1) www.antiwar.com
-my one true news love
-sort of like Drudge (except with an anti-war agenda instead of a right-wing agenda); combs and collects tons of different news sites and brings them all together
-heavy libertarian/non-interventionist lean in their political commentary/opinion articles
-really good set up; front page divided into countries and conflict zones, and it includes basically every conflict zone you could think of, plus the ones you don't, which is good, too
-check out the sources page for dozens of other sites
2) www.democracynow.org
-i know, i know. democracynow can have a tendency to be sensationalist and inflammatory, but it's a good model for news produced outside the corporate conglomerates by an outlet with any sort of clout. voices are heard here, man!
-always gets interviews with cool (aka prominent and outside the mainstream) people.
-fight the good fight of the leftist movement!
4) www.electronicintifada.net
-news and commentary about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict
-also, really cool graphics and layout
-also check out electronic iraq and electronic lebanon
5) www.bbc.com
-yay, Brits! when perusing this site, you must read all the news out loud with a british accent, it is 4 times more enjoyable. and sexy.
-thank you bbc for being accessible, and for having a million little sidebar links, so if i want to find out more about the article i am reading and its topics, i can. i love you bbc.
-also photos of the day are awesome.
Those are the only ones i really read regularly. open to suggestions.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
metaphysics
this was a letter i wrote to a friend, about the amendment 2 discussion we were having. i've been wanting to blog about this for awhile, and i felt like this was a pretty good representation of how i feel right now. for those of you who don't know, amendment 2 is on the florida ballot this year and it would add an official definition of marriage to the state constitution, defining it as being between a man and a woman.
text of message:
first of all, here's something i need to establish. that i understand that whatever the prophets and GAs say is generally a trump card, and that that is the way it is in Provo and with most LDS people that i am every going to talk to about this issue, and that's okay. i understand that and totally respect that, and i think it's a valid reason to be voting however you are voting.
but for me, it doesn't fly. especially on the issue of gay rights, because i've found that everything that i personally believe in basically goes head to head with official church statements of late.
of late being these last couple of months, because before that with all the literature the church has recently put out (god loves his children, the oak's interview from awhile ago, a couple of ensign articles) it seemed like the church was taking a fairly progressive stance and i liked what they were working with there.
however, i feel like the church's enormous support for prop 8 and anti-lgbt legislation is a step backwards.
i also feel like provo is a sinkhole of anti-gay rhetoric, and i've sort of given up trying to defend my beliefs, which is sad, because the majority is adamantly, fanatically against my beliefs. well, that's probably not true. i feel like when i do bring up issues, people are a lot more caring and loving and understanding than i expect.
but i think this has been hightened by the prop 8 rallies. yes, i know all about the official support, and the special broadcast, and how california members are supposed to be donating all this time and energy to support the effort, and that's all really interesting because they church doesn't often take official positions like this, though it has an amazing amount of manpower and is an extremely effective network for this kind of situation (which makes me feel kind of sad that we utilize this for anti-gay culture war issues but we would never do that for any sort of anti-war movement. but anyway, that's different, i guess.)
so basically, what i'm trying to say is that i feel like there is no room whatsoever for dissent or questioning of any kind in this town concerning prop 8, and i think that's too bad. that's what life is for: to question and dissent from what's "right"and try and find out the truth of all things. that is the plan of salvation. that is what we fought for--to come to earth and be individuals who make mistakes and question things, and sometimes question things and get it right, and sometimes question things and get it wrong, but still have the ability to come to the truth anyway.
this relates to this issue, i swear. because yes, i have a testimony and i'm not an apostate, but i still want to be able to struggle with this issue in the normal realm, and not just be all "well the prophet said so, so i don't want to hear anything against it." i can't do that. i can't live like that, especially not with this issue.
okay.
now, to concretes. because we can deal in ideas and trends all day, but that won't get us anywhere because if there are not concrete examples, then your ideals are no more valid than mine. got that?
here's the thing: same-sex marriage is already illegal in florida. it's in our state laws several different times. we already have a defense of marriage act. so if you are voting for it because you don't want gay people to get married, don't worry. they already can't. this isn't a debate about whether gay marriage has to be recognized or not, or that churches will have to recognize gay marriage or else they will be shut down. that's not what voting this law down would do. if it doesn't pass, nothing changes. the LGBT community doesn't suddenly have the right to get married. that would take a lot lot lot more legislation. the only thing that would happen is that it wouldn't pass.
so what does it mean if it does pass? that's debatable. there are several theories. i think they are all valid and possible, but i encourage you to research them yourself. first, it's to galvanize the religious right and get them out to the polls. if there are more right-wing voters voting in florida, which is traditionally a swing state, then it will go mccain, and that is a lot votes to be throwing at mccain. florida has a ton of electoral votes. so that would make it totally worth it for a lot of the Right to do this amendment just for that.
second of all, there are lots of senior citizens living in florida. a lot of senior citizens do not get married, because they would lose some social security benefits, but they still want to have visiting rights, ect. i don't ethically believe this is right, it's cheating the system and while the system sucks and deserves to be cheated, it still is dishonest. anyway, it would definitely be within the corporate government's interest to somehow get these senior citizens to stop having their cake and eating it too, and this law could very well do that.
now, the pro-amendment people will tell you that this isn't true, that's stretching the wording of the admendment and that's not what will happen. here's the wording of the amendment:
Inasmuch as a marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.
i think it could definitely go that way. supporters of the amendment argue that by not having this law in florida or in california, you are somehow endangering freedom of religion. that because a law like this is passed, churches or schools or other institutions that do not allow gay marriage could be shut down. i think this is also stretching it--if it's possible for that to happen if the law doesn't pass, it's possible for senior citizens and other unmarried couples, those that are in a legal union but not husband and wife, to also not be recognized as having the same rights as other married couples.
however, i don't think that will happen. if it passes, the courts won't let it outlaw partnership laws for senior citizens. i also don't think the courts would shut down churches because of their beliefs. i would hope that wise justices would recognize that this is a country where people are able to believe how they choose, and if that means that we don't allow gay students to attend byu, then that is what we chose. i agreed to that when i came here. (ps---this line of thought does need more development. but really, i see the argument that the defeat of these amendments as an attack on our freedom of belief as completely absurd. do you actually think that would happen? maybe. but only because of fanaticism, which these kind of laws don't solve, they only inflame.)
all that said, you are right. if the prophet is inspired to tell us something about how we should vote, well, God does know all things and He loves all his children way more than i ever could, and i have to have faith in that. but he didn't say that for florida. there's a proposition in arizona like this one, too, and they haven't said anything about that. he was inspired and directed to issue this fatwa for california, but not for the other places. if the prophet doesn't say, it means vote on your own judgement. and this is my judgement.
and freedom, and specifically, the freedom to believe however we choose
and see fit, is the most important freedom we have. but i think that in this day in age, it's also really important to make sure religion and belief and whatever that means to you is still examined. and that's what i'm trying to do. and also, it is most important that belief doesn't become fanatical. i've spent way too much time in southern baptist flordia and in the middle east to ever ever try and impose my beliefs on other people in anyway, and i think that needs to be kept in mind whenever our beliefs clash with other peoples in a public forum like politics and voting. bigotry and thinking we have a divine mandate to scourge society of all that we see as unfit never works out well. in the book of mormon, it was the self-righteous as well as the un-religious that caused the destruction of society.
so, don't take my word for anything more than what it is, my opinion. think about it yourself. pray about it. whatever you do to make a decision. one thing i suggest, don't think all in ideals. don't think all in trends. i'm a mystic, sure, i love ideas and living in a metaphysical world, but i want to live in the real one, too. you can do both. have a dual nature. i think we're old enough to start taking some of the responsibility of bringing ideas into the real world. and one of those ideas that we should bring into the real world is that we can all of God's children can live together in harmony, and be able to use their agency, whether that means believing that homosexuality is wrong or believing that people should be able to love each other however they choose.
so there you have it. i don't support the amendment. i'm not voting for it. first of all, i think it's stupid and second of all i support equal rights. but i also consider myself to be religious. and those two things seem to not mesh right away. but they will. i am refining my opinions all the time. i do not come to conclusions quickly. but i come to them, and hopefully when i do, they are the right ones.
**end message.
i hope i don't sound like an arrogant prick here. i think maybe i do: i am so smart and i think about things and no one else does! that's not how i mean to sound. it's probably what i think in my subconscious, but i would never let everyone else know like this :).
text of message:
first of all, here's something i need to establish. that i understand that whatever the prophets and GAs say is generally a trump card, and that that is the way it is in Provo and with most LDS people that i am every going to talk to about this issue, and that's okay. i understand that and totally respect that, and i think it's a valid reason to be voting however you are voting.
but for me, it doesn't fly. especially on the issue of gay rights, because i've found that everything that i personally believe in basically goes head to head with official church statements of late.
of late being these last couple of months, because before that with all the literature the church has recently put out (god loves his children, the oak's interview from awhile ago, a couple of ensign articles) it seemed like the church was taking a fairly progressive stance and i liked what they were working with there.
however, i feel like the church's enormous support for prop 8 and anti-lgbt legislation is a step backwards.
i also feel like provo is a sinkhole of anti-gay rhetoric, and i've sort of given up trying to defend my beliefs, which is sad, because the majority is adamantly, fanatically against my beliefs. well, that's probably not true. i feel like when i do bring up issues, people are a lot more caring and loving and understanding than i expect.
but i think this has been hightened by the prop 8 rallies. yes, i know all about the official support, and the special broadcast, and how california members are supposed to be donating all this time and energy to support the effort, and that's all really interesting because they church doesn't often take official positions like this, though it has an amazing amount of manpower and is an extremely effective network for this kind of situation (which makes me feel kind of sad that we utilize this for anti-gay culture war issues but we would never do that for any sort of anti-war movement. but anyway, that's different, i guess.)
so basically, what i'm trying to say is that i feel like there is no room whatsoever for dissent or questioning of any kind in this town concerning prop 8, and i think that's too bad. that's what life is for: to question and dissent from what's "right"and try and find out the truth of all things. that is the plan of salvation. that is what we fought for--to come to earth and be individuals who make mistakes and question things, and sometimes question things and get it right, and sometimes question things and get it wrong, but still have the ability to come to the truth anyway.
this relates to this issue, i swear. because yes, i have a testimony and i'm not an apostate, but i still want to be able to struggle with this issue in the normal realm, and not just be all "well the prophet said so, so i don't want to hear anything against it." i can't do that. i can't live like that, especially not with this issue.
okay.
now, to concretes. because we can deal in ideas and trends all day, but that won't get us anywhere because if there are not concrete examples, then your ideals are no more valid than mine. got that?
