Thor!!!

I really really liked it!  I hadn't read any Thor comics before I saw the film (although by the time this post goes live I should have my grubby mitts on at least one trade) and so I didn't really know what to expect from it.  It soon became apparent that the Marvel story is very different to the Eddas (I wasn'nt surprised) but it was fun nontheless.

Heimdall was ace.  As was Looki and Thor.  All the actors were great and Thor and Heimdall were huge!  Thor is also really fucking hot.  I got quite excited.  Asgard was impressive as was bifrost (although I'd have preferred something a little more ethereal and lighter in colour).

Thor was all gung ho until he lost his hammer, and the poor guy just deflated.  He looked utterly crestfallen.  the final fight was great fun!

In terms of the female characters, Sif was a warrior in this, not the earth goddess I thought she was, and Frigga was, well, not named.  I mean, what the fuck?  She's the Queen of the Gods and not once was she named in the film.  Ahe was stately and regal (and handy with a sword), but she wasn't NAMED.


Add to this the secret scene at the end of the film where it's the male scientist who gets invited to SHEILD, depsite the fact that Jane is the major character in this film, and I get cross (again).  This casual sexism makes me angry.

Apart from that, it was good.  Jane was a typical eccentric scientist type (this is usually a male character) and the comic relief was female (again, usually male).  One of my male friends commented that he was annoyed the way the comeptent female characters tend to get sidelined as love interests (at least that's what I think he was saying).  I'm not sure that's appropriate in this film's case but I thought it was an interesting view.

I also got to see the Green Lantern trailer on the big screen!  It still has it's problems but I am now really really excited to see it!

Thoughts on the gender binary and religion

So, when looking up Beltaine stuff recently I came across something called The 13th Principles of Wiccan Belief which I found quite interesting.  As the webpage is blue text on a black background (whoever thought that was a good idea?) I will repost the principles here:

1.     We practice rites to attune ourselves with the natural rhythm of life forces marked by the phases of the Moon and the seasonal Quarters and Cross Quarters.

2.     We recognize that our intelligence gives us a unique responsibility toward our environment.  We seek to live in harmony with nature in ecological balance offering fulfillment to life and consciousness within an evolutionary concept.

3.     We acknowledge a depth of power far greater than that apparent to the average person.  Because it is far greater than ordinary it is sometimes called ‘supernatural’, but we see it as lying within that which is naturally potential to all.

4.     We conceive of the Creative Power in the universe as manifesting through polarity – as masculine and feminine – and that this same Creative Power lies in all people and functions through the interaction of the masculine and the feminine.  We value neither above the other knowing each to be supportive of the other.  We value sex as pleasure as the symbol and embodiment of life, and as one of the sources of energy used in magical practice and religious worship.

5.     We recognize both outer worlds and inner, or psychological worlds sometimes known as the Spiritual World, the Collective Unconsciousness, the Inner Planes etc – and we see in the interaction of these two dimensions the basis for paranormal phenomena and magical exercises.  We neglect neither dimension for the other, seeing both as necessary for our fulfillment.

6.     We do not recognize any authoritarian hierarchy, but do honor those who teach, respect those who share their greater knowledge and wisdom, and acknowledge those who have courageously given of themselves in leadership.

7.     We see religion, magick and wisdom in living as being united in the way one views the world and lives within it – a world view and philosophy of life which we identify as Witchcraft – the Wiccan Way.

8.     Calling oneself ‘Witch’ does not make a Witch – but neither does heredity itself, nor the collecting of titles, degrees and initiations.  A Witch seek to control the forces within her/himself that make life possible in order to live wisely and without harm to others and in harmony with nature.

9.     We believe in the affirmation and fulfillment of life in a continuation of evolution and development of consciousness giving meaning to the Universe we know and our personal role within it.

10.Our only animosity towards Christianity, or towards any other religion or philosophy of life, is to the extent that its institutions have claimed to be ‘the only way’ and have sought to deny freedom to others and to suppress other ways of religious practice and belief.

11. As American Witches, we are not threatened by debates on the history of the craft, the origins of various terms, the legitimacy of various aspects of different traditions.  We are concerned with our present and our future.

12.We do not accept the concept of absolute evil, nor do we worship any entity known as ‘Satan’ or ‘the Devil’ as defined by Christian tradition.  We do not seek power through the suffering of others, nor accept that personal benefit can be derived only by denial to another.

13.We believe that we should seek within Nature that which is contributory to our health and well-being.

As you can see, it's an American charter.  More info on the background regarding how it was drawn up etc can be found on the website.  I should also point out that wiccanism is a sub branch of paganism, so not all pagans refer to themselves as wiccas, but all wiccas refer to themselves as pagans.

Anyway, what particularly interested me was principle number 4 -
"We conceive of the Creative Power in the universe as manifesting through polarity – as masculine and feminine"

See, this is where I fall out with most pagan teachings.  So much reference is made to the polarity read: binary) of masculine and feminine gender.  What about intersex people?  Trans people?  Those who regard themselves as gender free?  This polarity doesn't seem to allow room for them.


