Women, STRIDE!

I hate it when people shuffle, and especially that it's almost always women. It's a form of body language conveying infirmity, weakness, that the walker is unsure of their footing metaphorically as well as literally. Why do so many women do it? Because we don't know we're doing it, like so many other pieces of body language exhibited by women in this sexist society we've grown up in. We hold our arms in on the subway, too. We don't take up the bench. Because we're 'nice'. Because we're taught to defer to others, to wit, men. Because we're unsure of our position in society, so don't take up too much room, you know, or you might get slapped down by the mighty hand of the patriarchy. It's all part of the same thing, and if I see another woman shuffle down the street so fucking timidly today I may just have to kill her to put her out of my misery.

So much patriarchy to fight, so little time.

Little Things I Twitter/Plurk About Instead of Posting

Really, so much of my life gets compressed into 140 characters or less, leaving me circumscribed by an arbitrary limit (that isn't even 42, dammit) derived from text messages, which I hate *anyway*.

And so.

Point the first:

1. I have a barrelful of apples, since a half-peck of MacIntoshes were on sale at the Super 88 store the day after buying a giant bag of Galas from the Russian store on the corner, three days after buying a bag (only of 5) Braeburns from the organic farmer's market at Government Center. Yes, for a really good crisp apple, I will make a client wait on our way back to the office. I will even ask him to hold my umbrella. I have learned that lawyers must be thieves of our lives in between our lawyering, and if that means talking to my brother on the phone while waiting to go before a judge, such is life. And, oh, yes, children, I will eat these apples. For the apple is my favorite fruit, crisp and juicy with that sublime flavor of knowledge of good and evil. I may also cook some kind of apple sauce (not applesauce apple sauce, but some kind of liquidy entity with chunks of apples in it, and spices) and freeze it for those long months devoid of apples, or make a relish and pickle the heck out of some of them. Or...make an apple *curry*. Oh, small symbol of the loss of innocence, how sublimely delicious you are!
2. Fabric origami boxes! What a neat idea! fabricorigami.com. How clever. I wish I'd thought of it.
3. Funniest Thing I've Read in Weeks: translations from the feline: the flying mouse affair. Hysterical.
4. Speaking of things I wish I'd thought of, or things I wish I'd written (see #3), there's been a remarkable dearth of creativity on my part these past two years because I've been killing myself in the vain attempt to have more money. By working 2.33 jobs, also known as 2 jobs normally, 3 in the fall semester. This has now reduced to 1.33 jobs, known as 1 job normally, 2 in the fall semester. I expected my creative juices would start flowing again and make their presence known sometime after the end of the fall semester, with perhaps a lag for actual, you know, recuperation. What I have not expected is the sudden desire to do photographic projects. That's just weird. I hate taking pictures. I hate having my picture taken. I like photography, at least, in principle. Sometimes, when done by other people (Jeremy Wheaton, for one). And yet. Sudden desire to take pictures of people. And things. In very specific combinations. It's so odd.
5. Also, there have been small amounts of yoga.


Note that I have not restricted myself to 140 characters in discussing these topics. You lucky ducks.

Judge orders military to stop enforcing 'don't ask, don't tell'

Judge orders military to stop enforcing 'don't ask, don't tell'.

FAN-FUCKING-TASTIC, that's all I have to say. Along with "high time."

The Number of Things About Which I am Displeased Keeps Growing

It includes things ranging from too many Dems without spines, oil creeping around in the gulf, toxic sludge elsewhere, land-based marine pollution, the need for all my income to be spent on paying off loans and credit cards when I also need it to continue working in some semblance of lawyerly attire, journalists that don't practice journalism, our broken immigration system, various other broken systems, the cat puking in areas difficult to reach to clean up (well, done, Tortoiseshell of Gondor), and today's rip in my skirt.

I am now 40, so my first post-40-birthday post should be cranky, yes? Good start.