here's the thing: same-sex marriage is already illegal in florida. it's in our state laws several different times. we already have a defense of marriage act. so if you are voting for it because you don't want gay people to get married, don't worry. they already can't. this isn't a debate about whether gay marriage has to be recognized or not, or that churches will have to recognize gay marriage or else they will be shut down. that's not what voting this law down would do. if it doesn't pass, nothing changes. the LGBT community doesn't suddenly have the right to get married. that would take a lot lot lot more legislation. the only thing that would happen is that it wouldn't pass.
so what does it mean if it does pass? that's debatable. there are several theories. i think they are all valid and possible, but i encourage you to research them yourself. first, it's to galvanize the religious right and get them out to the polls. if there are more right-wing voters voting in florida, which is traditionally a swing state, then it will go mccain, and that is a lot votes to be throwing at mccain. florida has a ton of electoral votes. so that would make it totally worth it for a lot of the Right to do this amendment just for that.
second of all, there are lots of senior citizens living in florida. a lot of senior citizens do not get married, because they would lose some social security benefits, but they still want to have visiting rights, ect. i don't ethically believe this is right, it's cheating the system and while the system sucks and deserves to be cheated, it still is dishonest. anyway, it would definitely be within the corporate government's interest to somehow get these senior citizens to stop having their cake and eating it too, and this law could very well do that.
now, the pro-amendment people will tell you that this isn't true, that's stretching the wording of the admendment and that's not what will happen. here's the wording of the amendment:
Inasmuch as a marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.
i think it could definitely go that way. supporters of the amendment argue that by not having this law in florida or in california, you are somehow endangering freedom of religion. that because a law like this is passed, churches or schools or other institutions that do not allow gay marriage could be shut down. i think this is also stretching it--if it's possible for that to happen if the law doesn't pass, it's possible for senior citizens and other unmarried couples, those that are in a legal union but not husband and wife, to also not be recognized as having the same rights as other married couples.
however, i don't think that will happen. if it passes, the courts won't let it outlaw partnership laws for senior citizens. i also don't think the courts would shut down churches because of their beliefs. i would hope that wise justices would recognize that this is a country where people are able to believe how they choose, and if that means that we don't allow gay students to attend byu, then that is what we chose. i agreed to that when i came here. (ps---this line of thought does need more development. but really, i see the argument that the defeat of these amendments as an attack on our freedom of belief as completely absurd. do you actually think that would happen? maybe. but only because of fanaticism, which these kind of laws don't solve, they only inflame.)
all that said, you are right. if the prophet is inspired to tell us something about how we should vote, well, God does know all things and He loves all his children way more than i ever could, and i have to have faith in that. but he didn't say that for florida. there's a proposition in arizona like this one, too, and they haven't said anything about that. he was inspired and directed to issue this fatwa for california, but not for the other places. if the prophet doesn't say, it means vote on your own judgement. and this is my judgement.
and freedom, and specifically, the freedom to believe however we choose
and see fit, is the most important freedom we have. but i think that in this day in age, it's also really important to make sure religion and belief and whatever that means to you is still examined. and that's what i'm trying to do. and also, it is most important that belief doesn't become fanatical. i've spent way too much time in southern baptist flordia and in the middle east to ever ever try and impose my beliefs on other people in anyway, and i think that needs to be kept in mind whenever our beliefs clash with other peoples in a public forum like politics and voting. bigotry and thinking we have a divine mandate to scourge society of all that we see as unfit never works out well. in the book of mormon, it was the self-righteous as well as the un-religious that caused the destruction of society.
so, don't take my word for anything more than what it is, my opinion. think about it yourself. pray about it. whatever you do to make a decision. one thing i suggest, don't think all in ideals. don't think all in trends. i'm a mystic, sure, i love ideas and living in a metaphysical world, but i want to live in the real one, too. you can do both. have a dual nature. i think we're old enough to start taking some of the responsibility of bringing ideas into the real world. and one of those ideas that we should bring into the real world is that we can all of God's children can live together in harmony, and be able to use their agency, whether that means believing that homosexuality is wrong or believing that people should be able to love each other however they choose.
so there you have it. i don't support the amendment. i'm not voting for it. first of all, i think it's stupid and second of all i support equal rights. but i also consider myself to be religious. and those two things seem to not mesh right away. but they will. i am refining my opinions all the time. i do not come to conclusions quickly. but i come to them, and hopefully when i do, they are the right ones.
**end message.
i hope i don't sound like an arrogant prick here. i think maybe i do: i am so smart and i think about things and no one else does! that's not how i mean to sound. it's probably what i think in my subconscious, but i would never let everyone else know like this :).
Friday, October 3, 2008
Invisible
I was talking to Nacia a week or two ago about the biases that we have and don't even notice. its a weird topic to approach; if donald rumsfield was actually a thinkin' man, i would say that undetected biases are what he meant by those "unknown unknowns." because the thing is about real bias, to you, it isn't bias--to yourself, you just think you're right.
one hint i've used to detect this unknown unknown is i probably have some sort of bias when i just can't manage to be on the same communication planet as someone else--where you have No Idea where they are coming from, and there is basically no point where you can reference. If you realize the difference, it's not something that you can breach because....well, you just can't. you can't let yourself sink to that level. that's the bias. you know (think) you're right.
let me put this in concretes.
there were a number of things that absolutely disturbed me about the presidential foreign policy debate and the VP debate, but the number one issue was the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and how it is talked about and portrayed in the debates and by the US mass media.
For example, yesterday the VPs discussed the issue at length, for a whole segment or so. but not ONCE did they even SAY the word Palestine or Palestinians. not even the word. no comments. no references. just unabashed, unfettered declarations of love for Israel. Biden and Palin were in complete agreement about their undying, loving devotion to Israel, and their running mates, based on the last debate and other past statements, are in absolute agreement as well. its unanimous: the next administration no matter who is elected offers no bright light at the end of the tunnel for Palestinians (or the LGBT community, either, but that's a whole 'nother disgusting issue of disappointment). Palin even had the gall to mention that they would work toward building an embassy in Jerusalem. i mean, holy shit! freaking sign Palin up for the likud party! grrr....
the point is, current US foreign policy on israel/palestine is completely not on the same planet i am. i don't understand how it could possibly BE the way it is, and you know, i don't think i want to. cuz i think i'm right. bias.
some examples of things i absolutely do not understand:
1) why does everyone trip over each other to pay homage to israel? why does everyone que up to kiss israel's ass? sure, its our "only ally in the middle east." but saddam hussein was our ally as long as it served our interests, and as soon as it didn't anymore...yeah. being our ally has nothing to do with being the "good guy" (http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/breaking/110568.html) or being "right" or noble or anything like that. it's politics. i guess i understand that, as in i know how it works. and i guess that its our ally because its the only other democracy in the region, but if you want to claim israel as a democracy with all its human right abuses, than you should be able to claim turkey as one, too, and we don't really have anything to do with them (though i guess we ignore the plight of the turkey's kurdish population just as much as we do the palestinians, if not more, so look! it is the same). and is it really because israel is the holy blessed country of god's chosen people or something? thats another one of those religious notions that i always thought, before i came to The BYU, that no one really thinks like that anymore, along with other "duh" issues like women's rights and evolution, and sadly, there have been waaaaay too many times where my hopeful notions of what general sanity means have been proven to be just naivete (sure, bias, i suppose). so i wish that wasn't a factor, but the sad truth is it probably is. I'd just have to do a survey of my sunday school class to find out, but i don't want to take a chance on wounding my fragile testimony or organized religion.
2) why does everyone continue to ignore the fact that the israelis participate in illegal actions? I feel like anytime there is ever, Ever, just one remark that shows the Palestinians as victims, or mentions that hey, guess what, it sucks for 1.5 million people to live in a tiny strip of land with no access to economic resources or control of their own power or food sources and little to no infrastructure and be denied the right to leave, or that hundreds of illegal jewish settlers in the west bank violently attack palestinian villages and people, if anything like that is ever said, then it's all, "the israelis have got to protect themselves!" and man, have they gotten good at 'protecting' themselves. obviously, being such good allies of the US, they took a page out of our Iraqi/WoT handbook and decided that the best defense is a killer offense. These are some of my favorite (read:disgusting) statistics: http://www.btselem.org/English/Statistics/Casualties.asp
check out the rest of the website, B'Tselem, an Israeli Human Rights group. it's powerful. and its undeniable--the israelis are guilty guilty guilty, just as guilty of terrible crimes and offenses, if not more so at this point, than the Palestinians are. How could you ever say that it's "clear" who the bad guys are? okay. that sounds resonable. not.
3) what the heck the media is doing. that i cannot understand, in this situation, or in a million other situations around the world. i pull up CNN today, and all the "breaking news" links are about skinny dippers in japan and the view hosts and way way WAY too many useless gossip articles about the presidential candidates, and not anything new or useful or factual. i had to go through about 17 other articles in the newswire feed to find 3 paragraphs talking about violent deaths between feuding factions in Northwest India were over 40 people have died. but oh, my bad, you are right. that is not important, and neither are deaths in Palestine and in Iraq, and no one cares about Afghanistan anymore except Obama (sellout. don't even get me started). so yes, please tell us something vague and completely uninformative about the destruction of our economy and the democratic system.
so So many other things to say!
But this is ridiculous. because here's the thing: i know i'm not biased, i'm just searching for truth and answers. i don't want to wipe jews off the face of the planet or destroy israel or extract people, anyone!, from their homeland. Israel is a political, socio-economic, viable entity, and however it came about, it is there, and that's that. you have a right to exist. i saw some pro-Palestinian graffiti in Bethlehem once, and it read "to exist is to resist," and i like it a lot, especially because it was so true, and so ironic, because little did the artist know that it applies to both sides of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. they both exist there. they are both going to have to find a way to exist there. to exist is to resist, and that goes for all things in existence, Israeli or Palestinian or Kurd or Tibetan or whatever. no one wants to destroy israel just because they don't think they have the right to be there--that's not what all those "extremists" that call for israel's destruction are saying. they are saying stop the madness. stop the oppression. stop the blockades and the discrimination and the illegal settlements and illegal building of the wall, and everything!
why haven't we learned anything? why do we, as americans still not question? or why do we ask the wrong questions? why does the media fail us everytime? instead of hearing Ahmadinajad or other leaders in the ME saying hateful, violent things against Israel, and saying, "oh, well, they are anti-semitic and clearly enemies of israel and america and freedom and all that is good," why don't we ever ask, why does he say those kind of things? what would cause someone to hate another country that really poses no threat to them? that doesn't make sense. you cannot accept irrational explanations. it's the same type of bullshit they through at us after 9/11--they hate us because of our freedom. i was 13 and i knew that was crap and it didn't make sense. it felt like i was in those sunday school classes you always read about in atheist/agnostic memoirs, where the author heroically asked hard questions until the teacher couldn't answer them anymore, "that's just the way it is, okay?!" never mind that it doesn't make sense. believe. why do you accept that as an answer? don't ever accept that as an answer! why do they hate us because of our freedom? why does Ahmadinajad and Hamas and Zachariah Sheik and so many others want to destroy Israel? the answer is out there, just like it is for religion, you just can't let the Authority, sunday school or the news media or politicians, tell you that it's not. don't let them tell you they already have the answer. especially when you know that can't possibly be the answer. that's just the way it is. they hate us because of our freedom. israel is always the good guy, the victim, and the ally.
because accepting that, that's worse than bias, to accept answers that you know don't make sense. that's worse than unknown unknowns, because that is a known unknown, and one you don't care enough about to find the answer to.
THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE!!!!
one hint i've used to detect this unknown unknown is i probably have some sort of bias when i just can't manage to be on the same communication planet as someone else--where you have No Idea where they are coming from, and there is basically no point where you can reference. If you realize the difference, it's not something that you can breach because....well, you just can't. you can't let yourself sink to that level. that's the bias. you know (think) you're right.
let me put this in concretes.
there were a number of things that absolutely disturbed me about the presidential foreign policy debate and the VP debate, but the number one issue was the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and how it is talked about and portrayed in the debates and by the US mass media.
For example, yesterday the VPs discussed the issue at length, for a whole segment or so. but not ONCE did they even SAY the word Palestine or Palestinians. not even the word. no comments. no references. just unabashed, unfettered declarations of love for Israel. Biden and Palin were in complete agreement about their undying, loving devotion to Israel, and their running mates, based on the last debate and other past statements, are in absolute agreement as well. its unanimous: the next administration no matter who is elected offers no bright light at the end of the tunnel for Palestinians (or the LGBT community, either, but that's a whole 'nother disgusting issue of disappointment). Palin even had the gall to mention that they would work toward building an embassy in Jerusalem. i mean, holy shit! freaking sign Palin up for the likud party! grrr....
the point is, current US foreign policy on israel/palestine is completely not on the same planet i am. i don't understand how it could possibly BE the way it is, and you know, i don't think i want to. cuz i think i'm right. bias.
some examples of things i absolutely do not understand:
1) why does everyone trip over each other to pay homage to israel? why does everyone que up to kiss israel's ass? sure, its our "only ally in the middle east." but saddam hussein was our ally as long as it served our interests, and as soon as it didn't anymore...yeah. being our ally has nothing to do with being the "good guy" (http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/breaking/110568.html) or being "right" or noble or anything like that. it's politics. i guess i understand that, as in i know how it works. and i guess that its our ally because its the only other democracy in the region, but if you want to claim israel as a democracy with all its human right abuses, than you should be able to claim turkey as one, too, and we don't really have anything to do with them (though i guess we ignore the plight of the turkey's kurdish population just as much as we do the palestinians, if not more, so look! it is the same). and is it really because israel is the holy blessed country of god's chosen people or something? thats another one of those religious notions that i always thought, before i came to The BYU, that no one really thinks like that anymore, along with other "duh" issues like women's rights and evolution, and sadly, there have been waaaaay too many times where my hopeful notions of what general sanity means have been proven to be just naivete (sure, bias, i suppose). so i wish that wasn't a factor, but the sad truth is it probably is. I'd just have to do a survey of my sunday school class to find out, but i don't want to take a chance on wounding my fragile testimony or organized religion.
2) why does everyone continue to ignore the fact that the israelis participate in illegal actions? I feel like anytime there is ever, Ever, just one remark that shows the Palestinians as victims, or mentions that hey, guess what, it sucks for 1.5 million people to live in a tiny strip of land with no access to economic resources or control of their own power or food sources and little to no infrastructure and be denied the right to leave, or that hundreds of illegal jewish settlers in the west bank violently attack palestinian villages and people, if anything like that is ever said, then it's all, "the israelis have got to protect themselves!" and man, have they gotten good at 'protecting' themselves. obviously, being such good allies of the US, they took a page out of our Iraqi/WoT handbook and decided that the best defense is a killer offense. These are some of my favorite (read:disgusting) statistics: http://www.btselem.org/English/Statistics/Casualties.asp
check out the rest of the website, B'Tselem, an Israeli Human Rights group. it's powerful. and its undeniable--the israelis are guilty guilty guilty, just as guilty of terrible crimes and offenses, if not more so at this point, than the Palestinians are. How could you ever say that it's "clear" who the bad guys are? okay. that sounds resonable. not.
3) what the heck the media is doing. that i cannot understand, in this situation, or in a million other situations around the world. i pull up CNN today, and all the "breaking news" links are about skinny dippers in japan and the view hosts and way way WAY too many useless gossip articles about the presidential candidates, and not anything new or useful or factual. i had to go through about 17 other articles in the newswire feed to find 3 paragraphs talking about violent deaths between feuding factions in Northwest India were over 40 people have died. but oh, my bad, you are right. that is not important, and neither are deaths in Palestine and in Iraq, and no one cares about Afghanistan anymore except Obama (sellout. don't even get me started). so yes, please tell us something vague and completely uninformative about the destruction of our economy and the democratic system.
so So many other things to say!
But this is ridiculous. because here's the thing: i know i'm not biased, i'm just searching for truth and answers. i don't want to wipe jews off the face of the planet or destroy israel or extract people, anyone!, from their homeland. Israel is a political, socio-economic, viable entity, and however it came about, it is there, and that's that. you have a right to exist. i saw some pro-Palestinian graffiti in Bethlehem once, and it read "to exist is to resist," and i like it a lot, especially because it was so true, and so ironic, because little did the artist know that it applies to both sides of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. they both exist there. they are both going to have to find a way to exist there. to exist is to resist, and that goes for all things in existence, Israeli or Palestinian or Kurd or Tibetan or whatever. no one wants to destroy israel just because they don't think they have the right to be there--that's not what all those "extremists" that call for israel's destruction are saying. they are saying stop the madness. stop the oppression. stop the blockades and the discrimination and the illegal settlements and illegal building of the wall, and everything!
why haven't we learned anything? why do we, as americans still not question? or why do we ask the wrong questions? why does the media fail us everytime? instead of hearing Ahmadinajad or other leaders in the ME saying hateful, violent things against Israel, and saying, "oh, well, they are anti-semitic and clearly enemies of israel and america and freedom and all that is good," why don't we ever ask, why does he say those kind of things? what would cause someone to hate another country that really poses no threat to them? that doesn't make sense. you cannot accept irrational explanations. it's the same type of bullshit they through at us after 9/11--they hate us because of our freedom. i was 13 and i knew that was crap and it didn't make sense. it felt like i was in those sunday school classes you always read about in atheist/agnostic memoirs, where the author heroically asked hard questions until the teacher couldn't answer them anymore, "that's just the way it is, okay?!" never mind that it doesn't make sense. believe. why do you accept that as an answer? don't ever accept that as an answer! why do they hate us because of our freedom? why does Ahmadinajad and Hamas and Zachariah Sheik and so many others want to destroy Israel? the answer is out there, just like it is for religion, you just can't let the Authority, sunday school or the news media or politicians, tell you that it's not. don't let them tell you they already have the answer. especially when you know that can't possibly be the answer. that's just the way it is. they hate us because of our freedom. israel is always the good guy, the victim, and the ally.
because accepting that, that's worse than bias, to accept answers that you know don't make sense. that's worse than unknown unknowns, because that is a known unknown, and one you don't care enough about to find the answer to.
THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE!!!!
Monday, September 29, 2008
Pouty Paulson
awww, he looks so sad!!!
yay america for not being crazy and yay congress for listening to the PEOPLE.
Saturday, September 6, 2008
the best and the brightest
and once again, Jon Stewart and the fake media do the job the real media should have done.
Saturday, August 23, 2008
...and i began to pray.....
I've done a bit of traveling in the last two years, but i have never really felt the urge to travel blog at all. the pressing need to blog at all is something that (un?)fortunately comes and goes, anyway.
but after traveling mainly by myself for the last three and a half days, i feel like all these things have happened--and i haven't share them with anyone! !!!.
which brings me to the possibly pre-mature conclusion that i do not actually enjoy traveling by myself. however, there are so many people who do, and i think the general idea of traveling alone is somewhat attractive, or at least very romanticized and i like those sort of things, that i'll probably try it again in the future. maybe. maybe not.
heavens, why would i do that, though? i get along with most people, and i think that i'm a pretty fun/chill/nice person, who wouldn't want to be my travel companion? i think it would be a disservice to humanity to continue to travel alone--it would be a waste of my fabu abilities and personality. so there.
anyway, i got to san francisco three days ago and instantly mastered the public transportation system. suck on that, BART and CALTRAIN and and AirBART and MUNI buses and five million other acronyms! you can't outsmart me! i'm a map-reader! Post-Jordan instance of confusion #1: transportation here has actual schedules and leave on time and stuff. since i have consistently not been on time to things and missed the bus, i don't know if this is actually a good/more efficient way of doing things.
also, i rode the cable car. it was fun when i was like, "hey! i'm riding a cable car! @#$%!" and then it wasn't fun anymore because it cost, like, 11 dollars and also doesn't go very fast. moral of the story: cable cars belong in the category of Touristy Things Everyone Does But That Actually Suck.
anyway, i spent the rest of the afternoon stubbling around the Russian and Nob Hills neighborhoods of San Francisco, which are beautiful and hilly and have many alluring ice cream shops. i enjoyed finding grassy, woodsy spots in the middle of the city, like small parks or cool backyards, good trees. potted plants. they have an amazing little grassy spot overlooking the city a couple blocks up from the famous Lumbard street, it's beautiful and great for taking your shoes off. i haven't slept in the grass in sooo long...
