Courage Under Fire

Girls are constantly under attack for the way they look.  The clothes they wear, their body type, the hair style they choose.   Carleigh O'Connell was bullied by peers through a piece of graffiti.  It hurt, she was upset, and then she decided to fight back in the best way she could, by showing her courage to the world. 

She donned a swimsuit and stood next to that piece of hateful scrawl and took a picture.  She then put that picture up on Instagram and sent it to her mother so she could share it on Facebook. Carleigh wanted other victims of this type of bullying to know “There are people there for you. You’re not alone,” 

To quote Carleigh's mother:

"For all youth across America and the world. Words can hurt but how you handle the words makes all the difference.

"Please share this example with anyone you think is hurting because of others and thank you for reading this."

Carleigh O’Connell, as the father of two daughters I want you to know that I am proud of you for the example you just set for young women everywhere.  You knocked it out of the park.

And to the person(s) who wrote that little missive on that concrete all I can say is: 

Well...I can't say what I want to say because I'm attempting the same level of class and dignity as Carleigh, something I'm not always capable of doing, particularly when it comes to bullies.

To help share this example of courage, go here to Daryl Lynn O'Connell's Facebook post.  And while you are there, read the entire post by Carleigh's mom.  As a parent, I totally get where she is coming from and I applaud her for standing up with her daughter in her efforts to help others. It is hard to let your kids be courageous, your instincts are to protect them.  But sometimes the best way to protect them is to let them be brave.  It's not always easy to do.

Kudos Ms. O'Connell, you and your daughter have done something special and I applaud you. 

(If you know of a kid struggling with these kinds of problems http://us.reachout.com/, and http://www.about-face.org/ have a really positive message and were created for teens to have someone to talk to whenever they need it, day or night.)

I Can’t Be a Slut, I Have a Gold Card!

Where are the feminists when you need them?

When I was a kid, you couldn’t swing a dead cat without hitting a dyed in the wool feminist.  They wore their empowerment, their sexual liberation, like a medal of honor.  And they demanded that women stand together in their hard fight for equality.  

Well turn back the clocks ladies, because the young women of America are eating their own and they are doing it in a nasty way. 

A recent study out of the University of Michigan has examined the act known as “slut shaming” and has found that rich girls are using the label of "slut" to separate themselves from those girls who come from lower incomes.

According to the study as reported on NBC.com:

Researchers […] studied a group of 53 women who lived on the same college dorm floor in the 2004-2005 academic year and followed them for about five years for the study published in the June issue of Social Psychology Quarterly.

What the researchers found is that class warfare, expressed in terms of sexuality, is alive and well. Rich girls, who have more hookups than their less well-to-do female classmates, believe their own sexual escapades are "classy." Their poorer classmates who have the same sexual behaviors are "trashy," or "slutty."

That so-called "classiness" gives the more well-to-do young women license to enjoy sexual exploration without the fear of a derogatory label, explains lead researcher Elizabeth A. Armstrong, associate professor of sociology and organizational studies at the University of Michigan.

"We were surprised by how willing (these) women were to throw around the word 'slut,' since it's so clearly damaging," says Armstrong, co-author of "Paying for the Party: How College Maintains Inequality." 

Simply put, the rich girls are actually having more sex but they want you to think they're classy.  So they throw damaging labels like "slut" and "whore" on girls who aren’t as rich as they are in order to feel better about their own sexual escapades.

I’ve written more than once on the damage income inequality does to our country and our society. But I never thought about this cruel and personal way that it affects our young girls. As a parent of two girls, I am both worried and disgusted by the way they could be treated merely because we are middle class.

Feminism, in nearly all its forms, would not condone using sexual slurs as a way to cement a woman’s superior social status over another woman. The way that these girls are bullying those less financially fortunate than themselves hurts both the individuals targeted and the overall cause of equality for women. Women are still paid less than men.  Women are still be bought and sold as sex slaves. And yet the little rich girls would rather bully another young woman than stand with her in solidarity.

Of course, it could be a case of depraved indifference.  The rich girls have it pretty good these days.  Their families are getting richer while everyone else is treading water or getting poorer. They have their designer bags to hold their gold cards while the rest of us are pinching pennies at WalMart.

