Friday, August 18, 2017

New ☆ Tweet from @tomtomorrow

Blogged with IFTTT

Thursday, August 3, 2017

Mid-Life Political Identity Crisis

Reading the @ replies on Adam's tweet, and on Amanda Marcotte's, got me about triggered, as my son would say.

Blogged with IFTTT

I've identified as a liberal progressive since I registered to vote. Democrat, natch. (That's thirty-odd years, so no blink of the eye.) That self-ID started faltering during the Obama years, and pretty much collapsed during the 2016 campaign season.

The old saw goes something like: you're a heartless bastard if you're conservative when you're young, and a naive hippy if you're a liberal when you're old. My experience has been: you're a heartless bastard any time you're a conservative; you're naive and soaked in capitalist ideology as long as you're a liberal.

So, here I am, approaching fifty-years-old admitting I still have so much to learn ... but I can't abide Democratic hypocrisy any longer. I'll remain a registered Democrat, for now, but I won't throw my vote away on a centrist Dem again. They'll get my vote when they run candidates willing to fight for Medicare for all, raising the minimum wage ($15 is the bare minimum), criminal justice reform, abortion rights, and an end to perpetual war. I have absolutely zero confidence this will happen in my lifetime.

The label "progressive" doesn't carry the weight it used to, but I'm not ready to stop using it. Until we finally achieve socialism, we need to make progress in curbing the excesses of capitalism. I doubt we can get to socialism incrementally, it's going to take revolution, but my sense is revolution can only happen after the workers and the poor have come together and won several smaller battles, and the fight for those ameliorating measures like the Fight for 15 and for single-payer or what I'm calling "progressivism" in the meantime. There's no revolutionary party, the (ahem) proletariat are divided and unorganized. The unions are on the ropes and enthralled to the Democratic party and organizations like the DSA and the Green party remain marginal players. And "marginal" feels pretty generous, more like marginalia on the footnotes.

Man, though, if I hear "brocialist" one more time ... these performative accusations of racism and sexism by folks who blithely dismiss progressive women and POC because they don't meet donor-class approval criteria reek of projection. I'm a sexist/racist for not falling in line behind Kamala Harris because of her actual positions, but liberals who bash Ellison and Lee using right-wing smear tactics are somehow not? Fuck that. And fuck them.

Liberal, give me a straight answer on how you can support Bain Capital employee Deval Patrick before you get on my back about blaming Harris for her failure to prosecute banksters. You want to go to the mat for Cory Booker? Suit yourself, but you know where he stands and you're going to wind up in bed with unsavory, big money goons and you know it.

How is it I support Elizabeth Warren more than you when push comes to shove, despite your Nevertheless She Persisted chatter? It's because despite her foreign policy failings, a problem she shares with Bernie, I actually support her when it comes to reigning in Wall Street. I'll vote for Warren if the Dems run her in 2020, will you? What if it was Ellison? What, oh my, what if it's Bernie? What if the most popular politician in America wins your party's nomination? Will you practice what you preach and hold your nose to vote for him over Trump? Or will you sabotage him every step of the way and stay home on election day? Or worse, like nearly 1 in 5 Hillary supporters did in '08, vote for the GOP?

Wednesday, August 2, 2017

2017 Garner Rex Healthcare Sprint Triathlon

That was fun. No super-heroics to report. I hoped I would finish middle of the pack, and I did. 159th position from a start position of 190 out of a field of 302 racers. I think I might try another of these. Maybe sign up for the whole series in 2018.

Next time, I'll make sure to give an accurate swim time, more like 4:40 instead of the 5:20 I supplied. It might not have made much difference, but I stayed in line, didn't try to pass, and it felt very slow. I caught up to the swimmer in front of me in the first length of the pool. Watching the earlier swimmers go out, the guys who passed people looked like jerks, kept hitting other swimmers coming down the lane the other way head on, so I had decided I would just trail the swimmer in front of me, regardless. The key here, it seems to me, is give an accurate time and get seeded behind someone same speed as you or just slightly faster and then don't don't let them get too far ahead of you. Lesson learned.

