Unnecessary Rudeness

Now Playing: Snow Patrol – The Weight of Love

I was at a dinner recently at a restaurant that looked as though it had just opened. Around 50 people occupied 3 long tables, so the wait staff were definitely kept busy. I forgot to give the waiter my drink order when he came around, and then when everyone else had a glass of water in front of them, I felt insanely thirsty. Five minutes later, when I noticed a waiter was at the table next to us, I got his attention quietly and asked for a glass of water. A woman seated further down the table, wearing a pair of giant rhinestone-studded dangling earrings and an otherwise unremarkable outfit, had the same problem as me but a rather different way of solving the problem. 

“EXCUSE ME!” she bellowed. “MY FRIENDS AND I HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR WATER FOR SO LONG NOW! WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO BRING IT?”

“So sorry,” said the nearest waiter, “I’ll bring some right away.” 

As he walked towards our table with a glass of water, Giant Earrings said, loudly, “AND NOW HE’S COMING WITH ONLY ONE GLASS! CAN YOU BELIEVE IT?”

The rest of the party was, I think, rather taken aback by this woman and her incredibly awful behaviour. Even her friends who wanted water looked embarrassed, though she didn’t. The rest of the dinner proceeded without further outburst from Giant Earrings, thankfully. 

The incident stuck with me, and it got me wondering, “Why are some people deliberately assholes?” I mean, we all have bad days, but I’ve never inflicted my frustration on a random third party. I’m not saying this as some super-calm, zen person;  a lot of the time, but especially when I’m PMSing, I am often at a Red Lantern level of rage. It’s not that I don’t have the urge to strike out blindly, I just don’t see why I should inflict my temper on strangers. The world is a difficult place, and I don’t see why you would want to add to the general hostility by being deliberately unpleasant. 

TL;DR – as Wil Wheaton says, don’t be a dick.

mad as hell (and we're not going to take it anymore)

A girl died on Saturday. We don't know her name, so we call her Fearless One (Nirbhaya), Treasure (Amanat), Lightning (Damini) and Braveheart. She was only twenty-three when she was gang-raped, brutalized and murdered on a Delhi bus.

Delhi has long had a reputation for being unsafe for women (with a rape occurring every 18 hours, deservedly so) but this is not just about Delhi; women all over India have worked out their own strategies for dealing with harassment and molestation. My mother, Mumbai born and raised, has a trick of having an umbrella ready to smack anyone who tries to get handsy. Devika Bakshi lists some of the measures Indian women take to stay safe. Some of these are common-sense, "text me the cab’s licence plate number", for instance, but others - "wear leggings under a skirt" - are unfortunate examples of the restrictions women place on themselves to navigate a environment in which they are constantly under threat. Women are sick of hemming themselves in to stay safe, and their anger at the horrors inflicted on this girl has catalyzed protests against a government seen as ineffective, a police force that seems to blame the victim more often than not, and the society that produces such monsters.

The 2007 film Chak De India has a scene in which the Indian women's hockey team is at a restaurant when one of the girls is harassed by local louts. Rather than staying quiet and backing down - which would be the "safe" thing to do - the girls confront their harassers, leading to an all out brawl in which the girls prevail. I can never watch the scene without an absurd feeling of vindication and pride. Rationally, I know that there are better ways to solve a problem than violence, but viscerally and emotionally, the part of me that is sick of wondering what outfit is safe to wear, or calculating how late is too late to be out safely, is thrilled. Bas. Today, women are saying enough is enough; our society needs to change and us with it. I hope that happens.

Democracy For All (Irony Not Included)

"In this respect, the United States represents the form toward which capitalist democracy is tending; related tendencies include the progressive elimination of unions and other popular organizations that interfere with private power, an electoral system that is increasingly stage-managed as a public relations exercise, avoidance of welfare measures such as national health insurance that also impinge on the prerogatives of the privileged, and so on. From this perspective, it is reasonable for Cyrus Vance and Henry Kissinger to describe the United States as "a model democracy," democracy being understood as a system of business control of political as well as other major institutions.

Other Western democracies are generally a few steps behind in these respects. Most have not yet achieved the U.S. system of one political party, with two factions controlled by shifting segments of the business community."

Chomsky, Noam. "Containing the Enemy." The Essential Chomsky. Ed. Anthony Arnove. London: The Bodley Head, 2008. 257-58. Print.

[More on the US Healthcare Debacle here and here.]

"Life's a bitch, now so am I."

(Inspired by Indiequill's post here.)

