Wednesday, December 4, 2013
When Irish Eyes are Smiling
Mr Daisy was watching "Arrow" DVDs, and the actress playing Laurel seemed so familiar to me. It was driving me crazy. I KNEW I'd seen her.
Her eyes. Very distinctive. I knew I had seen them before.
I can usually spot actors in various roles, even if they are wildly different. It's something I enjoy doing--trying to remember where I've seen them; which movie or TV show they were in previously. I especially enjoy solving the puzzle if many years have passed and they look recognizably older. (i.e. Did you realize that's 17-year-old Laurence Fishburne, primarily known to the younger generation as Morpheus, playing 'Clean' in Apocalypse Now?)
But I couldn't remember seeing this person AT ALL. I was confused. Why do her eyes look so familiar?
And so, finally hollering uncle and officially giving up, I went to the indispensable Internet Movie Database, that great settler of marital disputes.
She is David Cassidy's DAUGHTER. Ahh, so that's it! She assuredly has his eyes; Irish Eyes are Smiling.
Mr Daisy offered the observation that I had stared at David Cassidy's eyes on my bedroom wall for YEARS as a teenager, along with The Monkees, The Who, David Bowie, Iggy Pop, Lou Reed, Michael Jackson, and so many others.
And he's right. David Cassidy's eyes were lodged in my memory. They must have made quite an impression, to make his daughter appear so familiar to me.
~*~
When I visited my father in Indiana as a kid (usually a traumatic experience), I would try to stay away from his house as long as possible by hanging out with my cousins. I liked them a lot, and they thought I was cool for being from a "big city"... yes, you are now wondering why anyone would think Columbus, Ohio, is a "big city"--but in comparison to my father's hometown, it certainly was.
While we would be eating ice cream in front of what was then called the local Five and Dime, somebody would walk by, stop dead in their tracks and then do a double-take and ask me if I was _____'s daughter. In small towns, everyone knows everyone else.
It was galling, intrusive, but strangely validating. I hardly knew my father; years would go by when I didn't see him. Then he would inexplicably get a sudden attack of parental responsibility and drive across state lines to collect me for the summer. In Indiana, everyone would oooh and ahhh at our striking resemblance, which even extended to how we laughed, how we gestured, and our general 'theatrical' nature. It kinda blew my mind, since I had always believed you had to be raised by someone to "be like" them (not just LOOK like them) and it seemed that somehow, that had turned out NOT to be true at all. My mother raised me, not my father, and yet somehow, I was so much like him.
And so it is with young Katie. I knew I'd seen her before, knew she reminded me of someone I had watched before, very closely. It isn't just her eyes, of course. She is similarly LIKE him, as I was "like" my father. "Resemblances" are such an odd phenomenon; it isn't only a physical thing.
The cars stop, the people turn around on the sidewalk and ask Who's Your Daddy?
Posted by
Daisy Deadhead
at
9:15 PM
Labels: Arrow, celebrities, childhood, David Cassidy, genetics, IMDB, Indiana, Katie Cassidy, Laurence Fishburne, movies, parenthood, teenage idols, TV
Tuesday, March 12, 2013
DIY Greenville space - Garaj Mahal
The new DIY Greenville space, known as the Garaj Mahal, had their first show last night. It was epic! I am SO PROUD of these kids. They are very open, accepting, and intensely committed to diversity and creativity. They are ready to try anything, the whole DIY ethic brought to life. Daisy hereby gives the whole endeavor a big fat A plus.
The new space is in an old garage near Paris Mountain; the "before" photos show a piled-up dump of furniture and detritus right out of the TV show "Hoarders" ... the DIY collective jumped in with aplomb; cleaning, hauling trash, scrubbing, building, installing a usable toilet and importing the requisite stinky old couches required by punk rockers everywhere (there's a law somewhere, I'm certain of it). When we arrived, the place was staffed with eager young volunteers with hula hoops and balloons-- as well as the occasional baby and dog.
The overall vibe really reminds me of the days of 70s Deadhead culture, people selling (or giving away) their own handmade comics, patches, buttons, t-shirts and zines of all descriptions. Although the music is (mostly, not entirely) punk, I can distinctly remember a violent, repellent, scary skinhead/biker atmosphere in the days of 70s punk, which often served the purpose of keeping women and gender-variant people away. Neo-nazis invariably showed up at 70s punk shows, usually sporting biker chains, swastikas, racist patches sewn on their butts ("Drop the Bomb and let God sort em out" was a real favorite) and other unfriendly paraphernalia. (It was due to this default-racist atmosphere within punk, that the Rock Against Racism movement was born, which I was proud to be part of.)
By contrast, the young folks in the current DIY movement seem more like the artist-rebels at an event like Burning Man. They are lots of fun, dedicated to advancing anti-corporate culture, and very positive.
And not a single swastika.
~*~
Photos below, and as always, you can click to enlarge.
Hay Fever, featuring lovely singer/guitarist Amber and drummer Ryan.
~*~
Weapon Y/Z
~*~
I was thinking that this guy brought the freaking house down with his bang-up Broadway-stripper version of Total Eclipse of the Heart, and I thought Who is he? And whaddaya know, he's already one of my Facebook friends! Small world, huh?
I also heard the opening bars of "Nothing compares 2 U" and I was really disappointed he didn't tear that one up as well.
