Fiction Mania | The book of Judith

The Book Fiction Mania, changed her life.

Judy sat crouched in the corner, tears rolling down her face as her blood swollen lip, and bruises ached with intensity. A nightly ritual for her as her husband, Fernando, came home. This attack however was one of the worst. After finding out she had recently became impregnated by her drunkard of a spouse, Judith as her mother called her, endeavoured to escape without Fernando knowing, but ultimately, was caught mid-act, and wrestled back into capitulation. Judith knew she couldn't bring a child into this nightmare, so each morning when Fernando left for work, Judith would prepare for her escape. The instructions for her departure came by way of a single book, a 17th century leather bound novel called "gwallgofrwyd: tynged newid", or in English, "Fiction Mania: Destiny Changed.", that she had found in the attic by chance. It was an Welsh childrens' book, or so she believed, an epic about two children who use a device known as the Antithesis Machine, an ancient Welsh relic, washed upon the shores of Wales to change history. Oddly enough, the author included an unusually detailed description of how to build this device. For months Judith sat in the kitchen floor fashioning her hopes into a single cog, clock-work apparatus, born from sacrificial parts of the toaster, blender and other appliances.

During the next nine months Judith continued to endure Fernando's feverish assaults. She'd do her best to lessen his anger as she attempted to shield her womb and unborn child. Upon one occasion, gumption arrived at Judith's tongue and she bravely announced, "Can you see yourself? Who you've become? This isn't who I fell in love with, and I want out!" Fernando responded to his fears and to his wife's strengthening mentality by screaming "Shut your mouth trollop! You ever try to leave and I'll cut you into a million bits."

I can see myself, for who I really am.

Eventually child was born, named Hope, and Judith for the sake of that child became the savior against the Grendel to which Fernando had become. In the end, Judith and Hope would try to make one last attempt to escape. For one week a month, Fernando would refuse to sleep in her bed, "unclean" he would tell her, as he laid in the living room chair hairy chested without a shirt, a burnt-out cigarette still between his fingers, and half-drunken beer bottles at his feet. "Quiet, sweetheart" she whispered to little baby Hope as she walked down the hall hoping the infant did not sense the fear and cry. Swaddled in a blanket, Judith reached into the hallway closet for her invention and her coat. A golden bronze box, with a small mechanical number-counter on the side. As she did, she made her fatal mistake. On top was the book, Fiction Mania, as it flew to the floor with a thud, stirring dust as it did; its pages sprung open by the wind of the awakening adjacent giant. Fernando was lucid. He thundered towards Judith and the baby spewing atrocities into their ears, grabbing them like a rotten tree, throwing them to the ground. The baby now screaming, as Fernando in his madness reached for his axe that sat in the closet. Judith, more clever than ever, slid the child into the safety of the far corner of the room, knowing the impending battle which must be fought. She kicked at his legs as he approached with the axe, screaming as he thrusted it downward through her skin, slicing through muscle, and bone. Judith a siren of agony, covered in blood, as Fernando swung again and missed into the wall. Begging for her life, screaming for help; Fernando exclaims from his dripping red faced hairy cheeks "It's your fault! You made me him!" The axe now overhead and falling fast comes slamming through Judith's left arm, the blade now dulling, stretches the meat like rising dough before finally breaking through to the wood floor below. The Antithesis Device no longer clutched by a functioning appendage falls to the floor. Nearly unconscious, Judith has only one hope as her lone limb reaches for the the button on the device. She presses it with the entirety of her hand. The cog turns, the numbers count-down from 86 almost instantly, and Fernando's third swing, now in motion slows down and with it time. A flash of blue light, a deep thundering boom, and eyelids shut. When it was over, Judith now stood over Fernando in his floral white dress, covered in blood. She was now him, and he was now her. "No!" he screamed from his new found voice womanhood in the depths of humanity. The axe and its momentum was too much to stop as it severed Fern's final feminine arm. Judy, now standing over herself asks Fern one final question before life escaped him "Can you see yourself for who you are now?"

Red Cross's Blood Policy for Transgender Women is Disturbing.

The following is a letter given to me by a student, to post if we'd omit her personal data. She explains, while she did mail the letter to the Red Cross, she chose not to further pursue the matter and simply continue with school, and not being able to donate because she didn't feel like being a poster-child for the genderless blood movement. It highlight's Red Cross's blood policy as very disturbing..