Why do we bite our tongues? Why, when faced with something or someone annoying, do we swallow down our anger and tell ourselves that there's no need to make a fuss, the irritant will soon be gone?

I recently had the dubious pleasure of meeting, after a very long time, an old acquaintance. Said old acquaintance - let us call him Q - has always been abrasive to the point of rudeness. Case in point: when we were at school together, Q was an agnostic, which was totally fine by me. I don't care if you're a Rastafarian or a Pastafarian; your religious beliefs - or lack thereof - are your own. Also frankly, I was brought up to believe it was rude to question other people's religious beliefs. Q, sadly, suffered no such scruples. "I don't know how you can believe in God," he said, "knowing what we do about science."

Now, ideally, this is the point where I would say, "Back off, jackass - my religious beliefs are none of your beeswax." Instead, what I did do was to smile politely and noncommitally and murmur something to the effect of to each his own. I could have pointed out that if Q was such a proud agnostic, why did he still pretend to be religiously observant at home? Nope, I shut up.

It was to be hoped, therefore, that Q had mellowed over time. Sadly, this was not the case. He still had an opinion for every occasion and the more strident the better. "You live where? I could never live there. Isn't it full of rich Mallus*?" Did I say anything, dear reader? I wish. How I wish I had said something freezing and cutting. Instead I again murmured something polite and noncomittal (You may notice a trend there.) What did I have to lose by saying, "Shut. UP! You don't know half as much as you claim to, and what you do know is iffy, so please hold your tongue regarding things you know nothing about." Instead I shut up, as usual.

It is difficult to shake off the habits of a lifetime, to silence the inner voice that continually says, "be nice, or people won't like you" but I've decided to atleast try, because frankly, I'll like myself better that way. So, word to the wise, people who are going to be rude to me in future - I'll smile politely, catch myself, take a deep breath and tell you to fuck off.

*It's not, by the way.

That Gaping Maw

Now Playing: Little Boots - Symmetry

From the Rush Limbaugh show, Jan 13th:

 "Yes, I think in the Haiti earthquake, ladies and gentlemen -- in the words of Rahm Emanuel -- we have another crisis simply too good to waste.  This will play right into Obama's hands. He's humanitarian, compassionate.  They'll use this to burnish their, shall we say, "credibility" with the black community -- in the both light-skinned and dark-skinned black community in this country.  It's made-to-order for them.  That's why he couldn't wait to get out there, could not wait to get out there.

[...]

CALLER:  Mega Rush Baby dittos.  My question is, why did Obama in the sound bite you played earlier, when he's talking about if you wanted to donate some money, you can go to WhiteHouse.gov --

RUSH:  Yeah.

CALLER: -- to direct you how to do so.  If I want to donate money to the Red Cross, why do I need to go to the WhiteHouse.gov page and --

RUSH:  Exactly.  Would you trust that the money is going to go to Haiti?

CALLER:  No.

RUSH:  Would you trust that your name is going to end up on a mailing list for the Obama people to start asking you for campaign donations for him and other causes.

CALLER:  Absolutely.

RUSH:  Absolutely right.

CALLER:  That's the point.

RUSH:  Besides, we've already donated to Haiti.  It's called the US income tax."

 Atleast 30,000 people have died in the poorest country in the western hemisphere, and Rush Limbaugh is more concerned with scoring points off Obama - who, of course, is only concerned with this because it is a black issue. 

It was bad enough when he mocked Michael J Fox' Parkinson's symptoms, when he flat-out stated that he wanted Obama's administration to fail - if anyone had said that about Bush, he'd have been first in line crying High Treason - but this is just beyond the pale. When is someone going to stand up to Rush Limbaugh and say, "Have you no sense of decency, sir? At long last, have you left no sense of decency?"

In Which A Very Questionable Metaphoric Decision Is Made

Now Playing: Lindisfarne - Meet Me On The Corner

"Having curly hair," I mused, "is like being in an abusive relationship."

"What?!?"

"No, really. You know how abusive spouses can be sweet as pie one day, and then the next day they break your nose because you didn't get their coffee right, or whatever?"

"Um, okay?"

"And then, even when women leave their abusive husbands, a lot of times they have trouble getting into new, loving relationships because they've come to expect craziness from their relationships as opposed to normalcy?"

"And how does this have anything to do with curly hair?"

