Flap Your Lips Friday
Posted by Michelle Moquin on April 27th, 2012
Good morning.
Over the years we’ve read stories here over on the horrific treatment of women in the Middle East. It hasn’t changed. A must read.
Why Do They Hate Us?
The real war on women is in the Middle East.
BY MONA ELTAHAWY | MAY/JUNE 2012
In “Distant View of a Minaret,” the late and much-neglected Egyptian writer Alifa Rifaat begins her short story with a woman so unmoved by sex with her husband that as he focuses solely on his pleasure, she notices a spider web she must sweep off the ceiling and has time to ruminate on her husband’s repeated refusal to prolong intercourse until she too climaxes, “as though purposely to deprive her.” Just as her husband denies her an orgasm, the call to prayer interrupts his, and the man leaves. After washing up, she loses herself in prayer — so much more satisfying that she can’t wait until the next prayer — and looks out onto the street from her balcony. She interrupts her reverie to make coffee dutifully for her husband to drink after his nap. Taking it to their bedroom to pour it in front of him as he prefers, she notices he is dead. She instructs their son to go and get a doctor. “She returned to the living room and poured out the coffee for herself. She was surprised at how calm she was,” Rifaat writes.
In a crisp three-and-a-half pages, Rifaat lays out a trifecta of sex, death, and religion, a bulldozer that crushes denial and defensiveness to get at the pulsating heart of misogyny in the Middle East. There is no sugarcoating it. They don’t hate us because of our freedoms, as the tired, post-9/11 American cliché had it. We have no freedoms because they hate us, as this Arab woman so powerfully says.
Yes: They hate us. It must be said.
Some may ask why I’m bringing this up now, at a time when the region has risen up, fueled not by the usual hatred of America and Israel but by a common demand for freedom. After all, shouldn’t everyone get basic rights first, before women demand special treatment? And what does gender, or for that matter, sex, have to do with the Arab Spring? But I’m not talking about sex hidden away in dark corners and closed bedrooms. An entire political and economic system — one that treats half of humanity like animals — must be destroyed along with the other more obvious tyrannies choking off the region from its future. Until the rage shifts from the oppressors in our presidential palaces to the oppressors on our streets and in our homes, our revolution has not even begun.
So: Yes, women all over the world have problems; yes, the United States has yet to elect a female president; and yes, women continue to be objectified in many “Western” countries (I live in one of them). That’s where the conversation usually ends when you try to discuss why Arab societies hate women.
But let’s put aside what the United States does or doesn’t do to women. Name me an Arab country, and I’ll recite a litany of abuses fueled by a toxic mix of culture and religion that few seem willing or able to disentangle lest they blaspheme or offend. When more than 90 percent of ever-married women in Egypt — including my mother and all but one of her six sisters — have had their genitals cut in the name of modesty, then surely we must all blaspheme. When Egyptian women are subjected to humiliating “virginity tests” merely for speaking out, it’s no time for silence. When an article in the Egyptian criminal code says that if a woman has been beaten by her husband “with good intentions” no punitive damages can be obtained, then to hell with political correctness. And what, pray tell, are “good intentions”? They are legally deemed to include any beating that is “not severe” or “directed at the face.” What all this means is that when it comes to the status of women in the Middle East, it’s not better than you think. It’s much, much worse. Even after these “revolutions,” all is more or less considered well with the world as long as women are covered up, anchored to the home, denied the simple mobility of getting into their own cars, forced to get permission from men to travel, and unable to marry without a male guardian’s blessing — or divorce either.
Not a single Arab country ranks in the top 100 in the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Report, putting the region as a whole solidly at the planet’s rock bottom. Poor or rich, we all hate our women. Neighbors Saudi Arabia and Yemen, for instance, might be eons apart when it comes to GDP, but only four places separate them on the index, with the kingdom at 131 and Yemen coming in at 135 out of 135 countries. Morocco, often touted for its “progressive” family law (a 2005 report by Western “experts” called it “an example for Muslim countries aiming to integrate into modern society”), ranks 129; according to Morocco’s Ministry of Justice, 41,098 girls under age 18 were married there in 2010.
It’s easy to see why the lowest-ranked country is Yemen, where 55 percent of women are illiterate, 79 percent do not participate in the labor force, and just one woman serves in the 301-person parliament. Horrific news reports about 12-year-old girls dying in childbirthdo little to stem the tide of child marriage there. Instead, demonstrations in support of child marriage outstrip those against it, fueled by clerical declarations that opponents of state-sanctioned pedophilia are apostates because the Prophet Mohammed, according to them, married his second wife, Aisha, when she was a child.
But at least Yemeni women can drive. It surely hasn’t ended their litany of problems, but it symbolizes freedom — and nowhere does such symbolism resonate more than in Saudi Arabia, where child marriage is also practiced and women are perpetually minors regardless of their age or education. Saudi women far outnumber their male counterparts on university campuses but are reduced to watching men far less qualified control every aspect of their lives.
Yes, Saudi Arabia, the country where a gang-rape survivor was sentenced to jail for agreeing to get into a car with an unrelated male and needed a royal pardon; Saudi Arabia, where a woman who broke the ban on driving was sentenced to 10 lashes and again needed a royal pardon; Saudi Arabia, where women still can’t vote or run in elections, yet it’s considered “progress” that a royal decree promised to enfranchise them for almost completely symbolic local elections in — wait for it — 2015. So bad is it for women in Saudi Arabia that those tiny paternalistic pats on their backs are greeted with delight as the monarch behind them, King Abdullah, is hailed as a “reformer” — even by those who ought to know better, such as Newsweek, which in 2010 named the king one of the top 11 most respected world leaders. You want to know how bad it is? The “reformer’s” answer to the revolutions popping up across the region was to numb his people with still more government handouts — especially for the Salafi zealots from whom the Saudi royal family inhales legitimacy. King Abdullah is 87. Just wait until you see the next in line, Prince Nayef, a man straight out of the Middle Ages. His misogyny and zealotry make King Abdullah look like Susan B. Anthony.
