Brotherhood

Mar 14th, 2017 3:50 pm | By

Ah Saudi Arabia.

They have invented a thing they call a girls’ council, which is apparently a place for men to show off their fashion sense.

There were a total of 13 men (not all pictured) on stage to launch the Qassim Girls Council in Saudi Arabia

See, it says Girls Council right there on the sign, so we can’t blame a faulty translation. There’s the Girls’ Council, and there are all the men, looking manly.

The male-dominated photos have been circulating widely on social media, after the meeting took place on Saturday.

It has been compared to another viral hit – an image of US President Donald Trump, surrounded by men, signing an abortion policy in January.

US President Donald Trump signing executive orders in the Oval Office

It’s a proud tradition, men deciding what women can and can’t do. Trump can barely write his own name, but he gets to tell us what we can and can’t do.



No elected official may benefit from the lease

Mar 14th, 2017 3:26 pm | By

The owners of a popular wine bar in DC are suing Trump and his DC hotel.

Mr. Pitts and Ms. Gross claim that the Trump International Hotel, in the Old Post Office building in Washington, and the restaurants within enjoy an illegal advantage in the city’s restaurant market because of their association with Mr. Trump and that Cork has suffered as a result.

“We’re used to a lot of competition — it makes you better, faster, stronger — but the competition that’s coming from the hotel is not fair,” Ms. Gross said.

The wine bar, which serves more than 50 varieties by the glass, has hosted events for a variety of groups, including White House officials, members of Congress, the World Bank, Naral Pro-Choice America and the Sierra Club, according to the couple.

But Cork is losing business to the Trump hotel, which they say — as others have suggested — may be attracting diplomats and politicians looking to curry favor with Mr. Trump.

We’ve heard from diplomats and politicians saying they are doing just that, so it’s not a very far-fetched claim.

Ms. Gross and Mr. Pitts are not seeking monetary damages. But the suit, filed in District of Columbia Superior Court, offers a few improbable ways to resolve the issue: The hotel can stop operating; Mr. Trump and his family can fully divest from the business; or Mr. Trump can resign from office.

It shouldn’t be all that improbable. He shouldn’t be carrying on the way he is, and someone should be able to make him stop.

The pair is represented by a team of lawyers who are working for free. That team, led by the law offices of Mark S. Zaid and the Veritas Law Firm, includes the George Washington University Law School professors Alan B. Morrison, who co-founded and led a public interest group with Ralph Nader, and Steven L. Schooner.

Mr. Schooner, who specializes in government procurement law, has repeatedly warned that Mr. Trump may be in violation of the lease his company signed with the federal government for the post office building.

One clause of the lease, in particular, states that no elected official may benefit from the lease. The clause’s presence, the couple’s lawyers argue, supports Cork’s claim of unfair competition.

It’s a clause in the lease, but apparently that’s still a “far-fetched” reason to make him stop.



38 new Trump trademarks

Mar 14th, 2017 10:19 am | By

China has cleared the way for Trump to provide pimping services there.

China has granted preliminary approval for 38 new Trump trademarks, paving the way for President Donald Trump and his family to develop a host of branded businesses from hotels to insurance to bodyguard and concierge services, public documents show.

Trump’s lawyers in China applied for the marks in April 2016, as Trump railed against China at campaign rallies, accusing it of currency manipulation and stealing US jobs. Critics maintain that Trump’s swelling portfolio of China trademarks raises serious conflict of interest questions.

Oh, sure, but nobody who can do anything about them will do anything about them.

If President Trump receives any special treatment in securing trademark rights, it would violate the U.S. Constitution, which bans public servants from accepting anything of value from foreign governments unless approved by Congress, ethics lawyers from across the political spectrum say. Concerns about potential conflicts of interest are particularly sharp in China, where the courts and bureaucracy are designed to reflect the will of the ruling Communist Party.

Dan Plane, a director at Simone IP Services, a Hong Kong intellectual property consultancy, said he had never seen so many applications approved so quickly. “For all these marks to sail through so quickly and cleanly, with no similar marks, no identical marks, no issues with specifications – boy, it’s weird,” he said.

Well they just want to maintain good relations with the US head of state. Oh wait – you mean that’s the conflict of interest right there. That sounds like the special treatment in securing trademark rights that he’s not allowed to get unless Congress approves it.

The trademarks are for businesses including branded spas, massage parlors, golf clubs, hotels, insurance, finance and real estate companies, retail shops, restaurants, bars, and private bodyguard and escort services.

Nothing undignified or sleazy there, no indeed.



Somebody else’s babies

Mar 14th, 2017 10:10 am | By

The racists are, of course, feeling emboldened.

Senior Republican congressman Steve King has sparked a backlash on social media after tweeting his support for the Dutch anti-Islam politician, Geert Wilders.

“Wilders understands that culture and demographics are our destiny,” Mr King wrote on Twitter.