I met some interesting people the first day. best of all, we spoke in english. i've just been wallowing in the delight of making conversation with people in english for the week that i've been back in the US. today, i sat in my friend's cousin's living room for twenty minutes, and they were all talking and i was just sitting there, and i understood everything that was said! without even trying! native languages are awesome! anyway, the first man i met introduced himself as Eskimo. he was a six foot black man with the largest diamond rings i have ever seen, bigger than Jordanian college girls, who sat across from me on the BART train. he complimented my outfit, which meant a lot to me because he was wearing a black velvor suitcoat and tux pants like it was normal at 2 in the afternoon, and so that was cool. he told me the first thing i should do in San Fran is go the Gucci store, and then go to the mall. then he asked for my email address. i'm still in Jordan-avoid males mode, so i didn't give it to him, then when he was getting off at the same subway stop i was, i rode to the next one and then back tracked. it was probably smart, anyway.
my first day, i also ate at the greatest seafood restuarant (oh! fresh shrimp! it has been too long!), Swan something or other on some street (just ask around or something), and that is where i met a man named Mike. he'd lived in San Francisco for 16 years and he loved everything about it. when he found out that i was here by myself and that i had spent the past four months studying in Amman, he referred to me repeatedly as "very balls-y", which i admit, i quite enjoyed, though the actual truth of that statement is in question. anyway, he was very entertaining, and i enjoyed playing the use-other-excuses-than-mormonism-for-why-i-can't-drink game with him ('under twenty-one' never works, 'alcoholism runs in my family' always does), and he and his friends shared their oysters with me. they were the kind that you just slurp right out of the shell, which was a first for me. the first one i ate was loaded with tobasco sauce, and i had to pretend that it was too hot for me, because they were all old men and i didn't want to show them up with my hot-foods toleration prowess. the second one i ate just by itself, just slurped that little thang right up, and it tasted exactly like what i image licking a seaside dock would taste like.
later that day, when i was hanging out in this cool park, i met a kid from boston who was hanging out for the summer in San Francisco with his brother and a few friends. we talked about obama and foreign relations and the middle east and books and how he is dropping out of college because he invented the facebook graffiti application and has a pretty solid thing going with that. so that's cool, i met someone who influences all of our lives in one little way :).
The next day, i explored this marsh land around Palo Alto. PA is where mallory has been living, its the town near Stanford. It's cute in general here. cute houses, cute downtown area, cute people. cute! but the marshlands were pretty great. marshy-ness and the smells it generates reminds me of my childhood. unfortunately, i was not exactly prepared for this type of adventure, and got some kind of nice clothes really extremely dirty, especially when i was scaling the balcony of an abandoned ranger station (which, by the way, trespassing is way scarier in the US than in Jordan, because you can't pull that whole 'i don't speak the language here' thing to avoid being arrested) and trekking thru mud that mysteriously swallowed my shoes (i got them back). anyway, after that i went to the cute parts of town, but i still smelled like marsh so it was even cooler. later met up with Mal and we ate Thai food, which i'm always told is awesome, and it's not bad, but i like indian better.
So yesterday, i performed another wonderous feat of public transportation and went to Santa Cruz, the Nor Cal surfing capital. Oh
my
GOODNESS GRACIOUS the water is freezing cold there.
i think the first day, i swam for maybe a total of an hour. it didn't help that with wind chill, the air temp was only about 65. it was sunny outside, but it was all a facade, that sun. you couldn't feel a single ray. The second day, in despair and desparate for some ocean time, a rented a wetsuit. this allowed me to swim for an hour and a half. blah. i could go to the beach in january in florida and the water would have been warmer.
i also ate the most delicious blueberry pancakes of my life in this city. i walked up to some man, asked him if he knew the area, and then asked him where in the heck i could get some pancakes. Linda's Seabreeze Cafe. Homey and bizzare, excellent pancakes.
i didn't meet very many people in Santa Cruz. it was because a) i was too busy trying to figure out how to swim without dying b) i was eating pancakes or corn on the cob, both of which were kinda overly sensual experiences and people could just tell i need some time to be alone and eat c) a lot of people were on drugs or had that shabab leer going on, so i didn't want to talk to them d) my roommates at the hostel were old ladies who went to bed at 9 and a surly french girl who never made eye contact with me e) when you did talk to people, hey used the phrase "right on" a lot, and i don't know how to respond to/handle that.
anyway, i have another week to knock out San Francisco and the surrounding territories, and also add to the list of things i've learned during my first independent traveling experience. seriously, this is the story of learning experiences. awesome! not.
but after traveling mainly by myself for the last three and a half days, i feel like all these things have happened--and i haven't share them with anyone! !!!.
which brings me to the possibly pre-mature conclusion that i do not actually enjoy traveling by myself. however, there are so many people who do, and i think the general idea of traveling alone is somewhat attractive, or at least very romanticized and i like those sort of things, that i'll probably try it again in the future. maybe. maybe not.
heavens, why would i do that, though? i get along with most people, and i think that i'm a pretty fun/chill/nice person, who wouldn't want to be my travel companion? i think it would be a disservice to humanity to continue to travel alone--it would be a waste of my fabu abilities and personality. so there.
anyway, i got to san francisco three days ago and instantly mastered the public transportation system. suck on that, BART and CALTRAIN and and AirBART and MUNI buses and five million other acronyms! you can't outsmart me! i'm a map-reader! Post-Jordan instance of confusion #1: transportation here has actual schedules and leave on time and stuff. since i have consistently not been on time to things and missed the bus, i don't know if this is actually a good/more efficient way of doing things.
also, i rode the cable car. it was fun when i was like, "hey! i'm riding a cable car! @#$%!" and then it wasn't fun anymore because it cost, like, 11 dollars and also doesn't go very fast. moral of the story: cable cars belong in the category of Touristy Things Everyone Does But That Actually Suck.
anyway, i spent the rest of the afternoon stubbling around the Russian and Nob Hills neighborhoods of San Francisco, which are beautiful and hilly and have many alluring ice cream shops. i enjoyed finding grassy, woodsy spots in the middle of the city, like small parks or cool backyards, good trees. potted plants. they have an amazing little grassy spot overlooking the city a couple blocks up from the famous Lumbard street, it's beautiful and great for taking your shoes off. i haven't slept in the grass in sooo long...
I met some interesting people the first day. best of all, we spoke in english. i've just been wallowing in the delight of making conversation with people in english for the week that i've been back in the US. today, i sat in my friend's cousin's living room for twenty minutes, and they were all talking and i was just sitting there, and i understood everything that was said! without even trying! native languages are awesome! anyway, the first man i met introduced himself as Eskimo. he was a six foot black man with the largest diamond rings i have ever seen, bigger than Jordanian college girls, who sat across from me on the BART train. he complimented my outfit, which meant a lot to me because he was wearing a black velvor suitcoat and tux pants like it was normal at 2 in the afternoon, and so that was cool. he told me the first thing i should do in San Fran is go the Gucci store, and then go to the mall. then he asked for my email address. i'm still in Jordan-avoid males mode, so i didn't give it to him, then when he was getting off at the same subway stop i was, i rode to the next one and then back tracked. it was probably smart, anyway.
my first day, i also ate at the greatest seafood restuarant (oh! fresh shrimp! it has been too long!), Swan something or other on some street (just ask around or something), and that is where i met a man named Mike. he'd lived in San Francisco for 16 years and he loved everything about it. when he found out that i was here by myself and that i had spent the past four months studying in Amman, he referred to me repeatedly as "very balls-y", which i admit, i quite enjoyed, though the actual truth of that statement is in question. anyway, he was very entertaining, and i enjoyed playing the use-other-excuses-than-mormonism-for-why-i-can't-drink game with him ('under twenty-one' never works, 'alcoholism runs in my family' always does), and he and his friends shared their oysters with me. they were the kind that you just slurp right out of the shell, which was a first for me. the first one i ate was loaded with tobasco sauce, and i had to pretend that it was too hot for me, because they were all old men and i didn't want to show them up with my hot-foods toleration prowess. the second one i ate just by itself, just slurped that little thang right up, and it tasted exactly like what i image licking a seaside dock would taste like.
later that day, when i was hanging out in this cool park, i met a kid from boston who was hanging out for the summer in San Francisco with his brother and a few friends. we talked about obama and foreign relations and the middle east and books and how he is dropping out of college because he invented the facebook graffiti application and has a pretty solid thing going with that. so that's cool, i met someone who influences all of our lives in one little way :).
The next day, i explored this marsh land around Palo Alto. PA is where mallory has been living, its the town near Stanford. It's cute in general here. cute houses, cute downtown area, cute people. cute! but the marshlands were pretty great. marshy-ness and the smells it generates reminds me of my childhood. unfortunately, i was not exactly prepared for this type of adventure, and got some kind of nice clothes really extremely dirty, especially when i was scaling the balcony of an abandoned ranger station (which, by the way, trespassing is way scarier in the US than in Jordan, because you can't pull that whole 'i don't speak the language here' thing to avoid being arrested) and trekking thru mud that mysteriously swallowed my shoes (i got them back). anyway, after that i went to the cute parts of town, but i still smelled like marsh so it was even cooler. later met up with Mal and we ate Thai food, which i'm always told is awesome, and it's not bad, but i like indian better.
So yesterday, i performed another wonderous feat of public transportation and went to Santa Cruz, the Nor Cal surfing capital. Oh
my
GOODNESS GRACIOUS the water is freezing cold there.
i think the first day, i swam for maybe a total of an hour. it didn't help that with wind chill, the air temp was only about 65. it was sunny outside, but it was all a facade, that sun. you couldn't feel a single ray. The second day, in despair and desparate for some ocean time, a rented a wetsuit. this allowed me to swim for an hour and a half. blah. i could go to the beach in january in florida and the water would have been warmer.
i also ate the most delicious blueberry pancakes of my life in this city. i walked up to some man, asked him if he knew the area, and then asked him where in the heck i could get some pancakes. Linda's Seabreeze Cafe. Homey and bizzare, excellent pancakes.
i didn't meet very many people in Santa Cruz. it was because a) i was too busy trying to figure out how to swim without dying b) i was eating pancakes or corn on the cob, both of which were kinda overly sensual experiences and people could just tell i need some time to be alone and eat c) a lot of people were on drugs or had that shabab leer going on, so i didn't want to talk to them d) my roommates at the hostel were old ladies who went to bed at 9 and a surly french girl who never made eye contact with me e) when you did talk to people, hey used the phrase "right on" a lot, and i don't know how to respond to/handle that.
anyway, i have another week to knock out San Francisco and the surrounding territories, and also add to the list of things i've learned during my first independent traveling experience. seriously, this is the story of learning experiences. awesome! not.