NEXT TIME, Jake Xingu! I'm holding you to it!
~*~
From Indiana, Ghost Mice--lots of fun!
~*~
Below, the Ghost Mice fiddler with her significant-other and adorable little leopard-clad baby; dancers; hula-hoopers, etc.
And the very last photo, a man who certainly needs no introduction here at DEAD AIR: my fabulous radio co-host, DOUBLE A, rock and roll diehard.
And a splendid time was had by all!
Posted by
Daisy Deadhead
at
9:29 PM
Labels: DIY, Double A, Garaj Mahal, Ghost Mice, Greenville, Hay Fever (band), history, Indiana, Jake Xingu, music, OCCUPY, punk, racism, Rock Against Racism, South Carolina, Weapon Y/Z
Monday, December 10, 2012
Ratstorm
Photos from RATSTORM show, December 6th at Cabin Floor Records in Greenville. Ratstorm hails from Bloomington, Indiana.
Lots of moshing, so I had to keep my distance for safety's sake. (Nobody over 50 was moshing, needless to say.) But I love how the photos came out, accurately reflecting the energy and chaos of the show. (as always, you can click to enlarge)
~*~
Saturday, June 2, 2012
Meanwhile, back at the ranch
At left: We enjoyed sets by The Flashbacks last evening in downtown Greenville. I love me some big brass noise with my old soul music! (You can click to enlarge.)
Our show today had three callers! Woot! Unfortunately, none were (frequently-requested) calls from irate Bob Jones University students, who continue to fulminate on Facebook about Chris Peterman being expelled for watching Glee. They are very upset that he went national with that story, since as everyone around here knows, BJU likes to keep its dirty laundry in-house.
When you ask if you can quote these irate students by name, they immediately flip out. What are they afraid of? Shouldn't they WANT to be quoted and given credit from BJU for their undying loyalty? Hm?
Well, no. Because BJU is a cult, and there is simply no pleasing a cult. These students know, on some level, that they will screw it up. They will say at least one wayward word or use some outlawed phrase that the cult will find displeasing or incorrect, and they KNOW it. So instead of stepping up to preen and get themselves on the air, they shrink and run for the shadows when the spotlight shines on them, and become nearly-hysterical if you suggest you will actually use their names.
They suddenly send a torrent of private messages pleading, pleading, pleading that you will not quote them.
It is patently bizarre, since at the same time, the BJU-student-mouthiness never stops. They do not seem to understand that they draw a lot of attention with their odd behavior, since 1) as products of the BJU-bubble, they don't understand how odd they sound in the first place, and 2) they have not been raised in the glare of the mainstream media, as the rest of us have been. We EXPECT that if we throw a tantrum, people will stare. (By contrast, in the Old South, they would politely look away and pretend they hadn't seen any tantrum. BJU is still steeped in Old South manners and the accompanying paradigm.) The rest of us are aware that if we throw said tantrum in a public place like Facebook, people will inevitably ask for follow-up, they will expect some sort of explanation. They will put the spotlight right on you and gape for several minutes at a time. (And what did you expect?)
These BJU kids seem unaware of this; they are shocked that outsiders like me expect them to answer for their nonsense. And yet, they accuse the world at large of all manner of sins. We just aren't supposed to reply. Instead, they say, they are addressing only Chris Peterman, or other ex-BJU rabble-rousers like Camille Lewis. When somebody like me barges in and asks for clarification, we get the proverbial deer-in-the-headlights expression, and the aforementioned semi-hysterical pleas for anonymity. (Or we can end up simply censored, with no reply at all, as a certain Hidalgo Grain Company person specializes in: endless pissed-off yammerings and then howlings of persecution when those yammerings are taken seriously. This seems to be the general pattern.) Overall: they seem stunned that the outside world exists at ALL.
Well, it does. And we're watching. And we won't stop watching, the way people rarely stop rubbernecking at an especially unpleasant, nasty train-wreck.
We couldn't turn away now if we WANTED to.
I admit: The slow-motion implosion of Bob Jones University is some of the greatest entertainment I have ever witnessed.
~*~
At left: I do not know who this person is, but I knew yall would never believe me (BJU readers excepted) if I didn't take a photo. I saw this Gospel-singing dude on the local Christian TV station late last night, and just check out those flags. (Note: You can see the logo of the Trinity Broadcasting Network in the upper right corner of the screen.)
THIS is what I vainly tried to explain to people in THIS post, and lots of em didn't get it.
As I said in that post, Israel's military well-being is possibly more important to the Christian Right than it is to Jews, and Israel directly benefits from the Christian Right's political power. I would very much like to hear more criticism of this unholy alliance from liberal and anti-militaristic Christians and Jews. But alas... (((crickets))) ... it is not a very popular topic. (Meanwhile, Israel still treats its own Palestinian Christian citizens like shit.)
But take note of that photo, gang... on HIS RIGHT is the Israeli flag. I think the order is supposed to be reversed?
Or maybe not.
~*~
THESE PEOPLE (heavy, heavy warnings) helped me decide that this month would be GAY PRIDE MONTH, on the blog and the radio show. That alarming link takes you to a toddler (!) singing "Ain't no homo gonna make it to heaven" at his church in Indiana. I really wish I was making that up.