“We can’t restore our civilisation with somebody else’s babies,” he added.

That’s a pretty choice of phrase, isn’t it? “Somebody else’s babies.” It’s so tidily othering. We are we, and those other people we don’t like are “somebody else.” Who, exactly? Oh, you know. Them. Not-us.

Anthony Zurcher dares to call it white nationalism.

Congressman Steve King has a history of walking on the edge of white nationalist rhetoric, and on Sunday afternoon he once again hit the hornet’s nest, perhaps in his most direct manner yet.

The outrage from Democratic politicians and commentators across the political spectrum was quick, ferocious and entirely expected. The bluntness of Mr King’s message, the talk of “our destiny” and “other people’s babies”, ensured a vigorous response.

Of greater interest will be how Republican officeholders handle the controversy. So far they have remained silent. That may be increasingly difficult, as this is yet another indication of the growing bonds between the Trump wing of the Republican Party and white nationalist movements in Europe.

In spite of Trump’s warm admiration of his dear friend Frederick Douglass.

Mr King’s comments in support of Mr Wilders on Sunday led to accusations that he was “openly peddling white nationalism”.

His post was retweeted by the former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, David Duke, with the words “sanity reigns supreme”.

Mr Duke later tweeted: “God bless Steve King.”

God is a huge fan of racists. Huge.



Trumpistanian whispers

Mar 14th, 2017 9:02 am | By

The Times reports from the hall of mirrors where it gets to correct the lies of Trump and Trump’s people about what the Times has reported in the past that Trump and Trump’s people are citing as justification for Trump’s lies about Obama’s dastardly wire tapps [sic] of Trump Tower.

Two senior White House officials suggested on Monday that President Trump’s unsubstantiated claim that President Barack Obama had tapped his telephone was not meant to be taken literally, arguing that Mr. Trump had been referring more broadly to a variety of surveillance efforts during the 2016 campaign when he made the incendiary accusation.

“He doesn’t really think that President Obama went up and tapped his phone personally,” said Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary.

In fact, Mr. Spicer said, when Mr. Trump charged in a Twitter post last weekend that Mr. Obama “had my ‘wires tapped’ in Trump Tower,” he was referring generally to surveillance activities during the 2016 race — not to an actual telephone wiretap.

“The president was very clear in his tweet that it was, you know, ‘wiretapping,’” Mr. Spicer said, using his fingers to make a gesture suggesting quotation marks. “That spans a whole host of surveillance types of options.”

Hahaha yeah sure Spicey, the president was “very clear” that he wasn’t saying what he was saying. It’s always “very clear” what he means by those random quotation marks he sticks in for unfathomable reasons in apparently arbitrary places. It’s not at all that he has the bad habit shared by many semi-literate people of using quotation marks whose meaning is undetectable. Some people use “them” sort of like pepper “or” hot sauce, to add a bit “of” flavor. It’s not true – it’s a lie – that Trump was “very clear” that the quotation marks on “wiretapping” meant “not really wiretapping.” In fact such a reading would render the tweets gibberish, since they were all about his outrage at that very wiretapping. If he really meant “wiretapping”…then what was the outrage about?

No, Spicey, that won’t fly.

The remarks were the first time the White House sought to explain the accusation Mr. Trump made in a series of posts on Twitter saying Mr. Obama “was tapping my phones” and calling the former president a “bad (or sick) guy.”

The explanations came as the Justice Department asked the leaders of the House Intelligence Committee, who had given a Monday deadline to produce proof of Mr. Trump’s claim, for more time “to determine what if any responsive documents exist.”

How much time? A little under eight years, perhaps?

Then there were Kellyanne Conway’s exciting new claims about spy microwave ovens and stuff.

The unusual and shifting explanations from Mr. Spicer and Ms. Conway reflected the contortions that members of Mr. Trump’s inner circle have employed to explain the president’s explosive accusation, which he has yet to address personally. Neither Mr. Trump nor anyone at the White House has presented any evidence for the claim, instead asking Congress to investigate it as part of its inquiry into Russia’s interference in the presidential election.

Both the House Intelligence Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee have requested that the Department of Justice provide evidence it may have for Mr. Trump’s charge, but Mr. Spicer said on Monday that the president had not instructed the department to furnish any.

He suggested that Mr. Trump had relied on multiple news reports, including in The New York Times, to make his charge.

And there we enter the Hall of Mirrors, where the Times gets to explain that the Times never said what Spicey implied.

“It is interesting how many news outlets reported that this activity was taking place during the 2016 election cycle, and now are wondering where the proof is,” Mr. Spicer said.

The Times and other news outlets have reported extensively on surveillance in the United States during the 2016 presidential campaign, particularly related to Russia’s efforts to influence the election. But The Times has never reported that intelligence or law-enforcement officials were themselves spying on Mr. Trump. What The Times and other news organizations have reported is that American intelligence agencies have communication intercepts that officials believe show contacts between associates of Mr. Trump and Russian officials during the campaign.

