nabil: (Default)
Walking across the street to the laundromat I just ran across a group of scantily clad young people-- the girls in tutus and the boys in wrestling shorts. They were posing in the street to have their picture taken for something called Not Your Mother's Lube Wrestling. I was given a flyer.

All giggles and glitter as they ran to the park when the light turned green, back into the street to pose quickly when it turned back to red.

I love, love, love my neighborhood. I love, love, love my city. I love, love, love all these absolutely gorgeous young queers.


nabil: (Default)
I have wanted you to be a waif-boy; thin and pale, asymmetrical dark hair and light eyes; fey and sweetly vicious. But you are a big man, looking less educated then you are, speaking more roughly then you are-- ashamed of your body and your sweat and your maleness which I love-- multiple showers a day, a light voice speaking quickly in this sort of stream associative poetry of curses and threats that are so over-the-top they make me laugh.

I have wanted a waif but I am so delighted to have you.

I will buy you a duster at the army supply store; I will coax you into a good mood; I will let you make me laugh on a hard day. Let us go together, you and I, to the late-night Mexican restaurant with the waiter who you will call, with great respect and admiration, the robo-dude. I will accompany you to the theater with the best accoustics in DC; I will sit with you in the seat precisely chosen for the best view; I will do this on opening night of the most apalling and explosion-filled movie to come out this way; I will wait with you in a line circling the block for two hours and I will be delighted by the privilege. Just come to me tonight, dear love, dear lost neglected inspiration, come to me and tell me a story.
nabil: (Default)
I've been at FogCon for the last few days, and am just now emerging in an exhausted haze; I adore staying up all night talking about books with smart people, but it does take a toll. Home sick today and hoping that I'm just over-tired, not stricken with yet another flu...

I was on three panels, Friday night's was about Monsters in spec lit and what happens when the heroine/ hero is a monster. I got a bit excited and carried about 40 pounds of books around with me all day, got to the panel at 9pm and spread them out on the podium in front of us to the suprise of my fellow panelists. It was a good and lively conversation; it felt like that lovely intellectual play of writing with a smart person, or daydreaming together, bouncing delightful ridiculousnesses back and forth.

The other two panels I was on had less content, but were still fun-- one where the four panelists and the room created a city in an hour-- more of a city state actually-- and one on the punk, or lack therof, in steampunk spatterpunk witpunk and so on and so on... The punk panel was the most content-free and shallow, but really quite delightful-- much empty posturing, table-pounding, swearing and shouting "No!" at each other and the audience. A good time was had by me, and seemingly by a fair number of other folks...

Other then that, it was a good con-- staying up all night talking about books, meeting new folks & hanging out with people i don't see enough of. (yay frankie! jm! yay jessie the k! yay bill! cynthia! debbie notkin! laurie! w00h00!) But good lord, I don't have the stamina of my youth... I came home very early Sunday morning, slept the whole day away, still felt wretched today (Back out again last night, yargh chronic pain...) Called in for my 10am meeting and my boss pretty much told me I sounded awful and stay home...

Hopefully tomorrow I'll be (at least a bit) sparkly again. But it was a truly excellent con. And well needed-- between Cicely's illness & my work difficulties & the general February pit of despair it's been a bit of a time.



oh ps-- I want to read everyone's fogcon reports-- link me pls?

roll call.

Mar. 14th, 2011 03:34 pm
nabil: (Default)
who do i know on dreamwidth?
nabil: (Default)
So, some of you might already know that I've been reading a lot of economics blogs for the last few years-- for about four years, with increasing intensity over the last year.

For about six months or so, economics bloggers who I consider to be extremely reliable-- some of the same folks who pointed out the problems with subprime loans before the housing crash-- have been warning about a new potential danger:  increased pressure on retirees and other homeowners to take on reverse mortgages.