Speaking of which, as I reported on my show today, somebody in Texas saw Jesus in their shower mold.
Really.
Posted by
Daisy Deadhead
at
1:24 PM
Labels: Bob Jones University, Camille Lewis, Christianity, Christopher Peterman, Facebook, fundamentalism, GLBT, Indiana, Israel, Judaism, politics, religion, soul music, talk radio, Texas, The Flashbacks
Friday, June 24, 2011
ALERT: New photo ID law makes it harder to vote in SC than anywhere in the USA
At left: Delores Freelon has lost the right to vote in the next election because she can't meet requirements of SC's new photo ID law in time. 178,000 South Carolinians without state-issued photo IDs will have their voting rights rescinded under the new law.
You can listen to Delores' story here.
Thanks to Becci Robbins and the South Carolina Progressive Network for the information in this post. (And if you'd like Facebook updates from SCPRONET, click here).
Excerpted from SC Prog Blog (link above): The National Conference of State Legislatures has identified seven states as having the most restrictive photo ID requirements for voting: Georgia, Kansas, Texas, Indiana, Wisconsin, Tennessee and South Carolina. All require voters to show a photo ID, but states vary in what kind and how hard it is to get.
...» In Georgia, if voters are already registered, they automatically get a new photo ID voter registration card.
Numbers are hard to project, but it is clear that some of the 178,000 registered South Carolina voters who don’t have their papers in order will not be able to vote in the next election.
» In Kansas, voters can use a driver’s license from out of state, any accredited college ID, or government-issued public assistance cards. Voters over 65 may show expired ID.
» In Texas, you can get ID to vote with your concealed weapons permit, your boating license, insurance policy or beautician’s license. Or you can vote a provisional ballot if you will incur fees in order to vote. Voters over 70 are exempt.
» In Indiana, those without a photo ID get their provisional vote counted by claiming the fees to get the required documents were a burden.
» In Wisconsin, voters can use any state driver’s license, Social Security card or student ID.
» In Tennessee, a driver’s license from any state allows you to vote.
» In South Carolina, voters must produce a birth certificate to get the state-issued photo ID required to vote. No exceptions. (If you vote a provisional ballot, that won’t count unless you present your state-issued photo ID within three days.)
Even though there are no cases of the kind of fraud this law is purported to prevent, our cash-strapped state will spend at least the $700,000 supporters say it will cost to implement. Opponents say it will cost two to three times that much to educate poll workers and the public about the new law.The governor has said you can’t put a price on the sanctity of the vote.
...
She should tell that to Delores Freelon, a Columbia resident and registered voter who won’t be able to vote in the next election because she has a Louisiana driver’s license and can’t get her birth certificate from California in time. What about the sanctity of her vote? What about Ms. Kennedy in Sumter, whose birth certificate lists her first name as Baby Girl, meaning she’ll have to go to court to get her papers straight in order to get a photo ID? Or Larrie Butler, who was born at home in Calhoun County in 1926 and is being told he needs records from an elementary school that no longer exists in order to establish a birth certificate?
Stories like these are coming in from around the state. The SC Progressive Network, which for 15 years has been advocating for voting rights, is fielding calls from people with questions about the new law or having problems meeting the ID requirements.
The lucky ones will still get to vote, but only after jumping through hoops and paying fees at various state agencies. Some will have to amend their birth certificates by going to court, at considerable cost. People without a car, a computer or short on money are simply out of luck. The disenfranchised will be primarily seniors and the poor. Many of them will be people of color who have voted all their lives.This quiet whittling away of the vote is no accident. It is, in fact, the point. It’s the pattern being repeated in GOP-controlled legislatures across the country.
In South Carolina, we have a brief chance to challenge this law. Because of our state’s history of disenfranchising people of color, ours is one of seven states that must get pre-clearance from the US Dept. of Justice (DOJ) before new voting laws can go into effect. Once the state attorney general files the case, DOJ has up to 60 days to consider whether the law suppresses the minority vote.
The SC Progressive Network is gathering statements to forward to DOJ documenting voters’ experiences. We need volunteers around the state to help find citizens who will have a hard time meeting the new voting requirements. If you want to help, call the Network at 803-808-3384 or see scpronet.com for details.
SC Progressive Network
PO Box 8325 • Columbia, SC 29202
803-808-3384
email: network@scpronet.com
If you can help in any way, we would all appreciate it!
Posted by
Daisy Deadhead
at
3:57 PM
Labels: 2012 Election, African-Americans, Becci Robbins, Civil Rights, Delores Freelon, Facebook, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Larrie Butler, minorities, progressives, racism, SCpronet, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, The Dirty South, voting, Wisconsin
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Odds and Sods - First for 2010 edition!
It's been awhile since I served up the links... and you all have my deepest and sincerest apologies for not sharing.
I've been somewhat overwhelmed lately, and have mostly taken refuge in goofiness like old movies and playing FarmVille, she admitted, embarrassed. Mr Daisy has offered the unsolicited opinion that FarmVille should feature floods and tornadoes and periodically wipe out our crops, just like in real life. He doesn't seem to understand that real life is what we are ESCAPING FROM. Yeesh!
Anyway, fasten your seat belts, sports fans, and get ready for some fun reads!