"Are you kidding me? It is exactly like curly hair. One day, your hair curls exactly the way you want it to, the next, it's a giant ball of frizz that's too pathetic to pass off as an afro. On and off, off and on, until you don't know which way is up and you can't take it anymore, so you buy a hair straightener and iron the curl right out of your hair."

"Um..."

"And now you've got straight-ish/wavy hair that is easy to manage and a hairstyle that doesn't change daily depending on the wind, humidity and the caprices of the curl, right? Except now, that's boring. You've come to expect changeable, unpredictable hair. Hair that simply sits on your head and does what you want it to is somehow... bleh. So you trash the straightener, wash out your hair and let the curl do what it will. Just like an abuse victim going back to her abuser."

"You're seriously comparing having messy hair with being the victim of abuse."

"Um, yeah. It's like, I started the metaphor, and then midway I got how awful it sounded - "

"- and you finished it anyway?"

"...yeah."

"Alrighty then."

Too Hideous For Words (and I don't mean the "fatties")

Now Playing: Friendly Fires - Kiss of Life

How vain do you have to be to join a site called BeautifulPeople.com? A site so "exclusive" you can only get in if existing members agree that you're hot enough? How desperate for validation must you be?

It's alright though, they love you! You're officially one of the Beautiful People! But then, tragedy strikes. It's the holiday season, there are carbs everwhere, you can't avoid that turkey dinner with the folks, and before you can say "superficial," you've put on weight.

As easily as that, you've lost the acceptance of your peers - who aren't actually your peers anymore, as they've voted you and 4,999 others off the island and you're no longer a member of BeautifulPeople.com. Are you worth anything anymore? How can you know you're beautiful unless other people tell you so?

It's not the site's fault, of course. It had to maintain its standards as the last bastion of the Certifiedly Attractive on the internet. In the words of site founder Robert Hintze,

"As a business, we mourn the loss of any member, but the fact remains that our members demand the high standard of beauty be upheld. Letting fatties roam the site is a direct threat to our business model and the very concept for which BeautifulPeople.com was founded."

So even as you languish in exile, you have hope. Because there is still a place for your people - or the people you used to be, at any rate - where beautiful people roam, unmenaced by the fatties, the plain, the uncoordinated and the unprimped. One day, you will get back into paradise - if you have to starve, purge or cardio yourself to death to do it. 

Everyone says we're fine (but we're not)

In all the talk about how we're all exiting the recession - as if it were a cheesy house of horrors ride at an amusement park - no one seems to remember the underlying cause of the whole mess in the first place: real estate debt and the securitization thereof.

Some $3,500bn (€2,355bn, £2,125bn) of commercial property debt is outstanding in the US alone. (emphasis mine.) Of that, about one-quarter was securitised, where groups of loans are packaged and sold to investors in tranches offering different levels of risk and profit.

Moody's has warned that commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) issued during the boom are set to incur significant default rates, given an average fall in values of 43 per cent since the peak in the US. The holders of certain riskier bonds are already expected to have had their investments wiped out.

Troubles will grow as maturities approach on bonds issued at the peak of the market, according to Moody's. It is estimated that up to $153bn of CMBS will come to maturity by the end of 2012 and $100bn will face refinancing difficulties. The US government has already been forced in effect to underwrite the CMBS market.

(...)

A property recovery may yield only limited benefits. "It is questionable whether a recovery will be in time and in sufficient magnitude to absorb the wave of bullets falling from 2011 onwards," says Euan Gatfield, analyst at Fitch.

Although CMBS can be extended, securitisation rules are not simple and most of the products have a legally finite life.

(Source)

Now you might point out that the US housing market is up 7.4% in November, month-on-month. That is absolutely true, but that was due in large part thanks to the $8,000 tax credit for new home buyers, as well as the $6,500 tax credit for existing home owners of five years standing who want to relocate. Unemployment, by the way, is at 10%, the highest it's been since mid-1983. Now that the tax credit has been extended till April 30th, we're likely to see a levelling off in demand, followed by a fresh spike in sales in April. As with the Cash for Clunkers program, this tax credit is basically the US Government throwing cash at its people, yelling, "Buy, bitches, buy! Keep the wheels of the economy turning!"

The operative letter here is W, as in W-shaped recovery, if we're lucky.

Want, Order, Have

Now Playing: Steve Miller Band - Fly Like An Eagle

I was watching Demons the other day - the show is nothing special, except as a showcase for Philip Glenister's inexplicable "American accent" and if I were him, I wouldn't draw attention to it - when a character was told to read Bram Stoker's Dracula and asked, "Can I watch the movie instead?"