Still, several far-right websites, including Infowars, which traffics in conspiracy theories and whose eccentric operator, Alex Jones, has interviewed Mr. Trump, have erroneously asserted that The Times and others had reported that the president was under surveillance.

In a story dated March 6, Infowars cited a Jan. 19 article in The Times detailing how American law enforcement and intelligence agencies were examining intercepted communications as part of a broad investigation into possible links between Russian officials and Trump associates.

“Flashback: NYT admits wiretaps used against Trump,” the headline read. The story noted that The Times “didn’t specifically mention that Trump himself, or Trump Tower, was bugged,” but the caveat has not stopped Mr. Trump’s supporters from insisting that The Times was a source for the president’s tweet.

Of course, there’s a sense in which that can be perfectly true. Trump is thick as a plank, so he could easily have misunderstood something he read, or believed something Alex Jones said, and in that way “sincerely” derived his story from the Times reporting.

The chain could go like this:

The Times reports on surveillance in the United States during the 2016 presidential campaign–>Alex Jones translates that to “the Times reports on wiretaps on Trump by the Obama administration”–>Trump translates that to “the Times reports that Obama wiretapped Trump Tower.”

Trump is the one with the nuclear codes.



Just a bit of an invitation, isn’t it

Mar 13th, 2017 5:10 pm | By

Here’s another:

H/t Stewart



Trolls in real life

Mar 13th, 2017 4:43 pm | By

Now this is familiar.



Otherwise intelligent

Mar 13th, 2017 3:29 pm | By

Oh good lord.

At Pink News one Josh Jackman explains what women are.

There seems to be an epidemic of otherwise intelligent, respectful, feminist people suddenly blurting out that trans women “aren’t real women.”

*grits teeth*

One, he mentions two people (and things Germaine Greer said years ago); two is not an epidemic. Two, it’s neither stupid nor disrespectful nor unfeminist to say that trans women are not women in every sense of the word. Three, nobody “blurted out” anything; two women made reasoned arguments.

After that, Josh Jackman (I don’t dare say “he” lest I be accused of misgendering…them) gets down to the hard work of explaining why it’s wrong to say that trans women are not women in every sense of the word.

It’s really very simple.

No-one switches gender.

Being misgendered and living in the wrong body is not a privilege.

Trans women are women. Trans women are women.

That’s it. That’s the substance, from start to finish. All that’s left is a smartass list of things that aren’t women, illustrated with photos. A can of paint, a guitar, Corsica – hahaha laydeez, do you feel stupid enough yet?

And in conclusion, and in big letters:

Also, anyone who self-defines as a woman. Got it?

No, I don’t got it, because I consider it bullshit. I consider it magical thinking and eyes-tight-shut denial. It doesn’t apply across the board, so why should it apply to “a woman”? It’s not true that anyone who self-defines as a crocodile is a crocodile. It’s not true that anyone who self-defines as a Russian is a Russian. It’s not true that anyone who self-defines as Shakespeare is Shakespeare. Making a simple-minded simplistic crude claim like that a matter of mandatory belief on pain of noisy social media bullying and shunning is a ridiculous way to carry on. It shouldn’t be treated as a crime to say that starting out male makes a difference and that there are some differences between the experiences of trans women and those of women. There shouldn’t be a mandatory dogma on the subject.

Glosswitch as always summed it up beautifully:

https://twitter.com/glosswitch/status/841365727181459456

https://twitter.com/glosswitch/status/841365934342320128

https://twitter.com/glosswitch/status/841366249829474304

Stop ignoring the conscripts.



When women dare to spark

Mar 13th, 2017 12:27 pm | By

Now Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s daring to say that she thinks trans women are trans women has become a news item. I guess it’s shocking when women say things like “trans women are trans women.”

The LA Times tendentiously headlines:

Author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie angers transgender community

And the Motoons “provoked the Muslim community” and Charlie Hebdo “sparked outrage” and on and on it goes.

Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, the Nigerian novelist and outspoken feminist, drew criticism from transgender activists after suggesting that the experiences of transgender women are different from women whose gender was assigned female at birth.

Which is ridiculous, because of course the two sets of experiences are different. In other contexts that’s seen as the whole point.

The Washington Post is slightly less accusatory, but only slightly.

Women’s issues are different from trans women’s issues, feminist author says, sparking criticism

Her comments propelled her to the center of a nuanced, long-running gender identity debate between some feminists and transgender rights activists. The dilemma is based on the belief that most trans women were born assigned to the male gender and were raised male until they decided to transition. As a result, some feminists argue, transgender women spent a fraction — or large part — of their early lives experiencing male privilege.

Which many trans women agree is true.