~*~
Big shocker: Sarah Palin has a gig on Fox News now! As SouthernFemaleLawyer humorously puts it, What a Non-Surprise:
SouthernFemaleLawyer is one of my new favorite pit-stops in Blogdonia; centered, logical and insightful, don't miss her blog! And her observations about Palin are right on the money.
While I obviously am not a Palin fan, I don’t think that anyone can deny that the idea of Palin has become almost metaphysical. And not just to her supporters. “Palin” now represents, in a strange way, the ultimate expression of democracy. The sticking point there being, of course, that we are not a democracy. But the idea that anyone (yes, even YOU) could control the shots, combined with the idea that anyone (yes, even YOU) can override the current party system and define the country, pretty much has resulted in Palin-the-Idea.
However you look at it, it is a pretty empowering concept, which is why I don’t think that there is anything Palin (the person) could do to damage Palin (the idea). And that applies to both a pro-Palin sentiment AND an anti-Palin sentiment. Because what the meta-Palin represents to me is the fact that the conservative use of a social pyramid scheme (‘we the powerful will convince the powerless masses to support us against their better interests by pretending that they could one day be us’) has gone terribly awry. And, given, history, it was only a matter of time.
~*~
Jessamyn Smyth always rocks my Facebook feed with some great stuff. This week, her contributions have been particularly noteworthy:
The Loss of Legibility, Or, Why Do People Still Pile Into Grad School?
Love and Death in Indiana is about the murder of Don Belton, gay assistant professor at Indiana University:
Why do people still go to grad school in the liberal arts?
My generation had an excuse; we were told that a great wave of retirements was imminent, after which jobs would spring from the ground like mushrooms. In other words, we were lied to.
But the adjunct trend is so well-established at this point, and the economic irrationality of grad school so screamingly obvious, that it's fair to wonder why many departments are actually experiencing record applications.
An excellent, if very sombering, read.
It is easy to speculate about what may have happened. In fact we do not know. But the circumstances track with a familiar pattern -- one common enough to have a name: “the ‘gay panic’ defense.” This rests on the idea that the wave of disgust created in a heterosexual person at exposure to gay sexuality can create a state of temporary psychosis. The panic-stricken victim loses responsibility for his (for some reason, it always turns out to be “his”) actions.
This is an idea that should be retired to the Museum of Deranged Rationalization as soon as possible. But it seems far-fetched to imagine that Griffin and his counsel will get through trial without invoking it. (Despite his confession, Griffin has pleaded not guilty to murder.)
On the other hand, the “panic” defense touches on an issue that was of vital interest to Belton himself. He wrote the introduction to a book edited by the late Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick. Her work on queer theory includes a sustained inquiry into the complicated and damaging way certain institutions have forged intense bonds among men while also obliging them to police one another for the slightest trace of homosexuality. This contradictory demand makes for paranoia and volatility.
DEAD AIR sends our deepest and most heartfelt sympathies to Don Belton's family, and novenas are currently ascending to heaven for his immortal soul.
~*~
Pat Robertson has once again opened his big, dumb mouth... this time about the tragedy in Haiti--undoubtedly you have heard this one already.
Robertson's "true story": Haiti "swore a pact to the devil" to get "free from the French" and "ever since, they have been cursed":
See, remember back in the Middle Ages, when the Catholic Church wouldn't allow just anybody to freely pontificate (root word: pontiff) about the ways of God?
PAT ROBERTSON: And, you know, Kristi, something happened a long time ago in Haiti, and people might not want to talk about it. They were under the heel of the French. You know, Napoleon III and whatever. And they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said, "We will serve you if you will get us free from the French." True story. And so, the devil said, "OK, it's a deal."
Well, that is the kinda thing they were worried would happen.
(sigh)
~*~
And speaking of Catholicism (giggle! simply could not resist that segue!), Figleaf offers the amusing post titled "Women's Sex Drives Lowered By Guilt?" Why Would it Cost Us $105,000 to Learn If Research Really Says That?. Research? They really need RESEARCH for that?!? (They could have paid ME $105,000 and I could have told them!)~*~
I am #10 on the local library's list for the fabulously scandal-mongering GAME CHANGE... I am afraid I may have to break down and actually buy it before all the fuss is over! I promise, sports fans, I will review the book here if I ever get my grubby little hands on it.
Already, my feminist antennae are up, as the women in the narrative (Hillary Clinton, Elizabeth Edwards, Sarah Palin) are getting the Lady Macbeth media-treatment. Those of you who saw 60 Minutes last Sunday know that Sarah Palin remarked that her choice as VP nominee was "God's will"... which is hardly the worst thing I can think of. (Is that supposed to be some big deal? Religious believers of all stripes regularly make this statement.) Much more alarming was the fact (later disputed by Palin, of course) that she didn't know why there was a North and South Korea. OMG.
Hillary is painted as crazy as a bedbug, and apparently, Elizabeth isn't far behind. The men (you know, the guys with the power) seem to fare much better. Hm.
As I said, my feminist antennae are up and I will certainly let you know.
~*~
AND FINALLY: Daisy (the Curly Cat) and Harley are being very, very good kitties and trying hard to find two disabled kitties a home! They must be adopted together because they help each other. Their names are Lenox and Diamond and you can read all about them HERE! They are located in South Florida, so if you can help at all in any way, please contact Your Daily Cute (see second link) or Animal Aid at LeeSparkman (at) aol (dot) com.