SO WHY DO THEY HATE US? Sex, or more precisely hymens, explains much.
“Why extremists always focus on women remains a mystery to me,” U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said recently. “But they all seem to. It doesn’t matter what country they’re in or what religion they claim. They want to control women.” (And yet Clinton represents an administration that openly supports many of those misogynistic despots.) Attempts to control by such regimes often stem from the suspicion that without it, a woman is just a few degrees short of sexual insatiability. Observe Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the popular cleric and longtime conservative TV host on Al Jazeera who developed a stunning penchant for the Arab Spring revolutions — once they were under way, that is — undoubtedly understanding that they would eliminate the tyrants who long tormented and oppressed both him and the Muslim Brotherhood movement from which he springs.
I could find you a host of crackpots sounding off on Woman the Insatiable Temptress, but I’m staying mainstream with Qaradawi, who commands a huge audience on and off the satellite channels. Although he says female genital mutilation (which he calls “circumcision,” a common euphemism that tries to put the practice on a par with male circumcision) is not “obligatory,” you will also find this priceless observation in one of his books: “I personally support this under the current circumstances in the modern world. Anyone who thinks that circumcision is the best way to protect his daughters should do it,” he wrote, adding, “The moderate opinion is in favor of practicing circumcision to reduce temptation.” So even among “moderates,” girls’ genitals are cut to ensure their desire is nipped in the bud — pun fully intended. Qaradawi has since issued a fatwa against female genital mutilation, but it comes as no surprise that when Egypt banned the practice in 2008, some Muslim Brotherhood legislators opposed the law. And some still do — including a prominent female parliamentarian, Azza al-Garf.
Yet it’s the men who can’t control themselves on the streets, where from Morocco to Yemen, sexual harassment is endemic and it’s for the men’s sake that so many women are encouraged to cover up. Cairo has a women-only subway car to protect us from wandering hands and worse; countless Saudi malls are for families only, barring single men from entry unless they produce a requisite female to accompany them.
We often hear how the Middle East’s failing economies have left many men unable to marry, and some even use that to explain rising levels of sexual harassment on the streets. In a 2008 survey by the Egyptian Center for Women’s Rights, more than 80 percent of Egyptian women said they’d experienced sexual harassment and more than 60 percent of men admitted to harassing women. Yet we never hear how a later marriage age affects women. Do women have sex drives or not? Apparently, the Arab jury is still out on the basics of human biology.
Enter that call to prayer and the sublimation through religion that Rifaat so brilliantly introduces in her story. Just as regime-appointed clerics lull the poor across the region with promises of justice — and nubile virgins — in the next world rather than a reckoning with the corruption and nepotism of the dictator in this life, so women are silenced by a deadly combination of men who hate them while also claiming to have God firmly on their side.
I turn again to Saudi Arabia, and not just because when I encountered the country at age 15 I was traumatized into feminism — there’s no other way to describe it — but because the kingdom is unabashed in its worship of a misogynistic God and never suffers any consequences for it, thanks to its double-whammy advantage of having oil and being home to Islam’s two holiest places, Mecca and Medina.
Then — the 1980s and 1990s — as now, clerics on Saudi TV were obsessed with women and their orifices, especially what came out of them. I’ll never forget hearing that if a baby boy urinated on you, you could go ahead and pray in the same clothes, yet if a baby girl peed on you, you had to change. What on Earth in the girl’s urine made you impure? I wondered.
Hatred of women.
How much does Saudi Arabia hate women? So much so that 15 girls died in a school fire in Mecca in 2002, after “morality police” barred them from fleeing the burning building — and kept firefighters from rescuing them — because the girls were not wearing headscarves and cloaks required in public. And nothing happened. No one was put on trial. Parents were silenced. The only concession to the horror was that girls’ education was quietly taken away by then-Crown Prince Abdullah from the Salafi zealots, who have nonetheless managed to retain their vise-like grip on the kingdom’s education system writ large.
This, however, is no mere Saudi phenomenon, no hateful curiosity in the rich, isolated desert. The Islamist hatred of women burns brightly across the region — now more than ever.
In Kuwait, where for years Islamists fought women’s enfranchisement, they hounded the four women who finally made it into parliament, demanding that the two who didn’t cover their hair wear hijabs. When the Kuwaiti parliament was dissolved this past December, an Islamist parliamentarian demanded the new house — devoid of a single female legislator — discuss his proposed “decent attire” law.
In Tunisia, long considered the closest thing to a beacon of tolerance in the region, women took a deep breath last fall after the Islamist Ennahda party won the largest share of votes in the country’s Constituent Assembly. Party leaders vowed to respect Tunisia’s 1956 Personal Status Code, which declared “the principle of equality between men and women” as citizens and banned polygamy. But female university professors and students have complained since then of assaults and intimidation by Islamists for not wearing hijabs, while many women’s rights activists wonder how talk of Islamic law will affect the actual law they will live under in post-revolution Tunisia.
In Libya, the first thing the head of the interim government, Mustafa Abdel Jalil, promised to do was to lift the late Libyan tyrant’s restrictions on polygamy. Lest you think of Muammar al-Qaddafi as a feminist of any kind, remember that under his rule girls and women who survived sexual assaults or were suspected of “moral crimes” were dumped into “social rehabilitation centers,” effective prisons from which they could not leave unless a man agreed to marry them or their families took them back.
Then there’s Egypt, where less than a month after President Hosni Mubarak stepped down, the military junta that replaced him, ostensibly to “protect the revolution,” inadvertently reminded us of the two revolutions we women need. After it cleared Tahrir Square of protesters, the military detained dozens of male and female activists. Tyrants oppress, beat, and torture all. We know. But these officers reserved “virginity tests” for female activists: rape disguised as a medical doctor inserting his fingers into their vaginal opening in search of hymens. (The doctor was sued and eventually acquitted in March.)
