 at a gas station to fill up. Moving into a badass new condo as Obama transitioned into being the certain Democratic nominee. Mundane stuff, really, but how we experience politics in our lives. Even as my life has gone up and down over the past 8 years, I've felt something was stolen from me, and it changed things. It's not just that I became a political blogger, though that's the big one. It's just that it made a difference in who I was at a fundamental level, and everything I describe above was colored by it. Cynicism set in. Knowing how mean, racist, petty, and vicious Americans can be---enough to elect Bush once and nearly elect him once before---infected my thought processes and decisions, for good and for bad. Mostly, it made me ball up into my own world, trying to stick around with the tolerable people of Austin and save my own hide. I started to blog mostly to vent, not because I thought it mattered. If anything, I blogged at first because I thought it didn't. Decency had lost. The dream was over. Now all we had left was pushing pus out of the wounds by screaming onto our blogs.
I didn't believe in the dream of America. And it was you guys out there in the blogosphere who turned things around for me. I blogged, and you replied. You blogged, and I replied. We were coming from a common place, and it was this dream. It wasn't completely spoiled. It wasn't a lie. Every day, people out there are living it. They believe in justice. They live for freedom. And while we'd strayed from the path, I could see pretty solid evidence of how far we'd come in my own life. A generation ago, a woman like me would be trapped in a bullshit marriage with a couple of children that I hadn't really desired so much as just accepted. I'd have no creative outlet. I've had my troubles, but because of feminist gains, I'd been able to get past them. The dream hadn't been killed completely, since I've been able to live it.
The Obama campaign became this yelp of hope and love from this country, and even hardened cynics like me got swept up into it. After all these years, we found we had it in us to believe again. The right accuses of us of making Obama some kind of messiah, but that's not how it's really experienced. We aggressively believe he's just one man. We know that we are the real story, the everyday Americans who reached past the cynical destruction of the Bush era into ourselves and found that we do, we really believe that humanity can be better than this. We can transcend racism and sexism and homophobia and all our other petty bigotries. It may not happen in our lifetimes, but we can strive. We can be better. I hope the history books note this, but the brilliance of the Obama campaign was not that they dictated this feeling of movement, but they spotted it and rode the wave. "Yes we can," became a slogan not because it was demanded on high, but because people responded to it, and the campaign responded to the people. It didn't feel canned to say it. It felt real, because in a sense, we invented it, not them. On the night of Obama's election, I went to a party and people did spontaneously chant, "Yes we can! Yes we can!", and frankly, through all my cynicism, it felt real. They weren't say that Obama could. After a point, it wasn't about him. We can. We do believe in this country, and this election proves it.
Obama is not some sort of leftist dream, and we know it. He's a centrist Democrat, barely a liberal at all. But really, the moment was not about him. It was about reclaiming what Bush took from us, which was the American Dream. And that's not the dream of the white picket fence with 2.5 kids. It's Martin Luther King's dream for America, a place where we can transcend a long human history of injustice and brutality. Not because we elect the right politicians, but because we ourselves are it. The feeling of waking up from a long national nightmare isn't exactly rooted in this policy decision or that. It's the feeling of waking up from 8 years of a hateful America, an America where people have slowly lost their minds because they've been fed a steady diet of resentment and fear. It's the feeling you have when you wake up and your first thought isn't about how you're going to get through the day, but about how lucky you are to have this lovely day. It's like nothing I've ever really seen.
I keep breaking into tears, because I thought that my country and its ideals were a joke, but now I've found that underneath it all, I still believed in the ideals. It's been a long 8 years not knowing that about myself.
So please, share your stories in comments about how it's been for you these past 8 years.
Videos for your pleasure:
This looks like a good place to put this thing down [Live inauguration feed and comment thread]
I hope that Hulu has lifted their US-only restriction for this. Hope, but don't assume. Feedback from international types would be appreciated; and if anyone knows of an embeddable live link with better access, let me know.
Sympathy for the Devil
It was almost a post title in search of a subject, wasn't it?
Vice President Dick Cheney will be using a wheelchair at the inauguration, the White House says, because he hurt his back Monday while moving boxes into his new home in McLean, Va.
Poor guy.
Oh boy, it's time to hate artists again!
This piece is a WPA mural from my hometown of Alpine, TX. Just a non-subtle reminder that New Deal arts projects beautified even the most ignored rural areas of the country, the places that conservatives claim to care so much about. Clearly, there was no reason to put paintings in Alpine other than to hate America. You can see more of un-American art celebrating American life here.