Red Cross

Charlotte Regional Headquarters

2425 American Park Road

Charlotte, North Carolina 28203

September 19, 2010

Re: Blood Drive

To whom it may concern,

My name is Charlotte Frambois, and I'm a 33 year old mother of two who attends [omitted] Technical Community College in [omitted], NC. On September 15^th 2010, I attended a blood drive on campus and donated blood just as I have for the last fifteen years. I've done so since high-school in hopes that, though I'm poor, though I'm average, I- one person, can make a difference in someone else's life. My donations became even more important to me when my Grandmother was diagnosed with leukemia and required weekly blood transfusions. I believe it's the right of every human being to be altruistic, and to be denied that opportunity of helping fellow-humankind when so much help is needed, when there is no rational reason or justification in not doing so, is a breach of our fundamental rights as a human being. It is offensive, and demeaning to suggest a woman in perfect health, who is unwilling to part with her convictions of who she is as a person be denied this opportunity to save another human life. However this is exactly what is happening, and until this fact changes I must ask that colleges, and any other organization which sponsors blood drives stop immediately. Continued sponsorship endorses discrimination which minorities have fought against for decades. I can no more allow the Red Cross to dictate who I am, then they should be allowed to dictate the false stereotypes upon minorities. Were this the Red Cross telling a person they are not the color they are, we would find such an idea a horrific atrocity. However when it's a woman who has recently obtained corrected legal documentation to represent the appropriate gender after corrective surgery she is told that she cannot be the gender she is, and therefore a “male”. She is told if she does not donate under the marker: “male” then she cannot give blood. The Red Cross's answer to me was to go away.

I am not male, nor have I ever been. I am female, born female. This distinction alone should be enough to appropriately allow the Red Cross to interpret their criteria for blood donations. The fact that at one time there was information in the system to indicate an alternate gender for myself, does not supersede the fact I was female then, and I am female now. However, The Red Cross believes this distinction warrants me a “former male”, and they have chosen to decide this despite popular medical opinion, and even their own trade publications.

“That is, your constant referral to transsexual women as “he” and “him” shows no science, only moralistic bias and reveals you as completely disrespectful. [as such is] unethical and arbitrarily discriminatory behavior which could open such blood banks up to litigation.”

-California Blood Bank Society Network Addenda

Their concern is since I use to have sex with men, which I have not, (as if it matters) that I'm more at risk to donate. In fact I would believe that my twenty or so past (and tested) donations that I've given should be a more appropriate indication of any sexual transmitted disease in my blood. Apparently not. I've had a single partner my entire life, a female if you must know, who has had only one partner herself- me. I was born with an intersex condition, meaning despite being female, my body developed in a ambiguous nature. Because of the (once thought) rarity of the issue and the small amount of medical information available on the subject 30 years ago, I was given a gender and raised in that gender only to decide once I was an adult the wrong choice was made for me. Now 33 years later, someone else is making a choice for me, a decision against my will. A decision without a rational or scientific explanation. One that takes the action of human altruistic behavior and removes all the respect and dignity for the individual- for me. A individual who gives of their own body for humanity is alienated by the Red Cross from humanity because they are seen as less than a woman. Perhaps less than human. For only those who have damaged blood or bodies cannot donate. This is how I felt when I received a call from your depository. I spent the afternoon in tears, and while it takes a great deal of humility to say it- I feel you should understand there is a person behind this letter, a reason to say these words- so that I or others shall be not made to feel this way any longer.

Let me be clear that I understand statistically why gay man are not allowed to donate. I also understand the law when it comes with respect to donation. It is however, not the law but the Red Cross's interpretation of such law that is a problem, for as I previously stated I am not a man, nor am I gay in that respect. Furthermore, from every legal, and medical standpoint I am now female. My legal identification, my status with the federal government, my body and more importantly my conviction. Furthermore, this policy is unjust in the fact it is discriminatory towards those in my current predicament. Those who have donated before and changed their legal information. You require no medical tests, or proof that any other donor to prove their gender- (despite statistics suggesting a portion of the donation population would be considered opposite of their “birth” gender) it's only when a donor openly and honestly provides that information you begin discriminating. In fact there are several problems with this concept since the policy is not applied evenly across all donors. Most importantly the fact that unless someone is open about it, then we must assume your current blood donation supply currently contains some undetermined portion of blood already from individuals such as myself. Secondly the only supplied alternative is to manufacture a false social security number and address and re-apply as a new donor. (Not very hard when only 8% of the population donates.) This policy, if analyzed by any rational individual; only serves to taint your blood donation data and encourage dishonesty. I could have quietly disappeared into the night and continued to donate in such a manner, but it would serve no one to continue to be oppressed under this unjust concept, to allow others to be oppressed- when I can and am able to unequivocally state my disagreement and provide scientific reasoning to abandon it:

As I sit here and write this I can still see the two puncture wounds in my arm. My own blood taken from me and not used in the manner I directed.

Red Cross staff knowingly falsifying my medical records against my own will to the gender of their choice despite legal documentation, and my own deposition to the contrary. (I understand this is a felony.)

Furthermore it is the belief of many legal and medical professionals that the data is owned by the patient while the forms and computers its stored on is owned by the Red Cross. I have already requested destruction of all my medical information, and that request has been denied. This simple mechanism could have allowed for an unbiased solution to this moral dilemma.

I have been advised the only procedure to continue my donation is only through my own self-slandering during intake to public staff members each time. Asked to knowingly lie to facilitate a antiquated and tort policy that's legally questionable and which by the Red Cross's own spokesman in Charlotte North Carolina states “is discriminatory.”