I think that most pagans would argue that the masculine and feminine labels are ways of understanding human and divine nature and don't mean that only male and female people (or Gods) exist.  That, for example, a man can identify with feminine traits and a woman identify with masculine traits (or that many people will identify with both).  Certainly pagans believe that both the masculine and feminine are worthy, that one isn't superior to the other and that both are important facets of life and should both be embraced.


My issue is that we are only human and we frame our ideas and understanding with human values and experiences.  We cannot know the absolute divine truth because we are only human.  Along with that, we (in the West at least, I am not qualified to talk about different cultures) live in a patriarchal society which is obsessed with the gender binary and tries to rigorously enforce it.


So, when pagans talk about the masculine and feminine aspects of the divine, I can't help but feel that
they are feeding into this ciscentric view of gender.  It prioritises conventional gender presentation over other 'hidden' genders (intersex, trans, gender free etc).  Either/or.
Ok, so there are some Gods who are a mixture of both sexes, Hermaphroditos (the son of Hermes and Aphrodite) comes to mind.  However, this God is mostly referred to by the male pronoun and often is presented as being more about a mixture of sex (and sexuality) than gender.  Of course the confusion between sex and gender and their linkage tends to confuse most cis-gendered people (I include myself in this) and I think helps feed into this obsession with the male/female binary.


I am just not comfortable with that.  This creates a conundrum in my mind and I have trouble rationalising where I fit amongst these beliefs.


In my (limited) readings I've come across some authors who state that past pagan societies weren't sexist, women were revered and not treated as second class citizens and part of the evidence for that is the worship of the Goddess.  It will surprise no one to read that I think this view demonstrates a complete misunderstanding of history, culture and gender relations.  Having said that, I haven't found another religion which has as much pro-feminist leanings as this one.  Plus, the lack of structure and ability to choose your own way is very appealing to me.


I don't know, if anyone reading this considers themselves pagan and has thoughts on this masculine/feminine binary I'd be really keen to read your thoughts.  Please no one comment to the effect of paganism being wrong, or cisgendered people being the only real people.



Note: I really hate the way blogspot's spellcheck doesn't recognise 'cis' or 'cisgendered' as words.  Rubbish.

Veils in France

So, last week, France's law banning face coverings came into effect.  It is widely believed that this law was brought about to stop women form wearing the burka.  However, I don't believe the law specifically mentions the word burka.  I think I've talked about this before, but I'll talk about it again.

This is a fairly drastic law that has been enacted to stop a handful of women, (about 300 or so, I believe), from wearing the burka.  It is being enforce din the name of equality and ending oppression.  Now, maybe I'm being a little naive here*, but the idea of fighting oppression with yet more oppression is not only ridiculous, but unworkable.

No woman, no human, should be forced to wear something they don't wish to.  Women shouldn't be forced to wear the burka if they don't want to.  But this law won't address this issue of force.  For those women forced to wear it in public, there is a high possibility that now they simply won't be allowed out of the house, i.e. out in public.

For those women choosing to wear it, how on earth does this law help them?  How does banning their wearing of it make the banners (the government) any better than the people who force other women to wear the burka?

How does taking away women's choice help us achieve gender equality?

Mind you, I don't really believe that this law is about achieving gender equality.  France has always been very protective of it's culture, very keen to preserve the French language and French way of life.  Radio and TV stations must play/show a certain amount of French language songs/TV programmes, for example.  It's a secular country and doesn't have a lot of time for religion.  It also doesn't particularly like immigrants, or anyone un-French.  I get the impression it can be rather racist.

I think these things have led towards the ban on the burka,  I think that mentioning feminism and gender equality is just lip service, and that these terms are used only because it is politically convenient.  France is not free of sexism or misogyny (where is?) and this ban on face coverings does not further the feminist cause.  If this law is to be followed to the letter then I expect to see fancy dress masks and carnival masks also banned.

I don't expect this will happen.  Why not?  Because the French government cares about how French  (as in the degree of Frenchness of a person) people look on the outside.  Muslims in the burka do not look French, so they should be got rid of.  Out of sight, out of mind and all that.

For those that argue for a ban because seeing a women in a burka makes them, the onlooker, feel uncomfortable, well, if you think that you're a prat.

I think the French government would prefer Muslim women to wear more Westernised clothes - no doubt fashionable garments, probably tight and accompanied by high heels.  I.e., swapping one sort of clothing conformity for another, ugh.

No, this ban on the burka and other facial coverings does not help women at all.  There are more effective ways to help abused and oppressed women, whatever their religious or cultural background, but this stupid and downright offensive law is not one of them.


Discussion and comments welcomed.

*Here's a hint. I'm not.

UK Census

On the 27^th March all households in the UK are required to complete their census form.  This data will be collected by the Office of National Statistics and use to inform government policy over the next 10 years.  There’s a lot of questions asked, concerning sex, age, occupation, language, place of work, religion, ethnicity, age and mode of transport to work.

There’s a big brou-ha-ha over the census – I get the impression that this is a regular occurrence whenever the census is sent out.

Conspiciously absent is a question on sexual orientation, leading to the creation of a facebook group asking people to declare their religion as lesbian.

In the language section there isn’t enough room to write British Sign Language (although the question does state that you should put down British Sign Language if that is your first language, and the census is available in BSL on the official website).

