The merits of discussion and common decency.

I just finished watching The Colbert Report, the guest on which was Meghan McCain, the daughter of John McCain. I have to admit that before I saw a previous appearance by her on The Rachel Maddow Show, I didn’t know much about her. I was impressed by her appearance there, and was equally impressed by her appearance on TCR.

I’m not a Republican, which I think is fairly obvious, but whenever I hear about or listen to reasonable, rational Republicans like Meghan McCain, I’m always deliriously happy. At heart, I’m a dork, and I just love discussion. It almost doesn’t matter what we’re discussing; it’s probably going to be interesting to me. In politics, though, it’s so hard to have a thoughtful, productive discussion, because 90% of the time it turns into a screaming match in a matter of minutes. I get why this is so sometimes. I freely admit that there is a topic which I could not discuss academically if my life depended on it (gay marriage, for the record) because it is too personal, and detaching myself is impossible. That said, when so much of the political world is bogged down by ideologues who would rather call each other names than talk about things like the adults they supposedly are–theater gets more ratings that substance, after all!–it’s really nice to see someone out there and think, You know, we agree on almost nothing, but they are totally someone with whom I could have a frank, interesting conversation. It’s good to know that there’s still hope, and that a discussion of politics isn’t always guaranteed to turn into chaos.

After all, I know it’s true in my day to day life, as my brother is a Republican with whom I have had a great many debates, as is my absolute favorite teacher, who is one of the most intelligent and thoughtful people I have ever met, and we’ve always been able to talk rationally. I think we can do this because of this strange thing that I believe is called something like “common decency” and I wish it was reflected much more in the mainstream media and blogosphere. Wouldn’t it be something if everyone could say, “I have different ideas about how the government should run than you do; allow me to explain,” instead of calling them fascists, or communists, or terrorists, or people who hate America, or just plain saying they’re assholes?

I know; I’m a dreamer. But with rational people starting to show up in the mainstream (finally!), I just can’t help but hope.

Choice.

I watched Jon Stewart’s appearance on Letterman tonight, and I have just one thing to say to him and his wife: rock the fuck on, guys. Seriously.

He mentioned how his kids were falling into stereotypical gender roles with the toys they played with, and how he and his wife attempted to mix it up (e.g., giving their son a baby doll to play with and their daughter action figures). While he also said it didn’t work out quite as they expected, I have to give them massive props for allowing the option to be there.

So many people think feminism is about forcing something on an unwilling populace, and therefore mark it as evil. It’s not that at all. It’s about the above. When given the choice, their kids stuck with what they were used to, and that’s just fine. The important part of the scenario is that they had the choice to do so, and clearly, the options are open if, when they get older, they decide to branch out. Choice is what’s important, and I commend the Stewarts for raising their kids to be open-minded when it comes to gender roles. It’s a small step, but an important one, and it makes me hopeful.

Now if only all parents could be like that, then we’d be pretty well set!

On expectations.

I will be the first person to call myself a liberal and a feminist. Neither of these descriptions scares me away; they’re quite accurate in describing my belief system. Sure, there are probably a few discrepancies somewhere down the line (I am vehemently in support of animal testing, which tends to make some other liberals twitch at me, for example) but in general, I am pretty solidly liberal, and most definitely a feminist.

However, something I’ve noticed with liberals is our tendency to assume that others, because at some point they said something that might be classified as leftist, progressive, feminist, what have you, are warriors in our cause. I say “our” because I freely admit I’ve done this before as well. We then expect this person to consistently be a representation of our ideals, and are—naturally!—highly disillusioned and disappointed when they, well, don’t do what they never promised they would. Then we turn on them—kind of viciously, too. That, of course, leads to turning on ourselves: specifically, those who don’t immediately disavow any significance, importance, or assistance this person might still be able to offer.

This is our mistake.

I’m not saying that we should let people get away with stupid comments because sometimes they say things that make sense, but I am saying that we need to acknowledge that first of all, people fuck up. They say things that they shouldn’t say because they’re frustrated or upset or angry and—perhaps—a little disillusioned themselves. It happens, especially in politics.

Second, it’s not an all-or-nothing game. Someone can have valid opinions despite having once said something that was unsavory. Someone can fuck up despite having once said something that was thought-provoking and exciting. People are not defined by one comment they make, and it’s silly to expect them to be.