In response to Adichie’s comments, Julia Serano, author of “Whipping Girl: A Transsexual Woman on Sexism and the Scapegoating of Femininity,” called out non-transgender women who feel the “audacity” to comment on the experiences of transgender women without having personally lived them.

Meanwhile, Serano has previously written that before her transition, “nothing could have truly prepared” her for what male privilege would entail.

“I underestimated just how frustrating, infuriating and hurtful it would feel to have strangers regularly hurl cat calls and sexual innuendos at me, or to have men speak down to me, talk over me, and sometimes even practically put on baby-talk voices when addressing me,” she said.

Well that’s our point exactly. She underestimated just how frustrating, infuriating and hurtful it would feel to have strangers regularly hurl cat calls and sexual innuendos at her or talk down to or over her – which is another way of saying that she experienced male privilege. Not living through years of cat calls and being talked down to is what we mean when we talk about the different experiences. I do not see why we can’t just agree on that and move on.



Locked up for Holi

Mar 13th, 2017 11:21 am | By

Michael Safi reports from Delhi:

As India’s raucous spring festival of Holi approached this year, a memo circulated among two women’s dormitories at the University of Delhi.

Undergraduate women would be locked inside the student halls from 9pm on Sunday until 6pm on Monday, it read – well after most Indians had finished smearing each other in dye, dancing or drinking from cups of bhang lassi, a milky cannabis-based concoction.

The decision of the hostels highlights a darker side to one of India’s most joyous festivals: as inhibitions decrease, many women say the street harassment endemic to Delhi life also surges.

And naturally the solution to that is to imprison the women. Literally imprison them for 21 hours. Literally imprison them during a festival that they might actually want to participate in (without being harassed or beaten up or raped, oddly enough).

“It’s a very sexualised thing. You get touched or hit on your buttocks or your breasts,” said Devangana Kalita, an activist and researcher at Jawaharlal Nehru University.

“There’s a particular targeting of women’s genital parts,” added Shristi Satyawati, who on Saturday tried to lodge a police case against a group of young men who pelted her with water balloons “on my breasts and bum”.

The police said they can’t do anything – it’s Holi.

Delhi police announced they had posted around 25,000 officers around the city to prevent hooliganism during the festivities.

Nonetheless, Delhi University’s two female dormitories were locked up for the day, along with several others across the city, to the chagrin of women’s and student’s groups.

“The men can remain free and roam about, but the women who are the supposed victims need to stay – it’s atrocious,” Naqvi said.

It’s lose-lose for women, isn’t it. They can have the burqa, or imprisonment, or sexual assault – those are the choices. Men can do whatever they like.

Rumblings have been growing against the tight curfews on women studying in Delhi’s student hostels and grew louder last week, when India’s minister for women, Maneka Gandhi tried to defend the restrictions.

“When you are 16 or 17 you are hormonally very challenged,” she said. “So to protect you against your own hormonal outbursts, perhaps a [boundary] is drawn.”

Pinjra Tod, a student group fighting against discriminatory rules for women’s hostels versus the men’s accommodation, said in a statement: “The rise in sexual violence and harassment that women experience around Holi is barely addressed. Instead, women are once again locked up for their ‘own safety’ with arbitrary restrictions.”

Oh well. I’m sure someone remembered to bring them food and water.



It is amazing

Mar 13th, 2017 10:46 am | By

Donnie from Queens showing his usual dazzling self-awareness and insight.

Ah yes, he’s such an expert at avoiding rudeness. He’s so good at being nice. Du wut he sez, nott wut he duz.



The potential for surprises

Mar 12th, 2017 5:20 pm | By

Poor Angela Merkel. She has to go visit Trump on Tuesday. Yuck. I hope he doesn’t try to hold her hand.

German officials say the detail-oriented Merkel, 62, has been preparing assiduously for her trip to Washington.

She has watched Trump’s speeches and [pored] over his interviews, including a lengthy Q&A with Playboy magazine from 1990 in which he floats many of the controversial ideas he is now trying to implement as president, they say.

Members of her entourage have also analyzed Trump’s encounters with other leaders – including Britain’s Theresa May, Japan’s Shinzo Abe and Canada’s Justin Trudeau – and have had exchanges with some of their counterparts on how to handle the unpredictable former reality-TV star, the officials added.

“We have to be prepared for the fact that he does not like to listen for long, that he prefers clear positions and does not want to delve into details,” said one senior German official.

Sigh. In other words, they have to be prepared for the fact that he’s a giant stupid baby, who refuses to do the most basic tasks that the job requires. He has no attention span, he’s lazy, and he wants everything made simple and easy as if it were a toddler’s dinner cut up into itty bitty bites. It’s so shaming.

One of the biggest concerns in the chancellor’s camp before the visit is the potential for surprises.

Japan’s Abe had an awkward 19-second handshake with Trump, while May was criticized in some sections of the British media for holding hands with Trump during a stroll at the White House, apparently after he reached out to steady himself.

