Tis a low ball to insinuate anything via someone's family name...

Kathleen Parker of the Washington Post Writers Group commented (criticized, no need for euphemism on my own blog) on Obama's latest speech to the Muslim world at the Cairo University on June 4.

Granted that most of Ms. Parker's columns leave me fuming, I have learned to agree to disagree with her and her fans. There is no arguing in politics and religions. That's why when people get together, they watch sports. (Or so I assume. We don't watch sports in our house, and therefore we are not popular on our block... Oh, that and the fact I have an Obama sticker on my car...)

I can see her point in "Obama's Muslim campaign": that Obama in his speech to the Muslims quoted too many lines from the Qur'an and criticized the errors in the U.S. history just a tad too much to make audience back at home squirm uncomfortably. But here is the sentence that really got my attention, not in a positive way:

"To delegitimize the man whose name rhymes with his, Obama had only to show up and not be George W. Bush."

1. Yes, I tend to obsess over one tree and ignore the forest. I get to do this in my personal life. So there.

2. I am not about to defend W.

What I have an issue with is this insinuation of a relation between Obama and Osama, "the man whose name rhymes with his."

Come on! Give me a break!

We are guilty by association of family names now? Great! Remember during World War II when all the Japanese Americans were rounded up and sent to the concentration camps? (Oh, I am sorry, RELOCATION CAMPS they were called), many non-Japanese Asians in the U.S. hastily proclaimed their non-Japanese-sounding surnames for fear of guilt by association of family names. So we are going back to that now?

Here is my advice for all the non-mainstream citizens in this multicultural only in theory society, name your kid Brandon and Emily, and if you can, change your name to something less foreign sounding. For the sake of your children, in case they run for important public office one day.

Although the definition of "Foreign" is arguably faulty here. Basically anything that does not invoke a Western heritage...

"No, Newt, You're the Racist" Thank goodness someone more elequont wrote this rebuttal...

to the charge by some Republicans against the Supreme Court Nominee, Sonia Sotomayor, as being a racist against the white people, and specifically, white male people.

I first saw this charge when I was waiting to board the plane. (You know the CNN scrolling texts on the bottom that drive everybody crazy but, I have to admit it, was pretty useful when there was NO sound on!) I could NOT believe my eyes. But I was not surprised either.

In my head I was formulating all these rebuttals, clever comebacks, theories, arguments against charges of any type of Reverse Racism. The best I could come up with was: It is like the Royal Families complain about being prejudiced against because people are jealous of the privileges they enjoy.

Seriously? Give me a break!

Thank goodness for Vanity Fair. Here is again another article that I LOVE so much that I want to print it out and eat it whole. I really should be working since I am buried by projects that are all due YESTERDAY. But I need to get this off my chest before I explode into a pile of, YES, non-white, mess...

No, Newt, You're the Racist by Michael Hogan (May 27, 2009)

Mr. Hogan, I assume who is white and male (NOT that there is anything wrong with that...), managed to deliver a rebuttal against this utter nonsense in an even-handed, non-didactic, non-preachy way.

Digression: I also appreciate much the fact his article does not invoke White Guilt either, for nothing is more annoying to me than condescension and patronization born out of White Guilt. No, thank you very much, we have managed along quite well. We do not need to be rescued by a knight in shiny armor. Give me outright Racism any day ( Disclaimer: obviously, I understand VIOLENCE committed on the basis of racism is no joke. Here I am referring to TALKS. DISCOURSES.) When it is veiled in White Guilt, I am at a loss as to how to react to it.

Anyway, the best quote from the article is as follows, although I do hope you read the entire thing if you have stayed with my rant so far...

"The reason so few sensible people take [any charge of reverse racism] seriously is that there is no effective anti-white discrimination in America or, for that matter, the world. Being white is almost universally easier than being any other color, just as being male is almost universally easier than being female. (If you’re white, male, and still angry, the problem is you.)"

Nicely done. Thank you.