Sikh and Jew isn’t included in ethnicity, although both are included as options in the religion section.

Sex only lists male and female options, leading to this interesting post on Shakesville, where it seems that by sex they actually means gender,

If you don’t fill out the census you are liable for a £1,000 fine, although I understand that approximately 40 people got fined last time round, when the numbers of those not completing it were probably closer to 3 million*.

Some people are calling for the government to drop the census (which they are intending to do anyway – apparently it’s too expensive – and gather the data from councils, police records, doctors’ records etc.  I think these people don’t really understand how important it is to gather the information correctly.  It would be near impossible, if not actually impossible, to collate and accurately merge the data from a variety of sources.

I have no problem with filling in the census – I think it’s necessary and I’m quite angry that the current government intend to cease carrying it out.  How else are they going to know the demographic of their citizens?  I’m also quite angry about there being no sexuality question.  I’m in the middle of writing a Starman review for Prism comics and I talk about the concept of bisexual erasure within the comic (I was recently reminded of the term by James Ashelford, thanks James!).  Erasure of certain sexualities (or other demographic types) would be much less easy to do if we had concrete data stating how many people termed themselves as such.  The census would be an excellent, nay only, opportunity to effectively gather this data.

How are we meant to prove that we’re here if we’re ignored?  I believe the current estimate of people terming themselves gay is 10% of the UK population.  I’m not sure that I believe it’s as low as that, but I have no way to disprove it.  If we had decent data we would be able to argue for funding towards queer organisations and also promote discussion about homo/biphobic attacks and discrimination.  As it is, we have nothing.  How ridiculous is that?

* or a million.  I can’t remember the figure.

Herald book review! That I am shoehorning into the LGBT book challenge!

Some of you may know that the wonderful blogger Sea-of-Green has written a book, AND has had it published.  This makes me incredibly in awe of her.  What makes me even more in awe is that it's good.  It's called Herald and is the life story of the Greek God Hermes (part of it anyway).  I downloaded it about a year ago and finally got round to reading it this Christmas on my BRAND NEW KINDLE!!!!  Which is the most exciting present, ever.  Anyway, since I entered the LGBT challenge I thought this would be a good way to ease myself into it.  Doubtless Sea will be surprised at it being included within the challenge, but bear with me, I think Herald is a valid inclusion.

NB: I will refer the author as Sea, not as Houck, because Houck is a pen name and I know her as Sea.  I will also assume that readers of the post know something about Greek mythology.  If a name or reference eludes you either leave a comment asking for clarification or look it up.

Here we go.

Herald, by N.F.Houck

As a long time fan of Greek mythology and the Greek Gods I'll admit that this book is a typical sort of read for me.  I've always been a fantasy buff and as a kid my favourite books described the Greek, Norse and Celtic pantheons.  However, I have located very few books which turn the stories of the Gods into a novelisation format, and that is what marks this book out as special.

Told from the point of view of Hermes, herald to Zeus and Hades, trickster, liar and god of merchants, communication and travellers, we start with a trial against Hermes, brought by Hera.  This introduces us to the major players on Olympus and helps set up the characters.  The Muses then interrupt the storytelling and insists that Hermes does it properly, so we skip back in time to Hermes birth and his first adventures.  We learn about his relative strength when compared to the other Gods, how he invented the lyre, how he got his winged sandals and helmet and his attributes as thief and liar are developed.  The first trick he plays on his brother Apollo is amusingly told and conjures up some bizarre images of sheep as shrubbery.

Later on in the book we learn about Hermes lovers, his children, the other mythical beings of Ancient Greece (for example Pegasus, dryads and naiads, the Gorgon sisters) as well as the often complex relationship between the Gods.  Through Hermes' eyes we also get to see many other famous stories of the time - Athena's birth, Hephaestos' capture of Ares and Aphrodite, the creation of Winter, as well as touching upon other beings such as Boreas, Adonis, Eris and Narcissus.

Sea makes it clear that the Greek pantheon is vast and she weaves each story and event into one cohesive narrative.  This must have been pretty difficult to do as the Greek stories are not neatly presented anywhere.  Like all mythologies, there are many different versions of each tale in existence and no 'official' linear guide.  It is up to each reader to develop their own narrative and pull out the versions of the stories they feel most comfortable with.  Herald is one such book and the way in which it presents the events is admirable and easily understood.

As for the LGBT content.  Well, the rules of the challenge do say that books with minor LGBT characters can be included.  To that end, let me explain how this book is LGBT friendly.

Apollo - God of healing, music and reason.  In my understanding of the stories he is also closely associated with the sun, drawing the sun across the sky in his chariot, but this is not the case in Herald.  Anyway, at one point in the book Hermes and Apollo are discussing sex and Apollo lovers'.  Here we find out Apollo takes both female and male lovers.  Now, Apollo is a major character in the book, being a close friend of Hermes and one of the 12 Olympians, however his sex life is relatively unimportant to the plot.   At one point we see Hermes and Persephone taking a detour to avoid Apollo and Cyparissos as they are it in a field, but that (and the aforementioned discussion) is all we see of Apollo's sex life.