Far be it for me to say, but I think a lot of wingnuts are mildly relieved that Obama is going to be President. The whole point of being a wingnut is nursing grievances, and it's much harder to pull that off when your people are in power. But now that the evil liberal agenda with all their reading and weekend mornings spent naked in bed doing pleasurable things is back in power, it's time to start screeching with resentment again. Roy Edroso caught the choads at Redstate getting all excited at the prospect of really resenting artists again for doing horrible things like eating and paying rent. Quoth the pathetic wingnut, at the prospect of increased arts funding under Obama:
Where is the outrage that a president dares imagine that HE should be telling artists what to do with his little “art czar”? Where is the “artistic integrity” of these purported artists who so often wish to claim they are free of coercion or control by government and should remain so? Why is it that they don’t seem to mind The One taking control of their world of art?
Ah, but that is just it, isn’t it? These so-called artists really HAVE no principles. They love them some Obama and that is all they need to turn around and paradoxically cast their general disdain of government out the proverbial window. Of course, wait until the next Republican gets in office and see them suddenly remember that they want their freedom from oppressive government, eh?
But, for now, the silence from the “art” community is deafening.
Yeah, I know. It's pretty pointless quoting him. His excuse for bemoaning the prospect of artists getting money is thin indeed---obviously, government money is either tied to specific projects agreed to beforehand, or it's handed out with the understanding that the government doesn't get artistic control---and it's just a thin cover for the real point of this post, which is to drum up hatred against artists for being part of the pointy-headed intellectual set that wants to infect America with decency and sense.
Artists really make perfect right wing villains, don't they? In the popular imagination, artists are enviable people, even if they're not well off. They have fashion sense and interesting friends, and they spend their time drinking coffee or wine and having meaningful conversations. They're creatively fulfilled and presumable sexually fulfilled, because being an artist really gets you a lot of that kind of attention. They don't just visit New York City or San Francisco; they live there. They don't have to lean on cheap racism to make funny jokes, and their music collections are genuinely interesting. They engage the world on a deeper, more meaningful level. Even people who would sooner die than eat dinner sitting on the floor with lighting provided by a candle shoved in a wine bottle must have pangs of envy imagining the bohemian lifestyle after a day of work under fluorescent lights followed by a fast food dinner and entertainment provided by second rate sitcoms. The tension between squares and bohemians has been a popular theme for more than a century now, and shows no signs of dying. And it's a tension that makes the sworn squares feel like, well, squares, and thus like dishing out the hate. Or, as Roy's post shows, openly wishing starvation on artists as a sort of karmic justice. Sure, the guys at Red State may live lives devoid of meaning and largely devoid of joy, but you're broke, so there.
Now, anyone who actually knows people in creative professions knows that it's not quite the stereotype that I describe there, but let's face it, there's a sliver of truth to the idea that people pick the creative life (if they can get away with it), because the rewards outweigh the drawbacks. And that's enough to stoke the resentments. It's like it's been the past couple of days with my email box. I've been getting a bunch of angry emails from some anti-choice nut trying to argue that you can be an anti-choice atheist. I don't deny it, because an atheist can be a sexist, though in order to really do so, they have to forsake a commitment to rational thought. And furthermore that the atheist anti-choice population seems composed primarily of a bunch of bitter men with major issues regarding women, and a fucked up sense of entitlement. Having given him this, I told him that was that of my attention. He then sent a shit ton of emails to me that I didn't read, except to point out that his relentless demands on my attention really proves my theory. On the surface, it seems that the issues are unrelated. But really, it all fits into the grand theory of wingnuttery, that its main appeal is that it gives people who are crippled with certain resentments an opportunity to lash out and punish people who are annoying because they're more interesting, The racism, sexism, and homophobia are really a piece of this bigger picture. For the resentful hoards of angry white men, the idea that women, gays, or non-white people are seeing their opportunities increasing while they, the resentful white guys, are stuck in their boring lives/personalities just makes the whole thing all the more unfair.
Dr. King's Dream - poll tested by CNN
A new CNN poll found that two-thirds of blacks believe Martin Luther King Jr.'s vision for race relations has been fulfilled.
The CNN-Opinion Research Corp. survey was released Monday, a federal holiday honoring the slain civil rights leader and a day before Barack Obama is to be sworn in as the first black U.S. president.The poll found 69 percent of blacks said King's vision has been fulfilled in the more than 45 years since his 1963 "I have a dream" speech -- roughly double the 34 percent who agreed with that assessment in a similar poll taken last March.