Also, riding a single-speed bike was a bit of macho I wouldn't repeat. I'll get a geared bike before doing this again. The bike portion is probably where I could improve the most. Hard to build up any momentum going downhill without a high gear to work with, can never go very fast, and that's momentum you don't have to spend on the flats or coming to the start of a hill. Bet I could get under 30 minutes for next time.

As far as the running goes, I'm not sure how much more speed I can cultivate. My time there might represent about the best I can expect when it's 90 degrees out. Cooler conditions though, I bet that'd come down a bit as well.

Tuesday, July 18, 2017

Attack the Blockheads: The Doctor Is a Woman, Deal With It

Jodie Whittaker debuts as 13 in the announcement video.

It's as simple as this: the "the character must be a man" argument is invalid. The Corsair, the General, the Master/Missy all prove canon allows it. Time Lords can change gender and skin pigmentation during regeneration, exactly as you'd expect given their hair color, eye color, apparent age, etc., can all change. (We'll come back to skin pigmentation in a bit ...)  There is absolutely no canonical, in-universe reason the character we know as the Doctor can't be female. The argument that the Doctor must be a man, when made despite these clear examples, reveals itself to be no more than: "I can only accept the character as male." You don't have to like it. But, I'm afraid you do have to accept that you can't argue against it except to argue that your feelings on the matter should trump the decisions of the shows producers. Which, of course, is patently ridiculous.

If you can't accept a female Doctor, then see you, wouldn't want to be you. I'm sure the feeling is mutual and we can agree to disagree without speaking to each other about the matter again. But what that means is if you go on twitter or the fan group on facebook to continue making the bad argument, the rest of us don't have to humor you.

Nobody's saying you have to like the casting, or even that you aren't entitled to your opinion based on your feelings about the whole thing. Only that you need to recognize an opinion isn't an argument, and doesn't warrant being treated like one. When you've got a reactionary opinion, you should expect to mocked and/or blocked for it.

There's an argument that the decision is bad because the show's ratings are down, and the controversy will drive away more fans than it will draw back or retain, and this could kill the show. That's a lousy argument as well. For one, we won't know until next season starts how the ratings will be impacted. Even when we get the overnights for the first episode, we'll need to see how the new writers do, and what impact the new production team has on the show overall, as well as how well Whittaker does in the role; it's only the combination of all those factors, plus other factors (what the show is up against on other networks, for example) that will drive the ratings. It's far more likely, IMO, the first episode will get higher ratings because of all the attention the casting has received ... how much of that initial bump can be retained once the novelty wears off will be interesting to see. Without the data, arguing that "change is too risky" with regard to this show in particular looks disingenuous. Leaning on this argument signals that you're concern trolling to mask the fact you're actually making a case for your He-Man Woman Hating Club position. All the indications I've seen are that there's skepticism about Chibnall, and had he cast another white dude, it would've only endeared him to reactionaries, while giving fans looking for the show to stop emulating the post-Jackie Robinson Red Sox (famously and shamefully the last MLB team to field an African-American player) even more reason to de-prioritize watching.

I hope to see more public support from past Doctors and companions ... Sylvester, Billie, Freema, Karen, Arthur, Janet Fielding, and others have shown their support. Hoping to see a new video message from Tom Baker, something from McGann, Eccleston, Tennant, and Smith.

I've been watching with interest how Six has outclassed Five by a wide margin since the announcement. What's with Davison saying give the frightened a coddle first thing, anyways? That's your first reaction, before congratulating the new Doctor? Harumph. I've always liked Davison, never saw or heard anything that made me think he might be a jerk, but this hasn't sat well with me ...

I didn't make it to Raleigh's Con this past weekend, but there's video of the Alex "River Song" Kingston getting the news ... and it's priceless:

A little more intersectionality might've been in order, the Doctor is *still* white. Let's hope that's also addressed in the next regeneration. We don't know yet how they'll handle her sexuality, it's been a little fluid the last several years, but it remains to be seen if she'll have any, for starters, and how much of whatever type it turns out to be.

Some more tweets that caught my eye getting appended below:
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...