When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met Trump last month, he and his team spent the day before running through endless scenarios, lines of questioning and role-plays to ensure they were prepared for any scenario.

But in the end, they were still taken aback when Trump spoke off the cuff at their news conference on the sensitive issues of settlements and a future Palestinian state.

In other words he has no idea how to behave, and no inclination to find out, so he’s almost certain to do something inappropriate and embarrassing, or rather, many such things.

https://youtu.be/yfl6Lu3xQW0



Penny wise

Mar 12th, 2017 4:54 pm | By

The health commissioner of Baltimore ponders what she would have faced if she had had no health insurance when she got pregnant.

Even though I’m a relatively healthy 34-year-old, I have several medical conditions that call for more frequent monitoring. My doctor recommended that I return every two weeks for a physical exam and ultrasound. Closer to delivery, I should plan to see him every week.

I didn’t hesitate to follow my doctor’s recommendations. I have excellent health insurance with no copay for doctor’s visits and a minimal cost for tests.

But what would I have done if I didn’t have insurance?

One obstetrician visit would cost $150. With an ultrasound each time, it would be $400. A Pap smear would cost $53. One set of blood tests would add another $300. All told, my prenatal care with all visits and tests included would be over $10,000. This is not counting labor and delivery, which in my area is estimated to be up to $30,000 for a vaginal birth and $50,000 for a cesarean section.

Facing these astronomical costs, would I be forced to pick and choose care based on my ability to pay, rather than the best available medical evidence? What services would I forgo, and with what consequences?

If she had no insurance, of course she would be forced to pick and choose according to what she could pay for. That’s why universal insurance should be the universal goal.

The Republican proposal to replace the Affordable Care Act would drastically cut Medicaid, which provides health coverage for women, children, seniors, and individuals with disabilities. In Baltimore, where I serve as the health commissioner, the majority of pregnant women are insured through Medicaid. Thousands of low-income women could lose coverage and have to pay out-of-pocket for services; others who have insurance may only be able to afford bare-minimum plans that don’t cover needed services.

As a physician who worked in the ER before the Affordable Care Act went into effect, I have seen what happens when patients forgo needed interventions because of cost. I have treated patients who end up in irreversible comas because they couldn’t afford seizure medications. I have treated people who died from drug overdoses because their insurance didn’t cover addiction treatment. And I have treated women who were priced out of prenatal care, whose babies suffered the consequences in the form of preventable diseases, prematurity, birth defects, and even death.

Women without prenatal care are seven times more likely give birth to premature babies, and five times more likely to have infants who die. The consequences are not only poor health, but also higher cost passed down to taxpayers. The average medical cost for a baby with problems of prematurity is $79,000, compared to $1,000 for a healthy newborn. Hospitalizations for a preemie in the first year can be upwards of $500,000; intensive care can cost in the millions.

Conversely, studies have shown that for every dollar spent on prenatal care, there are expected savings of nearly $5. Early intervention saves lives and cuts cost. Our health care system should incentivize prevention and discourage rationing of needed services.

It’s better for the people who need the care, and it’s much cheaper overall. But hey – the Republicans want to punish the poor and cut taxes for the rich, so whaddya gonna do.



They are not an afterthought of nature

Mar 12th, 2017 12:29 pm | By

Margaret Atwood on The Handmaid’s Tale:

Over the years, “The Handmaid’s Tale” has taken many forms. It has been translated into 40 or more languages. It was made into a film in 1990. It has been an opera, and it has also been a ballet. It is being turned into a graphic novel. And in April 2017 it will become an MGM/Hulu television series.

In this series I have a small cameo. The scene is the one in which the newly conscripted Handmaids are being brainwashed in a sort of Red Guard re-education facility known as the Red Center. They must learn to renounce their previous identities, to know their place and their duties, to understand that they have no real rights but will be protected up to a point if they conform, and to think so poorly of themselves that they will accept their assigned fate and not rebel or run away.

The Handmaids sit in a circle, with the Taser-equipped Aunts forcing them to join in what is now called (but was not, in 1984) the “slut-shaming” of one of their number, Jeanine, who is being made to recount how she was gang-raped as a teenager. Her fault, she led them on — that is the chant of the other Handmaids.

Although it was “only a television show” and these were actresses who would be giggling at coffee break, and I myself was “just pretending,” I found this scene horribly upsetting. It was way too much like way too much history. Yes, women will gang up on other women. Yes, they will accuse others to keep themselves off the hook: We see that very publicly in the age of social media, which enables group swarmings. Yes, they will gladly take positions of power over other women, even — and, possibly, especially — in systems in which women as a whole have scant power: All power is relative, and in tough times any amount is seen as better than none.

Yes, women will gang up on other women. Yes, they will accuse others to keep themselves off the hook. Oh hell yes.

Which brings me to three questions I am often asked.