But whites remain less optimistic, the survey found.
"Whites don't feel the same way -- a majority of them say that the country has not yet fulfilled King's vision," CNN polling director Keating Holland said. However, the number of whites saying the dream has been fulfilled has also gone up since March, from 35 percent to 46 percent.
"Has that dream been fulfilled? With the election of Barack Obama, two thirds of African-Americans believe it has," CNN senior political analyst Bill Schneider said.
"Most blacks and whites went to bed on election night saying, 'I never thought I'd live to see the day.' That's what the nation is celebrating on this King holiday: We have lived to see the day," Schneider said.
Well, I didn't expect to see that day either, but it will happen tomorrow. That said, I'm clearly not in the camp of those polled who believe King's dream has been fulfilled. Just based on my small universe of blogging and personal experience, too many people cannot even discuss race without getting tied in knots, in terrible arguments or falling silent, or afraid to speak their minds.
People in this country cannot even come to an agreement on whether our new president is black or biracial -- his actual racial composition or his race "assigned" by our culture.
Look at the attempted and actual voter suppression that continues to go on today -- misleadling robocalls, voter registration intimidation, not enough or broken voting machines in majority-black precincts. The Voting Rights Act will be reviewed by the Supreme Court later this year. The CNN poll found two-thirds of blacks questioned said the Act is still necessary, only half of whites do. That's a serious disconnect given the recent organized attempts at voter suppression. The good news and story in 2008 is that the sheer number of young and minority voters who came out and did cast their ballots represented a tidal wave of new registrants activated by the prospect of voting for Barack Obama.
Blacks are Tased and shot by police far greater numbers than whites in encounters in pre-trial, extra-judicial summary electrocutions and executions. Take a look at the Blend Taser files to see the long list of incidents documenting police out of control. Look at the case of Oscar Grant. That is not King's dream fulfilled. Look at the Blend McCain/Palin mob files.
Or this:
There is much work to do.
I Have a Dream
Related
The invisible, inaudible Bishop Gene Robinson
If you were channel surfing to catch HBO's inaugural concert coverage at the Lincoln Memorial where openly gay Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson delivered the invocation, you didn't see him. Remember, this was the supposed salve on the wound to the LGBT community for the upcoming high-profile appearance of Rick Warren at the actual inauguration on Tuesday, which will be seen by millions and will float out there on YouTube in perpetuity. I had no illusions that Robinson's appearance would reach the same level of exposure as Warren's, but damn -- no broadcast of it at all? That's just freaking rich.
Leah McElrath Renna at HuffPost reports that some fundies showed up to protest Robinson's appearance. These folks were "Brother Ruben and the Official Street Preachers" since they didn't even bother to come up with original signs.
With a diverse and otherwise joyous crowd of adults and children of all ages streaming by, the three protest participants shouted about hate, hell and "homo-sex" - using a megaphone to assert that "homosexuals are eternally damned" and "Jesus doesn't love homosexuals."On its website, the group claims to "preach a loving message to sodomites. We tell them the truth, that unless they repent they shall likewise perish in Hell Fire!"
Kenny Yum of the Canada's National Post was liveblogging the event and reported that many there couldn't even hear Robinson (mic problems?) and were shouting "We can't hear you."
The exclusion from the broadcast was a decision made by the Obama Presidential Inaugural team, not the cable network, btw (AfterElton):
Contacted Sunday night by AfterElton.com concerning the exclusion of Robinson's prayer, HBO said via email, "The producer of the concert has said that the Presidential Inaugural Committee made the decision to keep the invocation as part of the pre-show." Uncertain as to whether or not that meant that HBO was contractually prevented from airing the pre-show, we followed up, but none of the spokespeople available Sunday night could answer that question with absolute certainty. However, it does seem that the network's position is that they had nothing to do with the decision.
Sarah Pulliam of Christianity Today did shoot video and posted it:
UPDATE (1/19. 3:30 PM ET): HBO, Presidential Inaugural Committee still pointing fingers over invisible Robinson invocation
Via Leah McElrath Renna @ HuffPost:
Coming on the heels of the controversy caused by selection of Rick Warren to deliver the Invocation at the Inauguration, the omission of the prayer delivered by openly-gay Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson from the broadcast of the pre-Inaugural concert at the Lincoln Memorial is creating a controversy of its own.In a conversation with this writer, Jeff Cusson, Senior Vice President for Corporate Affairs for HBO, confirmed that HBO was not involved in the decision to move Bishop Robinson's remarks to a time prior to the beginning of the actual broadcast:
"HBO had no involvement in the scheduling of those who appeared as part of the televised event. You'll have to talk to PIC about all of the scheduling decisions. We had a set broadcast time and went forth accordingly."