What hope can there be for women in the new Egyptian parliament, dominated as it is by men stuck in the seventh century? A quarter of those parliamentary seats are now held by Salafis, who believe that mimicking the original ways of the Prophet Mohammed is an appropriate prescription for modern life. Last fall, when fielding female candidates, Egypt’s Salafi Nour Party ran a flower in place of each woman’s face. Women are not to be seen or heard — even their voices are a temptation — so there they are in the Egyptian parliament, covered from head to toe in black and never uttering a word.
And we’re in the middle of a revolution in Egypt! It’s a revolution in which women have died, been beaten, shot at, and sexually assaulted fighting alongside men to rid our country of that uppercase Patriarch — Mubarak — yet so many lowercase patriarchs still oppress us. The Muslim Brotherhood, with almost half the total seats in our new revolutionary parliament, does not believe women (or Christians for that matter) can be president. The woman who heads the “women’s committee” of the Brotherhood’s political party said recently that women should not march or protest because it’s more “dignified” to let their husbands and brothers demonstrate for them.
The hatred of women goes deep in Egyptian society. Those of us who have marched and protested have had to navigate a minefield of sexual assaults by both the regime and its lackeys, and, sadly, at times by our fellow revolutionaries. On the November day I was sexually assaulted on Mohamed Mahmoud Street near Tahrir Square, by at least four Egyptian riot police, I was first groped by a man in the square itself. While we are eager to expose assaults by the regime, when we’re violated by our fellow civilians we immediately assume they’re agents of the regime or thugs because we don’t want to taint the revolution.
SO WHAT IS TO BE DONE?
First we stop pretending. Call out the hate for what it is. Resist cultural relativism and know that even in countries undergoing revolutions and uprisings, women will remain the cheapest bargaining chips. You — the outside world — will be told that it’s our “culture” and “religion” to do X, Y, or Z to women. Understand that whoever deemed it as such was never a woman. The Arab uprisings may have been sparked by an Arab man — Mohamed Bouazizi, the Tunisian street vendor who set himself on fire in desperation — but they will be finished by Arab women.
Amina Filali — the 16-year-old Moroccan girl who drank poison after she was forced to marry, and beaten by, her rapist — is our Bouazizi. Salwa el-Husseini, the first Egyptian woman to speak out against the “virginity tests“; Samira Ibrahim, the first one to sue; and Rasha Abdel Rahman, who testified alongside her — they are our Bouazizis. We must not wait for them to die to become so. Manal al-Sharif, who spent nine days in jail for breaking her country’s ban on women driving, is Saudi Arabia’s Bouazizi. She is a one-woman revolutionary force who pushes against an ocean of misogyny.
Our political revolutions will not succeed unless they are accompanied by revolutions of thought — social, sexual, and cultural revolutions that topple the Mubaraks in our minds as well as our bedrooms.
“Do you know why they subjected us to virginity tests?” Ibrahim asked me soon after we’d spent hours marching together to mark International Women’s Day in Cairo on March 8. “They want to silence us; they want to chase women back home. But we’re not going anywhere.”
We are more than our headscarves and our hymens. Listen to those of us fighting. Amplify the voices of the region and poke the hatred in its eye. There was a time when being an Islamist was the most vulnerable political position in Egypt and Tunisia. Understand that now it very well might be Woman. As it always has been.
******
Readers: It bothers me to no end when women write in telling us of their plight. But it doesn’t bother me when women write in telling us how much they hate their men, crying out for help. I can understand why they would feel that way. As stated above: “Yes: They hate us. It must be said.”
Women wouldn’t hate if men didn’t hate them first, if they didn’t have a reason to hate. Men do horrific things to women for no reason (not that there is ever a reason to hate like they do)…but just because they are women…because of their hate of women.
How could women not hate in return? The difference in hate, is that women hate men because of what men do, not because they are just men. Men express their hatred with violence, abuse, rape, murder. But many woman may feel their only recourse is their expression of hatred, their venting of hatred, when their hands and bodies are tied by their men…by laws controlling their every move. I can understand why women write to me asking for Madaline’s help.
Would you not if you were in their shoes?
Now it’s Friday. Blog me.
Peace & Love.
Lastly, greed over a great story is surfacing from my “loyal”(?) readers. With all this back and forth about who owns what, that appears on my blog, let me reiterate that all material posted on my blog becomes the sole property of my blog. If you want to reserve any proprietary rights don’t post it to my blog. I will prominently display this caveat on my blog from now on to remind those who may have forgotten this notice.
Gratefully your blog host,
michelle
Aka BABE: We all know what this means by now :)
If you love my blog and my writes, please make a donation via PayPal, credit card, or e-check, please click the “Donate” button below. (Please only donations from those readers within the United States. – International readers please see my “Donate” page)
Or if you would like to send a check via snail mail, please make checks payable to “Michelle Moquin”, and send to:
Michelle Moquin PO Box 29235 San Francisco, Ca. 94129
Thank you for your loyal support!
