Marybeth Windsor

Back On!

2006-10-17T09:53:00.000-07:00

I'm back in-country, and I hope to be around this fall to cover the elections and beyond!

Unequal Relationships

2005-03-30T16:43:00.000-08:00

What I keep hearing from certain parts of our society is that Islam is evil and Muhammad was an evil pedophile because he married a nine-year-old. I don't know enough about the Qur'an and the traditional literature to know the details, but I can do research and ask the experts, and they say that's just another western misrepresentation.

But even if she were nine, does that really make him and his religion evil, or just more open-minded? The Journal of Homosexuality has produced many thorough studies on intergenerational / adult-child relationships, most notably in this issue, although there are occasionally individual articles on it. (If they don't get national acclaim, it's because of our repressive society's biases and ignorant fears, not because they have no value.) They show that, if people can overcome their biases and defy the stigma, there can be meaningful and productive adult-child relationships. In fact, it can be a source of comfort to be with someone more experienced, so you can avoid the anxiety of "not knowing what to do."

Yes, there are definitely abuses. Just like there are in all types of relationships. But because one in four (or more) straight women are sexually abused, does that mean we should ban straight relationships? Plus, since we have defined all adult-child relationships as abusive, even relationships that continue into the younger partner's adulthood are stigmatized and deemed illegal, abusive, and rape. Until we realize that not all intergenerational sex is abusive, there can be no progress towards tolerance and acceptance.

People will say that the power imbalance is the issue. Good luck finding something without a power imbalance. Even in same-age, same-sex relationships, the only things without a built-in power imbalance, there's almost always one person more powerful than the other. If it's the person who brings home the higher income, or the person with a stronger or more manipulative personality, or the "butch" partner in relationships that work that way, or the one with a more secure life apart from the relationship, or anything else, someone is going to hold more power. You can't get away from it.

So? Abuse should be, and is, illegal. But don't call things evil and abusive just because they're outside your comfort zone and they are demographically similar to abusive relationships.

Conservatives can't see sense!

2005-03-29T13:02:00.000-08:00

Pat Sajak is at it again. He's built a career on moving his arm up and down, so maybe he can be forgiven for thinking all other social movers are as idiotic as he is.

One of his friends asked him, "Well, don’t you think that people who live in large urban areas, who travel and read and speak other languages are better able to make informed choices?" Sajak's only response is that it's mean to say things like that. He couldn't argue with it, because it's an obvious truth. At least it is about bigger issues. I'm not sure I'd be able to make more informed choices about something like the best direction to park the trailer home in, although I probably would be able to make more informed choices about redneck things like brands of denture glue because I know how to research and find information and analyze it, and if all else fails I'm not afraid to ask people, so at least my choices would be as informed. I would probably be able to make more informed choices about just about everything, in fact. It took me so long to figure out something that wouldn't count. Everything I could think of, ham radios, tractor brands, hayseed strains, I could probably make better choices about, if I did the research, because I have a more open mind and I don't have the baggage of "but it's always been done that way!"

I spent a LONG time doing web research on this, just to see if anyone had critiqued the claim that the more educated and informed you are, the more likely you are to realize that liberal opinions are right. Lots of wingnut sites will repeat the claim and say, "look! that shows Dems are dumb and mean and out of touch!" but no one seemed able to come up with a counterargument or even a list of things that liberals are less-informed on. I'll admit that it's not a good political strategy, unless it shames some people into actually going and learning something, but it's plainly true.

First person?

2005-03-23T15:57:00.000-08:00

Reading the post below, I think first person may not be the best choice. I hoped to have a central figure who wasn't described as either male or female, because I don't think it would have as much appeal with two women, and there you get the problem of "she looked at her hands" and other obscure pronoun references. But I didn't want to do your basic heteronormative romance novel. If you're stopping by, tell me what you think: man, woman, or first-person undefined protagonist?

The Meeting

2005-03-22T12:16:00.000-08:00

The first time I saw her was on the Underground. I was on the District line on my way back from Knightsbridge. I was reading the Time Out I had picked up on the way in, annoyed by the loud chattering of the sixth-form girls standing in the area where the cars join. Then she caught my eye.