Rape Culture

I read a discussion by Christian men about how women should adjust their dress so as not to provoke their lustful desires. Now, as you can imagine, this lies with me about as well as the complementary application of the concept that if a woman dresses in a revealing fashion, she's asking to be raped. Which is, just to clarify, bull.

What I find repeatedly mind-blowing on a semi-annual basis is the idea that men are such sexual kleptomaniacs that they will, because of being overwhelmed by their lustful urges due to my wearing jeans that have stitching on the back pockets, commit a crime, and yet not be held responsible for it because we live in a world established by the Global Accords Governing Fair Use of Women. And a woman is public property, at least in the West.

Federal Judge in CA rules Prop 8 Unconstitutional

Really, you people should read judicial decisions but here's my translation of the Judge's summary of the evidence at trial and the two sides' arguments:

1. Plaintiffs (those seeking to allow same-sex marriage) offered clear arguments and expert testimony on the violations of the Constitution created by enforcing Prop 8;
2. Proponents (of banning same-sex marriage) engaged in a lot of hand-waving rather than produce actual facts in support of their case, and their proposed experts weren't credible.

As a result, Proponents "failed to build a credible factual record to support their claim that Proposition 8 served a legitimate public interest."

*reads more*

The Judge finds that Prop 8 fails both rational-basis (legitimate public interest) and strict scrutiny (narrowly tailored to a compelling government interest), violating the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment and denying plaintiffs their fundamental right to marry.

The Judge's equal protection analysis notes "[w]hen a law creates a classification
but neither targets a suspect class nor burdens a fundamental right, the court presumes the law is valid and will uphold it as long as it is rationally related to some legitimate government interest." Marriage, however, is a fundamental right.

The Judge notes further: "Most laws subject to rational basis easily survive equal protection review, because a legitimate reason can nearly always be found for treating different groups in an unequal manner. See Romer, 517 US at 633. Yet, to survive rational basis review, a law must do more than disadvantage or otherwise harm a particular group. United States Department of Agriculture v Moreno, 413 US
528, 534 (1973)."

"Plaintiffs challenge Proposition 8 as violating the Equal Protection Clause because Proposition 8 discriminates both on the basis of sex and on the basis of sexual orientation. Sexual orientation discrimination can take the form of sex discrimination."

"Having considered the evidence, the relationship between sex and sexual orientation and the fact that Proposition 8 eliminates a right only a gay man or a lesbian would
exercise, the court determines that plaintiffs’ equal protection claim is based on sexual orientation, but this claim is equivalent to a claim of discrimination based on sex."

"The trial record shows that strict scrutiny is the appropriate standard of review to apply to legislative classifications based on sexual orientation. All classifications based on sexual orientation appear suspect, as the evidence shows that California would rarely, if ever, have a reason to categorize individuals based on their sexual orientation. FF 47. Here, however, strict scrutiny is unnecessary. Proposition 8 fails to survive even rational basis review."

"[T]he state cannot have an interest in disadvantaging an unpopular minority group simply because the group is unpopular."

"The evidence shows that, by every available metric, opposite-sex couples are not better than their same-sex counterparts; instead, as partners, parents and citizens, opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples are equal. FF 47-50. Proposition 8 violates the Equal Protection Clause because it does not treat them equally."

The Judge held that Prop 8 violated both the Equal Protection Clause and the Due Process Clause, and enjoined the government defendants (that's distinct from the proponents mentioned earlier) from applying or enforcing Proposition 8.

Go forth, my friends and family in California, and wed, if you will it.

Living on Earth's (NPR) 1000th Episode

This episode includes a great history or overview of environmental politics, and a really stirring call from George Woodwell that scientists have an obligation today to be obnoxious (since simply setting forth the facts isn't being heard) to protect all people, b/c "the cost of failures...are going to be civilization itself."

The interview with Dianne Dumanoski about the "near miss" of the ozone layer hole clearly articulates the belief that the Earth was so robust there was nothing we could do harm it, which is what it used to be easy to think, even though it is demonstrably not true.