All content on this site are property of Michelle Moquin © copyright 2008-2012
“Though she be but little, she be fierce.” – William Shakespeare Midsummer Night’s Dream
" Politics, god, Life, News, Music, Family, Personal, Travel, Random, Photography, Religion, Aliens, Art, Entertainment, Food, Books, Thoughts, Media, Culture, Love, Sex, Poetry, Prose, Friends, Technology, Humor, Health, Writing, Events, Movies, Sports, Video, Christianity, Atheist, Blogging, History, Work, Education, Business, Fashion, Barack Obama, People, Internet, Relationships, Faith, Photos, Videos, Hillary Clinton, School, Reviews, God, TV, Philosophy, Fun, Science, Environment, Design, The Page, Rants, Pictures, Church, Blog, Nature, Marketing, Television, Democrats, Parenting, Miscellaneous, Current Events, Film, Spirituality, Obama, Musings, Home, Human Rights, Society, Comedy, Me, Random Thoughts, Research, Government, Election 2008, Baseball, Opinion, Recipes, Children, Iraq, Funny, Women, Economics, America, Misc, Commentary, John McCain, Reflections, All, Celebrities, Inspiration, Lifestyle, Theology, Linux, Kids, Games, World, India, Literature, China, Ramblings, Fitness, Money, Review, War, Articles, Economy, Journal, Quotes, NBA, Crime, Anime, Islam, 2008, Stories, Prayer, Diary, Jesus, Buddha, Muslim, Israel, Europe, Links, Marriage, Fiction, American Idol, Software, Leadership, Pop culture, Rants, Video Games, Republicans, Updates, Political, Football, Healing, Blogs, Shopping, USA, Class, Matrix, Course, Work, Web 2.0, My Life, Psychology, Gay, Happiness, Advertising, Field Hockey, Hip-hop, sex, fucking, ass, Soccer, sox"
April 27th, 2012 at 7:59 am
TAO, your present expectation of hostility when you venture past the Emperor’s net is the result of your superiority attitude in this arena.
Your successes in that sphere of contention will depend upon your willingness to cooperate in this one.
i.e. Yes, you have discovered where Roi is. But to successfully affect his healthy return, you will need that cooperation.
Note: Many will be willing to suffer huge losses to keep him where he is.
Jng
April 27th, 2012 at 8:03 am
The biggest problem with the Vatican’s position is that they believe that they have the final word on everything .
They are out of touch with the needs of women and the reality that women are no longer accepting the rule of man as if it is a god given right.
Corrine
April 27th, 2012 at 8:20 am
I still have yet to have anyone convince me that this is an action against nuns, in general. It is an action against the LCWR. Anyone on the WEB has had access for years to the materials presented at their conferences.
Faith was light and social justice was high. For non-Catholics that might be enough but these women are consecrated leaders of the Church – my Church.
And I don’t recognize what they espouse as being anything more than social work in their public presentations.
I expect more from Church leaders whether they are men or women. Women have no greater virtue than men here. Matriarchy is just the flip side of the Patriarchy coin.
I don’t think it is inconsistent therefore for the Vatican to say – get back to the basics on faith. That actually is their job.
And personally, I fail to see why the nuns don’t take up the abortion cause. It is the number one social justice issue. We kill the very least among us. One would think this would cause outrage on here on earth as much as I’m sure it does in heaven.
April 27th, 2012 at 8:30 am
Do-It-Yourself Face-Lift
With acupressure, many people can look years younger in just 20 days.
If you’ve got facial wrinkles that you would like to reduce but you don’t want to get Botox injections or a surgical face-lift, there’s a do-it-yourself option that’s far less invasive and far less expensive.
With a technique known as facial acupressure (similar to acupuncture but performed without needles), you can take up to five to 10 years off your appearance—and perhaps even improve your overall health in the process.
Sound far-fetched?
I’ve treated hundreds of patients who were contemplating face-lifts but found success with acupressure.
Bonus: Unlike Botox or surgery, acupressure won’t give you a tight, frozen or pulled-back appearance. The results are softer and more natural.
WHY ACUPRESSURE?
Acupressure is based on a Chinese healing technique that involves pressing or kneading key points on the body to stimulate energy flow, known as Qi (pronounced chee), through invisible pathways called meridians.
It can be used to relax or tone muscles, boost circulation and even improve digestion.
The conventional view: From the Western medical perspective, wrinkles are formed by changes in the skin’s composition, thickness and elasticity as well as continuous muscle activity—for example, forehead wrinkles may appear after years of furrowing your eyebrows or squinting.
As a result, the skin covering the muscle creases, eventually creating a wrinkle.
Chinese medicine has a different perspective. For example, specific meridians (that correspond to organ systems, such as those for the “Liver” and “Gallbladder”) are believed to affect certain body parts, but they don’t always seem to correlate.
For instance, a meridian located at the junction between your thumb and index finger corresponds to the head—rubbing that area can reduce headaches and, yes, wrinkles.
DO-IT-YOURSELF ROUTINES
To help reduce wrinkles and puffiness, use the following routines each day until you are satisfied with the results and then as needed…
Forehead wrinkles. What to do: Begin at the top of your right foot, in the junction between your big and second toes. (This point is called “Liver 3.”)
Using medium to firm (but not painful) pressure, massage the point in a clockwise circle 10 times. (If you have arthritic fingers, use your knuckle instead.) Repeat on left foot.
Next, move to the back side of your right hand between your right thumb and index finger (“Large Intestine 4”). In a clockwise circular motion, massage this point for 10 rotations. Repeat on the left hand.
Then, move to the back of your neck. Place both thumbs where your spine meets the base of your skull and move them two inches to either side until they each land in an indentation (“Gallbladder 20”). Massage clockwise with firm pressure for 10 rotations.
Lastly, move to your face. Place the pad of each index finger a half inch above the center of each eyebrow (“Gallbladder 14”). Massage with medium pressure in 10 clockwise (right to left) circles.
Repeat the entire sequence three times in a single session each day. For deeper wrinkles, do the sequence several times throughout the day. You should notice a reduction in forehead wrinkles within 20 days.
Under-eye puffiness (due to age or allergies). What to do: Place your index finger two inches above the inside of your right ankle between the bone and muscle (“Spleen 6”). Do 10 clockwise rotations using medium to firm pressure. Repeat on left leg.
Next, move to the back of your right hand (“Large Intestine 4”), as described earlier, and perform 10 clockwise rotations. Repeat on the left hand.