I just received a statement from the Obama camp/Presidential Inaugural Committee:
"We had always intended and planned for Rt. Rev. Robinson's invocation to be included in the televised portion of yesterday's program. We regret the error in executing this plan – but are gratified that hundreds of thousands of people who gathered on the mall heard his eloquent prayer for our nation that was a fitting start to our event," said PIC communications director Josh Earnest.
Take that for what it's worth.
Bishop Robinson was on NPR's Talk of the Nation today. The audio, according to the web site, will be up around 6PM ET.
I thought I'd run some reactions from the blogosphere...
Lisa Derrick of La Figa:
I got off of the plane from LA to DC, rushed to my friend's house, ordered Chinese take out, tuned to HBO--and WTF?! They edited out Bishop Robinson! No Bishop Robinson?! Why? We can speculate, they can prevaricate, but they did this, and it sucks, and if this is act symbolizes the opening of Obama's administration, as handled by corporate media, America, we are fucked.
Jim Burroway, Box Turtle Bulletin:
[B]y pointing out that Rev. Robinson's invocation would come at the start of the HBO-aired live concert in front of one of America's best-loved memorials, this high-profile announcement was portrayed as a separate-but-almost-equal bookend to Warren's invocation at the Capital steps.Well, except it turned out not to be nearly so equal. In yet another deep insult to injury, HBO did not air Rev. Robinson's invocation. The salve to the gay community meant to calm the outrage over Warren's selection was for naught.
Could it be that the American media has finally decided these public events should be 100% secular? Don't count on it, friends, because you know as well as I do that pop-pastor Rick Warren will be front and center and at full volume to kick off President-Elect Obama's formal Inauguration on Tuesday.
When you're throwing folks a bone it's a good idea to make sure they can, you know, see the bone.
More at: Joe.My.God, Good As You, Queerty and many more.
If you want to read Robinson's prayer in full, it's below the fold. From the Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire web site. The video was shot by Christianity Today.
A Prayer for the Nation and Our Next President, Barack Obama
By The Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson, Episcopal Bishop of New Hampshire
Opening Inaugural Event
Lincoln Memorial, Washington, DC
January 18, 2009
Welcome to Washington! The fun is about to begin, but first, please join me in pausing for a moment, to ask God’s blessing upon our nation and our next president.
O God of our many understandings, we pray that you will…
Bless us with tears – for a world in which over a billion people exist on less than a dollar a day, where young women from many lands are beaten and raped for wanting an education, and thousands die daily from malnutrition, malaria, and AIDS.
Bless us with anger – at discrimination, at home and abroad, against refugees and immigrants, women, people of color, gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.
Bless us with discomfort – at the easy, simplistic “answers” we’ve preferred to hear from our politicians, instead of the truth, about ourselves and the world, which we need to face if we are going to rise to the challenges of the future.
Bless us with patience – and the knowledge that none of what ails us will be “fixed” anytime soon, and the understanding that our new president is a human being, not a messiah.
Bless us with humility – open to understanding that our own needs must always be balanced with those of the world.
Bless us with freedom from mere tolerance – replacing it with a genuine respect and warm embrace of our differences, and an understanding that in our diversity, we are stronger.
Bless us with compassion and generosity – remembering that every religion’s God judges us by the way we care for the most vulnerable in the human community, whether across town or across the world.
And God, we give you thanks for your child Barack, as he assumes the office of President of the United States.
Give him wisdom beyond his years, and inspire him with Lincoln’s reconciling leadership style, President Kennedy’s ability to enlist our best efforts, and Dr. King’s dream of a nation for ALL the people.
Give him a quiet heart, for our Ship of State needs a steady, calm captain in these times.
Give him stirring words, for we will need to be inspired and motivated to make the personal and common sacrifices necessary to facing the challenges ahead.
Make him color-blind, reminding him of his own words that under his leadership, there will be neither red nor blue states, but the United States.
Help him remember his own oppression as a minority, drawing on that experience of discrimination, that he might seek to change the lives of those who are still its victims.
Give him the strength to find family time and privacy, and help him remember that even though he is president, a father only gets one shot at his daughters’ childhoods.