First, is “The Handmaid’s Tale” a “feminist” novel? If you mean an ideological tract in which all women are angels and/or so victimized they are incapable of moral choice, no. If you mean a novel in which women are human beings — with all the variety of character and behavior that implies — and are also interesting and important, and what happens to them is crucial to the theme, structure and plot of the book, then yes. In that sense, many books are “feminist.”

Why interesting and important? Because women are interesting and important in real life. They are not an afterthought of nature, they are not secondary players in human destiny, and every society has always known that. Without women capable of giving birth, human populations would die out. That is why the mass rape and murder of women, girls and children has long been a feature of genocidal wars, and of other campaigns meant to subdue and exploit a population. Kill their babies and replace their babies with yours, as cats do; make women have babies they can’t afford to raise, or babies you will then remove from them for your own purposes, steal babies — it’s been a widespread, age-old motif. The control of women and babies has been a feature of every repressive regime on the planet. Napoleon and his “cannon fodder,” slavery and its ever-renewed human merchandise — they both fit in here. Of those promoting enforced childbirth, it should be asked: Cui bono? Who profits by it? Sometimes this sector, sometimes that. Never no one.

There’s a great deal more.



She had to convince clients to respect her

Mar 12th, 2017 11:51 am | By

What happens when a man accidentally uses a woman’s name on the job?

Martin R. Schneider, an editor for the movie-reviewing site Front Row Central based in Philadelphia, realised men and women are treated differently in the workplace after he accidentally signed off on emails using his female co-worker’s signature

He tweeted the experience that made him realise women do not get the same respect in the workplace. The tweet that has been liked nearly 7,000 times and shared more than 5,400 times at the time of writing.

Mr Schneider, at the time working at another company, said that his colleague Nicole was getting criticism  from their boss for taking longer than he did on tasks that involved communicating with clients.

As her supervisor Mr Schneider thought this was due to his higher level of experience, until one day he noticed one of his clients acting unusually difficult.

“He is just being IMPOSSIBLE. Rude, dismissive, ignoring my questions,” he said, adding “Telling me his methods were the industry standards (they weren’t) and I couldn’t understand the terms he used (I could).”

He realised the problem was coming from his signature – Mr Schneider was accidently signing all his emails with the name “Nicole” since they shared an inbox and she was handling the project before.

So he corrected the mistake and you’ll never guess what happened next hahahaha of course you will.

“IMMEDIATE IMPROVEMENT. Positive reception, thanking me for suggestions, responds promptly, saying ‘great questions!’ Became a model client,” Mr Schneider said.

“Note: My technique and advice never changed. The only difference was that I had a man’s name now,” he added.

He and his colleague then did the switch for two weeks; nightmare for him, bliss for her.

“I realised the reason she took longer is because she had to convince clients to respect her.By the time she could get clients to accept that she knew what she was doing, I could get halfway through another client,” he said.

“For me, this was shocking. For her, she was USED to it. She just figured it was part of her job,” he concluded.

Yep.



Complicit

Mar 12th, 2017 11:16 am | By

Saturday Night Live went after Ivanka Trump this time.

Yet again this weekend, “Saturday Night Live” trotted out Alec Baldwin doing a Donald Trump impression for its cold open. And yet again, that wasn’t even close to its harshest political sketch.

That distinction this week was reserved for “Complicit,” a faux Ivanka Trump perfume ad that is liable to really ruffle some feathers.

The basic idea is pretty clear: As an outspoken woman known to be very close to her father, she is complicit in the things Trump does — and for not doing something about them.

Daddy boasts of grabbing women by the pussy, Daddy calls Senator Warren “Pocahontas,” Daddy accuses Obama of a felony based on something somebody said on Fox News. Daddy lies, Daddy cheats, Daddy steals. Daddy wants to take health insurance away from poor people, Daddy wants to make rivers and streams dirty again, Daddy hates brown foreigners. Ivanka’s right there with him.

SNL last week ran a very similar sketch about Republicans being unwilling to stand up to President Trump. But the decision to go after Ivanka Trump is certainly an interesting one — and one that her father is very likely to take notice of. Back when Nordstrom dropped her line, Donald Trump tweeted about it and Kellyanne Conway appeared to break ethics rules by telling people to buy Ivanka Trump’s products.



She was opened to a certain level of hostility

Mar 11th, 2017 5:56 pm | By

Emma Brockes interviewed Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie a week ago for the Guardian.

Last year, at a writing workshop she was teaching in Lagos,

a young man rose to ask the famous novelist a question. “I used to love you,” she recalls him saying. “I’ve read all your books. But since you started this whole feminism thing, and since you started to talk about this gay thing, I’m just not sure about you any more. How do you intend to keep the love of people like me?”

Of people who are not sure about this whole feminism thing and this gay thing? Perhaps she has no such intention.