If you happen to be white (in appearances) and you cannot see the implied privileges that come with your skin color, here is a great article/exercise that may resonate with you:

"White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack" by Peggy McIntosh in 1990. Yes, it is decades old. But hey, some things never change... or at least, not much.

p.s. Once again, the comments steal the show and become the proof for the importance of writing the article being commented on in the first place.

Michael Hogan, poor guy, he's being pummeled and maligned in the comment section. It is rather scary and disturbing what was said in those comments. I wish I hadn't read them because now I am officially pissed. And scared at the same time. And disturbed. And dispirited.

To @Wired: Whoever gave my husband the idea that Sorapot, instead of an IPod

was a good idea for a great Xmas present... is a f** idiot and can come & take it!

My husband's attempt to surprise me at Xmas was a success if he only meant to surprise me... This "teapot" was an overpriced piece of, eh, paperweight. If you have no intention of washing it, then do NOT get it for me!


Yeah. Now can you honestly tell me that it looks just as stylish sitting on my kitchen counter next to my high tech rice cooker, as the air-brushed picture you have shown?

Seriously? And you did at least 2 reviews of this last year? The review in May was not enough for you, and you had to give it another plug again towards year end, AND on the 2008 Wish List?

My husband, who, despite my well-known wish of getting an IPod, decided that Sorapot was just as good, if not better. It has been two months now since I am the owner of the most expensive glass teapot in the whole god damn world. Why am I pissed every time I have to gingerly take this thing apart and wash it and then assemble it together? Well, you be the judge! Sorapot or IPod??!!

Posted via email from submom's posterous

Utah Senator Butt-Arse calls Gays immoral. And polygamy is? Where is the Big Love?

No flaming please.  I didn't mean to compare Gays to Polygamists.  But if Utah Senator Chris Butt-Ars (A-ha!) has his right to speak what is on his mind, to spout garbage based on stereotypes and gross generalization and nothing else, despite being an elected public official, then I have the right to generalize the State of Utah as still the hotbed of polygamy, and then to generalize polygamy as the Pantheon of immorality. 

 

Hey, it is a free country, right?  Butt-Ars's Republican colleagues in the Senate seem to believe so.

 

Here is the gist:

 

In an interview for a documentary film, "Butt-Ars called gays 'the greatest threat to America' and likened them to Muslim radicals. He said homosexuals lack any morals and want special rights.  'It's the beginning of the end,' Buttars said. 'Oh, it's worse than that. Sure. Sodom and Gomorrah was localized. This is worldwide.'"

 

Butt-ars has been stripped of his chairmanships by Senate Republicans after a closed-door meeting brought about by the outcry, and his Republican colleagues were outraged and they are standing behind him.  (I wish I had loyal friends like these...)  Butt-ars likewise refused to apologize, but rather relished the pride of taking a stand for his own beliefs.  (Imagine: what if we all had showed respect for the slave owners who took the stand for their own beliefs?  Hmmm...)

 

Below is the lengthy quote from The Salt Lake Tribune because you simply cannot make this stuff up! 

 

"I want the citizens of Utah to know that the Utah Senate stands behind Senator Buttars right to speak, we stand behind him as one of our colleagues and his right to serve this state," said Senate President Michael Waddoups, R-Taylorsville. "He is a senator who represents the point of view of many of his constituents and many of ours. We agree with many of the things he said. . . . We stand four square behind his right [to say what he wants]."

Buttars, R-West Jordan, said he "totally" disagrees with his removal from the panel. In a statement he plans to post on the Senate's Web page, he said the action was an attempt to "shy away from controversy." And, he said, he would not apologize for his comments.

"I don't have anything to apologize for," he said.

"When it comes right down to it," Buttars said in his statement, "I would rather be censured for doing what I think is right, than be honored by my colleagues for bowing to the pressure of a special-interest group that has been allowed to act with impunity."

 

Wow.  Are you kidding me?  Is this for real?  In this day and age?  I must be incredibly naive to be astounded by these news lately so easily.   

 

This and the Cartoon from the New York Post yesterday are reminders that we should not be complacent about "How far we have come along" despite the victory of having elected the first African American POTUS.  Baby, we've still got a long way to go...

