revolution.

A revolution is coming — a revolution which will be peaceful if we are wise enough; compassionate if we care enough; successful if we are fortunate enough — But a revolution which is coming whether we will it or not. We can affect its character; we cannot alter its inevitability.
RFK, 1966

Can we really all just get along?

For my Psychology of Art class I had to read a few chapters from this book, actually one that was written by my professor. Now I really like my professor, he's a little senile I think but hey, he's kind of old. Anyway in this book he discussed the thoughts of human hierarchical thinking and how we tend to function in society. Now it's all good and well to want to work together all the time and cooperate and to aspire to be a cog in a well oiled machine so to speak. It must make it easy for everyone, no problems just each person to their station. However, how realistic is that? For one thing it is almost unheard of someone finding just one thing they love and sticking with it. And, if you are supposed to work well with others doesn't that mean compromising your sense of self?

In relation to art I think this all comes through fairly well. Your have the starving artist, staying true to what their vision truly is, unconcerned with the opinion of others. However, this artist usually cannot support themselves on just their passion. Then you have the mavericks, the ones that sell out, for lack of a less harsh term, in order to live; and hey, can you really blame them? These people sacrifice their true feelings and expressions in order to do only what they love and not anything else on the side. Who is really to say that one is happier and a truer form of an artist than the other? Either you stay in your portion of the societal hierarchy or you deviate, working on the idea that you need no one else's approval.

My professor went on to say that the true key to happiness is Compatibility, which is defines as "consistency with pro-life values and the other aspects of ecological consciousness. " That isn't all however, he also says that the importance of Compatibility is that we all hold the same pro-life values. I don't know about you, but I find that a tad too ambitious, and I might even say Utopian.

Get Off Your High Horse

I know it isn't Thursday and we've already had the weekly installment of "what grinds my gears" but this weekend warrants a special interlude. I just recently turned 21 as most of you know and it really is great, I am not treated like a leper and it seems like now I'm allowed to live as a true member of society. However, I do still have some underage friends and quite frankly I'd rather hang out with them then tools at bars but sometimes it is nice to go out.

One establishment in particular, that need not be named because people know where I'm referring to, of Burlington is just about the biggest joke ever. If you are under 21 be prepared to be ostracized, and if you are 21 be prepared to be quizzed on your home state, because having an ID just is not sufficient. This weekend past we attended a function at said club/bar and let me tell you we brought the party, it was empty and we were the only ones in the place. There were more bouncers then attendees, twas a bit sad for the dj. Anyway, I got a drink, as I am now permitted to do and generously let a couple of friends sip from the cup. Promptly I'm tapped on the shoulder and told "You're out," caught off guard and not really comprehending I said "What?" to which I got a stern, "You shared your drink, you're out." Well, confused and annoyed I said, "I'm sorry, I didn't know, it won't happen again," to which he replied "One strike and you're out," (we all know that's not the case). My drink, which cost me $5.50 mind you, was then taken away and we were watched by him and a crony until we had vacated the premises. All in all the whole fiasco cost us all about $35 dollars with the cover charge, drink, and coat check.

Now I understand there are rules, I'm not arguing with that. However, we all know there was no one of importance there, and quite frankly we didn't know we were breaking the rules. I really feel that first of all, every bouncer in that place is on one big power trip, and second of all, no one was doing much wrong. No one was buying alcohol for minors and no one was bothered. I would put money on the fact that had there been a crowd and the same "incident" had taken place, a blind eye would be turned, or we would not have been spotted at all. Does he really think, had I known I would have been kicked out that I would risk it after paying all that money, a sip is clearly not worth that. Just because he is pissed and cranky that he has to spend his Friday night monitoring a drunk crowd does not mean it is necessary to ruin the nights of others. I say, get off your high horse and remember that you were underage once and you too sometimes just needed a bit of sympathy and forgiveness.

Race! Gender!