By the Red Cross's own admission, it is discriminatory prejudiced, and misogynistic towards women in similar medical predicament. The Red Cross's own website in fact states in its diversity statement that it provides no protections against gender :

“It makes no discrimination as to nationality, race, religious beliefs, class or political opinions. “

-http://www.redcrossblood.org/about-us/diversity

What needs to happen now is the Red Cross needs to re-examine their definition and interpretation of gender roles with respect to federal law. Understand a woman is a woman even if they are not (in a traditional sense) born one. That individual data is the sole ownership of the individual, and that the Red Cross is inhumanely attaching incorrect and purposely falsifying medical documentation because of their false premise that in some skewed vision, women could have been men, therefore fall into some higher statistic for blood risk.

Immediately until resolved, a genderless intake form and questionnaire should be provided to ALL donors of both sexes. (After all, you never know how many women use to be men and vice versa.) Though I imagine others will take as much offense to you inferring they aren't the gender they are, it is the only way without change to policy to equally and nondiscriminatory accept donations. Blood is genderless, and so should the blind face of greater donor population who knowingly gives of themselves their blood.

I implore and beg of you to question your own policy, and find resolve with this before you are legally held responsible. So that history may look back upon your organization as a champion of human rights, not the grotesque monster we now remember so many groups of past civil liberty movements. For myself I am responsible for my two children and my spouse. I hesitate to think of the day they are injured and are need of blood and there is none, when I must turn to my children and tell them that their brother, sister, or other mother died because I wasn't good enough as a human, as a woman, to donate my blood. That I couldn't, not because I wasn't willing, but because I wasn't allowed.

Sincerely,

Charlotte Frambois

My Mother Stood Up In Church And Defended Me

Rather enjoyable (and action packed) read about being gay, coming out, and having your parents choose you over their religion; as well as, America's idea with what gay should be from my favorite actor, John Barrowman.

'Actually, they couldn't have been better about it. They had a pretty good idea that I was gay, of course. Parents so often do. But I do remember my dad saying to me at the time, "Your mother and I don't discuss what happens in the bedroom with you, so why should you with us?"'

Most touchingly, his parents - deeply Christian churchgoers - publicly defended him against their gay-hating friends, even choosing to leave their church because of its inherently homophobic approach.

'My mother stood up in church once when someone said that all gays should be put on an island and left there. "How dare you," she said. "That is my son you are talking about." My parents walked out. They lost friends. I admire them so much for taking that stand. I never had a problem with being gay, but their acceptance made it so much easier.'

He is incredibly close to his parents, to a level that most people won't admit to. 'I was staying in a hotel with them just recently, and I wandered through to their room to have a chat and got into bed beside them.

I'm not ashamed to admit that. My mum thinks you are never too old for a cuddle. My dad is the same. If I was sitting with him now, I'd have my shoes off and my feet in his lap. I like that I can be like this with them. There's no pretence there.'

He has been with his partner, architect Scott Gill, for 13 years, and seems to have applied the same 'work-bloody-hard-at-it' mentality to his relationship.

Two years ago, they became civil partners. He still refuses to use the term 'marriage', because 'that has religious connotations, and why should we want to be associated with a religious institution that hates us?'

John is clearly in an impossible situation when it comes to his sexuality. He would like it to not be an issue. He says, 'I'm an actor. Not a gay actor. Is Brad Pitt ever described as a "straight actor"?'

But he acknowledges that some do see him as a role model, particularly because of Captain Jack's persona - bisexual, or 'omni-sexual' as he prefers to describe him, but belonging to an age where sexual orientation is no longer even classified.

Still, he can't help railing against the homophobia in the showbiz world - still as rampant as it is in his parents' church, he believes, only much more insidious.

He was famously rejected for the role of Will in Will & Grace, on the grounds that he was 'too straight'. He rolls his eyes. 'Because I like sports and I like cars, I'm not easy to slot into that "camp" box. To me, it is just pigeonholing. Too easy.'

He believes that the Will & Grace model is a perfect example of what is wrong with the way the big American networks portray 'gayness'.

'If that programme was true to life, Will would have a boyfriend. But they want to perpetrate the myth that he is waiting to be "cured".

'I hate that. I've never wanted to be "cured". There is nothing wrong with me. I am walking proof of how a man can be gay and still have a loving partner, a great home, dogs, a happy family, all that stuff.'

He's getting perilously close to 'family values' here, I tease. He laughs. 'No, no. I'm far too naughty for that.'
cite

If you're not familiar with John who is famous for his role in Torchwood, (or even if you are) I'd highly recommend his series, "The Making of Me":

The Making of Me (6 Parts)
Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m27Awmlgi38
Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_J5ECYrxRU
Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMPvE7dQAi8
Part 4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgGPxzMjB4g
Part 5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqxbAuX516k
Part 6: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaETjddPCfo

Barrowman seeks to answer the question: why am I the way I am? In this one-hour special, Barrowman sets out to unearth what the latest scientific research can tell him about the origins of his homosexuality.

His search for evidence takes him back to his roots to meet family and old friends. He also meets with psychologists and geneticists, compares his DNA to his heterosexual brother's, and conquers his claustrophobia to undergo a brain scan - all in the quest to find out how nature and nurture might have interacted to make him who he is.

Barrowman tells the BBC: "My sexuality has never been deliberately hidden. I'm in a committed relationship with the love of my life, Scott Gill, and he is as much a part of the family as my sister's husband, Kevin, and my brother's wife, Dot. However, just because I'm comfortable with my sexuality doesn't mean that I'm not curious about it and that's one of the reasons I agreed to take this journey to discover the making of me."