Or maybe it is just a manifestation of the dark side of human nature. Since the beginning of human civilization, beating up on the poor has been a popular sport for the well-to-do, why should today be any different? 

All I know is, Bella Abzug must be rolling in her grave.

"But what about Chris' right to live?"

Samuel Wurzelbacher

Every time one of these mass shooting tragedies happens, some moron has to give the “Guns don’t kill people” speech.  You’d think they would be smart enough to keep their mouths shut, but they just can’t help themselves.  Zealots are like that I guess. But this one is particularly disgusting.

Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher, also known as Joe the Plumber, was the poster child for the McCain/Palin campaign.  He was supposed to be the example of how Democratic policies were keeping the hard working little guy down. He recently penned an open letter to the parents of the Santa Barbara victims.  In this letter, he wrote:

"I am sorry you lost your child. I myself have a son and daughter and the one thing I never want to go through, is what you are going through now. But: As harsh as this sounds -- your dead kids don’t trump my Constitutional rights,"

Well, I have an open letter for Mr. Wurzelbacher:

Dear Mr. Plumber,

As harsh as this sounds, you can go fuck yourself.  In fact, why not use that gun of yours to do it. Just take the bullets out (Safety First!) and shove it straight up your ass.

Oh, and while you’re enjoying that bit of self abuse, think about this: You are wrong. The children killed in Isla Vista, in Aurora, in Sandy Hook, and in the streets of Chicago every day had a right to live.  They had the right to grow up and get married and have kids of their own.  They were given that right by the U.S. Constitution as well as by God.

The Preamble to the Constitution reads:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

I think, and I suspect most scholars would agree, that getting gunned down in the streets is a violation of these founding principles.

Now Sam, I know you are not a scholar. You’re just an average Joe trying to make his way in the world, but even you can agree that an innocent kid getting shot to death is surely a violation of his Constitutional rights.

(That gun making your bungholio sore?  Try more lube.)

The 2^nd Amendment says “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

The very first phrase sets the context for the rest of the sentence.  In Heller, the U.S. Supreme Court stated that "[t]he adjective 'well regulated' implies nothing more than the imposition of proper discipline and training."

The vast majority of average Joe’s do not have the proper discipline and training to own anything more than a BB gun.  I know you were in the Air Force Sam, but Joe Six-Pack wasn’t.  His training was at best his old man telling him how to shoot, how to load, and how not to shoot himself or his buddies by mistake.  But I really don’t think that qualifies as “well regulated”.

Besides, anyone who has even glanced at the history of this amendment knows that it was intended to be an alternative to a standing federal army.  Nowhere in the debate was defense against common crime or the right to go hunting ever mentioned.  This was about providing for the “common defense”, the defense of our country, not your right to blast away at scary people on your doorstep or at fuzzy critters in the woods.

And don’t get me started on assault rifles.  They are designed to kill people.  They were intended for the military.  Joe Six-Pack isn’t military and he doesn’t need to have a 30 round magazine in a semi-auto killing machine.

Besides, you’re a “gun guy”, you and I both know that a short barreled shot gun is the very best choice for home defense.  It won’t accidentally send a bullet down the street and kill your neighbor and you don’t need much aim to use it.

How’s that sphincter feeling right about now?  Hurts? Well, now you know how the rest of us feel about you gun nuts and your misguided, ignorant and hurtful statements like the one you made to the parents of those dead kids.  You are a huge pain in the rest of our asses and we’d really like you to just shut the fuck up. 

Sincerely,

The T-Dude

The bottom line is this: gun control is constitutional, it is appropriate, and it is proven to be an effective way to reduce gun deaths. We force car owners to have liability insurance, to be licensed, to pass tests.  Shouldn't that be at least the minimum requirement to own something specifically designed to kill? You may have a right to bear arms, but that right was never intended to fill our streets with weapons…and the bodies of dead children.

Quick Hits: Now with Sex, Death and Reading

That’s a Wide Load

I sometimes wonder if scientists talk to each other or read each others research.  A new study has come out that says that women with wider hips have more sex.  The reason they suspect has to do with ease of childbirth and less fear of having a child.