Reverse mortgages have been around for some time; they are almost always a bad idea.  What's changed?  Well, what I'm reading is that some of the same people who made a lot of money off of commissions from subprime loans-- the same folks who pressured and outright lied to put people in subprime mortgages, even when they qualified for better loans, because the commission on subprime was higher-- have been looking around for new ways to make money.  And they've spotted reverse mortgages.  Like subprime several years ago, there is very little consumer protection or regulation around reverse mortgages.  There is a large population of aging folks facing financial trouble due to the current recession, with all or most of their assets tied up in their homes.  If you aren't too worried about ethics-- and the folks who lied to put people in subprime loans clearly aren't-- there is vast money to be made by swindling retirees out of their homes with reverse mortgages.

I just saw my first supporting evidence outside of the economics blogosphere that this might be a real risk.  I'm doing laundry, and the laundromat just showed an infomercial clearly aimed at retirees, sponsored by a real estate agency, offering to send you a free informational DVD with the facts about reverse mortgages and why they might be the right solution for you.  My blood is boiling; this ad would be very effective on confused retirees like my grandfather during the early stages of Alzheimer's; it was presenting an ad for a particular company as a neutral source of information. 

I'm reminded of the ways that real estate agents and others who financially benefited from the housing bubble and directly from subprime loans were regularly on TV as experts during the bubble.  When I was looking at possibly buying five years ago, it was difficult to find anyone on TV representing the perspective that you should make a 20% downpayment and only take out a mortgage that you could afford.  All the talking heads were repeating that "Housing always goes up; none of the old rules of thumbs on mortgages apply; taking out a huge loan on a small salary is just fine." 

I very much hope that we will _NOT_ see a wave of the same sort of salesmanship presented as objective truth on reverse mortgages.  Possibly the Obama White House will move to add consumer protections and regulation to ward off this risk; possibly enough people have learned risk aversion from the subprime fiasco that we will not have the same sort of massive foreclosures on retirees who have all of their savings tied up in their homes.  I'm not holding my breath.

I just phoned my mother; I assume that she will be targeted over the next few years for reverse mortgages.  (As a retiree, a widow, and a woman she is a prime target for con artists and scum bags.)  She also is a caregiver for a number of older women, also widows, who are even more likely to be targeted.  I strongly suggest that you talk to your parents, friends, and aging relatives and let them know that the same scumbags who did hard-sells on subprime mortgages-- sometimes outright lying, saying that the papers their clients were signing were different contracts then they actually were-- are now targeting retirees and homeowners for reverse mortgages.

And if you see more and more ads selling these reverse mortgages, and more and more talking heads on TV talking about how safe and fabulous they are-- just remember that a few years ago the talking heads were saying the same things about taking out mortgages with 5% or less downpayment, for loans that were entirely disproportionate to your salary.


nabil: (Default)
A bit of background: a couple of years ago the beloved youngest daughter of my old family friends was kidnapped and murdered. Since then that family has gone through hell.

My Mom lives near the girl's mother, and has been a good friend and solid support to her since then. And I have been a long-distance support to my friend-- pep talking her and encouraging her and being gently stern with her when she feels guilty for saying the wrong thing, reminding her that sometimes there's no way not to.

Had a long talk with my Mom about all this right now. The family's surviving daughter is in crisis. Her mother is at wit's end, and is turning to my Mom for help. More help then is reasonable to ask for, more then my Mom can give. I state this not in blame, but as a fact. Of course she is asking too much - she needs help, and she doesn't have other people to ask.

It's an impossible situation. These three loving, brave, ethical women in a situation that none of them made. Struggling with it, and inevitably hurting each other, my heart goes out to all of them-- but most of all to my Mom. Of course.

Last night, on the phone in my living room, watching the park as the light went out of the sky, I listened to my Mom's confusion and sadness. Describing a really painful conversation, feeling guilty for saying the wrong thing.

And I talked her through it, and calmed her down. Reminded her of what my dear friend Debbie had been reminding me. That there us an arrogance in her feeling guilty- she is ascribing herself power she doesn't actually have. She didn't make this duration, and she can't fix it. She can do what she's doing -- stick around, listen. Say the wrong thing sometimes, because sometimes there is no right thing to say.

I am fiercely proud of my Mom. Doing the right thing, the hard thing, because it needs doing and she's the one there to do it. And I am fiercely proud, and grateful, of myself. That I have some wisdom to offer her.