Posted by
Daisy Deadhead
at
4:37 PM
Labels: 2008 Election, books, cats, Don Belton, education, Elizabeth Edwards, Fox News, GLBT, Haiti, Hillary Clinton, Indiana, murder, Odds and Sods, Pat Robertson, politics, religion, Sarah Palin, sexuality
Sunday, May 17, 2009
Dead Air Church: Class privilege meme
It has taken me all this time to do the well-worn class privilege meme. It first circulated all over Blogdonia about a year and a half ago, but I just wasn't ready. I found it embarrassing and awful, and avoided it like the plague.
I finally decided to go ahead and take it anyway. I knew it would be unpleasant!
I initially read of this quiz (and accompanying online discussions) at Bint Alshamsa's blog.
~*~
How many privilege-steps would you have to make?
Step into Social Class (this is an updated version)
A Social Class Awareness Experience
Will Barratt, Meagan Cahill, Angie Carlen, Minnette Huck, Drew Lurker, Stacy Ploskonka
Indiana State University
© 2007
(NOTE: it is taken for granted that you are in college or did attend, since this test was first given to college students.)
Introduction:
An activity designed to help the participants gain awareness of the vast range of social class that exists within themselves and others. This has been updated based on the wide range of feedback we received as this was becoming a popular experience.
Equipment:
A big room with space to move for all participants
Chairs to sit for discussion
Rules:
Pay attention to how you feel. Angry, sad, happy, winner, loser . . .
No talking – we will talk about this a lot when it is over
Line up here and take a step forward of about 1 (one) foot or one foot length for every fact that applies to you.
For blogs, bold the following facts that apply to you:
Part I, when you were in college:
Father went to college
Father finished college
Mother went to college
Mother finished college
Have any relative who is an attorney, physician, or professor. (no blood relatives, but do have in-laws)
Were the same or higher class than your high school teachers
Had more than 50 books in your childhood home
Had more than 500 books in your childhood home
Were read children's books by a parent
Had lessons of any kind before you turned 18 (as I've said here before, they forced the violin on me to shut me up about the drums)
Had more than two kinds of lessons before you turned 18
The people in the media who dress and talk like me are portrayed positively
Had a credit card with your name on it before you turned 18
Your parents (or a trust) paid for the majority of your college costs
Your parents (or a trust) paid for all of your college costs
Went to a private high school
Went to summer camp
Had a private tutor
If you have been to Europe
Family vacations involved staying at hotels
Your clothing was all bought new before you turned 18
Your parents bought you a car that was not a hand-me-down from them
There was original art in your house when you were a child (by relatives, not by recognized "artists"--but it WAS original!)
Had a phone in your room before you turned 18
You and your family lived in a single family house (off and on, not consistently)
Your parent(s) owned their own house or apartment before you left home
You had your own room as a child
Participated in an SAT/ACT prep course
Had your own TV in your room in High School
Owned a mutual fund or IRA in High School or College
Flew anywhere on a commercial airline before you turned 16
Went on a cruise with your family
Went on more than one cruise with your family
Your parents took you to museums and art galleries as you grew up
You were unaware of how much heating bills were for your family
...
Now everyone recognize that you are at the same place academically.
Everyone turn around.
Everyone has permission to talk.
No one has permission to accuse any one or any group of anything.
Everyone must use “I” statements.
Note that the people on one end of the room had to work harder to be here today than the people at the other end of the room. Some of you had lives of more privilege than others. There is no one to blame, it is just the way it is. Some have privilege and some don’t.
(this can be said now or later, I don’t know where it will be appropriate)
Discussion:
What were the feelings that you had during this experience? Who was angry?
(Anger will be a primary emotion at this point.)
What, specifically, makes you angry?
Who are you angry at?
Who was happy?
Summary Statement
This experience was about creating awareness of privilege. What it is, what it does, and what it means. Having privilege does not mean that you worked less hard. All it means is that you had a head start, so maybe it does mean you didn’t have to work as hard . . . .
Homework
During the next week notice how your high school years helped or didn’t help your experience in school/at work . . . .
Explanations and Notes:
All of the step taking was about things not requiring effort on the students’ part, but were things done by others.
~*~
FIVE WHOLE POINTS. How did I feel, taking this test? Bad. Which is why everyone else did it a well over year ago, and I've been too ashamed to do it until now.
Chaser of The Paper Chase (who also got only five points!) added another level and I got some more points! :P
Part II, in childhood:
If your body does not bear long-term signs of malnutrition. (14 root canals)
If you had orthodontia.
If you saw a doctor for anything other than emergencies or school-mandated shots.
If you heated your home with clean-burning fuels or had properly vented heating.
If you grew up in a house without vermin.
If you had running water.
If you had a basement or foundation under your house. (sometimes yes, sometimes no)
If you had an indoor toilet.
If your parents and immediate family were outside the criminal justice system.
If you yourself remained outside the criminal justice system.
If your parents had a new car.
If you never went barefoot so that you could ’save your shoes for school.’
If your parents never argued in front of you about having enough money for food to last out the month.
If you ate hunted and fished meat because it was a recreational activity rather than as the major way to stock a freezer.