I'm beginning to loose sight of how thrilling and historic the Democratic presidential primaries really are because they have been dragging on forever. Whether it is Barak Obama or Hilary Rodham Clinton who nabs the nomination and (fingers crossed!) wins the presidency, this election is truly historic.
In 1870, the Fifteenth Amendment was ratified, stating that no government in the United States may prevent any citizen voting rights based on race or previous servitude. Fifty years later, the Nineteenth Amendment passed, stating that no citizen may be denied voting rights due to sex. It is arguable that the United States was not truly democratic until the Civil Rights Act of 1964, effectively outlawing the voting discrimination due to race.
During this election, many have argued if the issues of race and gender are still prevalent in this country. I myself have asked this question and it is, admittedly, a slippery slope. Why should it matter? If one is a bigger issue, who has won? If Obama is elected, does that mean African Americans have one up on women? The fact is, disgustingly enough, bigots and misogynists still troll our Purple Mountains Majesty, spewing bile and idiocy. No one has "won" until racism and sexism, whether obvious or subtle, is the minority and every person is afforded the same rights and opportunities regardless of color, gender, class, sexual preference, or religion. I would argue that would be aided with either Obama or Clinton in the White House.
One of the more thoughtful articles I've read on this subject of race v. gender is here. The writers explore why Obama talks about race and why Clinton doesn't (and won't) talk about gender. Maybe it's because I'm a white woman, but I still feel that Hillary is presented with the ever-present female paradox of "damned if you do, damned if you don't." Still, it's a very thoughtful article. And it's still historic. Still important.

You Know What Really Grinds My Gears?

"Grinds My Gears" will be a new Thursday installment to this blog. Think of it has the Thursday Styles of Dunday Sinner.

You know what really Grinds My Gears? Society. More specifically, it's the media that panders to societal notions of strict gender roles. So, all media Grinds My Gears. I was reading er, another blog, and stumbled across a new! hip! word to describe a hot! indie! underground female fashion and lifestyle movement. The women wear little makeup, if any at all! They don't wear pink! They like beer! Although I call this sort of women normal or 95 percent of women I know, The New York Observer calls them "Urbane Tomboys" or, the female counterpart to the "metrosexual" male.

In the article, we are introduced to Ali Tenenebaum (Tenenebaum you say?! Her family was the inspiration for The Royal Tenenebaums). Ali (or should I say Margot..) doesn't wear penny loafers, Lacoste dresses, or fur coats; she wears "black Hudson jeans, blue J. Crew cardigan, yellow T-shirt and designer sneakers." OMIGOD! What a punk. J. Crew and sneakers?! How unfeminine of Margot! I bet Ritchie still has a crush on her.

Let me get one thing straight. Although these women wear pants, they are not lesbians. Let me repeat because you may be quite confused: pants does not equal lesbianism. I know, these are strange new times. Ellen Page, preggers Juno actress and hottest new celeb, is an Urbane Tomboy, albeit a Canadian one. Sarah Silverman, comedian turned sex symbol turned Jimmy Kimmel's lady is one. Girly-girls, while you're applying your MAC charcoal eyeliner, your boyfriend is scoping out the Urbane Tomboy.

Similar to their girly-girl antithesis, Urbane Tomboys are not above consumerism. They luv! shopping. Wearing Comfortable Prada pants for biking and work, Urbane Tomboys is not above wearing a dress to a cocktail party. Wow! How unusual, how strange.

I know what you're thinking: am I an Urbane Tomboy? I wear pants! I like to be comfortable! I drink beer! You might be. But probably not. Urbane Tomboys wear sneakers to work because they're bloggers, blogging from their home or screen printers, working from their SoHo studio. They buy $2000 pants because they can afford it and might prefer it to Lindsay Lohan's stretch pants and Uggs look.

What you are is a normal woman who enjoys fashion and looking good, but isn't obsessed with it. You prefer sneakers to stilettos because sneakers are more comfortable. You don't wear makeup because you think that painting the barn for 20 minutes a day is a waste of time.

What really grinds my gears is not the douche-journalists at the Observer who think very little of women and are starved for the opportunity to break the new trend. What really grinds these gears are the polarizing gender roles that all people are forced to subscribe to. Those who don't fit neatly into societal norms are slapped with the latest pop culture buzz word. The man who favors fashion over smashing beer cans against his head is a "metrosexual." The woman who favors comfortable clothing to whatever LindsayParisNicoleJessica is wearing is a "urbane tomboy."

Curiously, The Observer sums up their own idiotic redundancy with this statement: "the urbane tomboy’s fashion rebellion is absent political message, or anger: it’s more of a casual shrug toward the strictures of femininity."