I ask you, how often do you see a male lead having both male and female lovers?  I know that this isn't a work of fiction on Sea's part, she is working with centuries old stories, but she could have chosen to ignore the God's bisexuality (for want of a better word).  Included in the end notes are these passages:

"Cyparissos is the least significant of Apollo’s male lovers (Hyacinthos being perhaps the most celebrated). However, like most of Apollo’s lovers, he eventually met with a tragic end. (When Apollo mentions this unfortunate trend among his lovers in chapter ιθ′ [19], he’s not kidding. No wonder nymphs ran away from him.)

There’s a common misconception that all of the Greek gods were bisexual, an error fueled by knowledge that pederasty was practiced in some (not all) ancient Greek city-states. To further confuse modern readers, the ancient Greeks didn’t have categories for sexual orientation and didn’t label people as heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, etc.; sex was merely sex and differentiations weren’t all that important to them.

At any rate, here again the Olympians reflect the different attitudes of the various Greek cultures. In some myths, Apollo, Zeus, Poseidon, and Dionysos had male lovers in addition to female. Hermes, Ares, Hephaestos, and Hades are not known to have had male lovers. "

The preferences of the Gods could have been glossed over.  They could have been presented as entirely heterosexual, or any homosexual acts could have been presented in a negative manner.  They're not and they weren't.

The other LGBT friendly aspect of the book is found when Hermes first discovers his role as psychopomp - escort of souls to the underworld.  In this he discusses how different souls react when they are dead.  Some hold onto their bodily shape, some adopt new shapes:

" The souls of crones would appear as young maidens, or the souls of wizened patriarchs would be as muscular youths. Rarely, men would appear as women, or women as men"

(emphasis mine)

Sound familiar?  It is not necessary for Sea to include this detail in her book, it doesn't advance the plot, it doesn't affect Hermes, but it's an easy way to acknowledge trans people and to make the book more effective at building a realistic world, reflective of our own.  It's great to have LGBT characters who are leads in a story, but it's also equally important to see them in the background, living normal lives.

Lastly, even though the challenge doesn't cover Intersex characters it's worth mentioning that we get to see Hermaphroditos too.  So named as he's the son of Hermes and Aphrodite.  The naiad Salmacis takes a fancy to him, so much so that she permanently fuses with him - together they become neither male nor female.  Hermaphroditos deals with and accepts his new situation, and is accepted by the other Gods.  You get the feeling that the Greeks were a whole lot more accepting of bodily differences than we (the West) are today.

In summary, Herald is an enjoyable book that successfully makes sense of the Greek stories.  Not everyone will accept or agree with the version of events presented within, but as I see it that's part of the fun of reading new versions.  For someone unfamiliar with the Greek stories and looking for way in this would be a pretty good place to start.

Now, all I need is for Sea to finish her sequel and for someone to write a similar thing from the point of view of Athena.  And Artemis.  And then for people to do similar with the Norse and Celtic pantheons.  If you've got any recommendations for me, please tell me in the comments!

A note: information on downloading the book can be found here.  It reads successfully on the kindle although some formatting is lost.

The Pope's visit to the UK later this year..

The F Word has an article up about it, cross posted here:

--------------------------------
The Catholic Church has contributed more than most to the oppression of women. Whether it’s the deaths of women in childbirth and of HIV / AIDS due to their commitment to preventing safer sex, or covering up the abuse of girl and boy children and protecting the abusers, they have consistently chosen paths which keep women controlled and ‘in their place’.
This is the church that ordered the excommunication of everyone involved in helping a 9 year old girl, who was pregnant with twins after being raped by her stepfather, to have an abortion. The church actively tried to prevent the termination, and when it failed it ordered that the child’s mother and the doctors involved be excommunicated. (Not the step-father, tellingly).

“If the B52 bombers flying over Vietnam were dropping contraceptives, the American Catholic hierarchy would have condemned that in a minute, but they were dropping napalm”
— James Carroll

The Pope has also been in the news this week for speaking out against the UK government’s equality policies, which would have required churches to stop discriminating against LGBT people. This is a man who, when he speaks, people listen. Just think what he could use his voice for. He could protest poverty, he could condemn domestic violence. But no, he speaks out against equality. Later this year, the Pope is planning a visit to Britain. Not only do I not want him here, I was really disgusted to hear that the £20 million cost of his visit will be paid for by public money. Just think how many Rape Crisis centres could be funded by that money!
The National Secular Society have started a petition to ask the Catholic Church itself to pay for the visit. As I write, it has 17,457 signatures, one of which is mine.
The Catholic Church, contrary to the guidance of many passages of the Bible, is a very rich institution. If this man, who played a leading role in a systematic cover-up of child sex abuse by Roman Catholic priests, wants to come here, let him pay for it himself.
------------------------------------------

When he speaks out against UK equality leglislation, when he colludes in the abuse and oppression of UK women, his visit should not be paid for out of UK public money.  Particularly not when we're in a recession, particularly not when there are funding cuts made across all manner of sectors.  Please consider signing the petition.

I would recommend reading the comments, if it were not for the seemingly inevitable feminists vs religion bollocks that always seems to occur.  Surely it's not too difficult to accept that feminists can believe in deitys, right?