Friday, August 15, 2008
it came from beneath
so....i sucked at that whole update your blog and tell people about your life half way across the world thing.
but i have about twelve more hours in jordan and i'm totally the deathbed repentance type, so i'll go for it one last time.
things i will miss about jordan:
-pita bread
-30 qersh (about fifty cent) falafel
-being able to get on the roof of any building, anywhere
-the foreigner treatment (the good kind where you get things for free and stuff)
-two hour church block
-microbuses can take you anywhere in the country
-fireworks all over the city every night
-adventures with comrade Nikki and other assorted peoples
-the complete removal from my 'real' (aka stateside) life and the amazing perspective this allows
i'd write a rebuttal "things i wont miss" list, but i don't want to get all angsty again, not when i'm so close to getting out. one of my biggest accomplishments this summer is that as bitter as i may have been at times, i'm not leaving bitter. i don't hate Amman. i don't hate arabic, or arabs, or my teachers here. i don't even really hate my host family (though i am never ever never doing a homestay again). i probably will record some of my bitterness so that i can have something to bring me back to earth when i'm feeling all nostalgic and romantic and orientalist about my time here, but not in this public forum.
but hey, i still have twelve more hours. and a day in egypt. and a return to the middle east in a very short time. this isn't a send off. this isn't an end. i can't even attempt to draw some overarching conclusions until the 12 hour plane ride. but these sort of things, study abroads and surrealism and such, they don't really have appropriate endings anyway. they just sort of taper off or explode violently or get drowned in this weird sleety white-wash of everything that has happened in the past period replaying itsself in your mind. how very very strange it all is, all these people i've met and things i've done and thoughts i've had.
fare thee.
but i have about twelve more hours in jordan and i'm totally the deathbed repentance type, so i'll go for it one last time.
things i will miss about jordan:
-pita bread
-30 qersh (about fifty cent) falafel
-being able to get on the roof of any building, anywhere
-the foreigner treatment (the good kind where you get things for free and stuff)
-two hour church block
-microbuses can take you anywhere in the country
-fireworks all over the city every night
-adventures with comrade Nikki and other assorted peoples
-the complete removal from my 'real' (aka stateside) life and the amazing perspective this allows
i'd write a rebuttal "things i wont miss" list, but i don't want to get all angsty again, not when i'm so close to getting out. one of my biggest accomplishments this summer is that as bitter as i may have been at times, i'm not leaving bitter. i don't hate Amman. i don't hate arabic, or arabs, or my teachers here. i don't even really hate my host family (though i am never ever never doing a homestay again). i probably will record some of my bitterness so that i can have something to bring me back to earth when i'm feeling all nostalgic and romantic and orientalist about my time here, but not in this public forum.
but hey, i still have twelve more hours. and a day in egypt. and a return to the middle east in a very short time. this isn't a send off. this isn't an end. i can't even attempt to draw some overarching conclusions until the 12 hour plane ride. but these sort of things, study abroads and surrealism and such, they don't really have appropriate endings anyway. they just sort of taper off or explode violently or get drowned in this weird sleety white-wash of everything that has happened in the past period replaying itsself in your mind. how very very strange it all is, all these people i've met and things i've done and thoughts i've had.
fare thee.
Sunday, May 25, 2008
o holy night
Tonight was one of the most surreal nights of my life.
i feel like i've started a lot stories that way in the past year or so--if everything is so surreal, than maybe it's not so much surreal as my perception of reality is a bit off.
anyway.
Abdoun circle is aparently this really fun place to hang out in Amman. my 17 year old host brother muhammed says he's there almost every night, and Tamara, my 25 year old host sister, agrees, though she doesn't want to go with Muhammed. She refuses to go with him, even though we all meet up, Tamara and Muhammed and Nikki and Muhammed's friend and i, we all meet up later at Abdoun circle like that was the plan all along and there wasn't a minor scene at the apartment about who was coming with who where.
anyway.
By the time Muhammed and Lutfi (maybe friends name, i'm never really sure) get there, i'm well on my way to bewilderment and sulking from the sheer incomprehension of everything that is going on.
Today is a holiday. no school. no work. Eid al-Istaklal--independence day in Jordan. We're watching cars go in cirlces around the duwar, honking repetatively, which is not abnormal for the ME, and waving jordanian flags and shouting, they keep going around and around and Oh Holy Night is playing over the cafe loudspeakers, and it's a version that i recognize, and old one, but i can't remember the singer and i don't think i ever knew it. the waiter brings us a complimentary cake, and it's not because of the two american girls it's because tamara is particularly captivating in a way i don't understand yet, and it's just a very very weird independence day. i can't remember too many other times when i've felt less independent in my entire life. and why the hell are they playing american christmas music at the end of may in a jordanian cafe. i don't even like this cake.
i'm still watching the cars, and trying to figure out how else i can tell my host siblings that i'm not unhappy i'm just tired, and i think about what Melissa said to me once about cars when we were in high school. i thought it was such an interesting remark to make and i keep waiting for someone else to say it again, in a different time and place, because i think about it a lot and i'm sure other people are thinking the same thing. especially in the ME. she said once, driving is kind of weird. everyone is in these large metal boxes, and the whole point is to move around as fast as you can without hitting each other, and it's just weird that we don't take these big, fast, metal containers and run into each other with them more often. If you've seen the traffic here, you would understand why i think about this all the time. why don't we run into each other more often? but i was thinking about this in a weird context the other day. in my hotel room, talking to lydia. i was asking her, i was asking the rooom in general and most especially i was asking god, if we all just want the same thing, if we all are just looking for happiness and peace, if we are all just looking for love, if we are all just trying to learn as much as we can, we doesn't it get done so much, why is there is still so much unhappiness and war and death and destruction and everthing, and why is is still so hard. why dont we run into each other more. it seems like there should be more crashes in life, whatever that may mean in all it's different contexts, and there aren't.
anyway.
i'm watching all these people and their jordanian independence day pride, and it's really weird. it reminds me more of cheering for the home team, like a mass rally for the favorite soccer team, than an outpouring of patriotism which may or may not mask certain ideological viewpoints. patriotism here doesn't have a the connotations that it does in the US, were overt and adament patriotism is associated with only, idk, hicks and republicans and whoever else. how strange. how very strange everything is.
anyway.
we're getting a ride home with Tamara and Muhammed's cousin. he pulls up in a little tiny bright green clown car. seriously, i saw this thing at the circus once. and we have a total of 7 people that have to fit in it. it was the weirdest ride home ever. i don't even know what i was laughing at. i think the sheer absurdity of my life as i know it. i don't even know what is happening. where am i? what street is this? did i pay my share of the tab at dinner? why is Lutfi half in the trunk, is he okay? how do i say this in arabic? what are they saying and why can't i understand it? how am i going to get through tonight and the next and the next and the next three months? absurdity.
anyway. we're home. or somewhere like it. happy jordanian independence day.
i feel like i've started a lot stories that way in the past year or so--if everything is so surreal, than maybe it's not so much surreal as my perception of reality is a bit off.
anyway.
Abdoun circle is aparently this really fun place to hang out in Amman. my 17 year old host brother muhammed says he's there almost every night, and Tamara, my 25 year old host sister, agrees, though she doesn't want to go with Muhammed. She refuses to go with him, even though we all meet up, Tamara and Muhammed and Nikki and Muhammed's friend and i, we all meet up later at Abdoun circle like that was the plan all along and there wasn't a minor scene at the apartment about who was coming with who where.
anyway.
By the time Muhammed and Lutfi (maybe friends name, i'm never really sure) get there, i'm well on my way to bewilderment and sulking from the sheer incomprehension of everything that is going on.
Today is a holiday. no school. no work. Eid al-Istaklal--independence day in Jordan. We're watching cars go in cirlces around the duwar, honking repetatively, which is not abnormal for the ME, and waving jordanian flags and shouting, they keep going around and around and Oh Holy Night is playing over the cafe loudspeakers, and it's a version that i recognize, and old one, but i can't remember the singer and i don't think i ever knew it. the waiter brings us a complimentary cake, and it's not because of the two american girls it's because tamara is particularly captivating in a way i don't understand yet, and it's just a very very weird independence day. i can't remember too many other times when i've felt less independent in my entire life. and why the hell are they playing american christmas music at the end of may in a jordanian cafe. i don't even like this cake.
i'm still watching the cars, and trying to figure out how else i can tell my host siblings that i'm not unhappy i'm just tired, and i think about what Melissa said to me once about cars when we were in high school. i thought it was such an interesting remark to make and i keep waiting for someone else to say it again, in a different time and place, because i think about it a lot and i'm sure other people are thinking the same thing. especially in the ME. she said once, driving is kind of weird. everyone is in these large metal boxes, and the whole point is to move around as fast as you can without hitting each other, and it's just weird that we don't take these big, fast, metal containers and run into each other with them more often. If you've seen the traffic here, you would understand why i think about this all the time. why don't we run into each other more often? but i was thinking about this in a weird context the other day. in my hotel room, talking to lydia. i was asking her, i was asking the rooom in general and most especially i was asking god, if we all just want the same thing, if we all are just looking for happiness and peace, if we are all just looking for love, if we are all just trying to learn as much as we can, we doesn't it get done so much, why is there is still so much unhappiness and war and death and destruction and everthing, and why is is still so hard. why dont we run into each other more. it seems like there should be more crashes in life, whatever that may mean in all it's different contexts, and there aren't.
anyway.
i'm watching all these people and their jordanian independence day pride, and it's really weird. it reminds me more of cheering for the home team, like a mass rally for the favorite soccer team, than an outpouring of patriotism which may or may not mask certain ideological viewpoints. patriotism here doesn't have a the connotations that it does in the US, were overt and adament patriotism is associated with only, idk, hicks and republicans and whoever else. how strange. how very strange everything is.
anyway.
we're getting a ride home with Tamara and Muhammed's cousin. he pulls up in a little tiny bright green clown car. seriously, i saw this thing at the circus once. and we have a total of 7 people that have to fit in it. it was the weirdest ride home ever. i don't even know what i was laughing at. i think the sheer absurdity of my life as i know it. i don't even know what is happening. where am i? what street is this? did i pay my share of the tab at dinner? why is Lutfi half in the trunk, is he okay? how do i say this in arabic? what are they saying and why can't i understand it? how am i going to get through tonight and the next and the next and the next three months? absurdity.
anyway. we're home. or somewhere like it. happy jordanian independence day.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
dipthongs everywhere!
So, reading through my Arabic notes from the last semester, i've written some funny/stupid/weird things about Dil. Let me share some of them.
"If a tyrannosaurus rex grew up as an only child in an upper middle class household and then went on to be a university professor, he would look exactly like Dil."
To explain:
--i think this particular comment has to do with the angularity of his jawline and cheekbones, and the way that he compulsively smooths his hair with what can only be described as a clawing motion....just think about it guys...
--basically, dil has a rather unfathomable personality. as i have not actually gotten to know him personally, i have made up his past and other factors that i think made him what he is today, which is probably completely wrong but much more entertaining than the real thing.
1. Dil probably grew up as an only child. he was fabulously smart, but his parents didn't spoil him or fuss over him as some try to do. they sort of treated him like that really nice boat you get when you have the money, thinking you'll use it all the time, but actually you don't. just sometimes, when it's really sunny outside, you think 'oh, yeah! i have a boat!' and then you use it and it's fabulous, and then you forget it again for another 3 and a half months. well, Dil was like that boat. his parents were very rich, and often went to parties and forgot about him and didn't come home until 4 in the morning. however, none of this was very tragic; he actually appreciated all the time alone and read a lot of encyclopedias. he's had glasses since he was 3 years old. that was how dil's childhood went. he also had a really big, loyal dog, that he loved a lot but never told it.
2. Dil has never lied to anyone in his whole life. that is why he says weird things sometimes that are really funny--because he doesn't know how to tell anything but the truth, and the truth is pretty funny.