Third, we need to stop adopting people. Unless someone specifically says, “Why, yes, I am a liberal/feminist/democrat/progressive/insert-your-term-here!” why don’t we hold back on claiming them as One Of Us, no matter how enticing it may be? The fact of the matter is, a lot of people hold a wide variety of views—some of which may fit in with the feminist or liberal ideal, and some of which may not. Instead of arbitrarily declaring someone a champion of our cause and then being disappointed when they aren’t a champion of our cause, why don’t we just appreciate their comments in the context provided, discuss it, and move on?

Fourth, there are a few basics that make up a feminist, which I think we can all agree on. However, the big thing we have to remember is that we are a very diverse group of people. Not of all us are going to interpret things the same way, have the same reaction to things, or think the same way. I therefore find it very silly when people go, “Wow, I’m surprised so many feminists still like so-and-so!” Well, silly and patronizing. It’s like they’re implying someone isn’t a true feminist because they haven’t denounced some person for some specific reason. Perhaps the reason is enough for one person to totally discount someone’s views; it may not be for everyone. It’s not an all-or-nothing game, remember?

I’ll give you an example so this doesn’t seem totally random and out of nowhere: I’m a fan of Keith Olbermann. I will easily and quickly admit that lately he has said some things for which I would like to smack him over the head. I will also easily and quickly admit that lately he has said some things for which I would like to hug him. The point is that I can appreciate the good he does, in spite of the occasional bad, because I don’t expect him to be SuperLiberal. I expect him to be a passionate, usually-intelligent pundit on cable news—exactly what he is. Does that mean I don’t get angry when he says something I find possibly sexist? Of course not. Just because I know it may happen doesn’t mean it’s okay or excusable. It just means that I have no delusions about his function in the news cycle. Is he a superhero? No. Is he someone in the news media I know I can turn to and usually find some insightful analysis? Yes, and that’s more than enough.

Obviously, we all have issues that make us passionate, issues are very near and dear to our hearts, and when we’re dealing with those issues, it’s very easy to get caught up and say and things that we really ought to be thinking about more carefully. If we could all just take a step back and make sure we’re not trying to impose a context that doesn’t actually exist—that we’re looking at the entire picture, and not just one little corner of it—I think it would make sorting through the good, the bad, and the fucking ridiculous that much easier.

What the flying fuck.

Rush Limbaugh, could you be anymore of a fucking idiot?

I speak, of course, about this. Yes, Rush. It was absolutely the fault of Elizabeth Edwards that her husband cheated on her. If only she’d just shut up and put out like an obedient little wifey always should, no matter what, none of this would’ve happened!

Sometimes I think there’s absolutely nothing morons like Rush can say that will surprise, shock, or disgust me anymore. Then I stumble across something like this. It honestly still manages to blow my mind that there are people who can still find a way to blame a wife for a husband’s infidelity. It’s just so plainly preposterous to my mind. He is the cheater! He lied to her! He betrayed her! I don’t care how many pounds she gained or how many times she wasn’t in the mood or what the fuckshe complained to him about; it does not excuse it! If you are in a monogamous relationship and you stray, the blame for that falls on you, not your spouse. And yet there are still disgusting fucking imbeciles like Rush Limbaugh trying to place the blame on the wife because their brand of sexism is so ingrained into their minds they cannot possibly wrap their tiny little brains around the idea that, no, women do not only fit into two roles: evil temptresses who lure unsuspecting men into being unfaithful, or nagging, unattractive hags who drive their poor, innocent little husbands into the arms of other women. It’s such an adolescent and emotionally stunted frame of mind. Grow the fuck up and learn to take some goddamn responsibility for your actions, you fucking immature little boys. You’re embarrassing the other members of your gender who would never stoop so low.

Ugh, this belief system is so repulsive in its misogyny. I feel like I need a shower now.

It’s late, and I’m pissed.

Now you know why I’m always exhausted. I stay up to absurd hours reading things that are bound to make me angry.

In this particular instance, I refer to: this. I occasionally read the site for laughs; a lot of the quotes they post are so absurd that you can’t take them seriously enough to get pissed. This is one of the exceptions.