Does Laser Hair Removal Work?

The Laser Hair Removal Chair of Pain!

No. No matter what they tell you, it doesn't and anyone saying anything to the contrary has money to be made from the process. Of course you're free to make your own decisions, but for me, and the majority of people out there, laser hair removal just does not work. The cost was outrageous, and its effectiveness dubious.

Of course it does sound all quite appealing doesn't it? Tired of shaving, you go into one of these places called laser hair removal spas where they shoot a cryogenic blend of supercooled air onto your skin, and red wavelength laser down into the hair follicle's root till it blows it up like some Reagan era Star Wars program shooting down communist satellites.

Curious about this process, I set up a consultation with my local Ideal Image to find out what this pleasure would cost me. Shocked I was, when she slid me a discreet piece of paper that estimated the upper lip at $690.00 dollars. Want your armpits lasered off? Try almost $1000.00. I grabbed her pen crossed out her numbers, moved the decimal over, and slid the paper back to her. She didn't think it was funny.

Eventually Ideal's competitor, Sona Med Spa enticed me in for a 35% off deal. A deal that committed me to eighteen months of brutal torture and pain, with limited or no results.

The number one question, I'm always asked about my experience with laser hair removal is, "Does laser hair removal hurt?" Oh yes, oh God, yes! It hurts beyond anything you can imagine. It's like taking a knife to your skin, slightly prying up on the tissue, grabbing it with vice grips, chaining it to a run-away train and having your face ripped off. And that's just one pulse.

"pew, pew!"

But let's get serious.... if it was so painful, why did I keep going back? Well I paid almost $1300.00 and hoped to see some benefits. I honestly can't say I have seen such results, but when your already indebted to hope, you pray that your failed results are due to a lack of persistence rather than the more obvious explanation, that laser is a complete hoax played upon the pocketbooks of us who are naively hoping for any easy answer. So we tell ourselves, "one more time", though we promised ourselves to never to do it again after last time. Because last time I left crying, hyperventilating, and in the uncontrollable emotional state.

This time I was prepared. One tube of Canadian Prescription strength topical creme called Triocaine, which is much stronger then the Sonacreme that's only 5% lidocaine. Triocaine is 6% lidocaine, 20% benzocaine and 4% tetracaine. Coupled with two hydrocodone-500s, it still was so painful I can not convey in words the amount of screaming that occurred in that tiny room. I felt like Stallone's character in Rambo, where he is secured to a bare-metal mattress spring, doused with water continuously, and shocked with an electric current. Rambo enjoyed killing the Vietnamese soldier when he was freed, but I wasn't even given the satisfaction of murdering my laser technician.

I don't want to make this a joke though. I don't want someone to mistake my metaphor for a reason to invest in laser hair removal. Oh no. I'm quite convinced the whole process to which companies make money in this sector of "health care" (laser hair removal), is largely based upon the concept that most people won't return because it hurts way too much. I mean, How can you take serious a place who claims you can lose 15% body weight by wrapping you in plastic for an hour?

I sit here blistered, burnt, and clearly not embarrassed enough to warn future victims of this mad science, of exactly what they're signing up for. No wait, I am embarrassed, but it's worth saying. I've been through surgery; recently had four wisdom teeth removed, I've had sciatica, even hit by car on my bike, and hit by a train in my car. None of it ever came close to the pain of laser hair removal. So does it hurt? Is it painful? Take a bottle of hairspray, aim it at your face, and light a match. That's what it feels like, and it will work about just as effective at removing the hair.

My advice, save your money and go to a traditional electrologist.

Am I a Lesbian?

Are transgender relationships outside of labels?

As interesting a subject as ours is, being in a relationship with another woman, a transgender woman, the questions newly informed people ask are common. I have become so used to the same rhetoric there is no more anxiety about my answers. I find that complete and blunt honesty is key. People always ask me if I'm a lesbian.

It has taken me a long time to understand who I am and a lot of courage to be able to say it. I answer yes. Being in a relationship with a woman kind of classifies us as lesbians. I am attracted to men, however I am attracted to this person who I've forged a relationship with. I am attracted to the person, not the sex, nor the gender. I am attracted to the person I'm in love with. In the eyes of society, we live an alternative lifestyle.

The second question I'm asked is if I think she will leave me for a man out of curiosity. The other part of this question is always "Does she do this to get attention from men; is she "gay"?" My answer is No: No and at least not today. I'm sure she is curious as are many of us if we admit it to ourselves of trying something unknown. We are in a committed relationship. Just because I'm attracted to men doesn't mean that I am going to run over and rape that hottie on aisle 3. We love each other and are faithful just like regular married people. Attraction is one thing, but acting on it in any relationship is a whole different story.

We all yearn to be liked. I cannot think of anyone who would raise their hand to be beaten with an ugly stick. We dress to impress, but not to trick people. Anyone feels better about themselves when they feel their appearance is as it should be. No matter who you are, getting a second glance is flattering. Now, is she "gay"? She is attracted to women. She finds some men attractive. We have both become "lesbian" by circumstance. Lessons in life have taught both of us that love is precious and rare and never to cheat yourself of love for something as silly as appearance.