Then, with your arm at your side, bend your left elbow to make a 90º angle. Pinpoint the area located at the outside edge of the elbow crease, between the bend and the bone (“Large Intestine 11”).
Use your index finger to massage 10 times in a clockwise rotation using medium to firm pressure. Repeat on your right elbow.
Lastly, move to your face. Place your right index finger just to the side of your right nostril. Move the finger laterally to a spot directly underneath the center of your eye, in your sinus area (“Stomach 3”). Press in and slightly upward, performing 10 clockwise rotations. Repeat on the left side.
Do the entire sequence three times daily. You should notice a reduction in puffiness under your eyes after a few days.
Source: Shellie Goldstein, LAc, a licensed acupuncturist, esthetician and certified Chinese herbologist who maintains a private practice in New York City and Amagansett, New York
(www.HamptonsAcupuncture.com). One of the first acupuncturists to work in hospitals and health-care facilities in New York state, Goldstein is the author of Your Best Face Now: Look Younger in 20 Days with the Do-It-Yourself Acupressure Facelift (Avery).
April 27th, 2012 at 8:39 am
Mary
Faith is light. But the men leader’s of the church practice a brand of social justice which is pledged to the principles of the republican party in this country.
Your statement “I don’t recognize what they espouse as being anything more than social work in their public presentations.” sums you up. I am a catholic and I recognize “social work” as one of the chief parts of my faith.
I don’t see the teaching of the church being merely my following a set of rules to get my soul in heaven separate from the actions I take toward my fellow humans, the planet and the animals on that planet.
How naive it is for a woman to say “Matriarchy is just the flip side of the Patriarchy coin.” Mothering and child birth involve much more than being a celibate male preaching on high about how to raise or birth a child.
I like the nuns precisely because they are practicing “the basics of faith.” That would be do unto others as you would have them do unto you, to start with.
If you wish to think it is more important to force a woman to bring a child into this world than it is to take care of the children that are already here, then that is your right.
But it is NOT your right or the church’s to force anyone else to accept it. That seems to be the sole motivating issue with you. It alone does not make the catholic church.
I would think that Heaven is even more outraged with how the poor, young and old male, and female are treated on this earth than it is about whether a poor woman should be forced to bring another child into the world that will be abandoned by the very hypocrites that force her to do it.
That would be that “social work” you seem to be so much against, Mary.
Alycedale
April 27th, 2012 at 8:40 am
All I get when I attempt to comment on this blog is Error establishing a database connection
April 27th, 2012 at 8:42 am
PrP, I love all the alien interaction you caused on this blog.
Now, we are getting back to the purpose of this blog. I thought it was lost when Howie left for parts unknown.
Scott
April 27th, 2012 at 7:25 pm
WOW Michelle, very powerful post today. Thank you for sharing.
/SB
April 28th, 2012 at 6:21 am
Making College Affordable; Working to End HIV/AIDS;
Honoring our Veterans
April 27, 2012
Share This
Email On:
Twitter
Facebook
Making College Affordable
Giving Americans a strong education is a critical investment in the strength and future of our workforce and the growth of our economy. This week, under pressure from Democrats and President Obama, House Republicans finally put forth a bill to prevent student loan interest rates from doubling for more than 7 million students nationwide. Unfortunately, their plan eliminates the Prevention and Public Health Fund; undermining the well-being of women and children. By choosing this path, Republicans are destroying investments in:
Childhood immunizations;
Screening for breast and cervical cancer;
Initiatives to reduce birth defects.
This is why I voted against the Republican bill. I will not vote for a bill that claims to support a middle class initiative, but then asks those very same middle class families to go without critical preventative health care. House Republicans must join Democrats to develop a real solution that prevents a disastrous increase in the student loan rate.
Congresswoman Pelosi plants trees during a Community Volunteer Workday
at the National AIDS Memorial Grove.
Working to End HIV/AIDS
For 20 years, the National AIDS Memorial Grove has stood as a monument to all that we have lost, but also all that we have held onto – our hope, our optimism, our steadfastness and determination in the fight against HIV/AIDS and our compassion for those who are living with this disease. That is why I was so proud to author legislation to make this sacred place a National Memorial in 1996. When we first introduced the legislation, many people said that it would never pass. But San Francisco persevered, because it all started here, for better or worse – the discovery, the sadness, the more than one funeral a day, the loss of our friends, and then an idea to remember in the spirit of renewal. The Grove has educated generations about AIDS, the environment, and service. On Saturday, I joined volunteers to plant trees and remember. Together, we will work with determination, hope, and compassion until the day that the HIV/AIDS pandemic is a terrible memory.
Honoring our Veterans
“Go for Broke” was the motto of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team as it defended our country against tyranny abroad and fought to end discrimination at home. Despite the injustice of internment, Japanese Americans who served in the 442nd, the 100th Infantry Battalion and the Military Intelligence Service (MIS) rose above the injustice to save American lives. On Sunday, I was pleased to honor the heroes who were unable to travel to Washington, DC to receive the Congressional Gold Medal at a ceremony in the U.S. Capitol last year.
As the site of the first headquarters of the MIS, San Francisco is proud of the heroism demonstrated by the honorees, many of whom call the city home. I commend the National Japanese American Historical Society for their efforts to create a museum in the Presidio to honor those who served in the MIS. Working with my colleagues, I was able to secure $3 million in federal funding to rehabilitate the site of the original MIS school. Once completed, the facility will showcase a permanent and rotating exhibition area; ensuring that the efforts of our heroic soldiers are never forgotten.
Please feel free to forward this information to your family and friends. To learn more about these efforts, to express your views, or to sign up for email updates, please visit my website. I am also on Twitter at http://twitter.com/NancyPelosi.