If your laundry was done at home in a washer rather than in a lavandaria. (Laundromat) (sometimes yes, sometimes no)
If your hair was cut by a professional barber or hair stylist instead of your parent.
~*~
Four more points!
Seriously, I find this terribly depressing. janevangalen at Education and Class commented:Speaking of that “privilege meme” that’s still buzzing around out there after oh so many days (even a blogger from Atlantic Monthly chimed in today, critiquing the exercise from her perspective as the graduate of a private school attended by “ultra-privileged” classmates for not reflecting her particular experiences)…
The protocol of the meme has been to “bold” the items that apply to you and to then say a bit about your background.
When something like this is done in person –as it was designed to be –a moderator can facilitate discussion among those whose lives have followed different paths and ensure that all voice are heard. A central point of an exercise like this is typically to generate conversation among the people in the room that would not take place otherwise.
But the people in this virtual room who keep batting this thing around seem to be people from very similar backgrounds.
While I’ve seen all sorts of assumptions made about how others live and what they value (and about how easy it would be for parents anywhere to find free museums to take their kids too “if they cared enough”. Have these people ever been outside a city?), I’ve not yet seen, in all of these hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of posts and comments, anyone who has thought to say:So, most of the things I’m reading on this are written by people who “score” relatively highly on this meme.
Might it not be bold to even wonder whether one might have it wrong?
But I wonder: what does this all look like to people whose backgrounds included very few of these things?
Indeed, I believe there is plenty wrong, but I don't know how to define it. For instance, why so few questions about the nature of families? No mention of traditions or religion; skills inherited or learned within families...no mention of family inter-relationships. I consider these crucial. Why doesn't the test? (Does this fact mark me as low-class also?)
Undine at Not of General Interest wrote about the subsequent internet discussion over this meme (which I found painful and tried to avoid):
As I've said, it took me a long time to do this. If I'd had to do it publicly in a class, I can easily imagine a few fibs here and there, so that I would fit in with the majority. I can also imagine attempting to "sit it out"--which is, in fact, exactly what I did when I first encountered it online.
A lot of people responded by saying, "Well, I had X but I worked for it myself" or "I didn't have a television set but I had books" or "This test is measuring the wrong things." There are lots of good points on all sides, so read the comments, too, at both places, which like the posts are excellent.
I think that what the exercise is trying to do--reveal the existence of class privilege to students in a real way--is important, but one thing was troubling: if you were a student, and especially if you had been bullied in the past for being different in some way, how would you feel about being forced to do this exercise in class? The teachers who chimed in on the comments all said versions of "oh, we don't make it mandatory; they can sit it out if they want to." Some said that they just had students write the answers on a piece of paper and turn it in.
Right. Would you sit it out, if you were 17 years old and your grade was on the line? Would you sit it out if you could see that your instructor thought this was a crucial part of the class and was clearly enthusiastic about the exercise? Would you write nothing or refuse to turn in the paper, again, if you believed that you'd be losing the good will of your instructor--and a grade--for doing so?
Since the admitted object of the exercise is to make students aware of and uncomfortable (in a good way, the authors imply) about their class privilege, most students would probably learn from it and shrug it off. Some are probably going to have their every statement greeted with eye-rolling about class privilege from then on, as I've witnessed when students in my classes volunteer information about trips to Europe or other markers of privilege.
But for a few, those who have been singled out and bullied for having the wrong haircut or being too smart or wearing the wrong clothes or being the nondominant race, it's going to make them feel like dodgeball targets all over again. Remember dodgeball, where some were out there flinging balls at the opposite team and aiming for those cowering in the corner, the ones you knew couldn't catch the ball on a bet, the dodgeball targets?
Chaser responds:
John Scalzi, who surprised me by defending his private school education as no big thang (!) provided the link to the follow-up Social Class Knowledge Quiz, with a derisive snort. (WARNING: Link is to a Word file!) As a confirmed coffee junkie, I knew the coffee question, but that was it for the "Blue Questions." By contrast, I knew all of the answers to the "Red Questions."
Whenever I use these types of exercises in class, it's painful. For example, for years I have used "unpacking the knapsack of white privilege" and unpacking the knapsack of male privilege" and there are *always* students who are offended.
To address privilege in some way is to threaten people's notions of what they "earned themselves." They have to face the fact the have not earned much of what they take for granted. It hurts and it is threatening.
Ultimately,so what if you earned the money for your car yourself--that's great. But it's not necessarily a sign you don't have class privilege. I worked in the fields with my parents for *nothing*. No allowance; no chance to get wage-earning work for car. People who tell me they "earned" their sports scholarships--sure, you worked very hard: but the leisure time you had in which to engage in those sports was bought for you by your class privilege. Oh, it's hard to hear that when these are things people are (understandably) proud of!
My favorite reaction to this discussion on the blogosphere was a grad student who is ALWAYS theorizing about race/gender/blah. When I added some point to the exercise--points that noted just how much more impoverished people can be than middle class people assume fellow Americans can be--somebody suggested this grad student should go look at my list. She said dismissively "I've read that list"--and then went right back to abstracting. It was the typical academic reaction to class privilege: it's too hard to face in practice, so we will chatter about it. It drives me crazy sometimes; I feel helpless enough as it is without having people I usually respect respond to these like this. I don't know how my colleagues of color stand it sometimes.