Oh, what about the kids? As parents we would love to shelter our children from the cruelties of the world. Though we try to protect them to the best of our abilities, it is impossible to keep them in a bubble. Our children will face challenge and ridicule. Our children are well loved and will grow up knowing about self respect and tolerance. They will appreciate life and love and beauty. Our children will know about honor, truth, strength and courage. Our children are blessed to have two parents and an entire team of loved ones to help them on this adventurous journey of growing up. How many of you were raised in a two parent, unbroken home?

As long as people are uneducated about gender and sexuality, and hold the key to unlock our strange mystery there will be questions. Plus I think people with boring lives are secretly curious and hoping for really kinky answers. Sorry, we're pretty average.

Sandili Sol Chauncey? How far can transphobia take you?

Back in September of 2007, the transgender community was up in arms when Sandili Sol Chauncey, a Duke student at the time demanded her roomate, a transitional female, be removed from the female dorms. At the time, Lee Chauncey, her father went on the news and said this:

Well as the one person pointed out, Duke "does have" a policy that prohibits discrimination against gender.


So technically it's not Duke's fault. However, Duke did act on this father's hypocritical request and went against that policy it appears.


The truth is, they should have told this guy, thank you for your opinion, and leave it at that.

Of course, after a little footwork, we discovered that Lee was in fact the father of Sandili, and it was she that the story was really about. A whole discussion went on here. Over the years, she's layed low, and her and her father have stayed out of the limelight, likely due to the unexpected exposure of their transphobia. Yet it doesn't seem to have stopped her from landing a $32,000 dollar a year job at the University of Texas, Oncology department. Aparently prejudice and bigotry does have its rewards.

I often wonder about the anonymous woman, who ended up exiled from the process. Both her and Miss Chauncey were extremely lucky to afford the $40,000 a year tuition of Duke. Perhaps that's what's wrong with me? Maybe if I was a bit more of an asshole, I'd make it further in this world? Till then, I'll just keep slugging away in community college, because I can't afford the cost on my conscience of what Sandili traded to get where she is.

My Cat Is Gay

Schitzy, our other gay cat.

We always knew Sunshine, our fluffy orange kitten, was different. Perhaps the mere fact we named our male kitty, Sunshine, is what got things off on a bad foot. Lately I've been told by our town priest that being gay is a lifestyle choice and that you can, in fact, choose to be or not to be gay. (Shakespeare was on to something.) So we had a bit of an intervention with the cats this afternoon. I sat our two cats down, and had a stern talk with them.

Sunshine's lover, Schitzy (short for Schizophrenia) is also a male kitty, a man kitten, with a major weight problem in addition to his sinful life choice. When I say weight, I'm talking like a fifty pound cat. This is not a thin cat by any definition of the word. In fact, if Schitzy's belly hung any lower to the ground his feet wouldn't reach the floor. This is a big cat, an obese cat. His favorite foods are pizza, cheeseburgers, and chocolate; although he is rarely allowed any of this any longer since starting his diet several months ago. However he's a clever kitten, and we've caught him several times hiding under the dinner table waiting for the our children to drop a delicious morsel of human-food-goodness.

So anyways I've tried explaining to them (the cats) that the Bible explicitly states the gay is a sin- just like menstruation. I really want my kitty to get into heaven, so curing our little feline friends of this cancer is very, very important to me. I sat down and explained to them that even though they loved each other, they should refrain from having sexual intercourse if they wanted me to buy them any more kitty nibbles.This is what us Christian pet owners call, tough love.

This of course didn't even begin to faze them, as they rotated their little heads in confusion, then attacked each other in a love embrace, and began licking one another all over. It was sickening, I think I threw-up in my mouth a bit. Certainly God did not intend for cute, lovely, little Kitties to be Gay??? Why Me God? Why?

Sunshine & Schitzy

It was at this point I grabbed Sunshine by the tail, dragged him in front of the television, and demanded that he watch some heterosexual kitty porn. Now in tears, I feverishly flipped through the channels trying to find the Discovery Channel, or National Geographic. What's this? A show called "Out of Africa: Gay monkeys of Kenya." - "NO!" I then, tried that Animal Channel, which had some inter-species comedy show between a cat and a dog. As a last resort I turned it to the Christian Channel, and it was at that very moment, I felt a paw slap me across my face and I swear I heard my cat meow: "what the hell is wrong with you?"

He was right and I knew it. Sunshine was gay. God had made him this way, and nothing I could say or do would change it. It wasn't a choice he made, it just was. It didn't effect my marriage at all. They could be gay and happy, and so could I. The best part is, we now all spend a lot less time fighting and arguing about it... Which of course, gave us more time to hide the lasagna from Schitzy, the fatty cat.

Why you should Hate Domestic Partnerships : Taxes.

I hate taxes!

Domestic Partnerships are the backbone of the majority of conservative America's excuse, in the argument to disallow gay marriage. At face value it seems like a great alternative for moderates, who agree to offer the same benefits to those individuals who fall under the label domestic partnership in lieu of marriage. Separate but equal is still fair to all, and it is after all just a label, right? Wrong, and this is why you should hate domestic partnerships: taxes.