3. Dil likes being a professor, but his dream job would really be a tennis instructor. however, he never liked the way he looked in tennis shoes, they made his ankles look to skinny, so he gave that up a long time ago and never looked back. Dil is the kind of person who makes decisions and knows to never look back.
and that is my completely fabricated analysis of dil's personality.
one more thing from my arabic notes:
"dil parkinson is one of the only people who would probably look good in a mortarboard"
"If a tyrannosaurus rex grew up as an only child in an upper middle class household and then went on to be a university professor, he would look exactly like Dil."
To explain:
--i think this particular comment has to do with the angularity of his jawline and cheekbones, and the way that he compulsively smooths his hair with what can only be described as a clawing motion....just think about it guys...
--basically, dil has a rather unfathomable personality. as i have not actually gotten to know him personally, i have made up his past and other factors that i think made him what he is today, which is probably completely wrong but much more entertaining than the real thing.
1. Dil probably grew up as an only child. he was fabulously smart, but his parents didn't spoil him or fuss over him as some try to do. they sort of treated him like that really nice boat you get when you have the money, thinking you'll use it all the time, but actually you don't. just sometimes, when it's really sunny outside, you think 'oh, yeah! i have a boat!' and then you use it and it's fabulous, and then you forget it again for another 3 and a half months. well, Dil was like that boat. his parents were very rich, and often went to parties and forgot about him and didn't come home until 4 in the morning. however, none of this was very tragic; he actually appreciated all the time alone and read a lot of encyclopedias. he's had glasses since he was 3 years old. that was how dil's childhood went. he also had a really big, loyal dog, that he loved a lot but never told it.
2. Dil has never lied to anyone in his whole life. that is why he says weird things sometimes that are really funny--because he doesn't know how to tell anything but the truth, and the truth is pretty funny.
3. Dil likes being a professor, but his dream job would really be a tennis instructor. however, he never liked the way he looked in tennis shoes, they made his ankles look to skinny, so he gave that up a long time ago and never looked back. Dil is the kind of person who makes decisions and knows to never look back.
and that is my completely fabricated analysis of dil's personality.
one more thing from my arabic notes:
"dil parkinson is one of the only people who would probably look good in a mortarboard"
Saturday, April 12, 2008
cuz tonight is the night feva.....we know how ta do it...
Friday, March 28th:
at the library studying until midnight.
Friday, April 4th:
at the library studying until i pass out. Go home and sleep.
Friday, April 11th:
at the library, reading The Economist. Go home and try to sleep. can't sleep. read book (scriptures, moby dick, the great gatsby), watch movie (after the thin man), be annoying.
party-party.
at the library studying until midnight.
Friday, April 4th:
at the library studying until i pass out. Go home and sleep.
Friday, April 11th:
at the library, reading The Economist. Go home and try to sleep. can't sleep. read book (scriptures, moby dick, the great gatsby), watch movie (after the thin man), be annoying.
party-party.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
stealin' thunder
me: hey, is lindsey Brown the one that lives in apartment 7? what is her last name?
Tori: Yes brown, yes number 7. Pourquoi?
me: networking.
blech
8:48 PM Tori: delightful. we talked about that in one of my classes, I hear it works wonders
8:49 PM me: so i heard.
Tori: How are you networking with Lindsey?
me: i'm not really into artificial networking, though. so this assignment is annoying.
8:50 PM it's this list i have to make for this teach for america internship i'm applying for
you have to make a list of people you know who would be a "good fit" for TfA, you know, to prove that you can network and meet people
i thought lindsey would be good because she taught english in china for a year and is cool
8:55 PM ps are you at the library now?
8:56 PM Tori: no. I am not going to the library tonight. I only got four hours of sleep last night, so I am rewarding myself with a day off (which will probably end up with another four hour or less night this week since that was the beginning of the craziness).
right now I am trying to turn our skiing into a meaningful experience that I can turn into a presenation
me: what, our skiing wasn't meaningful?
9:00 PM Tori: well, everyone has done these incredibly creative presentations. It has to be more than just a narrative--did you learn anything incredible or have ah ha moment whilst skiing?
9:01 PM me: well, i turn everything into metaphors for my life, but they are often stupid.
here is the skiiing one:
Tori: try me--
9:02 PM me: see, we were skiing and skiing and it was okay but i didn't get what the big deal was. it was like, whatever.
9:03 PM and i didn't particularly like it. and i was disappointed, because i heard it was fun, but it really turned out to be one of those activities that people say is fun and make a big deal out of how cool it is, but really it's only okay. like, if i died and never went skiing, then i wouldn't really care.
9:04 PM so then we played frisbee for awhile, and that was way better than okay. it was great! i love frisbee! i love running! i love tackling people! i love spitting! i love falling in the snow! i love diving to catch a frisbee!
Tori: maybe I should interview of each of you for your reaction.
9:05 PM me: it was really awesome. but you know, you can't do frisbee forever, and i got tired, and you just can't keep doing it past a certain point or it just becomes, 'eh, frisbee', and not 'frisbee!'
so iwas like, let's go skiing again.
9:07 PM and this time it was so fun! man, it was great, i really liked it. i loved it. it's one of those times, you know, where you can't think of anything else you'd rather do Right Then. and i thought, hey this skiing thing really is as great as everyone said it is.
...so guess what that is a metaphor for.
what part of my life, i mean.
9:08 PM Tori: Thanks that was amzing.
me: no, it wasn't and you didn't guess, you don't even know the metaphor yet!
9:09 PM Tori: well, okay I'm still waiting
me: guess!!!!
it'll be more fun.
Tori: umm...its never what you expect?
9:10 PM me: haha, no-ish.
dating.
i'm still in the frisbee stage.
9:13 PM Tori: sorry. but yeah, I don't I can quite use a literal translation of that quote since of the audience in my class.
or maybe I should?
9:14 PM me: um, what?
Tori: bcz of the individuals in my class.
9:15 PM me: because......they'll think i'm stupid?
it doesn't matter.
9:16 PM Tori: no because elliot is in my class
9:18 PM me: OoOoOoOoooooooh.
um......it probably still doesn't matter. i don't know if you would want to use it anyway because it is rather silly.
9:20 PM Tori: I liked all of it and probably will use it--maybe just not the comparison to dating, but I really like that. frisbee stage. fun.
9:21 PM me: yup. fun.
9:22 PM you can use the comparison to dating if it works well with whatever you want to say. it doesn't really matter--it's pretty vague enough that it would fit into whatever elliot already knows/assumes about why i am not dating/interseted in him
9:23 PM Tori: so...I think you are probably at the library for a reason. But we should continue this conversation later.
me: good idea.
but hey, do you know anymore people i can "network" with?
9:24 PM Tori: I would love to have a philosophical conversation revolving around frisbees. But for now, good luck with your homework.
9:25 PM me: okay, bye.
Tori: k bye.
Friday, April 4, 2008
the truly glamorous are very smart people who tend to stay up too late at night
dove campaign for real beauty video introduced to me via my roommate Woan:
(Note: if you get queasy easily, there are a few disturbing plastic-surgery related images, so beware)
(Note: if you get queasy easily, there are a few disturbing plastic-surgery related images, so beware)
melt with u
a great section of a great podcast:
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/4/1/iraq_has_become_somaliaa_collection_of
this part was really good, the interview with Nir Rosen, but i recommend listening to the whole podcast because it also includes a great interview with one of the journalists involved in reporting on privacy violations and spying and government pressure to keep it quite.
One reason i really liked this podcast was because it articulated one of the reasons why, though i lean democrat in the general bipartisan debate, i feel vaguely uncomfortable whenever they talk Iraq.
"I mean, she’s[hillary clinton] just utterly contemptible. The Democrats in general are, because they’ve been blaming the Iraqis. I mean, we know that the Republicans are despicable, that this is their war, but the Democrats have also been blaming the Iraqis..."
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/4/1/iraq_has_become_somaliaa_collection_of
this part was really good, the interview with Nir Rosen, but i recommend listening to the whole podcast because it also includes a great interview with one of the journalists involved in reporting on privacy violations and spying and government pressure to keep it quite.
One reason i really liked this podcast was because it articulated one of the reasons why, though i lean democrat in the general bipartisan debate, i feel vaguely uncomfortable whenever they talk Iraq.
"I mean, she’s[hillary clinton] just utterly contemptible. The Democrats in general are, because they’ve been blaming the Iraqis. I mean, we know that the Republicans are despicable, that this is their war, but the Democrats have also been blaming the Iraqis..."
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Turn over the parts of yourself that scream to be left alone
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/01/world/middleeast/01hamas.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=israel+palestine&st=nyt&oref=slogin
This article made me cringe.
when i was writing my ME Social Patterns paper, i realized i have an automatic, knee-jerk reaction to see israel as satan. kind of like my auto-reject function for when boys ask me out. kind of like my auto-eat mode for whenever i see anything with at least 40% fat calories. auto-categorize israel as evil.
so that's probably why i hated this article.
that's probably also the reason why i should read it.
This article made me cringe.
when i was writing my ME Social Patterns paper, i realized i have an automatic, knee-jerk reaction to see israel as satan. kind of like my auto-reject function for when boys ask me out. kind of like my auto-eat mode for whenever i see anything with at least 40% fat calories. auto-categorize israel as evil.
so that's probably why i hated this article.
that's probably also the reason why i should read it.
an unbreakable bond
link given to me by friend, given to her by MESA class:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-morlims2apr02,1,2488142.story?page=2
my favorite part is this paragraph:
"Both religions strongly emphasize family. They tend toward patriarchy, believing in feminine modesty, chastity and virtue. And although Islam discourages dancing involving both sexes, Mormons report that church-sponsored "modesty proms" commonly draw Islamic youths."
Well, that's what it boils down to, folks.
the mormon-muslim bond is one of big, overly-invovled family life, the oppressive patriarchy, and alcohol-free, sex-free, exposed shoulders-free faux-proms.
ilhamdu lillah.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-morlims2apr02,1,2488142.story?page=2
my favorite part is this paragraph:
"Both religions strongly emphasize family. They tend toward patriarchy, believing in feminine modesty, chastity and virtue. And although Islam discourages dancing involving both sexes, Mormons report that church-sponsored "modesty proms" commonly draw Islamic youths."
Well, that's what it boils down to, folks.
the mormon-muslim bond is one of big, overly-invovled family life, the oppressive patriarchy, and alcohol-free, sex-free, exposed shoulders-free faux-proms.
ilhamdu lillah.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
my favorite compliments ever
things people have said about me (to my face or behind my back) that are awesome.
"Gini? Is she that girl that is kind of weird and wears big glasses?"