Hah! A wonderful example of culture bias

This post looks at one of the oldest (yet found) female figurines that has recently been dug up in Stuttgart.  More specifically, it looks at how the archeologists et al have deemed it an early example of porn.

The writer then goes on to pull apart this assertion and show how the men commenting on this don't seem to be able to a) get past their own views on what constitutes pornography and b) coem up with any other reasons as to why figurines of women may have been created.

Gender blind and religion blind then.

Go read it.

Friday the 13th

Did you know that it has not always been considered unlucky?

The name, Friday, comes from the Norse goddess Freya.  (Wednesday comes from Odin - Odin's Day -> Wodin's Day -> Wednesday).  Freya is a goddess of love, passion and self care for women.

13 is a scared number because it is the number of moon cycles within a solar year.  It used to be thought that the moon governed women's menstrual cycles and that we would sync up with the phases of the moon.  I have no idea if women's bodies ever did this, nowadays with so many on the pill veyr few women will be in their 'natural' cycle.  As 13 is the number of moon cycles, it is linked with the power by which all life grows - plants, people etc.

So, Friday the 13th really shouldn't be considered unlucky.  To those with Pagan tendancies it should be considered a holy day for women, sexual health and love.

Nick Griffin thinks London has undergone an ethnic cleansing. Has it bollocks.

The British National Party, or BNP (fascist right wing racist organisation) was on Question Time last night.
Question Time is a UK show put on by the BBC where politicians from varying parties are invited on to debate the issues of the day.  Since the BNP have an MEP they were invited on.  More on the ethics of this later.  I am watching it a day late on the iplayer, and having read stuff about it earlier today I am rather revulsed.  Apparently Mr Griffin (BNP leader) thinks that London has been subjected to ethnic cleansing, presumably because it's not all white and he has to see asian, indian and black faces when he leaves his house.  I rather think he should look up the meaning of the phrase.  Make no mistake, he is a racist fascist following nazi ideals and the BNP are a very dangerous party.
I assume my UK readers are all well aware of this event, but I feel my foreign readers should also be made aware.

Here follows a live blogpost of his appearence on Question Time.

Jack straw (Labour) states first of all that the BNP is a party based on race.  Good for him
I love Jack Straw.
If Churchill didn't like immigrants or muslims that doesn't make the BNP OK.
I like the audience.  A lot.
Saying you don't have a conviction for holocaust denial doesn't mean you never denied it.  Prick
I love Bonnie Greer.
And Chris Hulne.
I really don't understand how people can hate others that much - how can you loathe someone based on their skin colour?  It's inconceivable to me.  I (unfortunately) understand unintentional racism, it's tied up with privilege, it's tied up with being part of an overwhelmingly white and racist society.  Now that don't make it right, which is why I try damn hard to overcome any internalised prejudice I have.  But I really don't understand this vicious hate people have.
Saying Nazis hate you doesn't prove you aint one.  Ugh, you were on a video with the had of the KKK.  Apparently the head of a 'non violent one'.  Ugh Ugh Ugh.
Oh god, I'm sickened.  He won't explain why he's allegedly changed his mind about holocaust denial.
Have you guys ever been to Auschwitz or the other holding or concentration camps?  They're hideous.
Don't you dare pull the women's rights crap.
There is nothing Christian about his values.
OK I like tory lady now.  A lot.
Shit, this audience is good.
OK, now Jack Straw is being a bit of a prat over an immigration questioon.  So's the tory lady.
Tory lady is Sayeeda Warsi.  Maybe she's not a prat.
One lady has made a distinction between Afro-Carribean and African-Carribean.  I'm ashamed to say i;ve never thought of the use of the Afro-Carribean before.  Mind you, in my work sector we tend to use the phrase BME communities - Black and minority ethnic communities.  When we break down ethnicity we use Black British, Black African, Black Carribean etc.  That's dictated to us by the requirements of our funding bodies, usually local government or regional authorities.
Bollocks you think skin colour is irrelevant.
Shit, you just said America Red Indian.  Prick.
Ahh my god white people are not discriminated against in this country!  There is no black conspiracy.  You fucker.
Us white folks are not subject to an ethnic genocide.  Fucker.
Oh gods I love Bonnie Greer.  Giving Griffin a history lesson, hurrah!  She's deputy chair of the British Museum and has invited him along to have a lesson or two.
Yep, send Griffin to the colourless landscape of the South Pole.  I wholeheartedly concur.
Yep, go tory lady.  Too right there's no such thing as a bogus asylum seeker.
What the fuck is wrong with change?
A ha! A question on whether Jan Moir's article should have been published.
Bonnie Greer reminds me of BSG President lady.
Oh there's a surprise.  Tory lady is homophobic.  And a liar.  Don't like her anymore.  And she's the shadow minister for community cohesion!!  What, are non hetero folks not part of the community?
Oh Fuck You Nick Griffin.  Fuck you.
Being homophobic is not 'the way it is'.  Oh, the militant gays can't preach homosexuality to schoolchildren can they?  It's perverse is it?  Fuck you.
The Labour party has done more for gay rights than any other party.  They may have a lot of other things wrong with them, but they have done a lot for the likes of me.
Oh.  He thinks the BBC is an unpleasent ultra leftist institution.  And he's shaking. Good.
Oooh, Jacqui Smith is on next week.