Last night I was able to give my Mom some hard-earned wisdom, bittersweet comfort, and even make her laugh- all things I gave from my queer life. And I am proud and grateful and humbled too.

When I was a kid I wanted to grow up and be wise. I wanted to get the he'll out of my parents house -- to grow up so I could make my own decisions about how to live - no marriage, no kids, live on my own terms. And i'm doing that. And now I get to take some of that wisdom from my queer life and give it back to my Mom.

It is bittersweet. And it is beautiful.

Sent from my iPhone
nabil: (Default)
I just received the sweetest message from my pal Robin-- at Gender Euphoria in Vancouver, there was a Heroes wall-- and someone had posted my name on it.

Thanks for letting me know, Robin.  That made my day.

I'm thinking back to the work that I did for trans folks, Arabs, Muslims, and folks of color.  Mostly in the 90s, mostly through True Spirit, with some also through Bint el Nas and El Fatiha.  It's funny, I've never really able to give myself credit for the work I did.  It was always so clear to me what I wasn't doing-- that other people were doing so much more then I was-- and that there was so much work going undone.  I never felt that I was doing enough.

But it was difficult work.  Probably not a lot in terms of the number of hours, but a lot in terms of difficulty.  I did a lot of first things-- to my knowledge, I set up and moderated the first listserve for trans folks of color-- was the first contact person/ hub for trans Arabs and Muslims-- organized events for trans folks of color at True Spirit for some years.   To my knowledge, the first English-language erotica featuring an Arab ftm and a Muslim lesbian.   Firsts are always hard; and these were really hard.  It was damn well terrifying to be listed online as a contact for trans Muslims-- I was quite aware of the folks who've been harassed and murdered for similar things.  It was really hard moderating the listserve and organizing the events-- I was seldom thanked, and often criticized-- I quit at the point that I was frustrated to the point of anger with the people I was trying to serve.  I removed my online writings after the hateful emails and threats that followed 911.

There were some people who said thank you.  The award True Spirit gave me-- that I wasn't there to receive, because I was dealing with a crisis with day care.  The lovely art that Mary and Nida gave me, in thanks for my work on Bint el Nas.  Emails from women and trans folks in the Arab world thanking me for being visible.  The court case that I helped to win-- asylum for a trans man from a small Lebanese village.  I was always deeply moved to hear that my work mattered, that it helped.  That the frustration and fear were worth something.

I'm still moved.  I'm really really glad.


nabil: (Default)
More health struggles this week/ month/ instantiation.  I'm going to create an opt-in health filter; you want in?


nabil: (Default)
Anybody have current contact info?


nabil: (Default)
* In war, it is immoral for a winning army to continue killing once it has won.
* In politics, it is immoral for a politician to spend more time pandering to those who opposed him then to those who voted for him.

Through my lifetime, the Democratic party has consistently spent more time compromising, working with, and pandering to Republicans then to Democrats.

This has led to the Republican party becoming more right-wing, the Democratic party becoming more right-wing, massive growth in inequity in the US, financial collapse, vast harm to the US public school system, decreased access to health care, increased homelessness, increased militarism, the growth of the prison industry and the percentage of Americans in prison, and a host of other horrible ills.

I wouldn't say it has gone well.

Since Obama has taken office, he has continued the Democratic party's strategy of reaching out to Republicans, while ignoring the concerns of those who voted for him.

1.  On torture, wiretapping, and government secrecy: Obama has reached out to a number of pro-torture advocates, appointing them to important policy and advisory positions. Since then, he has made pretty speeches about how the US does not torture. He has also moved to create a system of "indefinite detention", where terrorism suspect can be held indefinitely without a trial, on the grounds that they are a threat to the US if released. More recently, he has also pressured Congress to create legislation allowing the President to prevent the release of photographs of tortured detainees, even if FOIA has declared that they must be released, if the President says that they are a threat to American security. Links are to Glenn Greenwald's blog, which is an excellent resource on civil liberties.