If you dare, read more:
http://www.observer.com/2008/urbane-tomboys?page=0%2C0

Masters of War

Today is the 5th anniversary of the U.S. led invasion of Iraq.
President Bush defends his war despite the "high cost of lives." The Houston Chronicle reports the American death toll "quietly reaches 4,000." As of today, at least 3,988 American lives have been lost. General Tommy Franks states, "We don't do body counts" but I think that General Franks might know that as many as 89,760 Iraq civilians have been killed from war related violence.

Let me quote Bob because I'm at a loss for words:
How many ears much one man have
Before he can hear people cry?
How many deaths will it take till he knows
That too many people have died?

Protests against the war are taking place across the country and world throughout the month of March.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/7EF3BA7E-4685-4779-B54B-B18102BFAAA1.htm

People Really Are Dumb

On the lovely isle of Puerto Rico I was given the chance to see that most people my age really are tools looking for little more than a piece of ass. Whilst I waited for the bathroom I overheard a conversation that went a little like this:

Guy1: Do you know what the equator is?
Guy2: Uh, yes, it splits the earth into the northern and southern hemisphere.
Guy1: Well, this girl right here had absolutely no idea what it was, she guessed that it was some sort of furry animal.
(laughter)
Guy1 (to Girl): What continent does Russia belong to?
Girl: um...well...
Guy2 then proceeds to hit on her, at least she's hot right?

reeeally, yahoo news?

The headline of Yahoo news:
Was the Iraq war for oil?

thanks, news for retards!

Actual Conversation

At 5:26 pm on Thursday evening, I heard the following conversation in Apple Mountain:

Man: I got a HUGE laugh out of the guys at work today.
Woman (his wife): Oh yeah?
Man: I said, all soverign nations should be ruled by women. They said, that's very progressive of you.
Woman: You said that?
Man: I said, sure, there would never be any wars. Just every 28 days, there would be intense negotiations.
Woman: hahahaha.

(I guess I just broke my resolution to stop being such an uppity broad.)

skirting the issue

i love puns. and punk women protesting for an end to violence against women.
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2008/03/05/miniskirted_women_protest_attack_on_woman/7210/

clusterfuck to the white house

this "clusterfuck" to the white house, dubbed by jon stewart on 'the daily show' is becoming a reality. we made it through another super tuesday. it was specially super for me, because it was my first time voting. that's right, i became a woman yesterday. i can sincerely say that sitting in a makeshift booth a fine burlington elementary school was thrilling. regardless what the cynics say (i'm look at you, emily) the democratic process is empowering and i am beginning to realize why people have risked everything, including their lives, to vote.
i feel it's time for me to come out of the closet. i am a hillary supporter. yesterday, i took the fine-point pen supplied by h.o. wheeler school and filled in the bubble for hillary clinton. and it felt good. i've supported hillary since she declared her candidacy and i'll support her until the nomination takes her to the white house. she has a clear message about the war, the economy, and health care. i don't for a second doubt her ambition or intelligence. i am, however, disappointed that she signed 'yes' on the amendment that enabled george bush to take over the world (invade iraq). however, one of my professors brought this reasoning to light: as the senator of new york, hillary represented the peoples most affected by september 11th. to not support the invasion of iraq (where alleged weapons of mass deconstruction were hiding, remember, george?) would be a complete slap in the face to the new yorkers who she represented who felt extreme pride and hurt after 9/11. i honestly don't believe that hillary, as well as the people of new york and of the U.S., knew that bush, cheney, and rumsfeld were sitting around stewing this war in a big cauldron of deceit.
so where are we now? in my 20 years, i don't think that the democratic party has ever had 2 qualified and popular candidates. in 2004, john kerry ran with the slogan, "at least i'm not bush!" we should be thrilled! but i must admit that not only do i not want this primary season to drag on any longer, i don't want democratic infighting to result in a freaking fossil (john mccain) in the white house. but i am holding on to an ever-dwindling faith in the american people.
my presidential fantasy might include JFK, but really, it is hillary clinton as president and barak obama as VP. she's got the experience he wants and he's got the charisma she wants. he needs more time in washington and she deserves the chance to show america what a smart woman can do. so just think, two terms with hillary and then two terms with barak. the birds would be chirping, the sun would be shining, and the u.s. would be a truly changed place.

Garfield without Garfield

Our favorite pet owner, John Arbuckle, in his comic strip, except Garfield has been removed. Dark humor but check it out...

happy birthday, sara!

sara, you're the poet in my heart
-fleetwood mac (and dunday sinner)