Oh my god he's such a total cunt.  And there's not a signed version of the show???**

Arggh.  Now I feel unclean.  As to whether he should have been allowed on it or not.
Unfortunately the BNP do have a member of the European Parliament in place.  Which menas they have a 'right' to be on Question Time. Because they are a 'legitimate' political party.  I don't understand how they are legal, and I think it's very well saying that oh well Griffin has now shown himself up, but we can say that because we're all naturally left wingers anyway. 
I did have some more in depth thoughts about this, but my recall and brain power has now failed.  So instead, visit Deeplyflawedbuttrying.  She says it much better than I could.

If you want to view the programme you can find it here.  It will be available for the next 7 days.

**I take it back.  It maybe be available later, but it needs to be broadcast and signed first

So, this Ida thing, right

It says:

Child abuse in Ireland

Some of y'all may have heard about the report into child abuse in the Irish Catholic Church. In case you haven't, I would urge you to have a look into it. However, these links come with a big trigger warning.

The BBC website - article from Wednesday dealing with the findings of the inquiry, descriptions of the abuse and the victims feelings and reactions.

From the Morrigan Reborn blog:
Witness reports (definite trigger warning)
A letter to the Taoiseach (Irish Prime Minister) recommending what his next line of action should be.
Cross post from The Irish Times.

And in case any of yous are wondering what the Morrigan is, this is the description from her profile:
The Morrígan is the goddess of war, sovereignty, prophecy, fertility and death on the battlefield. Scholars debate whether her name means great queen, terror bringer or monstrous woman. She is associated with the raven, wolf and cow. She is often interpreted as a triple goddess, one part of a whole. Multiple meanings and interpretations throughout history.
A really interesting goddess.

Christmas time and catching up.

Topics discussed:
Christmas busy-ness, shoe throwing in Iraq, homophobia from the Pope, blog awards.

There has been so much I’ve wanted to post over the last few weeks, but due to Christmas and an extremely manic period at work I haven’t felt the inclination to write or post anything, and I haven’t had the time.

In personal news, work has now calmed down, at least for a short period, but I fully expect it to remain stressful until the end of January, at a minimum. I feel like I have to learn how to manage my superiors, which I feel uncomfortable doing, because I think they should know better. But it looks like I’ll have to get over that.

I spent a weekend visiting the family and friends 2 weeks before Christmas. 5 destinations in 5 days, all around Kent – between 1 and 4 hours travelling each day. I guess that may not seem a lot to my American readers, but it’s a long time to spend on a train or in a car for me! It was fun seeing friends and family so overall worth it.

In public news, I’ve had my ear and eyes bent by various incidents over the last month. Number 1, the shoe throwing episode in Iraq. Now I know on a mature level that stooping to violence is a bad thing. But on a personally aggrieved level I am supportive of the shoe thrower. I become more supportive when I heard Bush’s response of the facts being that the shoe was a size 10 (or whatever) when the newsreader then pointed out that throwing shoes in Iraq is a big deal – it’s a culturally recognised form of disapproval and dissidence. And for Bush to respond as he did shows a complete lack of understanding of Iraqi society and norms. In context, i.e. that America invaded Iraq under Bush’s say so, it appears that he just doesn’t care one jot about the country. Even in the middle of a speech stating what America’s future in Iraq will be.
I was also pissed off by the TV’s account of this. I really wish I could remember what channel I was watching, it would have been BBC1, 2 or channel 4. Anyway, they finished the article by talking about how under Saddam Hussein no one would have been able to throw a shoe. Well, yes, that might be true, but the implication of the article was that the Iraqis should now be grateful for their new found freedom (supplied by Westerners) and we should focus only on this capability, rather than what they are angry about. I could argue that this conveniently sidesteps the shoe throwers complaints and allows the Westerners to feel smug about liberating a dictatorial country. (Maybe I already have?) I wish I knew which channel it was so I could find a link to the article, so that you can all know I’m not making it up. Or at least, so that you could view it and decide for yourselves.

I heard bits about the hoo-ha from the Pope recently, where he says that homosexuality will be as much of a disaster as the destruction of the rainforests. Yes well, whatever (face). The first news article (on BBC Radio 4 no less), said gay rights groups were angry because of the Pope’s declaration on gender roles. Well, that’s awfully funny, thought I, because homosexuality/bisexuality has fuck all to do with gender. I know that gender issues cross over with gay/bi issues, but they do not define it.

Sexuality is to do with who you crush on. No more no less. Gender is to do with femininity, masculinity, identification with male and female roles and all those in between. I recognise that historically (and in the present) many gay men and women (fuck knows about the bi contingent) have blurred and mixed up the gender roles, but that is not an inevitable part or being outside the heterosexual mainstream. The two issues are separate, but can conflate.
After having listened to two more news broadcasts and reading stuff online I gather that it may have been the news broadcaster confusing the two areas, rather than the gay rights groups.

Lastly, Chris at ComicsAllTooReal gave me an award a few weeks ago! :D I would like to formally say thank you to Chris, I was very touched by it and pleased to hear that you value my ramblings. J
Now, this award is sort of a meme, and I’m meant to nominate my favourite 7 blogs as well and publicise them here, so that we can expand the reading pool and awareness of the blogosphere.