She was just as talkative as any of her friends, but there was a vivacity about her that set her apart from them. Some of her friends were still in uniform, but she had changed into slim low-cut jeans and a creamy knit top with a low scoop neckline. Neither dowdy and out-of-date nor pitifully put-on, like most of London's teenage girls, she looked easy and as if she had just come from Calais or a Paris couturier. Her heavy gold hoop earrings swung about when she gestured, and that motion may have been what first drew my attention. It could also have been her hair, so black it was nearly blue, mostly gathered at the nape of her neck but with several segments let loose. Or her flawless skin, a rich brown with rosy undertones, lacking the sallowness of many of her sun-shy fellows.

I found myself letting my eyes wander down her form. Tracing her collarbone, admiring the soft breasts just large enough to make a clear shadow in their cleft, lingering on her slim waist, noticing how her figure stayed straight with almost no increase around her hips. The seat of her jeans hugged her closely, and they could indeed have been boy's, as trim as she was. She left at Whitechapel, and I realized three things: I was very warm all over. I had missed my stop. And I had to meet her.

(To be continued...)

We don't exist for men's benefit, please!

2005-02-28T16:21:00.000-08:00

Another show that seems to have as its purpose the titillation of men by means of attractive and feminine/"desirable" lesbians. Boys? We come in all varieties, and a large number of us are not feminine, and, guess what? we're not interested in you. So give up.

The next move by the straight-police

2005-02-15T15:55:00.000-08:00

I'm sure everyone's seen this by now, but the Times has an article out about how they're yet again saying that the same-sex lifestyle is evil and dangerous and needs to be remolded into 1950's unnatural monogamy.

I've been told it's just my woman-loving bias, that man-on-man sex is physically harmful and (which I do know) spreads disease much faster than woman-on-woman sex. But even if it's true that it's physically harmful, I don't think that gives the straightness-enforcers the right to say that their freely-chosen relationships are wrong, just because they don't fit into the straight idea of a healthy relationship. If they find it fulfilling, they should be able to do it. Everyone knows about health risks of smoking, driving cars, and any kind of sex. So let them do what they want without trying to make them act like you want them to!

On the other hand, this guy disagrees, saying (like the Times) that the behavior is bad and must be changed.

(In other news, this is a pretty site. I want a pretty site.)

Kurds Gone Wild

2005-02-15T15:44:00.000-08:00

NBC just ran a segment with several pro-war mercenary contractors saying the US is hiring bloodthirsty thuggish Kurds. Kurds who think firing into a passenger car is a good way to clear a traffic jam and who think smashing children under a truck is a fun way to pass an afternoon, apparently.

This can be taken in two ways.

First, because the people telling the story think it's a great thing that we're in this racist war, it's quite possible that they're making the whole thing up. Why? Well, it's pretty obvious. These evil non-Americans are portrayed as bloodthirsty monsters, so everyone will agree that they are a subhuman race and nobody needs to feel bad about killing them. That's what our media does all the time anyway. Lots of stories about "terrorists" and Palestinian freedom fighters, but always about how they're hurting sweet innocent people and nothing about their motivations and how not-innocent the "victims" are.

On the off chance that the stories are true, well, what do you expect? We're trying to force our "enlightened" morality on another country, and they decide to stick with their own tried and true cultural practices, so we must paint them as evil just because their ways of dealing with things are different from our perfect American methods. What's next, will we get angry because their jailers don't go in for sex abuse?

Race Traitors

2005-02-11T05:27:00.000-08:00

People keep complaining when progressives call wannabe slaves self-hating race traitors. Why? It seems pretty obvious to me. Take Little Miss Rice. How much interest does she take in her own background, her own culture? She rejects it all. She's ashamed of it all. No, she wants to be white, so she ignores the rich traditions of African music in favor of "classical" (that is, white upper-class European) piano music, she rejects the beautiful traditional African clothing in favor of cookie-cutter WASPy suits, she takes care that her voice shows no traces of Afroamerican accent, and she sides with all the policies meant to keep her people down. How is it not clear to the wingnuts that she's ashamed of her heritage and trying to fight it and pretend it's not hers?