-some kid i had humanities class with to Tori
"you have a very symmetrical face"
-guy named johnathan (ps- i don't think he meant it this way, but symmetry is beauty http://www.usaweekend.com/03_issues/030601/030601symmetry.html)
"you are kinda hard to miss"
-kid named carl. i don't think he actually meant this either, but it's funny to think about.
"there is a nerd girl riding her bicycle....Gini is riding a bicycle..."
-my FHE group, in doing that sentence-picture-sentence thing. they also equated Holly with nerd, as well.
"all girls look stupid when they are running across campus to hug another girl. Except for Gini."
-Heather Dew, watching a girl running across campus to hug another girl, right before she realized that she was watching me.
"i've been here for eight hours, and you are the most adorable girl i have seen all day. i think it's the glasses"
-cute hispanic movie theatre ticket dude with a lip ring
"you can make people not feel so stupid by acting stupid."
-Colleen. okay, this is a serious misquote, she didn't mean it in this way at all, but it's funnier this way : ).
"Gini? Is she that girl that is kind of weird and wears big glasses?"
-some kid i had humanities class with to Tori
"you have a very symmetrical face"
-guy named johnathan (ps- i don't think he meant it this way, but symmetry is beauty http://www.usaweekend.com/03_issues/030601/030601symmetry.html)
"you are kinda hard to miss"
-kid named carl. i don't think he actually meant this either, but it's funny to think about.
"there is a nerd girl riding her bicycle....Gini is riding a bicycle..."
-my FHE group, in doing that sentence-picture-sentence thing. they also equated Holly with nerd, as well.
"all girls look stupid when they are running across campus to hug another girl. Except for Gini."
-Heather Dew, watching a girl running across campus to hug another girl, right before she realized that she was watching me.
"i've been here for eight hours, and you are the most adorable girl i have seen all day. i think it's the glasses"
-cute hispanic movie theatre ticket dude with a lip ring
"you can make people not feel so stupid by acting stupid."
-Colleen. okay, this is a serious misquote, she didn't mean it in this way at all, but it's funnier this way : ).
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
raising red flags
[John McCain] will not talk with the Syrians, will not talk with the Iranians, will not talk with Hamas and Hezbollah - he isn't going to push the Israelis 
Lawrence Eagleburger
Former US Secretary of State
I read this off a sidebar on a BBC article and I thought, hmmm, that's interesting. that sounds like doomsday.
Then, keep reading the rest of the article, and Eagleburger is actually a McCain supporter. Wowee.
May God Help Us All if this is what people in support of McCain's Middle East policy says.
anyway, here is the BBC article. it talks about all the candidates overwhelming depressing and unproductive and completely pandering attitude on Israel, and other Mid East countries.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7306822.stm
Also, there's an interesting article about neocons in the washington monthly, it's a bit windy (like a road not the weather--i really ain't sure how to spell that), but at least if you read this you don't have to read Heilbrunn's neocon book. anyway, it's fascinating because it's right--there is no such thing as neoconservativism anymore, because the 'regular' conservatives have completely swallowed the neocon agenda. gross. i admit i was a conservative at one point in my life, but i have repented and anyway i never was into the kind of satanical politics the wolfowitz/pearle/cheney/PNAC kids support. thank god because i'm pretty sure that's, like, worst sin number two or something. i think it's ranked like this:
-sexual sins
-supporting the neocon foreign policy agenda
-murder
oh, wait, the last two are the same. my bad guys.
anyway, link: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2008/0801.drum.html
also interesting is the analysis of the neocon "attitude" and temperment, which the article claims to be the real basis of their foreign policy, and not intellectual thought. Everyone has known that all along, but now it's in print and Ayn Rand has reasons to official be spinning in her tight-ass grave (hey, ayn, i don't like you either, but we've got admit we're on the same team).
remember kids, the Status Quo isn't Sexy.
Former US Secretary of State
I read this off a sidebar on a BBC article and I thought, hmmm, that's interesting. that sounds like doomsday.
Then, keep reading the rest of the article, and Eagleburger is actually a McCain supporter. Wowee.
May God Help Us All if this is what people in support of McCain's Middle East policy says.
anyway, here is the BBC article. it talks about all the candidates overwhelming depressing and unproductive and completely pandering attitude on Israel, and other Mid East countries.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7306822.stm
Also, there's an interesting article about neocons in the washington monthly, it's a bit windy (like a road not the weather--i really ain't sure how to spell that), but at least if you read this you don't have to read Heilbrunn's neocon book. anyway, it's fascinating because it's right--there is no such thing as neoconservativism anymore, because the 'regular' conservatives have completely swallowed the neocon agenda. gross. i admit i was a conservative at one point in my life, but i have repented and anyway i never was into the kind of satanical politics the wolfowitz/pearle/cheney/PNAC kids support. thank god because i'm pretty sure that's, like, worst sin number two or something. i think it's ranked like this:
-sexual sins
-supporting the neocon foreign policy agenda
-murder
oh, wait, the last two are the same. my bad guys.
anyway, link: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2008/0801.drum.html
also interesting is the analysis of the neocon "attitude" and temperment, which the article claims to be the real basis of their foreign policy, and not intellectual thought. Everyone has known that all along, but now it's in print and Ayn Rand has reasons to official be spinning in her tight-ass grave (hey, ayn, i don't like you either, but we've got admit we're on the same team).
remember kids, the Status Quo isn't Sexy.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
candlestick in the conservatory, but what was the motive?
We played an interesting 'game' in ME Social Patterns today.
what 5 characteristics best describe you? rank them in order of importance.
teacher was talking about demographic-type characteristics, mostly, and we pretty much stuck to that, but other things were included, too.
here's what i thought of:
1. student. I put this first because it's really what i am the most right now. I am just trying to learn, i'm just trying to absorb information and think about the world and be theoretical and try new things and experiment and everything. student is a good first defining point, because once you start thinking about how varied the student experience is, you start realizing just how vast and encompassing and ambiguous labeling yourself as a student is.
2. LDS. my religion. believe it or not, sports fans, thinking about G-d and truth and all the implications of all my religious experiences/revelations takes up a large part of my life and defines many of my choices. I do think its subordinate to my role as a student, though, at least at this point in my life.
3. female. I know, i know. I shouldn't have put 'female.' Female is just a biological characteristic and doesn't say anything about the social implications or system concerning my gender. Female is my sex, not my gender. blah blah blah, i know. I was a womens' studies minor for about 2 weeks for pete's sake. but i'm not really comfortable with labeling myself a 'woman.' that implies all kinds of maturity levels that i Know i haven't reached yet. i might be a 'woman' by many standards (i am physiologically mature, i am 20 years old, i am about 80% financially independent of my parents, ect), i don't want to be a 'woman' yet. if you are a woman, you have to wear eyeliner everyday or something, that's what i heard. so forget it.
4. middle class. i think this is a reflection of my obsession (one of dumb, too-scholarly obsessions. g-d, why can't i be obsessed with normal things, like christian bale or something) with class structure, and the attitudes engendered in the different classes, and the things that are different in my life because i am middle class as compared to upper-middle or working class or whatever else.
5...........
I left 5 blank. I did that for a couple reasons, none of which were intentional at first, but i'm a college student and a natural at english-major type b.s.-in', (which is why i'm not an english major, but anyway...), and so i have numerous reasons in retrospect :).
G-d, I sound so dry from this list. Boring.
I think the fact that i'm taking several sociology classes and am now always thinking about my life in terms of how do i fit into the general survey of society influenced my choices.
Things that other classmates put that i never would have thought of:
1. family. almost everyone put something about their family. wow, that would never have occurred to me. i don't know whether i feel happy or sad about that. neutral, i suppose. though honestly: we're twenty-something, are you really defined by your family still? i guess so, most everyone put it. I don't consider my family in any choice i make about my life. I know that is wrong. Or at least, sometimes i feel like it is wrong. But what what about personal liberty? what is so great about loyalty and 'family bonds,' anyway? my family made me who i am, they contributed to the traits i now possess, but now, it's up to me. Anyway, the idea to put 'daughter' or 'sister' of 'dickson' never crossed my mind, and that is probably tragic, or some future tragedy and battle of my identity waiting to happen, but i don't really mind all that much now.
2. Citizen. this was a la Cory (Corey? idk the spelling) and i liked it a lot. I asked him what he meant and he said that he had been realizing lately that he has responsibilities to the community and to the world and things like that, and that it defines who he is. Good answer. I liked it a lot, and it's true: we do have responsibilities, and they should define our actions.
3. Artist. another one of Cory's. he said in explanation something to the effect that he "hates engineers." haha.
all in all, this activity didn't so much apply to class as it did to me thinking about my life and what it means and yadda yadda i am so existentialist.
so what was with my numero cinco?
Well, i just really didn't feel comfortable defining that last one. I've worked really hard to be sort of 'undefinable,' in a way. I really couldn't sum up how i define myself or what i think is important about myself in that fifth spot, and so i didn't put anything. And that is the real reason i don't have a five.
other supporting reasons materialized as class went on.
For one thing, i noticed that not one of us put anything about sexual orientation. That's not really surprising---we are at here, in provo, and as far as i'm aware everyone in the room is pretty straight. But even if they weren't, its not like someone is going to list queer or gay or something on a public chalkboard at the BYU. I thought this was interesting because if you do identify as LGBT, then that's definitely something that is going to show up on your Top 5 Demographics list. And it wasn't represented here at all. I didn't even think about putting my sexual orientation.
Anyway, i mentioned this, and right after i said this Cory/Corey asked if i had decided on a 5th--i said no, i said i'd decided to leave it blank. and i hope in the context of that discussion it made everyone think twice about my sexual identity and sexual identity in general and assuming that everyone is straight. I wouldn't say that the LGBT community has a history of being maligned as significant and vast as other oppressed groups, like minority races and women, but it is something that we need to be aware about, like we're aware and sensitive as a society to women's issues or racial issues or being politically correct in other ways.
Which lead me to think about queer theory in general, and how silly, and maybe even inappropriate, in light of queer theory and issues with identity and ambiguity in identity in general.
First, another article (because i heart articles!), though this one doesn't have online access, i don't think. I know you can access it through BYU Library articles, but you have to have a BYU NetID, so if you ain't my classmate, forget it. Anyway, it's from Radical Teacher (see www.radicalteacher.org), Issue #79, called "Queering Public School Pedagogy as a First-Year Teacher." Read it if you can.
Anyway, one illustrative point that the author made was that because her gender was called into question, her race became ambiguous as well. Hmmm. That's interesting. and so queer theory. Reading the article was interesting for me, because i think i'm so smart and liberated from always labelling people and pre-concieved notions and all that pompous other psuedo-progressive tosh, but i had such a hard time with this article. Not because i'm against queer theory in the classroom, no i think it's great, but because i would be partway through this article and be all "so, what, are you a girl or a boy? or you bisexual or a lesbian or what?" and looking at the picture that accompanies the article, it took me forever to spot the teacher, because i was looking for what i traditionally think a teacher should look like--tallish, typical looking late 20s adult with a vague authoritarian air typified by heels or hose or a skirt of some sort of shirt/tie combination.