We - Generation Y for Youtube - take it for granted that a given text has been adapted for either the big or the small screen and further assumes that these adaptations are readily accessible, whether through Blockbuster, Netflix, or any of the plethora of legal and illegal download options. Caveat Lector: the faithfulness of the adaptation is never guaranteed. In fact, it cheers my cold, cynical heart to think of some hapless high school student writing about Hester Prynne and Arthur Dimmesdale's happy ending and promptly getting an F for his or her troubles.

In fact, we're not just the Youtube generation, we're the on-demand generation. I remember being lectured by a TA, "You guys have it so easy! When we had to look papers up, we had to actually go down to the library and look up references on index cards! All you guys have to do is sign on to Pubmed, work some key-word magic, and BAM!" (By this point, I realized that an extension on that assignment was highly unlikely.)

The cliche is coming true: the internet can bring most of the world to your finger tips if (a) you have a credit card or paypal account and live somewhere covered by major retail websites' shipping policies, or (b) you have good bandwidth and flexible ethics. The flipside of this is that "getting it done online" has gone from being one option among many to the only choice. If some horrible, Jericho-esque apocalyptic scenario does occur, the sound of clicking Ctrl + Z en masse will fill the land, fading out slowly as people die of radiation poisoning.

Or how about that other classic of apocalyptic fiction - the zombie epidemic?

"We're out of ammo and the zombies are getting through!"
"Don't worry, I ordered us fresh supplies from Amazon. One Day Rush!"
"There is no more Amazon, f***er!"

And then the crazy, right-wing, right-to-bear-arms, guns-and-ammo-stockpiling nutjobs will inherit the earth.

Oh, what's the point?

There is no justice in the world when Tracey Emin makes enough money to qualify for the UK's top tax rate.

Tracey Emin - whose most famous work is arguably My Bed, which was pretty much her bed and associated detritus - stained sheets, used condoms, underwear stained with menstrual fluids (yes, really) as well as more workaday items such as slippers - earns more than 150,000 pounds a year. That's atleast 248,000 Canadian Dollars or 873,000 UAE Dirhams per year.

Don't even get me started on Damien Hirst.

Nostrada-Me

Now Playing: Bomba Estereo - Fuego

I've said it here already, but I want to repeat it so I can grumble, "I called it!" when Palin romps to victory in 2012:

Obama winning the Nobel Peace Prize is less a Norwegian sigh of relief at the Bush Jr years coming to an end and more a giant right-wing conspiracy to ensure a Republican victory in 2012. First, moderate voters are going to think, "Well, what did Obama even do to win that Nobel? If he doesn't deserve the Nobel, why does he deserve the presidency?" Goodbye popular vote, goodbye landmark Northern Democrat electoral college victory! Next, this is going to hella cement the right-wing vote. "Anyone but Obama 2012! The Europeans like Obama, and everyone know's they're socialist and going to HELL!"

Seriously, that's the only way this award makes sense. I like Obama as much as the next left-wing pinko bleeding-heart liberal, but... no. Just, no.

On Polanski

Now Playing: A Fine Frenzy - Think Of You

I've only seen two Roman Polanski movies. The first was his 1971 version of Macbeth, which we watched in OAC English class, and the second was Chinatown, which was being shown as on TVO's Saturday Night at the Movies. I had a Penguin's Guide to Classic Films, and two of his films were featured - Chinatown and Rosemary's Baby - so I knew he was a director of no small skill.

Somewhere around this point, I discovered Wikipedia, and I looked Roman Polanski up, so that I could figure out what movies of his I should watch next. I learnt he escaped the Warsaw Ghetto and survived the Holocaust, though his mother died in Auschwitz; his pregnant wife Sharon Tate had been murdered by members of the Manson family; when he was in his mid-forties, he admitted to having sex with a child of thirteen.

I use the word 'child' deliberately, because I think to refer to the victim here as a girl of thirteen is simply window dressing that disguises the true nature of Polanski's crime. The survivor, Samantha Greimer, was an aspiring model whose mother consented to a private photo-shoot with Polanski. At the very least, Polanski had sex with a child thirty years his junior; at the worst, he drugged her with a combination of champagne and quaaludes before raping her.

Once the wheels of justice were set in motion, Polanski accepted a plea bargain that saw him pleading guilty to statutory rape, rather than go to trial for rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under 14, and furnishing a controlled substance(methaqualone) to a minor. Rather than go to prison, however, Polanski fled the United States for France, where he held citizenship and from whence he was unlikely to be extradited. He has since not visited either the United States or the United Kingdom, remaining in mainland Europe to live and work.