Democracy -- whether you want it or not!

2005-02-06T14:23:00.000-08:00

Sorry about the hiatus. We had a family emergency, and I got sidetracked. That said:

Winds of Change is yet another one of those reactionary groups that thinks all they have to do is ask some deep questions and then all progressives will abandon their principles. While the naivete is touching, I think it may help them out to answer a few of their questions:

"What would have been the best, most legitimate way for Iraq to achieve democratic elections?"
That's western ideological imperialism for you. Democracy-fetishism. Who gets to make the moral call that democracy is better than other forms of government? Why, when you see the corruption and mob-rule that passes for "democracy" here, do you want to force it on other people? (The same goes for the "tyrant" questions -- who are you to decide who's a tyrant and who's not?)

"If you had to wear a uniform and be put in harm's way, but could choose the flag you fought for, which flag would it be: Your family crest; your town's flag; your state's flag; your country's flag; your religion's flag; the UN, NATO or EU flag; or an NGO flag. Why?"
Isn't it time we moved pass these artificial borders? I don't see why we still have all of these archaic regional governments who disagree and spy on each other while paying lip-service to being allies or "friends." Why fight for a flag? Why not move past that and recognize how fluid the world has become and go to a one-world "government" -- in quotes because "government" implies two groups of people, the powerful governors and the lorded-over governed.

On Vacation

2004-12-22T11:44:00.000-08:00

Sorry I didn't mention this earlier, but I'm on vacation. Posting this from a friend's computer. I'll see you back next week!

Streisand on the Media

2004-12-10T17:47:00.000-08:00

An excerpt:

Frankly, the idea that the media is sympathetic to conservative causes rather than liberal ones is obvious, for reasons of ownership, economics, and outside pressure. With the major networks being controlled by a small group of large corporations, the news reporting has become most often sympathetic to conservatives, for fear of losing advertising dollars and being reprimanded by the current administration.

For the rest, go here.

Stay out of the bedroom!

2004-12-10T08:15:00.000-08:00

And what, may I ask, is wrong with this? There's no reason why people who can have sex without the law getting all over them shouldn't be able to marry. As far as I know, it's perfectly legal for a guy to sleep with two girls, even at the same time -- so it's as silly to prohibit an open recognition of that as it is to prohibit the wedding of my old teacher and priest (scroll down a bit).

Of course, there are people argue that there are unfair power balances in polygamous relationships (probably in polyandrous as well as polygynous). The men will exert unfair power and control over the women who outnumber them, they say. That's ridiculous. If anything, having more than one woman, who can band together, provides a counterweight to the skewed balance of power in "normal" one-man-one-woman relationships. If you want to ban anything that has a power imbalance, ban straight relationships. Lesbian love for all! (Hey, sounds good to me!)

Most of these panickers seem to argue that the "other," unwanted groups, are more prone to abuse. So what? One in four man-woman relationships has some form of abuse. Why not make the relationships illegal? People die in car crashes, so why not make car ownership illegal? (Of course, we should make private car ownership illegal, but for environmental reasons.) I'm sure you get my point: the abuse is what's illegal. Don't ban loving and voluntary relationships because of a few bad apples!

For the intergenerational sex, there's been study after study demonstrating that it's usually beneficial for the younger party. Just because there are a small number of child abusers doesn't mean that there can't be a loving and productive adult-child relationship.

The "Liberal" media takes on another blogger

2004-12-10T06:45:00.000-08:00

The media, which, as "everyone" knows, is liberal (for more on that, see below), has decided it doesn't like atrios. He tells the truth about how hideous the right is, so CBS decided to take him down by accusing him of being biased. Apparently, being affiliated with a group that seeks to override media bias is so threatening to the "nonbiased" media that a sympathy for such groups tarnishes one's writing back years before joining such a group -- and even years before it was founded.