So i guess the point of that digression is, i can talk the talk but can't always walk the walk, and take the following discourse about identity and queer theory and being comfortable without stereotypical labels with a grain of salt. and also, ignore my liberal use of cliches.
It's just that, what were we doing, with these labels? is this really healthy? most of us put down male or female or woman, but what does that mean? should it carry some sort of inherent sociocultural definition? no, it shouldn't. that is way to confining and oppressive. even the labels of 'gay' or 'straight' both are too defined, and that isn't fair. That is so limiting. How many people really identify completely as male or female or gay or straight or LDS or anything? to find yourself, and to find other people, and to find the truth, you need to destroy this 'identity' obsession that we all have. Deconstuctionists unite!
anyway....
back to normative socialogical discourse...
Anyway, i noticed a few other things. Like, i really try hard to fit in. Isn't that weird! I guess because i obviously don't fit in so much, then i do try to. For example, I listed LDS as my second choice, but i think that in high school, it would have ranked lower. And i don't think it was because i was less religious--if anything, i was more religious back then. But listing my non-mainstream-christianity religious identity would have been the not-so-popular thing to do. i like controversy, sure, i'm the one who alluded to my possible LGBT identity in class on purpose, but sometimes....and here, it is the shiz to be LDS. you basically can't make it any other way, or you can but it would be like high school again, all "you are what? why? you are going to hell!(ish. i guess we technically don't believe in hell)" Yeah. So that is just one example, but i really do just want to fit in. It would be nice. Good thing i usually give up, cuz it ain't worth it.
anyway, the concluding part of this lesson was that we should think about how other people, specifially people in the ME, define themselves, and not how we define them.
Good point. Let people define themselves, instead of imposing identity on them.
But maybe, we should take it one step further and queer everything and forget this whole "identity" schtick.
okay, well that's all. Remember, kids, Imperialism isn't Sexy.
what 5 characteristics best describe you? rank them in order of importance.
teacher was talking about demographic-type characteristics, mostly, and we pretty much stuck to that, but other things were included, too.
here's what i thought of:
1. student. I put this first because it's really what i am the most right now. I am just trying to learn, i'm just trying to absorb information and think about the world and be theoretical and try new things and experiment and everything. student is a good first defining point, because once you start thinking about how varied the student experience is, you start realizing just how vast and encompassing and ambiguous labeling yourself as a student is.
2. LDS. my religion. believe it or not, sports fans, thinking about G-d and truth and all the implications of all my religious experiences/revelations takes up a large part of my life and defines many of my choices. I do think its subordinate to my role as a student, though, at least at this point in my life.
3. female. I know, i know. I shouldn't have put 'female.' Female is just a biological characteristic and doesn't say anything about the social implications or system concerning my gender. Female is my sex, not my gender. blah blah blah, i know. I was a womens' studies minor for about 2 weeks for pete's sake. but i'm not really comfortable with labeling myself a 'woman.' that implies all kinds of maturity levels that i Know i haven't reached yet. i might be a 'woman' by many standards (i am physiologically mature, i am 20 years old, i am about 80% financially independent of my parents, ect), i don't want to be a 'woman' yet. if you are a woman, you have to wear eyeliner everyday or something, that's what i heard. so forget it.
4. middle class. i think this is a reflection of my obsession (one of dumb, too-scholarly obsessions. g-d, why can't i be obsessed with normal things, like christian bale or something) with class structure, and the attitudes engendered in the different classes, and the things that are different in my life because i am middle class as compared to upper-middle or working class or whatever else.
5...........
I left 5 blank. I did that for a couple reasons, none of which were intentional at first, but i'm a college student and a natural at english-major type b.s.-in', (which is why i'm not an english major, but anyway...), and so i have numerous reasons in retrospect :).
G-d, I sound so dry from this list. Boring.
I think the fact that i'm taking several sociology classes and am now always thinking about my life in terms of how do i fit into the general survey of society influenced my choices.
Things that other classmates put that i never would have thought of:
1. family. almost everyone put something about their family. wow, that would never have occurred to me. i don't know whether i feel happy or sad about that. neutral, i suppose. though honestly: we're twenty-something, are you really defined by your family still? i guess so, most everyone put it. I don't consider my family in any choice i make about my life. I know that is wrong. Or at least, sometimes i feel like it is wrong. But what what about personal liberty? what is so great about loyalty and 'family bonds,' anyway? my family made me who i am, they contributed to the traits i now possess, but now, it's up to me. Anyway, the idea to put 'daughter' or 'sister' of 'dickson' never crossed my mind, and that is probably tragic, or some future tragedy and battle of my identity waiting to happen, but i don't really mind all that much now.
2. Citizen. this was a la Cory (Corey? idk the spelling) and i liked it a lot. I asked him what he meant and he said that he had been realizing lately that he has responsibilities to the community and to the world and things like that, and that it defines who he is. Good answer. I liked it a lot, and it's true: we do have responsibilities, and they should define our actions.
3. Artist. another one of Cory's. he said in explanation something to the effect that he "hates engineers." haha.
all in all, this activity didn't so much apply to class as it did to me thinking about my life and what it means and yadda yadda i am so existentialist.
so what was with my numero cinco?
Well, i just really didn't feel comfortable defining that last one. I've worked really hard to be sort of 'undefinable,' in a way. I really couldn't sum up how i define myself or what i think is important about myself in that fifth spot, and so i didn't put anything. And that is the real reason i don't have a five.
other supporting reasons materialized as class went on.
For one thing, i noticed that not one of us put anything about sexual orientation. That's not really surprising---we are at here, in provo, and as far as i'm aware everyone in the room is pretty straight. But even if they weren't, its not like someone is going to list queer or gay or something on a public chalkboard at the BYU. I thought this was interesting because if you do identify as LGBT, then that's definitely something that is going to show up on your Top 5 Demographics list. And it wasn't represented here at all. I didn't even think about putting my sexual orientation.
Anyway, i mentioned this, and right after i said this Cory/Corey asked if i had decided on a 5th--i said no, i said i'd decided to leave it blank. and i hope in the context of that discussion it made everyone think twice about my sexual identity and sexual identity in general and assuming that everyone is straight. I wouldn't say that the LGBT community has a history of being maligned as significant and vast as other oppressed groups, like minority races and women, but it is something that we need to be aware about, like we're aware and sensitive as a society to women's issues or racial issues or being politically correct in other ways.
Which lead me to think about queer theory in general, and how silly, and maybe even inappropriate, in light of queer theory and issues with identity and ambiguity in identity in general.
First, another article (because i heart articles!), though this one doesn't have online access, i don't think. I know you can access it through BYU Library articles, but you have to have a BYU NetID, so if you ain't my classmate, forget it. Anyway, it's from Radical Teacher (see www.radicalteacher.org), Issue #79, called "Queering Public School Pedagogy as a First-Year Teacher." Read it if you can.
Anyway, one illustrative point that the author made was that because her gender was called into question, her race became ambiguous as well. Hmmm. That's interesting. and so queer theory. Reading the article was interesting for me, because i think i'm so smart and liberated from always labelling people and pre-concieved notions and all that pompous other psuedo-progressive tosh, but i had such a hard time with this article. Not because i'm against queer theory in the classroom, no i think it's great, but because i would be partway through this article and be all "so, what, are you a girl or a boy? or you bisexual or a lesbian or what?" and looking at the picture that accompanies the article, it took me forever to spot the teacher, because i was looking for what i traditionally think a teacher should look like--tallish, typical looking late 20s adult with a vague authoritarian air typified by heels or hose or a skirt of some sort of shirt/tie combination.
So i guess the point of that digression is, i can talk the talk but can't always walk the walk, and take the following discourse about identity and queer theory and being comfortable without stereotypical labels with a grain of salt. and also, ignore my liberal use of cliches.
It's just that, what were we doing, with these labels? is this really healthy? most of us put down male or female or woman, but what does that mean? should it carry some sort of inherent sociocultural definition? no, it shouldn't. that is way to confining and oppressive. even the labels of 'gay' or 'straight' both are too defined, and that isn't fair. That is so limiting. How many people really identify completely as male or female or gay or straight or LDS or anything? to find yourself, and to find other people, and to find the truth, you need to destroy this 'identity' obsession that we all have. Deconstuctionists unite!
anyway....
back to normative socialogical discourse...
Anyway, i noticed a few other things. Like, i really try hard to fit in. Isn't that weird! I guess because i obviously don't fit in so much, then i do try to. For example, I listed LDS as my second choice, but i think that in high school, it would have ranked lower. And i don't think it was because i was less religious--if anything, i was more religious back then. But listing my non-mainstream-christianity religious identity would have been the not-so-popular thing to do. i like controversy, sure, i'm the one who alluded to my possible LGBT identity in class on purpose, but sometimes....and here, it is the shiz to be LDS. you basically can't make it any other way, or you can but it would be like high school again, all "you are what? why? you are going to hell!(ish. i guess we technically don't believe in hell)" Yeah. So that is just one example, but i really do just want to fit in. It would be nice. Good thing i usually give up, cuz it ain't worth it.
anyway, the concluding part of this lesson was that we should think about how other people, specifially people in the ME, define themselves, and not how we define them.
Good point. Let people define themselves, instead of imposing identity on them.
But maybe, we should take it one step further and queer everything and forget this whole "identity" schtick.
okay, well that's all. Remember, kids, Imperialism isn't Sexy.
And just who invented sliced bread?
read this:
http://www.womensmediacenter.com/ex/020108.html
I'm not voting for Hillary Clinton, but I liked this article. A lot.
Just why am I not voting for Hillary? what are my actual reasons, huh?
What media outlets and what other opinions do I let craft my perception of what is good or bad about a person or a candidate or an idea or an issue?
I subscribe to other peoples' opinions way too much.
One thing I don't like about this article is that a few times i feel like she plays the 'women are oppressed more than black people' angle, which who cares if it's true or false, it's not right to do that. you can't overcome injustice if you insist that my injustice is bigger than your injustice.
http://www.womensmediacenter.com/ex/020108.html
I'm not voting for Hillary Clinton, but I liked this article. A lot.
Just why am I not voting for Hillary? what are my actual reasons, huh?
What media outlets and what other opinions do I let craft my perception of what is good or bad about a person or a candidate or an idea or an issue?
I subscribe to other peoples' opinions way too much.
One thing I don't like about this article is that a few times i feel like she plays the 'women are oppressed more than black people' angle, which who cares if it's true or false, it's not right to do that. you can't overcome injustice if you insist that my injustice is bigger than your injustice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