And please, God, keep him safe. We know we ask too much of our presidents, and we’re asking FAR too much of this one. We know the risk he and his wife are taking for all of us, and we implore you, O good and great God, to keep him safe. Hold him in the palm of your hand – that he might do the work we have called him to do, that he might find joy in this impossible calling, and that in the end, he might lead us as a nation to a place of integrity, prosperity and peace.
AMEN.
Barack Obama's speech at the Lincoln Memorial:
I want to thank all the speakers and performers for reminding us, through song and through words, just what it is that we love about America. And I want to thank all of you for braving the cold and the crowds and traveling in some cases thousands of miles to join us here today. Welcome to Washington, and welcome to this celebration of American renewal.
In the course of our history, only a handful of generations have been asked to confront challenges as serious as the ones we face right now. Our nation is at war. Our economy is in crisis. Millions of Americans are losing their jobs and their homes; they're worried about how they'll afford college for their kids or pay the stack of bills on their kitchen table. And most of all, they are anxious and uncertain about the future - about whether this generation of Americans will be able to pass on what's best about this country to our children and their children.
I won't pretend that meeting any one of these challenges will be easy. It will take more than a month or a year, and it will likely take many. Along the way there will be setbacks and false starts and days that test our fundamental resolve as a nation.
But despite all of this - despite the enormity of the task that lies ahead - I stand here today as hopeful as ever that the United States of America will endure - that the dream of our founders will live on in our time.
What gives me that hope is what I see when I look out across this mall. For in these monuments are chiseled those unlikely stories that affirm our unyielding faith - a faith that anything is possible in America. Rising before us stands a memorial to a man who led a small band of farmers and shopkeepers in revolution against the army of an Empire, all for the sake of an idea. On the ground below is a tribute to a generation that withstood war and depression - men and women like my grandparents who toiled on bomber assembly lines and marched across Europe to free the world from tyranny's grasp. Directly in front of us is a pool that still reflects the dream of a King, and the glory of a people who marched and bled so that their children might be judged by their character's content. And behind me, watching over the union he saved, sits the man who in so many ways made this day possible.
And yet, as I stand here tonight, what gives me the greatest hope of all is not the stone and marble that surrounds us today, but what fills the spaces in between. It is you - Americans of every race and region and station who came here because you believe in what this country can be and because you want to help us get there.
It is the same thing that gave me hope from the day we began this campaign for the presidency nearly two years ago; a belief that if we could just recognize ourselves in one another and bring everyone together - Democrats, Republicans, and Independents; Latino, Asian, and Native American; black and white, gay and straight, disabled and not - then not only would we restore hope and opportunity in places that yearned for both, but maybe, just maybe, we might perfect our union in the process.
This is what I believed, but you made this belief real. You proved once more that people who love this country can change it. And as I prepare to assume the presidency, yours are the voices I will take with me every day I walk into that Oval Office - the voices of men and women who have different stories but hold common hopes; who ask only for what was promised us as Americans - that we might make of our lives what we will and see our children climb higher than we did.
It is this thread that binds us together in common effort; that runs through every memorial on this mall; that connects us to all those who struggled and sacrificed and stood here before.
It is how this nation has overcome the greatest differences and the longest odds - because there is no obstacle that can stand in the way of millions of voices calling for change.
That is the belief with which we began this campaign, and that is how we will overcome what ails us now. There is no doubt that our road will be long. That our climb will be steep. But never forget that the true character of our nation is revealed not during times of comfort and ease, but by the right we do when the moment is hard. I ask you to help me reveal that character once more, and together, we can carry forward as one nation, and one people, the legacy of our forefathers that we celebrate today.
Here's another photo of the sad sack homophobic protestors at the concert, courtesy of Lambda Rising:
The crowd that surrounded them -- which seemed to be mostly young straight guys -- delighted in chanting "Hate is not a family value" and "Homosex is in!" Some, noting the substantial girth of several of the protesters, chanted "Gluttony is a sin!" and others asked "Isn't that polyester you're wearing?"
Diamond orgasms are a girl's best friend
Sometimes when I'm reading stories people send me about the pseudo-scientific claims of evolutionary psychologists,* I'm compelled to ponder the power of a media that can create a "science" almost strictly by its lonesome. Most sciences evolve from get-your-hands-dirty research-discovery-more-research cycles, but evo psych evolved to meet the need of the media to have a constant influx of stories justifying sexism through "science". Because it's a whole lot easier to get media attention to your work if your conclusions are that women are (fill in misogynist stereotype) and/or men are slaves to certain sexual signals that make it biologically impossible to treat women as they would someone they considered a full human being.** If you actually did some solid research with physical evidence of bona fide evolved traits in this species or that---which happens all the time, actually---there's very little chance of you getting an article celebrating your hard work in the mainstream media. If you do some half-assed research and draw some shaky conclusions that make a number of unlikely assumptions, but you confirm someone's misogynist beliefs, prepare for your phone to ring off the hook.