2.  On the economy, Obama has violated his own ethics guidelines, seeking common ground with economists who are entrenched in the banking industry and appointing them to policy and advisory positions.  This has led to bailouts that provide a massive wealth transfer to the richest people in the country, and warnings from all kinds of folks-- including IMF officials-- that the US has fallen into the trap of oligarchy which regularly destroys the economies of developing world companies.

3.  On health care, Obama has reached out to the health insurance industry, seeking common ground.  He has also reversed his earlier position that single-payer health care is the best way to attain universal coverage, and removed single-payer as an option under consideration.

4.  On reproductive rights, Obama has reached out to anti-choicers, seeking common ground with them.  Most recently, an anti-choice religious leader has been appointed to a senior position at the HHS,  I have not yet heard of Obama making a statement that the domestic terrorism of Christian pro-life activists against doctors is unacceptable, or any statement of how he plans to protect health care workers from terrorists.  If he has made such a statement, or done anything to protect health care workers, please do let me know.

Like most folks I know, I've been eager to extend Obama the benefit of the doubt.  And the man does make a pretty speech.  For someone who hasn't been in an office a year yet, though, I'm seeing a disturbing trend in what happens when he reaches out to find common ground with right-wingers and Republicans.

I think it's absolutely crucial to put Obama and other Democrats under tremendous pressure from the left.  I want to be part of that.

What do I want?

1.  Kill off the Republican party.  Stop pretending that they're reasonable people, stop talking about finding common ground with them.  Emphasize the connections between right-wingers and murderers, terrorists, hate-mongers, and liars.  Don't let right-wingers to continue to pretend that they're not connected to the fringe of domestic terrorists-- they are.  At best they incite them with hate speech.  At worst they are them.

2.  Pressure the Democratic party from the left.  As right-wingers like Arlen Specter join the Democratic party, there's a real risk of it moving even farther to the right.  We already know the right-wingers are shrieking-- wehave to shriek at least as loud as they do to keep that from happening.  We need to use the full weight of our moral authority-- we do not support terrorists, and we do not lie-- and the full weight of our political victories-- Obama won with more of a majority then Reagan, who ushered in thirty years of Republican rule.  (Note Reagan didn't do much compromising with lefties.)  We also have to mount primary challenges to Blue Dog Democrats, kick them out of Congress and replace them with lefties, while also working to enact meaningful legislation that reduces the current bribery of our politicians by corporations.

3.  Start an actual left-wing party that advocates for folks run by and for folks who aren't millionaires.  I don't know how you go about killing a party and starting a new one in the US, though I know it's happened before.  Any historians on my flist wanna help me out here?



nabil: (Default)
Press release from Catholics for Choice-- original here:

Antiabortion Advocate Appointed to Senior Position at HHS

Washington DC - Jon O’Brien, president of Catholics for Choice, issued the following statement today about the announcement that Alexia Kelley had been appointed to be Director of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships at the Department of Health and Human Services:

The antichoice organization Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good (CACG) has announced that Alexia Kelley, its co-founder and former executive director, has been appointed to be Director of Faith-based and Neighborhood Partnerships at the Department of Health and Human Services. Ms. Kelley’s appointment would be a defeat for reason and logic and calls into question whether President Obama’s administration is serious about reducing the need for abortion. And, while it may not gain many headlines, the impact and significance of this appointment should not go unnoticed.

“If Ms. Kelley had been appointed to another position in the administration, there might be less reason for concern. However, the Department of Health and Human Services is responsible for providing and expanding access to key sexual and reproductive health services. As such, we need those working in HHS to rely on evidence-based methods to reduce the need for abortion. We need them to believe in men's and women’s capacity to make moral decisions about their own lives. Unfortunately, as seen from her work at CACG, Ms. Kelley does not fit the bill.

“A look into Alexia Kelley’s leadership of CACG reveals a vehement antichoice stance that is focused on reducing the number of, not the need for, abortions. In voter’s guides the organization Kelley led characterized abortion as akin to war or torture. You can learn more about Catholics in Alliance here.

