Kurds and Gay

The latest in Mideast upset, the PKK rebels and Turkey, has been most intriguing. It is all one big foreign relations soap opera, with the US torn between declaring Armenian genocide some time after the fact, but wanting to keep its Turkey baby and not upset the only "good" thing it has going, Kurdish Iraq. Its the drama that keeps political nerds like us enthralled, but, who knew the cast would be so stimulating! Meet the ladies of the PKK, ready to fight anytime for their nationalist movement! Forget Itty Bitty Titty Committee, the women of the PKK are my rebel grrrls of choice.

And there is another funny valentine in my pop-culture consumption patterns, and I am beyond loving to hate it and hating that I love it. Now I accept that Tila entertains me as only good trash tv can, and it feels so good. How many stupid things can the guys say, how many times can "lipstick lesbian" and "a bisexual" be said instead of femme and bi? Will there be a glimmer of hope for gender education to the masses of our generation underneath all the stereotypes and red plastic liquor cups? I'm here to see, and watch straight people react to it, which is just as much fun. Tonight my three men-loving roommates sat fixed to the tv, taking in their weekly Tila shot, which trumped SVU. Thats saying something. I also like seeing girls in the gym react to the show, as I see them all intently absorbing the subtitles over the hum and bustle of treadmills, only to justify their interest with, "this show is crazy, what are they going to do next?" Its ok, honey.

Part of me wishes I had made it on the show, so I could infiltrate their lesbian-objectifying good time and send queer messages to the cast and the world with every heart-warming episode. But I probably would get kicked off faster than "hey, girl, hey" Keisha. Caution. So maybe I am not being a good lesbian feminist by not ripping this show apart. Of course, I could write a nice 5-7 page paper on how it is horrible for queer womens sexuality blah blah blah, but, you got to see it to bitch about it. I would label Tila as a guilty pleasure, but I am no a personal mission to let go of that label. A pleasure is a pleasure, whether our culture or religion or feminist ideology says its bad. I say fuck you, if I want to slow down as I drive by the car wreck, I will.

Speaking of other battles I must conquer in order to be even someone productive: they changed the tv channels, and now we have food network.

Goddess, help me!

I care more about who Mr.T endorses...

I guess it is important to many people who Chuck Norris is supporting among the Republican presidential candidates, and now the truth is out. Yes, this "Action hero compares former Arkansas Governor to King David."

Oh, that GOP, doing the same old jig, old Hollywood b-listers with some old time religion associations. Just so old, just like Chuck Norris jokes.

Another reason to be happy I left the hill...

If legislation and the demographics of their supporters weren’t enough verification, congressmen want to verify further that they are not down with the gay, ok? TheHill.com asked Representatives who they thought was the most attractive presidential candidate, and a good chunk gave homophobic answers and/or defaulted to Clinton, because straight dudes can not gauge masculine beauty for some frivolous survey. To quote Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr:

“I don’t know. Because I’m a serious heterosexual I would have to say Hillary — who else would I say?”

A serious heterosexual? A diehard heterosexual? Not an amateur, hobbyist, or one who only dabbles in being heterosexual? Most of these comments came from Democrats, and Jackson's shows the pressure to upkeep hetero masculinity for black voters, but "a serious heterosexual?" Who says that, other than insecure frat boys and others who feel they have to prove something?

Homophobia in the black community aside, we can’t overlook the rush to reinforce heteronormative declarations post-Foley/Craig scandals. We have all responded to their downfalls with amusement, whom can not help but revel in the irony of it all, and how it is helping to bring the conservative movement and the GOP to its knees just in time for a presidential election? For many of us, it is a long awaited exposure of the right’s hypocrisy, but some hold pity for these men. To be in power and with their party and voting base, they denied themselves and felt compelled to live double lives.

But the media and the collective public does not talk about issues of coming out and the overwhelming pressure for many to stay in. Foley and Craig colleagues immediately remove themselves from their fellow Republicans, not because of corruption, but trying to stay in the club while seeking some type of personal satisfaction. They are instead reduced to the plague and a running joke, and exploited to benefit from society's disgust and ignorance of all things not hetero. Their attempts to save face only mocked further as they try to prove their straightness to a world that rejects their gayness. Truly, it is a dark time in their lives, and I hope at some point they find peace.

Most gays would say fuck them, they don’t deserve sympathy for betraying us and using people’s hatred for us for political benefit. And I have to agree: if one is too scared to be honest about their sexuality, then they choose to live a life of the privileges of being straight, but ultimately a lie. You choose not to be brave and true to yourself. But there is something we can do.

Since I have gotten here, I have heard so many cheap shots at gay congressmen. It is used as an easy laugh in mixed company, by older people to appear “hip” in front of young people, or by dudes at a party. There are the jokes that embrace the irony of it all, and then there are the ones with the intent to confirm that gay is weird, gross, and a cultural crime. Craig and Foley become a safe avenue to express homophobic attitudes, and we are in a position to recognize and address them as we would normally, despite whether they are traitors or cowards.