The latest misogynist stereotype confirmed*** by evo psych wanks is the belief that women are shallow gold diggers that don't really know what love is. "Women are born whores," is quite possibly the favorite sacred belief of evolutionary psychology. (Hat tip, Roxanne, for emailing me this.)
Scientists have found that the pleasure women get from making love is directly linked to the size of their partner’s bank balance.
They found that the wealthier a man is, the more frequently his partner has orgasms.
“Women’s orgasm frequency increases with the income of their partner,” said Dr Thomas Pollet, the Newcastle University psychologist behind the research.
Wow! Really? Well, we always knew that women couldn't help it---Marilyn Monroe told me so.
We don't really need evidence. We have this song as a lead that says some scientists "proved" it, and that's good enough. But for shits and giggles, let's take a look at the rest of the article.
He and Nettle tested that idea using data gathered in one of the world’s biggest lifestyle studies. The Chinese Health and Family Life Survey targeted 5,000 people across China for in-depth interviews about their personal lives, including questions about their sex lives, income and other factors. Among these were 1,534 women with male partners whose data was the basis for the study.
They found that 121 of these women always had orgasms during sex, while 408 more had them “often”. Another 762 “sometimes” orgasmed while 243 had them rarely or never. Such figures are similar to those for western countries.
There were of course, several factors involved in such differences but, said Pollet, money was one of the main ones.
He said: “Increasing partner income had a highly positive effect on women’s self-reported frequency of orgasm. More desirable mates cause women to experience more orgasms.”
Okay, so they gave some numbers of the total number of women self-reporting orgasms to make this seem very number-heavy, but they didn't actually show the correlation between income and orgasm, which of course is the relevant data we care about. But let's give them the benefit of the doubt and say they showed some correlation, however small. What they've proven is that in China there's this correlation. I fail to see how the behavior of Chinese people proves anything about biological programming, since everyone there is subject to the same culture.
Here's the thing---you know what else correlates with wealth? Health. It's been demonstrated, and not through hazy surveys but actual physical evidence, that your wealth can have a huge impact on your health outcomes. People with more money have better food, better housing, better health care, and less stress. This last one is discussed in a recent Radiolab, where they talked about how a certain gland in your neck was much bigger in the poor because it grew in response to stress levels. Now, who here thinks that the varying levels of health and stress between income ranges might have an effect on the orgasm rate? We also know the divorce rate goes down when a community's median income goes up. Who here things that satisfaction with marriage due to lack of fighting over money might make it easier for women to achieve orgasm?
But wait! There's cross-cultural studies, or something like them!
This is not an effect limited to Chinese women. Previous research in Germany and America has looked at attributes such as body symmetry and attractiveness, finding that these are also linked with orgasm frequency. Money, however, seems even more important.
If you read that quickly, it seems that they're saying that there's been other studies about orgasm and income. But if you actually read it again with care, it seems that it actually says that there have been other studies about other things, but then there's this study that says that money is more important, a claim that wasn't, as far as I can tell, even addressed by the other studies. In fact, this paragraph is more about justifying the existence of evolutionary psychology by pointing out that there's a lot of studies done that this particular writer vaguely recalls reading about.
Hey, at least the scientists in the actual study argue that women's orgasms might be something that exist for women's pleasure, which would, in turn, encourage women to have sex. That would seem obvious, but to misogyny promoter David Buss---who turns up like a bad penny in all these stories---can't even go so far as to admit that women's pleasure might be about women.
David Buss, professor of psychology at the University of Texas, Austin, who raised this question in his book The Evolution of Desire believes female orgasms have several possible purposes.
“They could promote emotional bonding with a high-quality male or they could serve as a signal that women are highly sexually satisfied, and hence unlikely to seek sex with other men,” he said. “What those orgasms are saying is ‘I'm extremely loyal, so you should invest in me and my children’."
That's right, ladies. Male orgasms are about making men want to have sex. And female orgasms are about making men want to have sex. It's unclear if Buss grasps that women have feelings at all, or if he thinks we're robots programmed to expertly exploit hapless men who are ruled by their dicks.