“From the beginning, Alexia Kelley directed CACG to ignore the question of access to abortion and reframe the debate in terms of reducing the number of abortions—although polls consistently show that the majority of Catholics support abortion rights. This language around reducing the number of abortions should be a huge red flag to anyone who believes in and seeks to defend a woman’s right to choose. While evidence-based prevention methods can go a long way towards reducing the need for abortion, some women will always need access to safe and legal abortion and we must recognize that and ensure public policies support that access.

“Alexia Kelley is on record with her support for restrictions on access to abortion, despite her organization’s efforts to avoid the question of legalization at every turn. In an audio press conference prior to the 2008 election, Ms. Kelley agreed with other speakers who spoke out in favor of restrictions on abortion, saying, “Catholics in Alliance supports these restrictions as well.”

“Under Kelley’s leadership, CACG used flawed economic data to support anti-poverty measures as a means to reduce the number of abortions. While such measures are obviously beneficial for many reasons, poverty reduction will not by itself reduce the need for abortion. As Ms. Kelley’s group opposed evidence-based prevention methods such as contraception and comprehensive sexuality education, its “abortion reduction” rhetoric is simply a newly packaged antiabortion message.

“Rhetoric around “finding common ground” (or common good, as Ms Kelley would have it) and “reducing the need for abortion” has framed the abortion debate for the past few months. While this rhetoric and subsequent efforts may indeed help to move us past the culture wars over abortion and contraception, it is dangerous when these efforts devolve into an abandonment of ideals. In appointing an antichoice advocate to a key position in HHS we are seeing crucial principles abandoned—principles upon which so many men and women rely to lead healthy lives.”


Catholics for Choice shapes and advances sexual and reproductive ethics that are based on justice, reflect a commitment to women's well-being and respect and affirm the capacity of women and men to make moral decisions about their lives.
nabil: (Default)
I wanted to say thank you to my Christian friends who have been helping me as I struggle with the anti-Christian feelings that have come up for me after Dr. Tiller's murder.

Thank you especially to goodbadgirl-- you are such a good person, and I appreciate you so much-- the compassion you brought to my question, your willingness to tell your stories, to speak kindly in the face of my anger and aggression and defensiveness, and the bravery and honor you always show-- I just can't thank you enough. I love you. I so desperately hope that things improve for you soon.

Thank you also for the reminder that Dr Tiller was Christian; that he was, in fact, murdered in his church. The more I read about him, the more I honor and respect his ethics, compassion, and life. He risked his own life to help women in the most desperate circumstances. I must assume that his life and his choices were intertwined in his own Christian faith.


nabil: (Default)
So, I was pissed off at the description I heard of Obama's recent speech that we all just need to hold hands and sign Kumbaya with the anti-choicers. And pretty shortly after that speech Dr Tiller was murdered by Christian terrorists, and I'm even more pissed off. Obama, you are being pretty deeply offensive right now to say that pro choicers have common ground with pro lifers.

1. We don't assassinate people in church. Seriously, I have never heard of a pro choice person murdering a pro life person, not in church like Dr Tiller, or in a synagogue like the last doctor murdered by pro life terrorists, or anywhere else for that matter.

2. We don't claim to want to reduce abortions, while opposing contraception and sex ed. There is no national group of pro lifers that supports contraception and comprehensive sex ed. There are individual pro lifers who support contraception and comprehensive sex ed; rock on, I have no beef with you. But the national groups all oppose contraception and comprehensive sex ed-- this means that they don't actually want to reduce abortions, they just want to make sure that women suffer for having sex. They'll lie about it though.

For more information, check out Amanda Marcotte's recent piece on a training program for pro lifers on how to talk to college students-- they're advised to pretend that they support contraception, and pretend that they care about the lives of women, in order to soften up the target to be receptive to the ultimate message:

3. We don't make death threats to pro lifers, gather outside their churches and wave signs and scream that they are murderers, epoxy the locks of their churches shut, or otherwise harass them. We don't try to force them to have abortions. Many of us feel icky about abortion, too-- but we fight for the right of women to choose what they want to do with their bodies.