If we do not, then it will continue to be permissible for our elected officials to publicly disrespect the gay community, and feel obligated to make these ignorant statements. Besides, we all know Clinton is not the hottest candidate in the bunch, so why should they feel restricted to gender? It is only keeping us all from aesthetical integrity!

Nonviolence and World War III, all in the same day!

So I took a long lunch break to hang out on the West lawn and see the Dalai Lama. It was a beautiful day and thousands of people were there, and allowed for reflection that I would not normally have sitting in front of a monitor. Plus, hey, lots of Richard Gere love concentrated on the hill. Eunice and I were debating recently about Western "obsession" with the Dalai Lama, and if it is at all hypocritical for us to be supportive of a theocracy like Tibet-however benevolent-while discouraging them (or supporting them financially, in case of Saudi Arabia etc.) elsewhere.
But the Dalai Lama, and Tibet, is a different case. While other spiritual leaders like the Pope work to divide and push society backward, the Dalai Lama transcends faith and culture to promote universal notions of humanity and justice. I was happy to see him put on his visor and address us, and how everyone politely sat down and relaxed on the lawn as he stood. I dread his departure from this world, and the future of the Tibetan people and cause, with China planning to choose the successor to gain control in the nation. There is so much at stake for this one monk, his faith, and his people, and while millions love him and are with him, there is only hope for change in his lifetime. Even with these odds, the Dalai Lama preaches the virtues of nonviolence, the focal point of his address to the DC public and world today.

Both George W Bush and Nancy Pelosi personally honored the Dalai Lama with the Congressional Medal of Honor, and express their support of Tibet and their disapproval of Chinese policy. George W Bush, with his low approval ratings that are seven years too late and failures in Iraq, has been standing for a few human rights causes recently. The Medal of Honor for the Dalai Lama and his stance on Tibet has pissed off China, as well as his (and Laura) condemnation of the SPDC of Burma.

Yes, he is doing something other than nothing about Tibet and Burma, but strong words are all talk. The continuation of sanctions on Burma will continue to do what they have been doing: nothing. The administration "strongly urging" India and China to stop trading arms and natural resources with Burma also will have a similar affect. You can honor the leader of a movement with medals and words, but can you really call yourself an ally if you do just that? This country needs to do more if it wants to fancy itself as a proponent of social justice around the world, and to make up for what it has done in its past and continues to do in the present.

Example: don't talk about starting World War III. How can you give a medal and honor a man who has devoted his life to nonviolence and then the same day have a press conference where you shoot the same world-takeover agenda that we all know will lead us to a burning pit of suck in one hot minute? Bush, didn’t you learn anything with your encounter with the Dalai Lama? Did he fail to enlighten you? Your recent scrambles to appear like a swell leader of the free world didn't fool us! Another day of irony in DC...

I'd do anything

To see the Dalai Lama on the West Lawn tomorrow. Why during the afternoon when so many of us DC hacks have to be in our offices? We need secular talks from exiled religious leaders, too!

Damn it, Dennis

The only candidate I would consider voting for with a relatively clear conscience decided to skip out of the Michigan primaries, the only chance to vote for Dennis Kucinich, as everyone keeps telling me he is not going to get the nomination (really?). So now the only people I can vote for in the primaries are Clinton, Dodd, and Gravel. Thanks, arbitrary Presidential primary process! Clearly, states and voters have had enough of the same states having an unfair influence on deciding the candidates every cycle, and need to have a serious discussion and revamping if we are going to have anything resembling a democracy in this country. It is bad enough that our Presidential election, electoral college, and partisan politics leads us to vote for politicians with nothing different between them, but we have the same overly-centralized parties overriding the will of the people to have more say in the leadership of their country. Shouldn't we be coming up with real solutions to these problems, like a rotation of beginning primary election states, and not be shutting out millions of people who actually want to be part of this charade of a democracy?

Decisions like this only work to alienate citizens and demonstrate that politicians are more concerned about raising money and staying on good terms with their party, not voters. While Kucinich may be passing by Michigan in order to save money, I would think that a campaign run only on principle and no realistic hope of victory would screw this partisan pecking order and reach out to Michigan. In a state that has many cities and towns that have undergone the same rust-belt affects of free trade policy, unemployment, and threats to unions as his hometown of Cleveland, I am greatly disappointed by his plan to boycott Michigan and people who can relate to his message and values. It makes me question his motives and dedication to his mission.