Last week, however, Polanski visited Switzerland to attend the Zurich Film Festival, where he was to receive a Lifetime Achievement Award. He was arrested at the airport and is being held while the Swiss review his case and decide whether or not to extradite him to the US. This has led to a wave of support for him from members of the entertainment community as well as figures in the french and polish government - Polanski holds double citizenship of both these countries - and an opposing movement which calls for justice to be carried out.

I present a sample defence of Polanski from Joan Z Shore, who is (cue double-take) the co-founder of Women Overseas For Equality, with my comments in bold, a la the fabulous Malene Arpe:

Arresting Roman Polanski the other day in Zurich, where he was to receive an honorary award at a film festival, was disgraceful and unjustifiable. Polanski, now 76, has been living in France for over thirty years read - has evaded justice for over thirty years, and has been traveling and working in Europe unhindered, but the Swiss acted on an old extradition treaty with the U.S. and seized him! Yes, how dare the Swiss uphold an international treaty! The Swiss Justice Ministry will decide whether to extradite him to the United States. Which is toooootally unfair, since he's not even Swiss, you guys!

The judge in the 1977 statutory rape case is dead. Well, if the judge is dead, you obviously get to go off scott-free... Polanski had agreed at the time to a plea bargain, but then the judge reneged on it. Um, correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Polanski flee before he was sentenced? After a grand total of 42 days in jail? Polanski has tried to appeal.

But there is more to this story. The 13-year old model "seduced" by Polanski had been thrust onto him by her mother, who wanted her in the movies. Mommie Dearest foisted the girl at him! So that makes it totally okay! Candy for everyone! The girl was just a few weeks short of her 14th birthday, which was the age of consent in California. (It's probably 13 by now!) Um, I don't even know what to do with this. And you claim to be the co-founder of what appears to be a feminist organization? Rape is okay if you're close to the age of consent?!? Which I'm fairly certain is not fourteen?!? Polanski was demonized by the press, convicted, and managed to flee, fearing a heavy sentence. Well, that makes it okay then, since he was afraid of a heavy sentence. *headdesk*

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/joan-z-shore/polanskis-arrest-shame-on_b_301134.html

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-ostroy/why-robert-harriss-iny-ti_b_304100.html

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andy-ostroy/why-robert-harriss-iny-ti_b_304100.html

Whoopi Goldberg, on The View, said, "I know it wasn't 'rape' rape. I think it was something else, but I don't believe it was 'rape' rape." So having sex with a child of thirteen was only kinda rape? sorta rape? decaf rape?

Polanski's friend, photographer Otto Weisser, was quoted on CNN as saying, "He's a brilliant guy and he made a little mistake 32 years ago -- what a shame for Switzerland."

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anna-wainwright/welcome-home-mr-polanski_b_301994.html

Um, yes, I can see how sleeping with a thirteen year old was an easy mistake to make. No, actually, I can't. Please explain? And yes, definitely, it's Switzerland that should be covering itself in shame.

Harvey Weinstein, formerly of Miramax, chimed in with an op-ed piece in The Independent:

Roman Polanski is a man who cares deeply about his art and its place in this world. What happened to him on his incredible path is filled with tragedy, and most men would have collapsed. Yes, his life has been filled with horrible tragedy. Instead, he became a great artist and continues to make great films. And along the way, he found the time to have sex with a child. I was with him the day he won the Legion of Honour in France, which was a spectacular day. I remember the incredible love and affection that people have for him. Come oooon, you guys! People like Roman! You can't send him to jail![...]

Whatever you think about the so-called crime, Polanski has served his time. Forty-two days in jail. Yeah, that should do it. Plus the past thirty years that he's spent having a family, making movies, yep, he's definitely done his time. [...]

I hope the US government acts swiftly because because film makers are looking for justice to be properly served. I will be organising the effort myself by emailing everybody I know to sign the petition. And I know that Thierry Fremaux has got hold of Nicolas Sarkozy. Sarko, mon pote! C'est moi, Thierry. Bah, ecoute, on va laisser les Americains extrader notre gars Polanski? C'est pas cool, ca, quoi?

We will have to speak to our leaders as well – particularly in California. I'm not too shy to go and talk to the Governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and to ask him once and for all to look at this. Thankfully the Governator has already ruled out a gubernatorial pardon for Polanski. I never thought I'd say this, but yay Republicans!