You Are Focusing on the Wrong Thing, I Think. Literally.

It isn't that Women's Boobs Control Health, Wealth, and Earthquakes. I know, shocking. Try to control your disappointment.

It's that sexual stimulation is good for the circulation (and probably some endorphin release, too, IMO), not really that staring at boobs will extend your life. The study just reads that way.

Betcha $5 the same study of gay men would have different results.

This does, however, lay the foundation for an argument, I think, that the world really would be a better place if everyone got some every morning.

I am Furious.

GRRRRRRRR. "All Your Boobs Are Belong to Us"

I haven't read the decision, so I may have a more nuanced analysis later, but implied consent trumping an outright "no"? Are-you-shitting-me?

Any man who tries that shit on me is going to learn just how fast I can hurt him. Hint: Fast.

Big News: New Copyright Rules

Now legal in the U.S.: Jailbreaking your iPhone, ripping a DVD for educational purposes

Fair Use Legalized, Says EFF

Statement of the Librarian of Congress Relating to Section 1201 Rulemaking

The purpose of the proceeding is to determine whether current technologies that control access to copyrighted works are diminishing the ability of individuals to use works in lawful, noninfringing ways.

Cool.

Federal Judge Rules DOMA Unconstitutional

Fellow law types will get why this is important: The Judge conducted a rational-basis inquiry and found:

DOMA fails to pass constitutional muster even under the highly deferential rational basis test. As set forth in detail below, this court is convinced that 'there exists no fairly conceivable set of facts that could ground a rational relationship' between DOMA and a legitimate government objective. DOMA, therefore, violates core constitutional principles of equal protection.

Gill, et al, Summary Judgment Memorandum

All-Time Funny

You know, it's been 15 years and I still think my mother's response to a 1995 cover of the National Enquirer (or The Star, whichever) that informed us that the Martin Luther King Day earthquake in Northridge had

"Opened the Gates of Hell - President Puts National Guard on Alert!"

(with illustrative photo),

to wit, 'wow, this wasn't on CNN!'

is still one of the funniest things I've ever heard from anyone, anytime.

Happy birthday to a funny and much-loved lady.

Prop 8 case in Calif.

Just read quite fascinating issue brief from the ACS by Rebecca L. Brown, The Prop 8 Court Can Have it All: Justice, Precedent, Respect for Democracy, and an Appropriately Limited Judicial Role

Extremely interesting approach.

Patriarchy, Thy Name is ...Everybody

Including women who should know better.

So, get this. A woman celeb gets filmed through hotel peepholes by a stalker and another woman celeb in the same industry says she asked for it by cultivating a certain fan base. That is such patriarchal bullshit my head would explode except for the fact that I've heard it so many times before.

Here's how consent works, people. If you shut your hotel door, you have an expectation of privacy in your room - it's your room, you paid for it, and you don't have to explicitly tell some possible frat-boy fan-base wanna-peep-tom that he doesn't have permission to film you through the goddamn peephole. The door, being shut, kinda covered that already. If she'd wanted an audience while changing clothes in her hotel room, she would have done it out in the goddamn hall, not behind a closed door.

Having a job that requires you to be attractive as you broadcast sports news does not change that.

Erin Andrews' Peeping Tom Sentenced to 30 Months in Prison

*A* Bhopal Verdict, But to What End?

Guilty verdicts in Bhopal gas disaster

Keshub Mahindra, current chairman of India's top utility vehicle and tractor maker Mahindra & Mahindra, was the highest ranking person convicted on Monday. He was chairman of Union Carbide India Ltd, a unit of Union Carbide, at the time of the accident.

Union Carbide's Indian arm was also found guilty.

Those convicted can appeal to a higher court, a process that in India can take years.

"It's actually going to be nothing. What is it? We're looking at maximum punishment of two years or a fine. If that's not the biggest joke, then I don't know what is," Rachna Dhingra, a Bhopal rights activist, said.

"There's nothing to be happy about."