This is a label that often includes children, and spouses, real people. While many people associate the "label" of Domestic Partner as that of one synonymous with gay and lesbian individuals, it can, and often includes heterosexual couples as well. I mean after-all, why should someone be "forced" into a legal agreement only just to "call" yourself "married"?

Earlier this year, my company who went through a review and audit of our company health care plan found my spouse and myself in a "domestic partnership" rather than marriage. Indeed, there is no legal agreement between the two of us, but we do consider ourselves "married". We have two kids, a mortgage, and a dumb Labrador Retriever who loves table scraps, all in all- we're pretty normal, and it's no big deal to us, so why should it be to my employer? Except it isn't.

My family is entitled to the same great health-care plan under the classification of "domestic partnership", as my married co-workers, and this in turn allows my company to brag, and proudly say they're a diverse company, but what no one is going to tell you is how much more this "label" is going to cost you. At first glance, it appears that a health care premium is the exact same for a married family, as it is for individuals who get classified as a "domestic partnership." But, that's where it ends. The problem is this. As married, you receive the health-care as a "benefit", as a domestic partner you receive health care as "income". The company then subsequently tosses up there hands and says "there's nothing we can do," when you get the tab for this "income" on your taxes. Yes, you know that ten-thousand dollars that my supposed company is paying for the health care? Well, according to them, and the US Government, I am now responsible for that money as if I had handed me a pile of money and said "Go wild!" In fact, it's as though I earned that money on my paycheck. Yes that's right, I'm being taxed on my company's proportion of their health-care contribution, while my married counterpart isn't.

For those of you with a financial buffer, being taxed an addition ten grand may not seem like a financial burden, but when your annual salary is only about twenty-thousand dollars a year, you can clearly see that this asinine situation leaves me punished, and penalized merely because of my relationship.

According to a recent report by the Center for American Progress, those who fall into the classification of "Domestic Partnership" will be taxed on average $1069 more than their "married" counterparts. Now that's gay.

Now certainly my "diverse" and "friendly" employer, could step up to the plate, and offer to pay these taxes, or they could lobby congress and be good stewards to their employees. After all, a few billion-dollar-"diverse" companies complaining to congress could, or at least should, make some waves, but why would they? They're assuming our stupidity. They'll use excuses such as "Most companies don't even extend benefits to unmarried partners of employees." Let's be honest though, they don't want it to change. The less people that can afford their health care, means less expense to them as a facilitator, and that's the bottom line.

Look, I don't want some unfair advantage I just want equal taxes and equal benefits that allow me to put food on the table to my children, and also have health care for when they're sick? Is that too much to ask? If America can base their independence on taxed tea, surely I can claim foul in this day and age, when I'm the victim of taxation without medication?

We are a country of separationists. The great excluders. In fact I'm certain a good many of you reading this see nothing wrong with treating one group different than another. After all, "if it doesn't affect me, then it's not important!" Hopefully one day, we can look back and say that we were barbaric and neanderthals. On that day we will look back at history and be thankful that indeed "we" weren't that black slave, or that Jew in Germany, or that witch being burned at the stake. Only then will we realize how much we as a society really care for one another.

Stereotypes and Reverse Feminism

Shakespeare in Love.

An earlier version of myself wrote this for womens' anthropology at Ventura College back in 2000. I thought I'd share:

 All the worlds a stage and all the men merely players. It's a line that echoes through the ages. Simply stated, not only the written words of Shakespeare but some of the most profound words ever characterizing human culture. Understanding & acceptance of this philosophy questions society's lack of change, and the relevance of pre-established stereotypes. Do we dare? Do we take the script we are given and play our part fulfilling the ensemble role; that not of a play directed by us, but that of some unseen pre-established norm telling us how we should live our life?

Genesis, defined as origin is where we must start. Not in a biblical sense, but in the genesis of each of us personally. To trace who we are today, or who we will become, requires us to start at the beginning. We tend to to think of the beginning as birth; however we must begin sooner. At conception the chromosomal gamble instantaneously establishes our lives to our deaths. From that point forward, we are attached to the stereotypes of our sex, and expected to follow the norms of society that agree with that sex. How can so much be decided for us before we could even choose?

Some people will tell you sex is biologically inherited, others that it is social learned. Substantial evidence exists to support both ideas. While there are explanations such as deviant chromosomes explaining the reasons why people break from stereotypes and norms, we have yet to fully explain this phenomenon. I tend to believe biologically we have yet to understand how all the chemicals function and effect our bodies and minds, and two; I'm under the firm belief stereotypes and norms are man-made innovations that protect those who accept and follow them. Yet complicate and confuse those who don't, and do not pertain to the preference of everyone.

After birth we begin our training, we are given the costume, and begin to rehearse our part. We are given toys suited to our gender as props so we can pretend, and prepare for our performance as an adult. Later, we further our training, sending our boys off to Boy Scouts to masculinize them and "to learn discipline and manly survival skills." (Stone, 48) Boys begin to learn from their peers and family that they should suppress their emotions, and are ridiculed if they cry or show femininity. With constant pressure of humility looming over them, they quickly learn they should sit a certain way, dress a certain way, & talk a correct way. Is it really healthy to form these habits in an environment which only offers severe repercussions for those who go against them?