It is a shocking way to treat such a man. Polanski went through the Holocaust and the murder of his wife, Sharon Tate, by the Manson family. Free personal trauma pass, people! How do you go from the Holocaust to the Manson family with any sort of dignity? In those circumstances, most people could not contribute to art and make the kind of beautiful movies he continues to make. This is true. I am fairly certain though, that despite their artistic deficiencies, most people might manage to keep their hands and assorted appendages off thirteen-year-old children.

I would also further direct your attention to Andy Ostroy's demolition of Robert Harris' unctuous Polanski defence in the New York Times - though I suppose you can't blame Harris, Polanski is directing a movie based on his novel The Ghost:

Harris begins with: "...His past did not bother me, any more (presumably) than it did the three French presidents with whom he has had private dinners, or the hundreds of actors and technicians who have worked with him since 1977, or the fans who come up to him in the streets of Paris for his autograph."

French presidents? Is he kidding? Middle-aged Frenchmen accept and forgive Polanski's sexually deviant behavior and that's a defense? Perhaps Harris would welcome support from Italy's scandal-plagued, teenage-girl-chasing Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi too? Are we really to let Polanski off Scot-free because movie people like him? Or because fans seek his autograph? Perhaps Harris has never witnessed the throngs of idiots who still drool all over O.J. Simpson as if he's America's former football hero instead of the brutal monster who butchered two people. And this may come as a shock to Harris: America's judicial system couldn't give a rat's ass whether certain criminal behavior bothers you or not.

Harris then asks, "Why now?" To which I reply, why the fuck not? The argument that he's been allowed to roam free for 30 years, therefore he should be allowed to stay free is moronic. Just because some lame-ass law-enforcement authorities had their collective thumbs up their asses for three decades does not give Polanski a get out of jail free card. Should we not arrest Nazi war criminals because they've been living in Argentina for 65 years and might be "liked" by their neighbors? Who cares when justice ultimately gets served, as long as it gets served. Let's keep things in perspective here: the Los Angeles DA's office has not committed any crimes. Polanski has. [...]

Harris ends his convoluted diatribe by claiming Polanski is a "doting father" who's children "want him home." I'm sure O.J.'s kids want him home, too. Again I should remind Harris that in America we don't let children decide the judicial fates of their law-breaking "doting" dads.

In his closing line, Harris smugly quotes the Romans: "So cui bono," or, "who benefits?" The criminal justice system benefits, as does every single child who can feel some comfort and security that we still have laws that protect them from sexually-perverted adult predators who seek to horrifically abuse them.

*sigh*

I am angry and saddened that so many people have reacted as if Polanski had received a life sentence for jaywalking, and then fled the the USA for Europe and its less draconian traffic laws. What Polanski did is not a little boo-boo. Not being able to travel to Los Angeles to receive your Oscar in person is not justice; it's what happens when you're on the lam from justice.

In conclusion, I just want to underline why I'm so angry, with a little help from Melissa Silverstein:

Feminists everywhere are aghast about the fact that we have lost sight that this man raped a 13-year-old girl. Feminist everywhere stand up against rape because it is endemic in our society.

So to just remind people why we are all livid about this:

• 1 in 6 women will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime.
• In 2007, there were 248,300 victims of sexual assault.
• Every 2 minutes, someone in the U.S. is sexually assaulted.
• Approximately 73% of rape victims know their assailants.
• Only 6% of rapists will ever spend a day in jail.
• 44% of victims are under age 18.

I never did order those other Polanski films; I don't doubt his brilliance as a director, but his behaviour has been both criminal and repugnant, as is his refusal to accept the consequences for his actions. It's my own little boycott, and I'm happier for it.

The Horror

Statutory Warning: Please don't read this if you suffer from high blood pressure.

So, recently I came across this website called Ladies Against Feminism. Now, if I had a modicum of sense, I would have Alt + Left Arrowed my way back to my Google home page, but as has been demonstrated previously, I am an idiot, so -

The writers who contribute to this website believe, variously, that feminism is responsible for society crumbing into anarchy and that a woman's place is - as God ordained - in the home, caring for her children.

Competitive sport is not recommended for women for the following reasons:

"This rigorous physical and mental training tends to make women more masculine. I think it is prudent to often ask ourselves “Can a woman do this activity and retain a Biblically feminine character?” With sports I think it will be difficult in most cases. Even some of the traditionally more feminine sports like gymnastics and ice skating are now influencing women to be more masculine.