Seriously?

Did they completely ignore the research showing that women who don’t fit the stick thin ideal that the fashion houses and women’s rags promote are more likely to have sex because they are seeking affirmation of their attractiveness?

Women with wide hips aren’t less afraid of giving birth and therefore are less afraid of having sex.  Women with wide hips are afraid they aren’t as pretty as other women and therefore are more likely to use sex to feel desirable.

One in 25 on Death Row Likely Innocent

According to a new study, four percent (or one in every 25) of all defendants sentenced to death – and who are still on death row, are likely innocent of the crime of which they have been convicted.

To quote my youngest daughter’s famous line from kindergarten, “What the hell Josh?” (And soon after to her teacher who overheard: “It’s okay, it’s in the Bible. Besides, my mom says it all the time.)

Those revenge hungry, pro-death penalty folks will also quote the bible.  An eye for an eye they say.  But in every passage they quote, the person to be put to death is GUILTY. If we are unable to ensure that the people we are giving the ultimate penalty are actually guilty, then we have no business executing anyone at all.

Executing an innocent person is murder.  If I remember the commandments, somewhere around five or six on the “Thou shall not” hit parade is murder.  Whether you are a Christian or not, I think we all agree that murder is wrong and that is exactly what the death penalty is, or could be four percent of the time.

Oh, and the next time a pro-death penalty advocate decides to go all Old Testament on you, just give him the President Bartlett treatment.

Maycomb County goes Digital!

Harper Lee

For those of you who share my affinity for To Kill a Mockingbird, perhaps the greatest American novel, there is good news.  Author Harper Lee has given the okay for a digital release of her book. It comes out comes out July 8, the 54^th anniversary of the book’s original release. 

I hope this opens up the beauty that is Mockingbird to a whole new audience.  It is a masterpiece that everyone should read.

Another Reason to Occupy Wall Street

You learn something new every day.  

Unfortunately, these days, it seems like I’m not learning anything that really makes me feel good.  At first, I thought it was me.  But the more I read, the more I learn, the more disillusioned I become, the more I realize it is the world around me and I’m just reacting the way any sane person would.

This excellent article in The Week is a perfect example. 

It turns out that one of the big drivers behind our faltering infrastructure in this country is the deregulation of the banking industry and the total Vegas-esque free-for-all that is the investment sector of the economy.

Because of the disproportionate growth of the financial sector, money is no longer flowing to infrastructure or R & D investment.  In its simplest terms, the Wild West Wall Street investors are looking for short-term profits.  Investment in infrastructure and R & D is a long-term investment in the future.

To quote the article:

The deregulation of the financial sector — promoted by Republican and Democratic administrations — has changed America from an economy focused on sustainable growth toward a free-for-all for the wealthy.

This change is called "financialization." The financial sector has grown to almost 8 percent of GDP, from about 4 percent in Reagan's time. That the financial sector has grown isn't necessarily a problem; what is a problem is that it has grown faster than the rest of the economy. The purpose of the financial sector is to facilitate investment in a wide array of activities — to grease the wheels of the economy, so to speak. If the rest of the economy doesn't grow along with the financial sector, it is not fulfilling that purpose.

So, instead of money flowing to things like building/repairing bridges and roads and sewer systems that create good middle class jobs (which raises the ability of the masses to consume which helps grow the economy), money is being gambled back and forth at the Wall Street craps table where all the money goes back into the pockets of the gamblers. 

Oh, and the occasional hooker.

When you combine that with the historically low taxes on this type of income and the growing wealth and income disparity, cities and states no longer have the cash (or financing) available to keep our roads from crumbling from beneath our feet.

There is more to this story than that, but that is the gist.  Not only did the tax payers have to bail out the “too big to fail” banks, but now they are back to screwing us so that they can make even more profit.

We have to put some common sense back into our economy.  The richest among us should be taxed at a much higher rate, Wall Street needs to be regulated, and investment in infrastructure, in our country's future, should be rewarded.

It seems so simple when I say it out loud, but it doesn't make me feel any better.