The training and mental brainwashing that tells both sexes how we should think and act holds a stronger bond then any evil Shakespearean character could hope, continues throughout our lives. Men and women, are constantly reminded of their expectations through television and media. "Popular 1950's shows personified manhood as rugged through shows like Gunsmoke and Bonanza." (Stone, 48) Living up to these "Superman" images of super testosterone portrayed on television is hardly an expectation most men can fill in today's society. 

Women with their own expected stereotypes quite often are guilty of having an image of men onto which they request males to fit. Generally by this time, when the two sexes meets- we know our lines, our part, and every move. We've accepted our roles and have conditioned ourselves into nothing more than robotic "pickup lines" and "expected reactions". Generally it is assumed the man is the aggressor and that it is he whom should make the first moves. While not as common, and some stereotypes have begun to change, most women still look for masculine qualities in their partners like "financial security", while this is not so much of a concern for the male in their search for a female. This added pressure puts added pressure upon the male gender and sets the stage for women's reliance and submissiveness to the male.

Religion is another place where we see control over the male through rules and regulations. Despite the many oppressive functions of the Catholic church for both sexes, The recent uprising of an organization called The Promise Keepers, an all-male religious group teaches men to take control of their families by making their wifes "submit" to them. Founder Bill McCartney was instrumental in passing Colorado's anti-lesbian & gay amendment. He has referred to homosexuality as "an abomination of all-mighty God." (PK Net)

No matter the source of stereotypes; family, religion, or society, they're damaging. For men, they live an average of eight years less than women. Have a higher cardiovascular disease, ulcers, & tension, and even migraine headaches. The suicide rate of men is three times higher then that of women. Men are more likely to become alcoholics.

Stereotypes control the way we think, feel, and act; they take away our ability to choose and dehumanize us. While the women's liberation movement made us aware of the oppression of women, we fail to realize that these stereotypes are even less flexible for men. While it's acceptable for young girls to be tomboys, young males are ridiculed for any evidence of femininity. While women can bond by sharing emotions, men often feel they cannot form close emotional bonds because of societal taboos & norms. This rigidity of the male gender leads to the many problems previously discussed.

The restraint of stereotypes can be even more damaging when you consider men aren't allowed to show pain. This can lead to a phenomenon which is often joked about in America, battered men. Cartoons of a female chasing her husband with a rolling pin make this very serious issue comedic because our stereotypes don't expect the male victim to become humiliated, or the female capable to bring harm to the male. Battered husbands have historically been ignored or subjected to ridicule and abuse. In 18th century France, a battered husband "was made to wear an outlandish outfit and ride backward around the village on a donkey." Although feminism has opened many of our eyes about the existence of domestic violence, the abuse of husbands is rarely discussed. In 1974 a study was releases showing 47% of husbands abused their wives and 33% of women abused their husbands, however that same year the total number of homicides males against females, and vice a versus were almost identical. Black men are more likely to be murdered by women then any other demographic. 52% of elderly men are abuse victims. These are staggering numbers when men are less likely to report abuse and violence because of humiliation. To make things worse there are very few shelters for battered men, while most cities and towns have these shelters set aside for women.

As with and rules, or laws there is always people who will break them. People who challenge the thoughts, ideas, & boundaries of what normality is. If it wasn't for these people we might still think the earth was flat. Changing societies view of gender and its stereotype could prove difficult.

Accepting the fact sex isn't binary, nor limited to two styles destroys many of these stereotypes relevance. The importance of such individuals showing that stereotypes are the socially constructed portions of sex which can be changed or destroyed brings us closer to the truth. Deviating from one's gender stereotype because they have discovered their identity different from their anatomy the individual makes the decision to be their true self, often crossing into the other stereotype. Their true selves stripped of societal expectations neither really is nor wants to be "The Marlboro Man" or for women "Betty Homemaker". For those who choose to remain in oppressive roles, the oppression of one's interests and preferences become a depressive part of life. Non-conformist often face violence, discrimination, and hate crime for simply being who they are. On example from a Madison newspaper: "An 18 year old transgender individual was attacked by a man wielding a broken beer bottle. The individual was hit on the back of the head with a full 40-ounce bottle of beer and then stabbed in the abdomen with the broken bottle." While most would accept the attacker was wrong to inflict personal harm, society for the most part accepts the fear, that enforces the norms of the culture by allowing them to happen. This makes change even more difficult.

In conclusion, from 1st Samuel (16:7) "But the Lord said to Samuel, look not on his face, nor the height of his stature... for the Lord does not see as man sees for man looks on outward appearance, but the Lord looks on the mind." How can we continue to ignore this teaching. We needn't be puppets controlled by a puppeteer. It's time to deconstruct the stereotypes that victimize, dehumanize, and destroy who we really are. It's time to call the curtain on the final performance, and live our lives, both men and women without fear or expectations. We can change the rules, when we stop trying to change ourselves for others.

Man In House Causes Women 7 Hours More Work.

Yeah, like I'd ever find this type of man.