*By the way, every single time I write something on this subject, I get at least one email from a man who feels hurt that I don't take evo psych claims about how they're biologically incapable, as men, from seeing women as people, but that's okay, because biology programmed women to be exploitative monsters. It's a puzzling phenomenon. If it's true that nature requires them to see me only as a waist-to-hip ratio, why do they care what I think? I'm only half kidding. What's really funny about it is how hurt they are. One of the major functions of evo psych is to give Nice Guys® blanket permission to act out their masculinity fetishes by being assholes, I guess.
**Look, I'm not the one saying that men can't feel that someone they're attracted to is a full human being. But that's the subtext of so many evo psych claims.
***If by "confirmed", you mean, "not proven at all, but asserted by someone with a title, so I can badger my girlfriend and women at parties with 'proof' that they suck, and enjoy watching them quietly take it by utter submission or feeble defenses that are constrained by their social conditioning to be peacemakers", then indeed it's confirmed.
The End Of An Era
Piggybacking off of Amanda's post below, I'm just trying to think of how vicious and vituperative the commentary would have been if Clinton had left Bush with two wars, a tanked economy and a looming budget deficit in his first year that was bigger than any two combined years of deficits in our nation's history. It would have been saucy. And it also wouldn't have been couched in terms of Bush's challenges and his need to reconcile with his opposition.
Yes we can
I saw this video at Ezra's and started to choke up, like the giant nerd that I am. The idea of America has seemed so unlikely for so long that I thought it was most likely dead for me, but turns out that my hopes could surface once again with the mere application of a folk song that expresses the best of our national character, instead of the worst that's been given license to run a path of destruction for the past 8 years. A friend of mine said that she knew the minute that they certified Bush's election that we would be at war within a couple of years, but I doubt even the most prescient of us could have predicted that we'd see a major American city all but wiped off the map under his watch. We've lost so much. In fact, I'm choking up again thinking about it, and not in a good way.
Eight years is a long time. My memories of the debacle of the ballot count of 2000 are all mixed up with my memories of my first major adult relationship finally falling apart years after it really should have been put to bed, and so it's a doubly painful memory for me. Sorting CDS and thinking about hanging chads. Packing the car and thinking about the Florida riots. Putting on a Clash CD so that I could go another hour of late night driving and wondering if the right to choose would be gone soon. Hanging up the phone angrily and thinking about if we were facing a potential economic catastrophe. Being happy to be back home in Texas, but being ashamed that Bush was from Texas. Spending time with friends who I feared I'd left behind for good while worrying that we were too late to fight global warming. There was, in the months of the year 2000 turning into the year 2001, a sense of dread hanging over everything. And so when a friend called me on the morning of September 11, 2001 and told me that a plane had hit the WTC, I was not actually that surprised. I was still on the phone with her, turning on the TV when the second plane hit. And somehow, I still wasn't surprised. I didn't expect disaster to come in this form, but somehow I expected disaster.
In retrospect, it was a fucked up thing to think. Unlike the war or the tanked economy, which were in our future, the events of 9/11 were not Bush's fault. I mean, there were competence issues that came out later, but unless you're a crazed 9/11 Truther, you can't really lay this one on his feet. And really, I think that the ransacking of the country that happened in the years after that did in fact put the tragedy firmly in the past for everyone but a few wingnuts who will cherish the trauma forever, because it makes them feel like victims, which is their comfort zone. Bush still had many years to show us what willful destruction he could rain on this country.