Sincerely,
Member of Congress
April 28th, 2012 at 6:29 am
My colleague at RedState, Erick Erickson, has a piece up this morning that certainly requires a deeper look in to the state of American politics. The Blue Dogs are a coalition of conservative-ish lawmakers who are increasingly growing extinct, especially after the primary in Pennsylvania this week. Both Tim Holden and Jason Altmire, two Democrats, lost their primaries to candidates from the left and backed by special interest groups. In the case of Altmire, particularly, Big Labor injected their support into his opponent and eventual winner, Mark Critz. The mainstream media always asks where the moderate Republicans have gone, always chiding conservatives, but Erick looks at it a different way. Where have all the Blue Dogs gone?
Plus — John Hayward has a post on the new cyber security bill that passed the House last night. Great analysis and a look ahead at what is to be expected from this legislation. The Senate hopes to take it up when they return from recess.
And, as of a few moments ago, the House passed the bill to extend student loan interest rates for undergraduate Federal Direct Stafford Loans. The roll call vote is here, so you can see how your representative voted. We will have an analysis shortly.
Have a great Saturday.
-Adam
April 28th, 2012 at 6:40 am
I like a good repub fight. Saw this on huff:
——————–
MSNBC contributor Meghan McCain called out Fox News host Greta Van Susteren on Thursday for inviting Lindsay Lohan to the White House Correspondents’ dinner.
Van Susteren made headlines earlier this year when she announced that she planned to boycott the Radio and Television Correspondents Association Dinner because comedian Louis C.K. was headlining the event. She also encouraged her colleagues to do the same. She called C.K. “a pig” who uses “filthy language” to “denigrate women.” C.K. later pulled out as host of the event.
McCain seemed to find Van Susteren’s decision to invite Lohan confusing.
@McCainBlogette
Meghan McCain
Let me get this straight Greta Van Sustern is bringing Lindsay Lohan to the WHC Dinner but has a moral offense to Louie C.K?
———————–
Greta has a moral defense for Louie K.C. yet, loves Rush.
April 28th, 2012 at 7:03 am
Yes the fox air heads are making the HP news:
——————————-
Fox News’ Monica Crowley reacted to news that Sandra Fluke is engaged by tweeting “To a man?” on Thursday.
Fluke, a Georgetown law student, stepped into the national spotlight when Rush Limbaugh attacked her as a “slut” and a “prostitute” for advocating employer-covered contraception. On Thursday, it was announced that Fluke is engaged to her long-time boyfriend.
Crowley, an analyst for Fox News, tweeted:
Monica Crowley@MonicaCrowley
To a man? “Sandra Fluke Announces Engagement”
26 Apr 12 ReplyRetweetFavorite
She got plenty of pushback on Twitter, with people accusing her of “bigotry” and calling her “homophobic” and a “terrible person.”
Moments later, Crowley suggested that she had been joking, writing, “I love exposing the Left’s total lack of a sense of humor.” However, when one person said that Crowley had “insinuated” that Fluke was gay, she said that her original message was a “straightforward question.”
————————–
How on earth does being offended by a homophobic dig indicate a lack of a sense of humor? People like her don’t get it. The only way something like that *might* have been funny is if an openly gay woman said it, then followed it with disappointment. THAT could be considered a joke.
Otherwise, it is nothing more than a bigoted insult, and rather than point out any lack on the part of those offended, it simply indicates the overwhelming ignorance of the person who said it.
April 28th, 2012 at 7:06 am
You previously said, HP, that Van Sustren invited Lindsay Lohan. Now you say she invited Kim Kardashian. Try to keep up with yourself! And then let us know the facts.
April 28th, 2012 at 7:08 am
so meghan is upset because she wasn’t invited.
Who cares who attends.
If is a free country.
April 28th, 2012 at 7:09 am
All fox women look exactly the same…same color of blond hair, same sharp features, same harsh voices…weird.
April 28th, 2012 at 7:09 am
How can one distinguish one trashy, blond, shrill-voiced Fox female “commentator” from another? What is with the conservative thing for trashy, screechy blonds? Is this some S&M thing?
April 28th, 2012 at 7:10 am
I think i understand something now, Ms. Crowley posted a negative comment and therefore it is all Fox people and employees that get the blame for a personal comment.
I do not see the need for her to resign, she is entitled to a personal opinion outside of her daily job, the people at Fox are not all the spawn of satan as many of these comments would love to paint them as, and overall when did two wrongs make a right.
For every single person that has posted hateful or lewd comments here you are no better than she was for making her comment.
April 28th, 2012 at 7:12 am
Sandra Fluke is the best.
And there’s no doubt about that.
April 28th, 2012 at 7:15 am
Unbelievable!!! Romney is a rich man that can go (wants to go) wherever the wind blows when it comes to the affairs of the American people just to win an election.
There is nothing wrong with being rich; however, when the love of your riches blinds you to the fact that not everyone else is or not here for personal fodder for you and those like you, you are not good for America. Obama 2012.
April 28th, 2012 at 7:16 am
Which one is it! Is Romney for or against more affordable education. I cannot tell from his comments
April 28th, 2012 at 7:19 am
Michelle, Please!
Now that Howie is out there planet hopping with Carr, we need more alien stories. I visited PrP’s blog.
NICELY DONE!!!!!
But this is my chief source, so could you make room for a few more entries while you are selecting your acceptances?
April 28th, 2012 at 7:22 am
Michelle, thanks for keeping our terrible situation in the news. I really hope when the time comes you send Madaline to the Middle First.
If the day after no men are left the women will rejoice and praise God that She has been so merciful.
Zaranj
April 28th, 2012 at 7:25 am
Racists are quite active. All over the USA. In everything. Heard a lot of steel geetar and banjo music on TV lately? That’s the work of the racist right. Letter writing and phone calls. Taking America back to the days before the undesirables took over.
They managed to get several R&B categories kicked off the Grammy’s this year so that we could listen to more steel guitar.
So shut up America and listen to the steel guitar. In some high schools in the south, white kids who befriend black kids, or listen to music other than “their” kind of music are beaten up and victimized.