The Bible talks about women developing a quiet and gentle spirit; I think sports fosters anything but that. They instead develop a competitive and contentious spirit that will cause them to have great difficulty in their marriages. I already mentioned that the effort expended on sports will hinder the development of wifely duties around the home; even worse is when a man has to compete against his own wife in the workplace and community."

These women would, as a point of principle, not vote for Sarah Palin because that would force Mrs Palin (no Ms for the Ladies Against Feminism) to put serving the country above serving her husband:

"I would be putting Palin in a position to neglect her highest calling as mother and wife in exchange for a lower position as Vice President. Her generational impact would probably be far greater over time investing in being there for her children and teaching them diligently from home."

I cannot even begin to catalogue all the very many things I find wrong with their reasoning. I'm generally a to-each-their-own person, but this website makes me want to smash things. I - I could rant for paragraphs on this, but I'll just quote Rebecca West instead:

"I myself have never been able to find out precisely what feminism is: I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat."

"On what planet do you spend most of your time?"

Following on from this post -



Marry me, Barney Frank.

For a Brit's take on how Universal Healthcare is supposedly The Return Of The Nazis, go here.

Open Letter, or, a Clueless Canuck Seeks Answers

Now Playing: Friendly Fires – Lovesick

For all that the United States of America is Canada’s closest trading partner, our cultural brother-from-another-mother and the South to our True North Strong And Free, there are aspects to American Culture that I find unfathomable.

First of all, what is up with the one-dollar bills? This may seem a trivial point to many, but one of the things that really feels ‘alien’ about the US – when visiting from Canada –is the one-dollar bills. Why hasn’t there been a movement en masse to Sacagawea dollars?

More seriously, I have trouble understanding the mindset of people who do not think that universal healthcare is a right – who believe that adopting universal healthcare will turn America into a third-world country like Canada. Gee, is that why we’ve been calling Scarborough Scarlem all these years?

Why isn’t healthcare seen as a fundamental essential that everyone has the right to, like education? You’ll educate a child at government expense, but someone with a life-threatening illness has to shift for themselves? Alright, I’m unclear on the exact working of the US system – if you’re uninsured, are you treated at all? Or do you get treatment and then get slapped with a giant bill afterwards – and if you had the money to pay that, wouldn’t you have gotten insurance in the first place?

Answer me this - why defend the right to bear arms, but not the right to universal healthcare?

It is almost fashionable in Canada to complain about our healthcare services – the waitlist to see a specialist can run more than a month – but atleast we’ll never be in the position of not being able to afford cancer care.

A Glutton for Punishment

Now Playing: McFly- Please Please Please

Being a fan of the Indian cricket team is like being in an abusive relationship. When things go well – as the first India versus South Africa test did – you think, “Wow, maybe from now on it’ll always be like this!” But then things go downhill again – like the 2^nd and 3^rd test – and still you stick with the team, hoping against hope that things will look up again in time for the World Cup.

*sigh*

Anyway, it’s not like being a Leafs fan is any better.

*double sigh*

"Y'know, I just realized that..."

Now Playing: Ratt – Round and Round

So there I was, minding my own business, when Rishi takes it upon himself to tag me. First the guy told me who died in OotP, then this? This means war, man. *shakes fist*

But then I thought, “If I had to learn stuff in 2006, why should my blog readers get off scott-free?” Thus, without further ado, 2006 in Epiphanies, Realizations and Lessons Learnt:

1. Having all four wisdom teeth removed really isn’t that big of a deal - Seriously. You know how people are all, “OMG, the agony!!! It was horrible!!! THE PAIN!!!” and then you get all freaked out, and you almost decide not to have the surgery done, but then it’s too late to cancel? It didn’t help that a passing acquaintance (really, I’d just met her) felt the need to share the story of her friend who went into hospital to have her cancer of the mouth operated on, but who died of a hospital-acquired infection. Also not helpful was the knowledge that some people are actually non-receptive to pain medications such as percocet. So the night before the operation, there I was, tossing and turning, imagining myself dying of a horrible infection (damn you, pseudomonas!) without the least painkiller-induced respite. Imagine, therefore, my surprise, when the whole thing went off well, and I hardly even needed any pain meds, just a few days spent recuperating at home with an icepack to the face.

2. I may not be a dog person, but I absolutely cannot stand to watch movies where bad things happen to them. It’s pathetic, really – I cried everytime I watched the trailer for Lassie! The movie itself would probably have me bawling in the aisles, sobbing about that poor dog.