Eight years, looking back, is a giant chunk of my life. The Bush administration ate up my 20s, which means that the country spiraled down the drain and lost its way as I really found myself and built my life. It's enough to make one superstitiously wary of a better administration, if you're prone to that sort of thinking, which I'm not. In trying to wrap my head around the past 8 years, all my memories are grounded irretrievably from domestic settings. New Year's Eve 2000: a Man Or Astroman? show at Emo's where the sense grew in the room that this was somehow the last night of some kind of era, and you should party like it. I remember the build-up to the war as a series of TV viewings from a secondhand couch while wearing boxer shorts and wrapped up in a fuzzy blanket. Fights with my then-boyfriend about whether or not there were WMDs in Iraq. (My stance: "Bush is lying." His: "There's bound to be something." We were both completely against the war, so I fail to remember why there was fighting.) The quiet, dark room around me as I started to put together my first blog to talk about these issues, with cats sitting curiously in the windowsills next to me. Going to bed at my one owned home Mouse Manor when I though Kerry had won. Going to work at UT where people were crying quietly at their desks when it was certain he'd lost. Watching Katrina approaching New Orleans while sitting in my gun metal blue office at Mouse Manor. Unpacking my things post-break-up in my new apartment and getting a panicked phone call from my mother, who was worried that Hurricane Rita would somehow be a problem for me in my new place. Going to Amsterdam and having Dutch people give me pitying looks when I said I was from Texas. Having to abandon a trip to go see Obama speak in 2007 because the landlord wouldn't let me break a lease to move in with my new boyfriend. Selling my truck after paying $50 at a gas station to fill up. Moving into a badass new condo as Obama transitioned into being the certain Democratic nominee. Mundane stuff, really, but how we experience politics in our lives. Even as my life has gone up and down over the past 8 years, I've felt something was stolen from me, and it changed things. It's not just that I became a political blogger, though that's the big one. It's just that it made a difference in who I was at a fundamental level, and everything I describe above was colored by it. Cynicism set in. Knowing how mean, racist, petty, and vicious Americans can be---enough to elect Bush once and nearly elect him once before---infected my thought processes and decisions, for good and for bad. Mostly, it made me ball up into my own world, trying to stick around with the tolerable people of Austin and save my own hide. I started to blog mostly to vent, not because I thought it mattered. If anything, I blogged at first because I thought it didn't. Decency had lost. The dream was over. Now all we had left was pushing pus out of the wounds by screaming onto our blogs.
I didn't believe in the dream of America. And it was you guys out there in the blogosphere who turned things around for me. I blogged, and you replied. You blogged, and I replied. We were coming from a common place, and it was this dream. It wasn't completely spoiled. It wasn't a lie. Every day, people out there are living it. They believe in justice. They live for freedom. And while we'd strayed from the path, I could see pretty solid evidence of how far we'd come in my own life. A generation ago, a woman like me would be trapped in a bullshit marriage with a couple of children that I hadn't really desired so much as just accepted. I'd have no creative outlet. I've had my troubles, but because of feminist gains, I'd been able to get past them. The dream hadn't been killed completely, since I've been able to live it.
The Obama campaign became this yelp of hope and love from this country, and even hardened cynics like me got swept up into it. After all these years, we found we had it in us to believe again. The right accuses of us of making Obama some kind of messiah, but that's not how it's really experienced. We aggressively believe he's just one man. We know that we are the real story, the everyday Americans who reached past the cynical destruction of the Bush era into ourselves and found that we do, we really believe that humanity can be better than this. We can transcend racism and sexism and homophobia and all our other petty bigotries. It may not happen in our lifetimes, but we can strive. We can be better. I hope the history books note this, but the brilliance of the Obama campaign was not that they dictated this feeling of movement, but they spotted it and rode the wave. "Yes we can," became a slogan not because it was demanded on high, but because people responded to it, and the campaign responded to the people. It didn't feel canned to say it. It felt real, because in a sense, we invented it, not them. On the night of Obama's election, I went to a party and people did spontaneously chant, "Yes we can! Yes we can!", and frankly, through all my cynicism, it felt real. They weren't say that Obama could. After a point, it wasn't about him. We can. We do believe in this country, and this election proves it.
Obama is not some sort of leftist dream, and we know it. He's a centrist Democrat, barely a liberal at all. But really, the moment was not about him. It was about reclaiming what Bush took from us, which was the American Dream. And that's not the dream of the white picket fence with 2.5 kids. It's Martin Luther King's dream for America, a place where we can transcend a long human history of injustice and brutality. Not because we elect the right politicians, but because we ourselves are it. The feeling of waking up from a long national nightmare isn't exactly rooted in this policy decision or that. It's the feeling of waking up from 8 years of a hateful America, an America where people have slowly lost their minds because they've been fed a steady diet of resentment and fear. It's the feeling you have when you wake up and your first thought isn't about how you're going to get through the day, but about how lucky you are to have this lovely day. It's like nothing I've ever really seen.
I keep breaking into tears, because I thought that my country and its ideals were a joke, but now I've found that underneath it all, I still believed in the ideals. It's been a long 8 years not knowing that about myself.
So please, share your stories in comments about how it's been for you these past 8 years.
Copyright © 2025 Raw Story Media, Inc. PO Box 21050, Washington, D.C. 20009 |
Masthead
|
Privacy Policy
|
Manage Preferences
|
Debug Logs
For corrections contact
corrections@rawstory.com
, for support contact
support@rawstory.com
.