It's offensive bullshit, btw, to call the routine behavior of anti choice organizations non-violent. I have a friend who did nonviolent protest of a gay-hating church in Virginia; he talked to me about the discussions in his group on how to avoid looking at the folks they were protesting in a way that would hurt their feelings, he and his friends wanted to avoid "violence of the eyes." For more information on the violence that doctors and nurses are exposed to every day, check and

4. Obama, I hear that you brought up an example of two people who disagree, but work together to solve a real problem. And that you gave the example of a gay activist and an anti-gay Christian who work together to reduce HIV. What a lovely little fairy tale! How unfortunate that you chose an example that has never happened. How interesting that you were not able to give a real-life example of a gay activist and an anti-gay activist working together to do good-- a real-life example of two people who have names, who actually exist in reality-- BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ONE.

I would love to live in the fantasy world where pro choice and pro life people are both ethical, loving, compassionate people working together to cause positive change. That's not where I live though. I live in a world where ethical, loving, compassionate pro choice people have spent thirty years trying to compromise with lying, murdering terrorist who pay lip service to compassion and justice, but undercut it in every way. How fortunate Obama is that he hasn't worked in reproductive justice long enough to learn that the national pro life movement doesn't argue in good faith-- that it pretends to be about reducing abortions, while actually campaigning to eliminiate contraception and enforce abstinence only sex-ed. How deeply offensive that Obama isn't listening to, or acknowledging the work of, the people who have been working in reproductive justice for thirty years, and have learned that you can't compromise with pro-choicers. In the immortal words on Molly Ivins, Obama, time to dance with who brung ya. Quit disrespecting the people who voted for you in order to placate the lying murderers who didn't.

I may have common ground with individuals who aren't comfortable with abortion, but are reasonable human beings. I have no common ground with the lying, murdering terrorists who run the pro life movement in the US.


nabil: (Default)
For some reason, possibly related to spending all day in bed reading sf and farking around on the web, I feel like making a Statement on Marijuana tonight.

Basically, here's my take: Pot should be legal, can be useful when you're sick, and when smoked in excess brings a distinct risk of making you boring.

I don't smoke pot these days. My last year in college, after I was beat up and had my jaw broken and wired shut for a few months, I smoked quite a bit. My pal L would get me stoned, we'd eat soup and play cards and giggle. It was quite helpful. It made it easier to eat, and to deal with the physical and emotion after-effects of being attacked and having my jaw wired for so long. I'm still quite grateful to L.

I stopped because I was getting paranoid, and really stupid-paranoid too-- being worried that other folks could tell I was stoned even when they were the ones who had gotten me stoned! Stupid-paranoia.

Anyhow, I think it did me good, and I don't think it did me harm, and I'm left with strong feelings that pot is a great way to deal with nausea and loss of appetite and probably other physical problems too.

The main risk I see in smoking pot is that if you do it too much, for too many years-- especially while you're a teenager-- you can become boring. Basically, stoned people are too easy to amuse. So if you only socialize with stoned folks, there's a distinct risk that you'll lose the ability to tell a joke, or a compelling story, or make amusing conversation in general. Since amusing conversation is sort of my reason for living, this seems like a pretty serious risk to me.

That said, it's a much less heinous risk then lots of other activities carry, it doesn't happen to everyone who smokes pot, and it's a risk that's carried by other vectors as well-- like not being born in the South, or having boring parents. And, y'know, I absolutely support peoples' right to be boring if they want to be. I might not wanna hang out with boring folks, but I will fight for their right to be dull.

Definitely, it's not nearly enough reason to keep pot illegal.


nabil: (Default)
I woke up feeling quite tired-- it was the second day of sleep dep, last night I was up late due to Poly Speed Dating, the previous night I was up late due to reading cheesy sf about the Napoleanic war if it was fought with dragons. So, I didn't feel good, but I dragged my butt outta bed, got showered, dressed, and out the door in time to make it in for my first meeting.

I discovered I was sick when I threw up on the street in front of my office building. Huh. Still didn't really feel sick, a little stomach oogy but mostly just tired-- but, well, in general I have this rule of thumb that vomiting = stay home from work. Decided to go on up to the office, do any additional vomiting in the bathroom-- I hate puking on the sidewalk, it's embarrassing-- and tell my boss I needed to be off work.