I cannot stand rape apologists. They make me want to bash my head into the wall multiple times, because I figure if I’m going to hurt that much I think it should be self-inflicted. The sexism and misogyny that surrounds this viewpoint is just mind-boggling incredible. How…I honestly can’t even begin to contemplate it.

Let’s get a few things straight about rape. It isn’t about sex. It’s not about lust. Nope. It’s about power and rage, so you know what? What a woman is wearing makes not one whit of difference. It doesn’t matter if she has on sweatpants or a mini-skirt, if she’s 18 or 80, or if she’s attractive or not. Rape. Is. Not. About. Sex. Do we have that understood? Do we? Good.

Let’s also note that two-thirds of rapes happen indoors, and the vast majority are perpetrated someone the victim knows! Yeah, so that ‘grabbed by a stranger in a dark alley’ scenario you like to parade around? That’s actually the least likely way it would really happen. Kind of makes you feel like an idiot, no? Unless the woman is still at fault for not having armed sentries guarding her doors. I can see how you would make that argument. (Oh, shit, what if one of the sentries rapes her? Now we’re just getting confusing!)

Another thing: yes, false reports happen. So do false reports of assault, burglary, robbery, etc. But every time someone says one of those has happened, our immediate reaction is not to go, “Oh, they’re probably lying!” And the incidence of false reporting is about the same rate, so I’d really like to figure out why.

The misogyny inherent in this argument is palpable and obvious, but what about the incredibly poor characterization of men? To hear these idiots talk, every single man is a potential rapist, and that the moment they lay their eyes on some scantily-clad young woman, they will be so overrun by their primal and base urges that they will simply not be able to control themselves! Geez, that’s harsh! Personally—and I say this as a radical, liberal feminist—I think men are more than just slaves to their sex drives. I think they’re decent, respectable, intelligent people. Of course, I have a brain. The people who support this point of view do not. I guess that makes the comparison unfair.

I know it makes everyone feel better to think that only bad people have bad things happen to them, and if something as reprehensible as rape is the bad thing, well, clearly they must have done something to deserve it. I’m going to let you in on a little secret: the world doesn’t actually work that way. Sorry to burst your bubble, but bad things sometimes happen to good people, and this includes rape. Anyone can be raped, anywhere, at any time. It doesn’t matter what they’re wearing or what they look like, and it’s insane that we waste time blaming the victim when we could be, oh, I don’t know, trying to catch the rapist!

Gee, what a thought!

Newsflash.

I am a liberal. No, really. I’m sure you’re shocked. Also, I have it on pretty good authority that Grant is buried in Grant’s Tomb.

I just felt the need to mention it, and I’ll tell you why: it’s not an insult. It’s not a slur. It’s in no way derogatory. Sorry! Calling me a liberal will not make me stutter and deny it, nor will I cling to the banner of ‘moderate’ or ‘Independent.’ And I’ll tell you why: your political affiliation makes your opinion no more or less valid than anyone else’s opinion. Yes, this is actually true. I don’t care if you’re conservative, liberal, moderate, a Libertarian, a Democrat, a Republican, a Socialist, a member of the Green Party, or anything. If you have an opinion, the only thing that will make it valid is if you support it with logic, reason, and facts.

Anyway, I only bring this up because I was reading Keith Olbermann’s new book (I love gift cards to Barnes & Noble; they’re always spiffy) and got to a section where the first sentence reads, “I’m frequently accused of being a liberal, or a flack for the Democratic party.” Okay, I’ve got no issue with the second part of this sentence at all. Being accused of being a flack for anyone is insulting; it implies that you don’t think for yourself and do nothing but parrot the beliefs of whoever you’re working for. Certainly I can understand annoyance at that.

It’s the first part that made my eyebrows shoot up. “I’m frequently accused of being a liberal.”

Really? Being a liberal is something one is “accused of”? You know, it’s funny, but last time I checked? Liberal wasn’t a synonym for moron, criminal, terrorist, or any other thing one is typically accused of. And even if, bizarrely, one is “accused of” being a liberal…why? That’s like being accused of being a botanist. It’s just something you are. There’s no inherent negativity or positivity attached to it, or at least there shouldn’t be, and associating it with being accused of being a flack, which is inherently negative, is almost as insulting to me as the people who think “fucking liberal!” is the height of intelligent repartee. No one is ever “accused of” being a moderate or conservative, are they? Why is liberal different?