Eeeek! Who do I choose? Who indeed. As you can see from my link list and also the blogs I follow section I read a lot of stuff on the web. The internet forms of a large part of my weekday evening social life and I thoroughly enjoy the social interactions formulated within. Where else can I gleefully exclaim (with appreciative peers) about my comics and the recent events contained within etc?

But what criteria would I choose to nominate just 7 blogs? Initially I thought I’d focus on the ones providing social commentary. So I came up with Willow at Seeking Avalon, for her scathing dissections of race in popular culture, comics, movies, and well anything really. Also check out her post on why feminism isn’t for her. I also thought of maybe Ami Angelwings super cute rants of doom. Ami talks about lots of personal and public issues, often around - racism, transphobia, sexism and homophobia. I know some people don’t like her writing style, lots of internet speak, but if that bothers you I would urge you to get past that and focus on what she’s saying as she’s very bright and eloquent and honest. I value honesty. Oh and Digital Femme. Amongst other things she covers comics and racism. She's a very good writer.

Maybe I should be focusing on blogs that are updated regularly? The above two aren’t updated uber regularly. So lets look at others. Do I want comic based bogs? Or fun blogs? Or innovative ones? Or specialist ones?
For comic based blogs I recommend Green Lantern’s Butts Forever (75% due to the name and the devotion to the cause of locating a good GL ass), Hoosier Journal of Inanity (because it’s a fun light hearted read), Comics Fairplay (because of the Is this Gratutitous? feature, which admittedly hasn’t run in a long time but was very much welcomed and generated interesting debate when Heidi did run it), Supergirl Comic Box Commentary (because it’s a nice clean layout, what posts I have seen look good, and it’s a Supergirl blog. There cannot be too many of these. Ever). Lastly I’d like to mention When Fangirls Attack – not a typical commentary style blog, but a link blog. I’m not sure if this counts, as the contributor’s own views aren’t included, but it’s a wonderful and reasonably detailed resource to all posts concerning women and comics on the web.

I’ve recently found this DC Elseworlds fan videos blog . The costumes are pretty cool and I love the fact that people dedicate all this time and effort into producing this stuff.* Yes, it’s cheesy and clichéd in places, but the acting, direction and effects are no worse than say, oh I don’t know Smallville. It’s essentially cosplay on a larger scale and I feel that should always be encouraged.

For feminism, I recommend The F Word blog (for being the probable number one catch all daily resource for issues affecting women in Britain, and for stimulating good arguments in the discussions), and also Feminist SF – the blog! (does what it says on the tin).

For innovation I think ComicsAllTooReal Chris’ own blog deserves a mention, because it’s quite clearly a project utilising blog technology to get it’s voice and aims out there. I haven’t seen anything like it elsewhere.

For specialist stuff one of my friend’s has a progress blog about his model soldiers and imperial armies. I don’t understand most of it, but I appreciate his enthusiasm, and I think some of my readers may also appreciate it. Plus Drax plays a mean game of Scrabble. And Carcassonne. Kicking my ass every time.

For fanfiction Like Scratches in the Sand writes some beautiful one sentence fanfics.

So that’s 14 of gthe very best. I knew I couldn’t pick just seven. (Sorry Chris I broke the rules!) If you want more recommendations look at my linked blogs and the blogs I follow, on my profile page. I think they’re all worth taking a peek at, otherwise I wouldn’t have linked them.
Hell, if you want more recommendations, read other bloggers linked sites, follow the comments bakc to bloggers own sites, mooch around. In my experience active commenters equal (fairly) regular bloggers.


*If you like the idea of that you should also check out Gotham Public Works. Fucking wonderful.

More homophobia from the church

Quelle surprise.
The vatican wants to use psychological testing to weed out gay priests. From the news story on the internet (emphasis mine):
"Cardinal Zenon Grocholewski, prefect of the Catholic Education Congregation, said that a celibate candidate with "deep-seated homosexual tendencies" should be barred "not because he commits a sin, but because homosexuality is a deviation, an irregularity, a wound" that would prevent him from fulfilling his duties.
The guidelines, approved by Pope Benedict XVI, are designed to prevent the sort of sex scandals involving paedophile priests"

GAY DOES NOT EQUAL PAEDOPHILE. HETEROSEXUALS AND BISEXUALS CAN BE PAEDOPHILES TOO.

Deep seated homosexual tendencies? Are there shallow tendencies? I guess this comes from the same line of thinking that insists that gayness can be cured.
For cured, read repressed, quashed, tricked and led into a lifetime of unhappiness and dishonesty.
Also, homosexuality isn't a deviation, an irregularity or a wound. It's normal, it's not a sin, it's not morally wrong, it's just a way of being.
Where do the bisexuals come into this? Yet again, we're ignored. We can pass as straight if we want, so I guess that's OK huh? Or is it that bisexuals don't have 'deep seated' homosexual tendencies? Guess I'm back to being invisible, again.