3. There are some people with whom it is useless to argue. While I’d like to be able to take the easy route and say that most of these people are conservative / right-wing ideologues (Varsha Bhosle, Bill O’Reilly, Christie Blatchford), the truth is liberal / left-wing ideologues can be just as overzealous and screechy and blind to the possibility that there can be truth beyond their narrow ken.

4. I LOVE the angst. All my favourite TV shows serve it up in dollops. Grey’s Anatomy? Angsty. Supernatural? Hot AND Angsty. Battlestar Galactica? Subsists on Angst and Octagons. Veronica Mars? Noir with angst. Doctor Who? Long-running angst. My favourite movie of the year, The Prestige? Existentially angsty. Angst – the flavour of the future.

5. Doctor Who is the show that never ends. It only just struck me this year, and frankly, it’s rather off-putting. Who wants to watch a character who can just keep going and going and going (for atleast 3 more actors?) I mean, I know it’s a long-running show and a hugely successful formula, but don’t people want closure on the character?

6. I’m a Christmas Carol purist. I grew up listening to Jim Reeves & Andy Williams at Christmastime, and anyone else just sounds like an interloper to me. One notable exception is Josh Groban, whose rendition of O Holy Night is just melt-inducing. Here, have a listen.



And now I tag Hemlyn, Stephen, Beth and Maja for a bout of reminiscence. Enjoy!

Vindicated (and it feels so good)

Call me Gloaty McGloatGloat, 'cause guess how Stephen LeDrew did in the 2006 Toronto Mayoral Election this past Monday? The Great Bowtie placed a distant third, with an underwhelming 8,078 votes, or just 1.38% of total votes.

*happy sigh*

Sometimes, just sometimes, things go the way they ought to.

The politician's guide to idiocy

Gay Perry: Look up idiot in the dictionary. You know what you'll find?
Harry Lockhart: A picture of me?
Gay Perry: No! The definition of idiot. Which you fucking are!

Quote from Kiss Kiss Bang Bang (2005), courtesy of IMDb

Toronto lawyer Stephen Ledrew, who served as president of the federal Liberal Party of Canada from 1998 to 2003, was the last high-profile candidate to announce his decision to run for mayor. Ledrew is an idiot.

No, seriously.

Not only does the man owe Revenue Canada $364,140 in unpaid taxes, he’s actually proud of it. You see, Mr Ledrew, fine upstanding citizen that he is, says that he needed to put his children through private school rather than pay his taxes. In his own words, as quoted in the Toronto Star: “I owe taxes. The taxpayer can wait. My children can not. I was proud of my choices, my priorities. I'd do it again. Any father knows his children are the most important thing." (emphasis mine)

As John Barber in the Globe and Mail put it: “Has any would-be politician ever said anything stupider than that?” Public schools close because of lack of funding, a lack caused in part by twits like LeDrew, who don’t pay taxes and don’t care about the public system because their darling little angels attend exclusive private schools. Not only is he an unrepentant criminal, he’s publicly indicated his recidivistic intent – and now the man has the gall to run for public office?

*head explodes*

Like I said, LeDrew is an idiot. Don’t encourage him. On November 13^th, don’t vote LeDrew.

Not Getting Sexyback

The first time I heard this track, I had no clue who was singing. There’s something familiar, I thought, but damned if I know what that is. Halfway through the second time I heard it, something clicked. That… that’s not Justin Timberlake, is it? Since when has he sounded like a girl?

I like the song. It gets under your skin, drags you out of your chair and has you shimmying and dancing on the spot. Here’s the question, though: why is it that Paris Hilton’s first album is universally condemned as being over-produced, when her braying gets modulated down to singing – while here, Timberlake’s admittedly higher register gets bumped into a whole different sex, and no one says anything?

Ben Rayner on Paris Hilton in the Toronto Star, Aug 27th 2006: "Of course Paris sounds decent. The girl has more money than all of our gods combined and about equal "pull," at least in those rarefied celebrity circles where "pull" is considered next to godliness.

If the first 15 runs at the thing had turned out something that gave listeners brain aneurysms and wiped out migratory bird flocks, the cash would have kept flowing until the evil was sufficiently contained for mass distribution at Wal-Mart. The music industry needs customers; it's not gonna kill them outright."

Timberlake, on the other hand, made the cover of Rolling Stone in September.

Huh? I'm so confused.

PS - The fact that I’m - in a sense - defending Paris Hilton actually makes me dislike the song more than I would've under normal circumstances.