Having a husband creates an extra seven hours of housework each week for women, according to a new study. For men, tying the knot saves an hour of weekly chores. 

Having kids boosts house chores even further. With more than three kids, for instance, wives took on more of the extra work, clocking about 28 hours a week compared with husbands' 10 hours.

cite

I have a hard time imagining a life similar to what my mother, or even mother-in-law lived. Men who don't cook or clean, and I'm grateful to have a partner who I share these responsibilities with.

Ladies, Curious about her? He Won't Mind, Because All Women are Lesbians.

Forgiven Curiosity?

Men are more likely to forgive their cheating partners if they have a lesbian fling rather than an affair with another man, according to scientists.


Researchers found men are more than twice as likely to continue dating a girlfriend who has cheated on them with another woman than one who has cheated with another man.


But University of Texas study found women show the opposite pattern. Ladies are more likely to continue dating a man who has had a heterosexual affair than one who has had a homosexual fling.
cite

Sorry guys, no man love for you... without the risk...

"A robust jealousy mechanism is activated in men and women by different types of cues those that threaten paternity in men and those that threaten abandonment in women," said Jaime Confer, the study's lead author and a doctoral candidate in evolutionary psychology.

The question then becomes, if you're curious, and perhaps even slightly unhappy in your hetero relationship, what's stopping you from discovering a more, happy you? Hmmmm....

If gay people are said to be 10% straight, it stands to reason straight people are 10% gay. -Being Erica

I think a lot of it's true. Sometime you just have so many bad relationships with men, you're willing to try anything... and being that there isn't a stigma of being lesbian, that probably explains why most women do have a lesbian encounter at least once in their relationship history. Well that and the rest of us get way too drunk at a party and our boyfriends start chanting "Kiss, kiss, kiss"... don't ask me how I know this.

Interestingly enough, such backwards taboos in society may actually be in place to reinforce womens' sexuality. It appears as if most women are bisexual:

Heterosexual women, Dr. Chivers and her colleagues found, were no more excited by athletic naked men doing yoga or tossing stones into the ocean than they were by the control footage: long pans of the snow capped Himalayas. When straight women viewed a video of a naked woman doing calisthenics, on the other hand, their blood flow increased significantly.

“Women physically don’t seem to differentiate between genders in their sex responses, at least heterosexual women don’t,” she said. “For heterosexual women, gender didn't matter. They responded to the level of activity.”
cite

Tipping The Velvet.

Tipping The Velvet

I wanted to write about this, 'Tipping The Velvet', from the moment I saw the show a few nights ago. It was interesting to me on so many levels, but I truly just want to convey how much entertainment value it had. It's well worth a watch, though you do need to reserve three hours to watch the entire series. It was one of those few video rentals which you love every second of, and it is a very sad realization when you come to the end of it.

It's sweet, it's romantic, and reminded me so much of some of my romance novels. The difference in 'Tipping the Velvet', and traditional romance cinema was that instead of the two characters being male and female, it was two girls. Set in Brighton and London, the time period of the show communicated the sexuality of the lead characters in a way which was neither odd, nor did it have that corny aspect that so many programs do which deals with same sex relationships.The sexuality seemed natural, as it should, and it was nice to see a modern day love story represent that.

This movie, obviously based on a best selling book by Sarah Waters, that I've never read prior to watching the mini-series, follows the life of a poor rural girl and her rise to wealth, homelessness and finally family. It's beautifully done, and the music will so get stuck your head. Most of us will identify in some way with the trials and triumphs of the characters.

Virginia Woolf's 'Orlando'

One of my all time favorite movies is probably not what you would expect. Then again, you might. Among my more modern favorite films like 'P.S. I Love You', 'Eat Pray Love', and even 'Roman Holiday' is 'Orlando'. Some of you may have never heard of the movie; less of you the book, but you may know the author; Virginia Woolf. Ring a bell?

In the late 1920's Virginia wrote a book partially based upon her friend. The book entitled Orlando chronicles a young man who is gifted with immortality and who one morning awakes by some process which we don't understand, and becomes a woman.

The 1992 movie is a stunning retelling of Virginia Woolf's Orlando.

I've watched it many times, and can't speak to how much I enjoy Tilda Swinton in the role of Orlando. Orlando gains the favor of the queen, and with it great riches. He falls in love with a Princess, who in turn breaks his heart. He comes to a point where he despises women, until later in life and he is thrown into a situation where he has to judge his own humanity as a man. It's at this point Orlando is a woman, whether by choice or some other means we don't know. Clearly she, with her wisdom, understands the body is just a vessel and undertakes her new life with a unexpected acceptance. As if each person, could if upon the capability in doing so, would be fully able to choose, and successfully live a lifetime in both sexes. Later, Orlando falls in love with a man, loses everything she owns, and eventually has a child. By the end of the movie she has returned to being a male, with child.

It's a wonderful artistic movie with stunning visuals and an incredible dialogue. The dichotomy of the sexes, whether in politics, arts, or even law is as relevant in the 400 years of history starting in Orlando's time, as it is today.

I picked out a couple of my favorite scenes up top for sharing.... and it's definitely worth a read, or a video rental for the captivating tale of Orlando.