Why are people so gullible? They see that most journalists vote Democratic (if they vote at all -- a disturbing number never get around to it) and they take that as proof of bias. Never crosses their mind that that might be because they spend their lives looking at the issues and have an inside track, so they just might be a little more aware of what's right. If there's a bias on their part, it's either a bias towards the truth, or bending over too far to make sure their knowledge of the truth doesn't color their reporting enough to make it obvious they're Democratics. But, from the top, there's a conservative bias throughout these organizations, so they feel a need to cast aspersions on those who criticize them.

This could also be part of an "equal time" idea (which is silly as anything; in pieces on people trying to stop child abuse, they don't give equal time to people in favor of it -- nor should they!). They pointed out that a certain group of CBS-attacking bloggers were doing a hit job, so they feel a need to point out some bloggers of other political leanings.

Post-Abortion Woes?

2004-12-02T14:01:00.000-08:00

What does more women being depressed after an abortion (if it's even true) prove, other than either the same stuff as post-partum depression or, more likely, the psychological pressure of everyone considering you a baby-killer? Same thing with being gay -- it doesn't make you depressed, but everyone hating you just might!

CBS gives in to the right

2004-11-30T16:14:00.000-08:00

Even though the other networks seem to be holding out, CBS is bending over backwards to prove they don't support Democratics. After giving in to wingnut pressure about the memos, when there's no proof they were fakes and when everyone knows the story behind them is true anyhow, they're also falling in on the Repub party line saying that the UN is corrupt. Why? Like the oh-so-innocent Dick Cheney, Kofi Annan's son appears to be getting money from a group he's supposed to have cut his ties with. And, even though he's an independent adult, his father's supposed to have complete control over all his son does and know all his secrets. Republicans: the party against privacy.

What's the rest of it all about? The UN set up a great program to help guide the voluntary actions of a sovereign nation, and that sovereign nation may or may not (I haven't seen any proof) have misused the money in the oil-for-food program. Just like Kofi Annan's to blame for his adult son't actions, the UN is also to blame for a sovereign Iraq's actions, they say. What's next? Will we also blame the UN for the mess and chaos America's producing in Iraq? If there are any people left there when we're done killing them all, that is.

Thanksgiving

2004-11-24T07:31:00.000-08:00

Off. Back next week.

"Ideological Diversity"

2004-11-22T15:34:00.000-08:00

People are calling for "ideological diversity" on campuses, at the New York Times, and everywhere else where intelligent people generally support Democratic positions. Why? When people who spend their lives researching the issues come to the conclusion that Democratic positions are right, why does that show bias instead of sense? No one calls for creating artificial diversity in earth science departments by including flat earthers. Why include the less-informed or simply ignorant and wrong in more political departments, purely for the sake of "diversity"?

Liberal Media?

2004-11-19T04:33:00.000-08:00

Someone calling their site Beautiful Atrocities put up a list of Days stars and their religious/political affiliation. Most of them are warmongers or Christian reactionaries who see everyone else as hellbound. One guy even says, "I became a Bible-thumping Jesus freak."

Ok, if this is the "liberal-dominated media" we keep hearing about, I'm getting very scared. If warmongers and "Bible-thumping Jesus freaks" are liberal, I'm scared to think what they might call a "conservative." Hitler's probably a liberal to them.

Me all the way

2004-11-18T16:28:00.000-08:00

I like this:

More than 14 per cent of British Colombians prefer to disrobe to shop online. Apparently the national average is only four per cent. There were no figures for conventional shoppers who preferred to get their kit off.

I do that. Generally I wear a bra, and sometimes a garter belt (suspenders, for the Pythonites). But I'm rarely fully clothed. It's just too hot in my apartment, and my computer's unfortunately placed in the afternoon sun.

The Conservative Media

2004-11-18T04:31:00.000-08:00

Don't doubt that the news media leans way right? Well, this makes it pretty obvious. And that Halperin memo, wingnuts? a criticism of the right-leaning media, not a call to bias.

Lopsided Criticism?