April 28th, 2012 at 7:28 am
Getting Hitched, Getting Unhitched: Who Gets Fatter When?
For better or for worse, for richer or poorer…for fatter or thinner? When it comes to weight changes and marriage—or the end of a marriage—the effects on women are surprisingly different than they are on men, a recent study concluded.
What’s more, the results revealed a previously unrecognized risk for gaining a lot of weight, enough to pose a potential health risk. Details…
Researchers analyzed data on weight and body mass index (BMI) from a survey that tracked 10,071 people for more than two decades.
Unlike previous research, this study focused specifically on weight changes in the first two years following a wedding or divorce…and looked for large weight gains of at least three BMI points, which is about 18 pounds for the average woman or 21 pounds for the average man.
Results: Women were at significantly higher risk for large weight gain after getting married. But for men, the risk of a large weight gain increased most prominently following a divorce.
Why? Earlier research has shown that marriage is good for men’s health—so it’s logical that men would lose that benefit following a breakup and thus be prone to weight gain.
To help prevent weight gain and weight-related health problems, no matter what happens marriage-wise, take time to take care of yourself.
Source: Dmitry Tumin is a doctoral student and graduate research associate in the department of sociology at The Ohio State University in Columbus, and coauthor of a study on marriage transitions and weight presented at a recent meeting of the American Sociological Association.
April 28th, 2012 at 7:33 am
Social Butterfly:
I answered the call to write my representative. But the big money won.
—————-
The House of Representatives passed cybersecurity legislation Thursday aimed at protecting American companies from hackers who steal intellectual property.
The bill passed 248 to 168, largely along party lines, despite the Obama administration’s threats to veto the bill and its claims that the bill falls short in protecting civil liberties
The Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or CISPA, sponsored by Reps. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) and Dutch Ruppersberger (D-Md.), would give businesses and the federal government legal protection to share information about cyber-threats with each other. The government does not currently share that data because the information is classified and companies fear violating anti-trust law. The bill would remove legal barriers so they can do so.
On the House floor before the vote, Rogers said the bill was about preventing other nations from stealing intellectual property from U.S. companies.
————————-
John Gotti was right. We have government by the snitches, for the snitches, and of the snitches.
April 28th, 2012 at 7:34 am
The way I look at it is if the GOP is for it, it only benefits the rich and powerful.
IF the Chamber of Commerce is for it, it only benefits the rich and powerful.
AND not the rest of us.
There has become such a gigantic disconnect between the republican congress and America that is no longer just fodder for late night jokes and political cartoons, it is rapidly reaching a point where Americans are going to have to take their collective head out of their collective rears and stop hating each other long enough to ask themselves are they really working for ME or just against the guy I hate?
Now I am as liberal as they get and I have more faith in the democrats than in any republican currently holding office, but democrats aren’t off the hook that easily as well.
Their complete lack of a spine is their biggest problem as well and they need to start making very loud stands against the nonstop war against anyone not of the one percent, or the war on women, the war on minorities, the war on gays, the war civil rights, and on and on.
Now this war against the internet is of tremendous importance.
One major corporations get more than a toehold in our internet rights to read, re-distribute, email, view sites that the corporate world despises such as, for instance this one, then we are going to be up against an honest to god corporate dictatorship and stopping bills like this one is of major importance.
There simply is no real reason to vote republican. The nonsense the teababblers put out is not remotely a reason as well. Just all based on pure hatred and absolutely nothing else.
The republican party is no longer the loyal opposition, they are now the disloyal anti American party.
Voting republican is voting against America, its citizens, especially its women, and its future.
April 28th, 2012 at 7:35 am
Do people realize CISPA removes the protection of the 4th amendment? This is warrantless surveillance and you’re just letting it happen…
April 28th, 2012 at 7:35 am
The Majesty that it is You My Sweet
And the Glory of Your Being
Is such an overwhelming feast
One might question what they’re seeing
But when My eyes alight on You
And I see Myself in Yours
I feel the power of Your Love
And My Lion wants to roar
Together We share the greatest gift
That Love will ever create
Come hither My King and
Celebrate what intertwines Our Fate
April 28th, 2012 at 7:38 am
Thank you PrP. With the demise of contributions from Howie. You and your blog site have filled in quite nicely.
The poem add a genuine touch of class.
Kent
April 28th, 2012 at 7:39 am
Our system of government was a fantasy. Human beings do not have the personal integrity to run a Republic.
They figure out how they can steal for themselves and to stay in power until the country collapses.
It is not theirs and they don’t care what they do to it.
April 28th, 2012 at 7:41 am
Republicans like war…President Bush liked war and talked about it in his book.
I believe they do this to distract from the poor job they have done while running the country.
It is very convenient for republicans to forget just who caused this recession…it started in 2007 under Bush…a fact they conveniently overlook.
Banks failed under Bush, housing flopped under Bush and the economy tanked under Bush….as Mr. Romney likes to say….he was a nice man…but a failure.How anyone can forget how the public was lied to about wmd’s is beyond me especially because of the lives lost and people’s lives ruined.
No amount of rhetoric from the republcians can make me forget what a horrible thing the war in Iraq was and the fact that it was unnecessary. Too many lives lost or maimed because of a lie…..
I cannot or ever will forget this and I cannot forget the failures under Bush which the republican are trying to pass on to this President .Mr.Romney…most of us are not fools and have good memories.
April 28th, 2012 at 7:43 am
Michelle, I guess you will be losing weight and Doug,NLTMD will be gaining weight.
Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy. If you are looking, I’m available. Have jet will travel.
Craig
April 28th, 2012 at 7:44 am
Not surprising to me whatsoever. True Republicans these are. So they wanna reduce benefits to the poor, but keep building up the military, brilliant.
Our people are starving, but boy what a military we have, Unbelievable! Obama in 2012! Gotta keep them Republicans out of the white house!