Oh well, losing faith in politicians because they yield to politics is nothing new. Its not like I will be able to express my disapproval of Kucinich with my symbolic primary vote, anyway. Who would have thought that I will most likely vote for Clinton, if I decide to vote, which I am questioning for the first time. Part of me wants to be really excited about the potential of voting for a female president, but if it voting for a woman president just to have a woman take on the same role and patterns of power as before, what is the point? Why does she have to be such a hawk, and a closeted one, at that! Every time I hear her give an unspirited, monotone "GOD BLESS YOU ALL" to an audience, I just want to scream, "you fucking liar, you aren't religious!" Give me that supposedly crazy liberal Hillary of the 90s, bad suits and hair and all. Give me the Hillary fighting for universal health care and not to bomb Iran and make Iraq the new South Korea. Women should not be excited about voting for a woman if she wants to continue the same foreign policies, tired arguments, and same mistakes as the men before her. She has to do more, or at least that is what we should expect.

Weather, Cheney Crab Bakes, and Douchebag Justices

How can it still feel and look like summer in October? Maybe its too liberal of me to jump to conclusions that it has something to do with global warming, but dare I say that I am getting tired of this season. I yearn for the crisp air of fall, the changing of the leaves, and not having to worry about sweating buckets in my teeshirt and jeans when I step outside.
This unseasonable weather is also affecting my work ethic. Of course, it is not the nature of humans that I am drawn to laziness over doing my assigned readings and writings, it is this crazy summertime voodoo that still has a hold on me. How I wish for the spell to be broken, but it feels so good. Alas, this weekend will be mostly dedicated to work, and a crab bake.

Yes, a crab bake. Everyone in the program is invited to some alumni beach house in Maryland to eat lots of meat products and ride in a boat. We will also make "connections" and be shown where the Cheneys live. Oh, perhaps I will see one of my favorite gay Republicans, Mary Cheney! Oh, maybe her kid will be there, and either way, I will have the opportunity to go on a huge rant about her selfishness and the unbearable irony of her life in front of plenty of unwilling straight people! This did throw off my Sunday plans to see the WACK! exhibit for free at the National Museum of Women in the Arts (one of the few museums in DC that normally charges admission) and to play ultimate frisbee. Instead, I will eat more free food (this week has been unprecedented in that regard) and schmooze. Too bad I don't have a sun hat. I imagine that would be fitting if I were going to eat crab in Maryland. I will wear a bib even if I won't be cracking the famous crustaceans, because I'm one classy broad. Or maybe I should be prepared with a baby gift, just in case...

Boy, I wish I was seeing more famous people around. My roommate saw John Kerry stroll pass an expensive Italian restaurant the other day, and I am never going to see anyone at my new work place on Dupont Circle. I may have been in a sorry state by now if I were still on the Hill, but I would at least know that Elizabeth Kucinich has a tongue ring, be able to go up to Larry Craig and say, "I side with you and the ACLU," and tell Clarence Thomas that he is an asshole and needs to stop trying to destroy Anita Hill's reputation in order to clear his name. What does he have to gain by rehashing the same arguments of racial bias and liberal conspiracy as he and his defenders did almost two decades ago? It was not about him being black, or abortion, or the fault of Hill's character. As nearly every gender/women studies class has taught a generation since that confirmation hearing, the whole event was in Thomas's favor, with the media, black community, and even the liberal establishment on his side. As if being on the highest court for life wasn't a good enough booty prize for the hassle he went though, he has to relive it, in a new era.
Why did he feel this necessary, and why didn't any one try to stop him and his bad judgment? Cultural understanding of sexual harassment has evolved since he was able to easily dismiss Hill in front of America. People can distinguish the credibility of Hill from the catty depictions and accusations found in Thoma's autobiography. What hasn't changed is the media, which continues to present Thomas as a swell guy and miss or under quote Hill, or not consider her at all. CNN, that last island of hope for fair, wholesome "liberal" media, has to make a point that he has lesbian friends and is just lovable to make up for pubic hair comments. I really don't care if he has lesbian friends, everyone should have lesbian friends. Him toting around that he has dyke friends that he keeps a picture of on his desk to prove he is not sexist is like white people claiming they aren't racist because they have a token black friend.
If Thomas does want to bring out his dirty laundry, why doesn't the media give him the hell he deserves? Is that only reserved to blowjobs and Clinton? I can only imagine the type of blast from the past bullshit we will be subjected to in the near future, with Hillary Clinton's recent gains in the Democratic polls. Why not break it all down, how disgusting Thomas's behavior was, how people behave when they have power? Perhaps it fits better into assigned rules to give the benefit of the doubt to the position and gender in power, and overlook the one who questions or challenges it. Both Anita and Hillary are strong women who can take the abuse that our society gives women who stand up to or make steps to obtain that power, but we will continue to see the punishment they face for doing so. In the meantime, please, continue to bitch about Thomas and write to news outlets that give him a break. He certainly doesn't deserve it.