Long sleeved shirts under short sleeved shirts under long sleeved shirts
After a bit of a crappy week, yesterday was a fun night. At Chicago's famous, historic Riviera Theater, I saw the pop singer, Mika. The concert was theatrical, fun, kitsch (but in a good way), and the music was awesome. The crowd was on there feet the whole time, dancing, and singing. The eclectic crowd gave Mika a standing ovation that went longer than anything other performer I have ever seen. Also, The Riviera is a great place for a show. All in all, I give the concert an A+
1. "I'm glad they found the balloon boy in the attic. I thought Michael Jackson was ordering take-out." Too soon?
2. Last night I was watching The Daily Show when I learned about a new piece of legislation brought to congress by Senator Al Franken. Franken's amendment would eliminate the loopholes that stop defense contractors' employees from suing them if they are raped. This stems from an issue last year when former Halliburton employee Jamie Lee Jones was raped, and locked in a crate. Because of fine print in her employee contract, she was not allowed to sue Halliburton. This seems like a slam dunk that all 100 senators would support. However, in 2009, politics is politics. 32 senators voted against this amendment. Surprise surprise!!! They were all Republicans who did not vote for this. Is this Republicans looking out for Halliburton? Are they just angry with Al Franken? Politics as usual? Needless to say, Jon Stewart had a great piece about the story: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-october-14-2009/rape-nuts
posted by cyclonejohn @ 9:50 AM
8 Comments:
your titles are very Fall-Out-Boy.
that is all.
Actually, it's a Family Guy reference. I am pretty sure I am yet to include a Fall Out Boy subject title... not I'm above that.
im just saying they are long and irrelevent. and usually an odd reference.
Ahem: IT'S MISOGYNY.
Or it is blatant politics as usual.
IT'S MISOGYNY. Do you think 32 Republicans would have voted against prohibiting an "it's ok if you forcibly sterilize me" clause? Or an "it's ok if you murder me" clause? Why do you think Halliburton even HAD this clause in its contract saying this? Because rape in wars is rampant, always, and because Halliburton knows this and willingly employed not only likely victims but the rapists themselves. And yes, if they addressed this issue seriously in training, if they hired people of principle to oversee the human relations between their employees overseas, if there were serious consequences for harassment, this would have been prevented - or at least would've been much less likely to occur. But including this clause in contracts gives a tacit go-ahead to rapists. It says, "do whatever you want to whoever you want, just don't fuck up badly enough that it loses us money." It creates and cultivates a culture overseas in which women (yes, women, not arbitrary individuals, women) are brutally victimized by their colleagues. It's the same culture that exists in this country, but since war is even more of a good old boys' club than this nation, it's actually written into their contracts in war zones that it's ok to victimize women. And if you think for a second that Republicans (and Democrats, and private corporations, and the media) don't endorse, uphold and vigorously defend the good old boys' culture that keeps them comfortable and in power (with women as accessories - nice to look at, nice for keeping house, nice for having sex with - forcibly or not), you don't see this culture with clear eyes.
Goddamn whistle-blowers. Can't a company operate without looking over it's shoulder. First McDonald's get's sued for serving coffee that is hot, now this. What's next? Women's Sports that people actually care about?
Women are only good for three things,
cooking
cleaning
and vaginas
Post a Comment
<< Home