To be fair to the newspaper, the online article does state that:
"The decree appears to ignore the consensus among sex abuse experts that homosexuals are no more likely to molest children than heterosexuals."
This is a damn site more than I expected from the Daily Torygraph and is in stark contrast to the physical newspaper version of the story which reads as follows:

"Trainee priests suspected of being homosexual should be weeded out by psychologists and banned from joining the catholic church, the vatican has said.
Homosexuality was a "deviation" that must be rooted out in would-be-clergy early on in order to prevent "tragedies", it decreed in the new guidelines.
The guidelines are designed to prevent the sort of sex scandals involving paedophile priests that have rocked the catholic church in recent years."

I refuse to give vatican, catholic or church capital letters. They don't deserve the distinction. The problems with the dead tree version of this story:

• The use of psychologists implies that homosexuality is a mental illness. Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong.
• The description of homosexuality as a deviation.
• The implication that only gay people cause tragedies or are paedophiles
  
• The lack of a rebuttal to the above implication, as included in the online version. By not including the rebuttal it infers (implies?) that the church's views are correct, and that gay people are indeed the only ones who rape children. Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. Abuse is not about sex, it's not about hitting on someone you crush on, it's about power. It's the same whether the victim is adult or child, male or female.

I can see why deviation is in quotation marks, as the assertion that being gay is a deviation is incorrect, but why is tragedies in quotation marks?

Why isn't the church concentrating on weeding out paedophiles? Or unstable aggressive morally corrupt individuals who are potential attackers? Why aren't they seeking to help the victims more? Or even listen to the victims?

Fuckers. Ignorant, homophobic, hate filled morally bankrupt fuckers.

Second lot of reviews

Or wibblings, if you will.

Final Crisis Revelations 2 Ooh there's an angel of mercy! I believe I've mentioned how much I'm a sucker for religious stuff right? Well, by religious I mean christian stuff. Other religions do interest me but they don't get me in the heart like christian stuff does. I go to churches or cathedrals to sightsee and always end up lighting a candle and offering up a quick prayer. But I don't believe in the doctrine as a whole, just small parts get me.
I really really feel for Crispus. He was made to kill his son as the Spectre and now he's found out there's an angel of mercy and his world is turned upside again. He can't make sense of it. How do you live like that? How do you carry on?

Booster Gold 12 So much fun. It's nice to have a title not full of aggro and darkness. And Booster as Elvis. Bonus.

Green Arrow/Black Canary 12 Still the title I most look forward to each month. Love the art and colouring, love the GA family, love Dinah, getting to like Shado. I've now caught up on all the Green Arrow titles and will get round to putting up some thoughts later, along with lots of pictures of Ollie, who I now have a massive crush on. God I'm sad.

DCU Decisions 1 - Hell it centred round Ollie, of course I like it! I'm hacked off Lois is a Republican but glad to see Diana supporting Ollie making a stand.
But they shouldn't make all the characters take a stand. I mean Superman? Whatever you do it'll break a lot of hearts and tarnish the character. It's fine for Ollie, we've always known where's he's stood, but the none too obviously political ones? Please let us keep the story in our heads.

Teen Titans 63 Well Cassie was much improved in this. Bombshell wasn't how I expected, she seemed mad and homicidal last time we saw her, now she's stabilised? I guess it's a good thing, she's got more depth as a character now. Let's continue with her please, I like her.

Women Bishops

This whole debate about women as Bishops has got me to thinking to when I was a kid. I went to church, and Sunday school, I've been christened and had my communion and possibly done other ceremonies that i can't quite remember. My mum is from Dublin so is Catholic. Whenever we went to stay with her family we'd get taken to Church, which I mostly remember as being incredibly incredibly dull.
But you know, my mum tried to bring us up Catholic. It was an abject failure, possibly not helped by my dad being the most sceptical person alive when it comes to religion.

What I mostly remember about my reasons for not believing, as a kid, and a pretty young kid at that, was that I was utterly astonished that someone would be asking me to worship a man. It did not compute. What did men have to do with me and why should I be so grateful and prostrate myself before one? I lived in a predominately female household (mum, sister and my dad. even the pets were female). And my mum has always always been an ardent feminist.
Worshipping a goddess, that would make far more sense, and from there was spawned my interest in the norse, greek and celtic pantheon.

And as I got older I realised that being Christian made absolutely no sense given that they do not allow women to hold positions within the church. Cos we're, y'know, dirty and that.
There was a great debate on radio 4 yesterday morning - the traditionalist guy opposing the ordination of women bishops gave a couple of absolutely rubbish arguments as to why women shouldn't be ordained:
1) There are lots of women who also oppose it. (Yep, the vagina hive mind strikes again)
2) It's not sexism, it's theology.

Wtf? Anyway, I say bring on the women bishops, bring on a female pope. I don't think religion is an inherently bad thing, and allowing women to hold positions of power is not a bad thing. I don't think including women will lead to a more natural, less aggressive, less dictatorial religion, but it's gotta open up more kids eyes to the idea of a god or goddess. I'm liking Alanis Morrisette as God in Dogma. Awesome movie, go rent it out now if you haven't seen it.

And on another note, I'm about to start reading Full Frontal Feminism by Jessica Valenti of Feministing fame. I"m very excited about this. Anyone else read it and care to share their thoughts?