Betrayed by The Huffington Post? I want my Virtual Lives separated!

It is clear that I intend to keep my blog anonymous. Not that it matters to anybody anyway since in the grander scheme of things, I AM anonymous: one of the masses, does not matter whether my name is known or not. However, in the unlikely case when someone at work or a family member stumbles upon my blog, I really don't want them to know what I really think about things. I mean, some of the things are better left unsaid, un-discussed. If I could have discussed an issue or a subject with anybody at work or in my social circle, I would probably have discussed it with them and got it over with. No need to use this blog as my "therapy sessions". It is the same as when I leave comments on the Huffington Post. There are acquaintances and co-workers who I don't want to become privy to how I see things.

I made the first mistake when I signed up for the Huffington Post through my Facebook login. Lo and behold, my Profile name is now my real name, and when you click on my profile, you are prompted to a screen to connect with me through Facebook. Again, 99.999999% of the world population will not care or bother, since my name or "Jane Doe" does not make any difference to you. Again, however, in the unlikely chance that someone I know comes across the same posts and the same comments, I don't really want to be "found out."

Ok, lesson learned. Luckily the comments I left were pretty neutral and fair. No moral, emotional, outbursts of any kind. No bawdy remarks. No curse words (since they are not allowed in the first place). I left my first profile as is, nothing to be done about it. There does not seem to be an easy way to disenroll myself from THP. I am lazy. Whatever.

I created a second profile. This time I made absolutely sure not to log in through Facebook and used an inconspicuous handle. Things were going along well. No personal information divulged through my profile. Until just now...

Somehow, the system working behind the scenes detected my Facebook login when I was logged into THP at the same time, and automatically connected the dots on its own. Now my profile picture shows a tiny "F" at the corner and when you click on it, the screen shows my name, that I am on Facebook, and would you like to connect with me on Facebook.

Now the tiny F is a BIG GIANT HUGE F to me!!!

This brings back the memory when a tiny window creeped up from the bottom of my computer screen after I finished with my Blockbuster queue, announcing (not even asking!) that my friends on Facebook would be able to see what movies I would be watching. The window then quickly disappeared before I could click on the button "No F*ing way!"

In the age of social media, Web 2.0, etc. etc. it is probably boggles the mind of those who design these nifty, intelligent, systems that someone, like me, may not want to have all of their virtual lives tied up in a nifty bundle, that someone may still prefer to lead an anonymous life while pouring her heart out.

It is ironic. But we live in an ironic era, no?

Sexism at work. What sexism?

I work for a software company, and needless to say, most of the female employees work in HR (all female), Accounting (one male), and Administration (all female). I work in the business strategy arm of the company, needless to say, most of the time I am the only woman at the meetings.

Let me not start with how many meetings at which the speaker refused to look at me when he talked. (yes, I can use "he" here since it always is a he). Hey, I can play the game. I am using my feminine wiles to maneuver around the labyrinth of testosterone and survive in the man's world. Oh, yeah. I know how that works, and I have resolved never to accuse anybody or any company of being sexist. Come on. We are in the 21st century, are we not??

What sets me off, right at this moment, is the fact that somebody just asked me to "coordinate" a meeting to have the product team update the sales people. Or did he use "arrange"? What other verb can I use to make this task, say, less secretar-y? Strategize?

"Please strategize how we may bring the two parties together and create some synergy between the product and the marketing sides."

How does that sound? I am so good at B-S, I must say.

Of course this is not the first time this person has asked me to "strategize" the same meeting. Finally I grew some balls today (Thanks, Hillary! Or, rather, thanks, Amy Pohler on SNL) and asked him, "This sounds like meeting scheduling to me. Couldn't you ask one of the admins to do it?" He looked at me, in all seriousness, and said, "No. This job takes more than an admin. I need you to persuade people to participate in this meeting."

What am I? A sheepdog?

I dare anybody in this company to ask the men on my team to do any of the shit jobs I have been assigned to!