Wow.
An example of the tenor of Scalzi's commenters can be summed up by one outburst from someone named udarnik:
"Accused" of privilege? No, you are RECOGNIZED AS HAVING privilege.
This is not just a conversation starter, as the loaded term “privilege” indicates. Some of the questions are meant to make people feel guilty for having parents who cared about education and the welfare of their children, and instead of abusing those kids as privileged, the profs need to commend the other kids whose hard work landed them in school despite lacking some advantages.
I would have resented the hell out of this as an undergrad. Why should I be accused of privilege in a faux-Marxist confessional because my mom was a schoolteacher and my dad was an adjunct prof?
But hey, his parents' educational background didn't land him in school, his "hard work" did!
((((runs away screaming)))) See, this is why I hate this thing. It just makes me upset.
~*~
Did you do the quiz the first time it appeared on the net, or is this the first time you've ever seen it?
Any thoughts?
Posted by
Daisy Deadhead
at
5:30 PM
Labels: Angie Carlen, Blogdonia, childhood, classism, Dead Air Church, Drew Lurker, education, elitism, Indiana, John Scalzi, Meagan Cahill, memes, Minnette Huck, quizzes, Stacy Ploskonka, Will Barratt
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Brute heart of a brute like you

I don't talk about him often. It hurts.
Correction: It is embarrassing, frightening, beyond the realm of decency. I don't know HOW to tell it.
I recently said/did some things that hurt and angered many people who are my online friends. More confusing, I am not sure exactly what I said that was offensive, and the more I tried to explain, the worse it got. (Has that ever happened to you?)
I hit the wall, I said to myself. Yes, this is it. It's been relatively easy up to now... from this point onward, it is difficult.
~*~
I have always liked Abraham Lincoln's phrase, the better angels of our nature. As a child, I imagined my better angels flitting around my head, protecting me from harm. I saw them not as my imposing, scary, big Guardian Angel, but as friendly tiny angels, almost pixies. As I grew older, I imagined the Main Better Angel looking like Tinkerbell on Walt Disney's Wonderful World of Color, which we were too poor to watch in color, so we watched it in black and white. (When I first saw Tinkerbell in color, I was dazzled beyond description.)
I prayed about the situation described above, since I was confused and didn't have a clue. What did I do? Why is this happening? I don't understand, I said.
Tinkerbell flitted above my head, into my consciousness, trilling and twittering at me: Why are you so hard on yourself?
I don't know what I did wrong, and don't know how to find out.
You've come a long, long way, you know...Tinkerbell flitted a minute. Maybe you should talk about your father?
(((cringe)))(((panic))))(((shame))) I can't.
Why not?
People won't think I am cool, they will think I am backward. They won't like me! They will see everything filtered through these facts, once they are known.
Do you see how you sound? Like somebody coming out. Exactly like that.
Yes! I thought, it does sound that way.
People are already mad at you, and probably already thinking you are backward, Tinkerbell fluttered over my head, so why do you think that will make a difference now? Tell the story, because it's true. Truth is always good.
Yes, I know. But...
The truth shall set you free!
Or at least, I thought, closer to freedom than I currently am.
My better angel/Tinkerbell vanished, and I went digging through the family photos. Okay, it's time.
~*~
If you do a search for the word FATHER on my blog, chances are, I have never used the word. There is a reason for that.
My parents were divorced in 1959. I was two years old. My mother tells me that she did not know the extent of my father's racism when they married, and I believe her. The 50s were designed for American white people, even dirt-poor hillbilly and/or shanty Irish white people. In fact, such people have historically clung to whiteness like the proverbial life raft. It was often the only privilege they had.
My parents rarely saw black or other nonwhite people. Segregation technically did not exist in the north, yet was everywhere. Whites often did not see or interact with nonwhite people; they were kept apart in virtually every way. The very subject of race was exotic and strange to them. By the time my mother learned that my father was an extreme racist, she added it to the increasingly long list of things she despised about him. They screamed at each other over everything. My grandmother liked to tell me stories, her favorite involving my mother (who was born disabled) taking a piece of a vacuum cleaner to my father's head.
I don't know the chronology, and have tried hard to put it out of my mind. But I do know that my parents continued to sleep together, long after they married other people (plural). Their love/hate relationship, I understand now, was primarily about the sexual electricity between them...hotter than a pepper sprout. (This extended, as far as I know, even into the 70s.)
When my mother remarried, as she did constantly (not for long), my father would become angry and not visit me, or allow me to visit him. This wounded me beyond telling, I can say now. I was continually furious at both of them for not being like the other parents.
I would go for years without seeing him, and then he would re-appear like clockwork whenever my mother got divorced. He always seemed to have a new Chrysler. He lived in a small town in Indiana, where he continued his protected, segregated life, long after the rest of the world had seemingly caught up. He was more and more shocked by what he saw, when he visited the cities. Going to hell in a handbasket, he announced.
I don't remember when I became conscious, which is scary in retrospect. I do know that I eventually was startled, alarmed, and finally... the pieces came together. But I have to say, I was probably 10-11 years old before that happened. The racism was imbibed, the prejudice, the xenophobia, given to me much earlier. Of course it was. Deborah Mathis once wrote that racism was like an American family heirloom, passed from parents to children, a birthright. Her words shook me, because it was a birthright I did not want, although...I did want my father.