Adichie and I are in a coffee shop near her home in the Baltimore suburbs. We have met before, a few years ago, when her third novel Americanah was published, a book that examines what it is to be a Nigerian woman living in the US, and that went on to win a National Book Critics’ Circle award. A lot has happened since then. Half Of A Yellow Sun, Adichie’s second and most famous novel, about the Biafran war, has been made into a film starring Chiwetel Ejiofor and Thandie Newton. Her essay, We Should All Be Feminists, adapted from her 2013 TEDx talk, has remained on the bestseller lists, particularly in Sweden, where in 2015 it was distributed to every 16-year-old high-school student in the land. The talk was sampled by Beyoncé in her song Flawless. Adichie has become the face of Boots No7 makeup. And she has had a baby, a daughter, now 15 months old.

Adichie is still somewhat in the blast zone, not entirely caught up on sleep, but has published a short book, Dear Ijeawele, Or A Feminist Manifesto In Fifteen Suggestions, an extended version of a letter to a friend who, after having her own baby girl, asked Adichie’s advice on how to raise her to be feminist. I have had twin girls myself since our last meeting, so I am curious about her approach, not least because one of my two-year-olds currently identifies as Bob the Builder and the other as Penelope Pitstop. I would like to equip them to be themselves, while resisting whatever projections might be foisted upon them. We show each other baby photos and smile. “Welcome to the world of anxiety,” Adichie says.

What are selves in the absence of other people’s projections? It’s a tricky business trying to have some sort of “genuine” or “authentic” self when the self doesn’t really mean anything in isolation.

But some projections are much much worse than others.

The success of We Should All Be Feminists has made Adichie as prominent for her feminism as for her novels, to the extent that “now I get invited to every damned feminist thing in the whole world”. She has always been an agony aunt of sorts, “the unpaid therapist for my family and friends”, but having the feminist label attached has changed things, and not just among her intimates. “I was opened to a certain level of hostility that I hadn’t experienced before as a writer and public figure.”

This is partly why she has written the new book, to reclaim the word feminism from its abusers and misusers, a category within which she would include certain other progressives, and to lay down in plain, elegant English her beliefs about child-raising.

A depressingly large proportion of progressives are hostile to feminism now.

Dear Ijeawele is, in some ways, a very basic set of appeals; to be careful with language (never say “because you are a girl”), avoid gendered toys, encourage reading, don’t treat marriage as an achievement, reject likability. “Her job is not to make herself likable, her job is to be her full self,” she writes in reference to her friend’s daughter, a choice Adichie has come to elevate almost above any other.

Even when many progressives think your full self is…problematic.

 

Later they talk about Trump – Adichie lives in the US and Nigeria.

“Someone said to me, ‘Now that this is happening in the US, do you think of moving back to Nigeria?’ And I thought, no, because it’s not any better there. I admire America. I don’t think of myself as American – I’m not. So it’s not mine. But I admire it, and so there’s a sense that this thing I built in my head, it’s been destroyed.”

There is also, she says, something familiar about it all. “American democracy has never been tested. You might have disagreed ideologically with George W Bush, but he still kind of followed the rules. Here, it feels like Nigeria. It really does. It’s that feeling of political uncertainty that I’m very familiar with, but not a feeling I like. It’s ugly. But even worse, because America is so powerful, and so much at the centre of the world, these things have consequences for everyone. Nigeria doesn’t have that kind of reach, so our problems remain our problems.”

Trump’s erosion of language is one of the most frightening things about him, but even progressives, Adichie says, can be sloppy on this front. In response to her new book, a reporter emailed her the question: “Why not humanism?” (instead of feminism). To which, she says, “I thought, what part of the fucking book did this person not read?”

It’s like the people who go around saying All Lives Matter, I say, in response to the Black Lives Matter movement. “Right, which I find deeply offensive and very dishonest. Because we have to name something in order to fix it, which is why I insist on the word feminist or feminism.”

This, she says, in spite of the fact that many of her friends, particularly black women, “resist that word, because the history of feminism has been very white and has assumed ‘women’ meant ‘white women’. Political discussion in this country still does that. They’ll say, ‘Women voted for…’ and then, ‘Black people voted for…’ And I think: I’m black and a woman, so where do I fit in here?”

As a result, “Many of my friends who are not white will say, ‘I’m an intersectional feminist’, or ‘I’m a womanist’. And I have trouble with that word, because it has undertones of femininity as this mystical goddess-mother thing, which makes me uncomfortable. So we need a word. And my hope is we use ‘feminism’ often enough that it starts to lose all the stigma and becomes this inclusive, diverse thing.”

That would be good.



Lego NASA Women

Mar 11th, 2017 1:03 pm | By

Via Heroic Women to Inspire Game Designers

Lego NASA Women:

AMAZING NEWS: It’s official — Lego NASA Womenhas been approved by the LEGO Ideas Review Board and will soon be a real LEGO set. Everything is AWESOME!!!