April 28th, 2012 at 7:45 am
Zen Lill, you may miss a while but when you return BOOM! You do it with gusto!
April 28th, 2012 at 7:46 am
Who are these people? Are they human? Would they rather spend $40,000 a year to JAIL someone who has to steal food to survive?
April 28th, 2012 at 7:50 am
Craig play fair. Leave Doug,NLTMD alone. It wasn’t bad enough that he has lost the fair damsel.
He had to quit posting because he was No Longer The Main Dude and he couldn’t take the heat or comment without the title.
Me, I would have been more concerned about losing the bed privileges. From reading this blog for three plus years, I know there are NO friends with benefits there.
Yeah, give the man a break.
Oscar
April 28th, 2012 at 8:01 am
OK, they would…because the corporations own the private prison industry.
People are starved to boost the bottom dollar in those places, they go without medical care, the lowest of the low are hired for guards…and the prisoners work for pennies on the dollar….so yes… yes they would.
April 28th, 2012 at 8:08 am
I’ve made lot of money in the software business. Until now I wondered if it would significantly change my life.
Craig, your slick reference to the Health Info article on weight gain my males losing their spouses gave me an epiphany.
Michelle, this newly very wealthy 33 year old would do ANYTHING to gain that FWB status. Of course, I would be very interested in taking the relationship to a higher level.
Eric
April 28th, 2012 at 8:10 am
Conservatives/republicans believe in hierarchy; that is, some people are inherently better then other people.
Ayn Rand said those who are not “innovators” are parasites. And the battleground over this is economic Darwinism.
Those who are poor deserve to be poor, or God is punishing them for not being part of the righteous.
So this is there philosophical justification for the feudal state that they want to turn America into.
Thats right, folks. LORDS AND SERFS. Nothing less. Is this what you want?
April 28th, 2012 at 8:23 am
Just so we are straight on the facts. Republicans love war because they are the people heavily invested in the Military Industrial Complex, those businesses that supply the goods and services for our military.
The commentators on most news shows, including MSNBC, never mention this connection. They give deference to the white boy by not insinuating that the Right are sending our young men and women to die not for a proposed cause, or political ideology but for profit.
Hence we are supposed to believe that the Right has some other motive rather than pure profit at the expense of the lives of our military.
The truth is they could care less about one political philosophy or the other. Neither are they concerned about global danger posed to the USA or any other nation.
Their only concern is profit! So they start wars to make profit. If there happens to be a reason to fit their agenda, fine if not their is always “Weapons of Mass Destruction,” or some other reason.
In the end it is about the $Billions of dollars of profit made providing uniforms, gun, bullets, etc, etc ….. for that war.
The white boy has always worshipped at the altar of profit. He always will.
Robert,rt
April 28th, 2012 at 8:25 am
Robert, these are not Republicans and haven’t been Republicans for a long time.
Republicans would support and uphold the Constitution and free up the economy so that it can grow and help the poor.
They would not give more taxpayer money to the owners of the industrial military complex.
April 28th, 2012 at 8:27 am
Robert,RT, you are so right. Eisenhower warned us about the industrial military complex so you are right.
If Michelle isn’t, interested. This fine white girl is.
Mindy
April 28th, 2012 at 8:32 am
WS:
This is just a way for a few people to get richer by fleecing the Tax Payers.
The Republicans send tax dollars to the military complex and the military complex repays Republicans handsomely for the favor.
Republicans keep the money in the pockets of the wealthy while attempting to look patriotic about it.
They think we are too stupid to notice. I am so hoping that they are wrong.
Oh and Robert,RT I live in the Bay Area and if you are not opposed to a 24 year senor law student at Stanford, then I’m available.
Personally, I’m tired of the white boys here with their penis envy philosophies thinly disguised as political oratory.
Lilly
April 28th, 2012 at 8:42 am
Michelle, I hope that “once you go black, you don’t go back” adage isn’t so with you because my young brother is so rich and so handsome and such a gentleman.
He loves you. He has your pictures enhanced to an incredible degree. He even commissioned an oil by a very famous and expensive artist so he could hang it in his new mansion.
But he is so shy that when the women throw themselves all over him, he just retreats into his internet nerdy spiel.
He is 39, never married, 6’3,” played college football, got picked by the Washington Redskins in the first round but decided to put his talents into the web and made billion$$$$$.
Say it isn’t so and give my little brother a chance.
Evelyn
April 28th, 2012 at 8:45 am
Michelle, why not come to a Lesbian night in the Bay Area?
If you are so fair, give us girls a shot at filling the void Doug, NLTMD couldn’t live up to.
Men after all are the inferior species in more ways than one.
Ingrid
April 28th, 2012 at 8:46 am
I knew it. If you wait long enough the muff burger eaters will surface.
April 28th, 2012 at 8:48 am
Banding together to travel abroad to raid and plunder was rendered obsolete for the philosophy of battle called ‘defense’.
Republicans have adopted the ‘Bush jailhouse sucker punch’ as a means to blind side peace loving citizens at home and abroad in the name of ‘defense’.
They forget that there are many revolutions to choose from where arrogant wealthy organized thieves lose to the maddened crowd.
With all the Bush instigated radioactivity and crude oil toxins, the people better wise up fast. We all are being poisoned down and killed as I type.
Don’t forget the 1980s Bush41 deregulation of the meat packing industry and the past 15 years of the rise in number of Alzheimer’s cases.
You stuffed shirts out there need to do your homework before you vote in the ‘Grim Reaper’ himself.
April 28th, 2012 at 8:48 am
Paul, feeling inadequate are we?
April 28th, 2012 at 8:49 am
What our fearless leaders can’t comprehend is the fact that when rich people want money they draw money out…poor people are more likely to rob the bank, so now we need more police due to a raise in the crime rate….Which is cheaper… Feed the poor or Fight more crime