Didn't quite make it to the bathroom before puking again. Embarrassing!

Made an attempt to clean up the rug outside the bathroom door with paper towels, went into the office, sort of awkwardly told my boss I had just thrown up and was going home sick. Went downstairs and asked my pal the building guard to call me a cab and um, he might want to ask somebody to clean up the rug outside the bathroom on the seventh floor.

It's weird how embarrassing it is to be sick. I was highly tempted _not_ to say anything about the need to clean up the rug, to avoid admitting to causing the mess. After my clean-up with the paper towels, and given that I hadn't eaten anything yet today, I think mostly it looked like somebody had spilled tea on the rug. But, not ethical. Health risk. So, I bit the bullet and told my buddy the guard, apologizing repeatedly for making extra work for somebody.

Weird and awkward to tell my boss I had to go home cause I'd thrown up, too. I feel like I don't look sick, and like I sound crazy and weird and like I'm malingering. Bah.

Anyhow. My pal the really nice building guard called me a cab. And the cabbie was a total kook! He went onto this weird crazy paranoid rant about how racist Latino folks are, totally outta the blue, based on me just telling him my address. From there, he segued into a rant about how nasty men are to other men, and how much he hates Klingons. Kook!

It's kinda pointless arguing with a kook, but I also don't feel able to just let racist shit be said in front of me and not say anything. So, I agreed with him about what jerks Klingons are, and then told him a couple stories about the racism my old Puerto Rican boyfriend faced back in DC. Kinda did that thing where I never directly disagreed with him on a theoretical level, but kept telling anecdotes that contradicted him but that he sort of had to agree with. It actually made the conversation sort of fun for me, and I was distracted from wondering if I was about to throw up the whole cab ride home! (I had brought a trash bag with me from the office kitchen, after the earlier incidents when I was unprepared.) And I didn't puke in the cab! So yay for that. And we both agreed that Klingons are kinda pathetic really, and need to develop a sense of humor.

Anyhow. Now I'm home. Ted's staying home sick too. I made some chai to settle my stomach, and am going to try to get my nap on.

xoxo diseased kisses,

nabil: (Default)
explanation of why that lady said that stuff about gay marrige at that beauty pageant. turns out she's one of us.very funny.

Read more... )
nabil: (Default)

One filthy mattress, no sheets.

Posted via

nabil: (Default)
ganked from badgerbag.

EFF is seeking an energetic, enthusiastic, experienced Membership Coordinator for supporting EFF's current 14,000+ members and to help grow our membership.

Also a Sys admin

The ideal candidate must have three to five years of systems administration experience. In addition, the candidate must meet or exceed Sage level "Intermediate/Advanced." (See: .) 
nabil: (Default)
Hi everyone,

I know a lot of us have been really sickened by the murder of Oscar Grant by BART police.

Color of Change is working to try to make sure that BART introduces a civilian oversight board. This seems like a pretty crucial thing to me-- there needs to be some way that cops are accountable to the community they are charged and paid to protect.

I just signed this online petition, you might want to also take a look:

I gotta tell you, I keep thinking of the fact that Oscar begged the cop not to shoot him because he had a baby girl-- the cop murdered him anyway.

If you hear of any other things that I could do to possibly help, please pass them on.



On January 1, Oscar Grant -- already subdued by police and lying face down -- was shot in the back and killed by a BART police officer at the Fruitvale station.

Unfortunately, this tragedy is not a first for the BART police force, which has been accused in the past of using excessive and unnecessary force in two other shooting deaths.

Unlike most police departments around the country, BART police are not subject to a civilian oversight board, despite numerous calls for one by community leaders over the years. But BART has refused.

Assemblymember Tom Ammiano and Senator Leland Yee promised to introduce legislation requiring BART to create a civilian oversight board -- like the boards that have improved accountability and police conduct in other communities. While this is a significant step in the right direction, we must ensure that the legislature passes a strong bill.
Will you join the Courage Campaign and our friends at Color of Change by signing on to our letter thanking Ammiano and Yee for their legislation -- and demanding that the bill provide the strongest civilian oversight possible?