Designers at LEGO are already hard at work planning the set’s ultimate look and feel. Set creator Maia Weinstock will continue posting updates as they become available, so stay tuned… As ever, THANK YOU to everyone who’s supported and cheered for this celebration of all the women who’ve contributed to NASA History!

Update: For those asking, an on-sale date is not yet determined, but will be sometime late 2017/early 2018.

From the LEGO ideas blog:

Women of NASA
A big congratulations to 20tauri on becoming the next official LEGO Ideas fan designer! As a science editor and writer, with a strong personal interest for space exploration as well as the history of women in science and engineering, Maia Weinstock’s Women of NASA project was a way for her to celebrate accomplished women in the STEM professions. In particular those who’ve made a big impact through their work at NASA.

We’re really excited to be able to introduce Maia’s Women of NASA set for its inspirational value as well as build and play experience.



Yer fired

Mar 11th, 2017 12:09 pm | By

So the Trump people solved the problem by firing Preet Bharara.

On Friday, acting deputy attorney general Dana Boente began making calls to 46 prosecutors asking for their resignations. Such requests are a normal part of a transition of power from one administration to another, and about half of the 94 Obama-era U.S. attorneys had already left their jobs.

But Boente’s call to Bharara, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, appears to have left some confusion in its wake, in large part because President Trump met with Bharara soon after the election and had asked him to stay on.

During Friday’s call, Bharara asked for clarity about whether the requests for resignations applied to him, given his previous conversation with Trump, and did not immediately get a definitive answer, according to a person familiar with the exchange.

So that sounds less like a show of defiance from Bharara than simply uncertainty about what was going on. It also sounds like clumsy rudeness and incompetence on the part of the Trump people…but perhaps I’m being too generous, and they meant to be rude and abrupt-for-no-reason.

When asked Friday whether Bharara was also being asked for a resignation letter, one White House official not authorized to speak publicly said, “Everybody’s gone,” and would not engage further on the issue. Two people close to the president said the president’s chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon and Attorney General Jeff Sessions want a clean slate of federal prosecutors and are unconcerned about any perception that the White House appears to have changed its mind about Bharara. The ouster of former president Barack Obama’s federal prosecutors is about asserting who’s in power, these people said.

It’s about asserting who’s in power despite having decisively lost the popular vote and unprecedentedly low ratings in the polls, along with the ever-expanding knowledge base about Putin’s influence on the election.



It’s about the way the world treats us

Mar 11th, 2017 11:17 am | By

Uh oh. Uh oh uh oh. A woman said a wrong thing, again. A feminist woman. A feminist woman who is an author and widely respected. Uh oh uh oh uh oh; everybody get ready to throw things.

Feminist author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie has found herself at the center of a controversy over gender identity after comments she made about transgender women during an interview, which can be viewed in the clip above, recently went viral.

I like that “has found herself” – it’s so passive-aggressive.

Speaking earlier this week with the U.K.’s Channel 4, Adichie, who is promoting her new book Dear Ijeawele Or a Feminist Manifesto in Fifteen Suggestions, said, “When people talk about, ‘Are trans women women?’ my feeling is trans women are trans women.”

Her argument appears to stem from her idea that because many trans women have been assigned and raised male from birth until whatever point they decided to transition, she believes the male privilege they may have received fundamentally sets their experiences apart from those of cisgender women.

Silly silly woman, right? To have an “idea” that people raised male from birth have the experience of being raised male from birth. Where would anyone get such a zany and wicked idea?

“I think the whole problem of gender in the world is about our experiences,” she said. “It’s not about how we wear our hair or whether we have a vagina or a penis. It’s about the way the world treats us, and I think if you’ve lived in the world as a man with the privileges that the world accords to men and then sort of change gender, it’s difficult for me to accept that then we can equate your experience with the experience of a woman who has lived from the beginning as a woman and who has not been accorded those privileges that men are.”

While she did also add that she supports transgender people’s existence, saying they should be “allowed to be,” she ultimately asserts that their experiences should not be “conflated” with women’s experiences.

Adichie, who is perhaps best known for her critically and commercially acclaimed book Americanah and a guest spot on Beyoncé’s track “Flawless,” was almost immediately called out on Twitter for her comments.

Of course she was. No woman can be allowed to talk like that without being “called out” on Twitter.

She wrote a post about it earlier today:

Of course trans women are part of feminism.

I do not believe that the experience of a trans woman is the same as that of a person born female. I do not believe that, say, a person who has lived in the world as a man for 30 years experiences gender in the same way as a person female since birth.

Gender matters because of socialization. And our socialization shapes how we occupy our space in the world.

To say this is not to exclude trans women from Feminism or to suggest that trans issues are not feminist issues or to diminish the violence they experience – a violence that is pure misogyny.

But simply to say that acknowledging differences and being supportive are not mutually exclusive. And that there is space in feminism for different experiences.

Crazy, huh?