2004-11-17T11:40:00.000-08:00

People keep saying that it shows "bias" to criticize US soldiers for Abu Ghraib or shooting unarmed resistance fighters, while reporting on the execution of interfering outsiders by Iraqis without making moral judgments about it. I don't think so. I think it's right to make judgments about your own culture; I don't think it's right to make judgments about other people's cultures. If someone belonging to that other culture wants to say they're acting wrongly or immorally or anything, that's their right. It's not our place. It is our place to draw attention to the scum that's growing within the US military in order to mobilize people against it. The British military? That's the British people's problem, and nothing to do with us. Same with the Iraqi resistance. If they do something against their own moral system, they are the only ones with the right to speak out against it; it's rank cultural imperialism to expect them to act in accordance with our moral system, such as it is.

What, me an isolationist? Never! :-)

The Glory of Seams

2004-11-16T13:07:00.000-08:00

Seamed stockings really make you feel girly. Especially when hot girls stop you to ask where you got them. Here's to my fantasy: every hot girl in seamed stockings and garter belts! Mmm. Fun to wear, fun to put on, fun to sit down and cross your legs recklessly and let your skirt slide up to show a lacy border and a red satin strap (and then to see the guys who'll never get near you eyeing it), even fun to take off -- and, even more fun, there's no reason to take them off when you're having fun!

Bush: unable to think sensibly.

2004-11-16T13:02:00.000-08:00

I'm obviously in favor of women doing all the same things men do. But still, does Bush really think it's a good idea to put a woman in a job where countries with different value-systems won't be able to meet with her without violating their beliefs? Then again, he's never been good on the sensitivity. Or the thinking. Could be worse; she could be Jewish. Couldn't be much more right-wing, though.

But, I do have a solution: Powell says he'll stay until his successor is confirmed. I don't like him very much, but I do like him better than Rice. So, let's get the senate to refuse to confirm any successor. Powell stays in place!

Renewable Materials

2004-11-15T16:38:00.000-08:00

In other news, I just got my second bottle of Vampire Wine (and their website-lady has a nice voice). It's pretty good merlot, especially for the price, and the best part is, there's no cork. It's got some sort of a special rubbery stopper that comes out with a corkscrew like normal. I like it!

The Cabinet

2004-11-15T16:28:00.000-08:00

Is anyone else worried? I saw Spencer Abraham at Harvard; he seemed a sensible man, at least when discussing economics. I really remember his story about commandeering a tugboat to get a generator to NYC on 9/11. As for the others, it's true they're all Republicans, but, except for Rod Paige and his "values-based character education" ideas, the ones I know about are the least-Republican members of the cabinet. Does anyone really think they won't be replaced by far-right Bushies?

...Welcome!

2004-11-11T16:36:00.000-08:00

Perhaps I should have said this first: welcome to my new blog! I got tired of livejournal, and putting your relationship difficulties on the web is a bad thing if you don't want your relationship to get even worse. So, new life, new start. New site. New name, too, btw. Taking out a space and changing a last name makes for entirely different googling, I find. Other changes: For any of you who have been around from the old site: there will be less relationship angst. And more politics. People complained when I wrote about politics on a relationship journal, now I hope they won't complain if relationships still come in on a politics blog. Old habits die hard.

Murderers' Day

2004-11-11T15:27:00.000-08:00

All right, perhaps not the right way to begin a blog. Just give the wingnuts ammunition. I don't think all the military people are murderers. But, for all the wars I can think of, a good number of them have been, and their leaders.

And I went up there, I said, "Shrink, I want to kill. I mean, I wanna, I
wanna kill. Kill. I wanna, I wanna see, I wanna see blood and gore and
guts and veins in my teeth. Eat dead burnt bodies. I mean kill, Kill,
KILL, KILL." And I started jumpin up and down yelling, "KILL, KILL," and
he started jumpin up and down with me and we was both jumping up and down
yelling, "KILL, KILL." And the sargent came over, pinned a medal on me,
sent me down the hall, said, "You're our boy."

He wasn't just coming up with that out of nowhere; what better outlet for homicidal maniacs than joining the army in wartime? And, if you look hard enough, you can see quite a bit of it on both sides in pretty much all wars.

I just don't think we should celebrate homicide, no matter how "justified."