I’ve said before that I’m a fan of Olbermann’s, and I meant that. Personally, I couldn’t care less if he’s a liberal, moderate, Independent, or a member of a secret new party that seeks to eliminate consumption of hotdogs. (Actually, I’d be totally in support of that last one. Hotdogs are incredibly gross.) He seems reasonable and makes sense to me when I listen to him, and I agree with him on a lot of things—not everything, naturally, and I’d be a little disconcerted if I did. How he chooses to define or not define his political opinions doesn’t change any of that.

But for the love of dead gay Dumbledore, “I’m frequently accused of being a liberal”?

All I can think of in response to that is, “So what?”

If you see a penny, pick it up…

I am the luckiest person ever. So you know that research paper? I accidentally fell asleep last night and, uh, did not get to finish it. So I briefly panicked this morning until I decided to call my teacher. Evidently? During the last class that I missed (yay syncope and not being able to walk without fainting!) the class mentioned they were having trouble with it and she decided to extend the deadline until Monday. So yes, I am extremely lucky, and both B, my suitemate, and S, my roommate, totally hate me now. Haha.

In other news, I leave tonight for Georgia! I cannot wait, as it is sure to be awesome times thirty-seven thousand. The flight isn’t until 7:45, though, and I have to first suffer through Spanish and math (ugh, quizzes). That won’t be fun at all. And you know Time will be an utter bastard like he always is and purposely go really slowly, because he knows I want to be somewhere else. That’s just not nice, Time. You should work on being more pleasant to people. We didn’t do anything to you!

Yes, I’m rambling. I should stop now because I have to leave for Spanish. Bah. Adios!

Endorphins are good things.

I suppose I’m weird, but when I’m feeling gross and having cramps, (if that grossed anyone out, well, good; the twelve-year-olds need to stop reading my blog anyway) I actually like to exercise. (I use the treadmill.) It makes me feel a hell of a lot better and much less like I should immediately kill all lifeforms within a ten-mile radius. I’m also happy with myself today, because I pushed myself and went further than last time. (1.9 miles last time. 2.3 this time. Here’s hoping for at least 2.7 next time, since that seems t0 be the increment I am increasing at.)

I also ran solidly at a good speed for the last five minutes, (I run for thirty minutes plus a five minute cool-down) which is a holdover from my cross-country days: burst of energy at the start, steady pace throughout most of the race, and that last burst of energy at the end. I think I need to start actually running among scenery again. The treadmill is convenient, but one of the best things about running is the paths you can take when you do it.

I do actually enjoy running. I am strange, I realize this.

Adios!

Haha.

I have a research paper to write (…told you) so this will be brief.

Occasionally, procrastination takes you to new lows: reading old articles about Bill O’Reilly, for example.  I am a weird person, I know. But this sentence is undoubtedly one of the most awesome things ever (emphasis mine):

The show, initially called The O’Reilly Report, debuted with the launch of the Fox News Channel in October 1996. 

Yes, I laughed. I freely admit this.  I can’t help but be amused, though. And now I will go write my paper.

Adios!

Silly brain.

So B and I went to exercise today, and I suck at remembering to bring fluids with me when I exercise. This is bad, because my brain is special (read: ridiculous) and I suffer from neurocardiogenic syncope. This means I need to stay hydrated more than normal people do. And for said normal people, I will illustrate this disorder as though it were a chat transcript:

Something: *triggers*
Brain: Lol, whoa, heart, slow down! You’re totes going too fast.
Heart: Ohhhhh, really? ‘kay! *slows down*
Blood Pressure: WTF?! I’m low enough as it is! *drops*
Me: *gets dizzy, nauseous, and light-headed; faints*
Brain: …oops, my bad.

Yeah. It is uncool to the max. Especially when you can faint from just taking a shower in the morning. (Heat is a trigger, and I like my showers extra-hot. I have almost fainted in the shower more times than I want to count.) Dehydration is also a trigger, and I was forcibly reminded of that tonight when I got back and felt really woozy. So note to self: bring Gatorade (yes, it can be gross, but let me tell you internets: it is a gift from God when you have this condition; you get used to the taste pretty damn quickly) with you next time you go exercise, dumbass!

I am mean to myself in note-format, I know.

Adios!