I looked like him, talked like him, had the same gestures, the same laugh, the same coloring. Whenever we hadn't seen each other in a good long while, we would mostly just stare at each other. Our physical and behavioral similarities were hypnotic and striking. He was a large Jackie Gleason-sort of man, taking up far more space than anyone else in the room, a clown and a lover. I desperately wanted his love and his attention, and I never got either one.
The trips from Ohio to Indiana always started out the same way. The radio. Inevitably, a black performer on the radio. I would hear it, maybe sing along, and then... oh. No. "Don't sing that shit," he would snap at me, and then... the stream of consciousness would start...yes, you know why the world is going to hell, don't you? You know why. N-ggers, sp-cs, g-oks, k-kes, and on and on the list would go. I would try to tune it out, try to imagine myself in a little bubble, protected from his evil talk. When I got home, my mother, all hopped up on speed, would extensively interrogate me about WHAT HE HAD SAID TO ME. (Did she think she could undo it?) Of course, I could never agree with things he said, since my mother had taught me opposite values, and yet... I wanted his approval, his love, so desperately, so much. Left: from Stanley Kubrick's 1971 film, A CLOCKWORK ORANGE. (the way I felt while trapped in my father's automobile, for hours.)
The car trip was usually interminable, at some point becoming actually painful and excruciating. I would feign sleep, I would try to change the subject. I would compulsively stop at rest stops, I would burp, fart, eat, do anything... but he would always bring it back to that subject: race, bigotry, the Mexicans (who were migrant workers in Indiana during the summer), the blacks, the 'slopes' (Vietnamese). He could see very clearly that I wanted to change the subject and he wasn't changing it. I needed indoctrination; obviously, my mother had fallen down on the job. Worse, she was teaching me what he called "that racial equality shit." I felt like Alex in A CLOCKWORK ORANGE; forcibly indoctrinated, my ears unwillingly blasted, my eyes propped open wide. I don't want to hear this, I just want you to pay attention to me. And like Alex, I was indoctrinated, brainwashed, changed utterly, in ways both apparent and unapparent. [1] The subliminal along with the blatant. I heard it all. There is no racial or ethnic stereotype I was untutored in.
I would say to my mother, nothing. He didn't say anything.
~*~
My father was proud of a sign he claimed was once at the edge of his county of birth in Indiana: N-gger, don't let the sun set on your ass.
"What do you think of THAT?" He eyed me carefully.
I grunted and rolled my eyes in a superior, hopefully-urban fashion. But that wasn't enough. On and on he would go, in a stream-of-consciousness screed. Finally, he would start the jokes, many that I remember to this day. The family heirloom that Mathis describes, is a fact. I recall Christmas, Rudolph the Red-nosed Reindeer, sliced turkey, mashed potatoes, cousins, stuffed stockings, games, racial jokes. I remember Ed Sullivan, I remember Yoko sitting by John in the video of LET IT BE:
"Why'd he marry a goddamn g-ok, anyway?" he shook his head, amazed.
As they do with everyone--memories bubble up without consent ...I can not erase the details of my life, which are laced with racism and with judgment. I hear certain songs, see certain movies... I hear my father's endless racial rants, as surely as I remember his haircut, his Chryslers, his facial expressions, his choice of alcohol. This is part of the narrative of my life.
Even so, nobody said this about him in rural Indiana. It was simply part of the conversation, the air one breathed. You didn't call anyone a "racist" as if that mattered, or as if it constituted a serious criticism... Nobody offered the common-sense, gee-whiz observation that "BT is a pretty racist guy!" as they would now.
Because in that time and place, everyone was. Thus, nobody took notice.
Left: the cover of the Jackson 5ive's album MAYBE TOMORROW.
In my piece on having a black name [2], I mentioned racist incidents in the classrooms of my childhood, only to be told that such things could not have happened. I realized most people apply the morality of NOW to the morality of the past, and that it is important to tell the truth, tell how it really was. But then, nobody believes you, thinks you are exaggerating, or that your family was the worst. I assure you, my father was not the worst, he blended right in. There are indeed pockets of this country that even in the 70s, forbade children to listen to Motown or read books by black authors. In my father's house, these things were NOT DONE, and to take them on, was to take on my father.
I finally went to the wall for The Jackson 5ive. He would not allow me to bring the record into the house. I screamed, you need to get out of the stone age.
He decked me. I didn't argue again.
~*~
The white male braggadocio of the men in my father's family was pretty typical of the times, particularly when a gaggle of these guys all got together. One favorite topic was always the same: that (real? mythical?) time they kicked some black man's ass. [3] The black man in question was always really big, like Jim Brown, they would say. (I could tell they unwillingly admired Jim Brown, since he was one of the few black men they would mention by name.) It was years before I understood that this was to make themselves look like bad-asses, and it was impossible to know how much of their stories were true; they contradicted themselves constantly, piling more and more on in an effort to look like the baddest white man of them all, John Wayne in The Searchers. Who knew what was real? I told myself, that didn't really happen. But I was scared, and at least once after overhearing their stories, I vomited.
After my marriage to a Jewish man, my father cut me off. After our divorce, he briefly talked to me again. (I will save the story of our bizarre reunion for another time, since it threatens to turn into a monster-sized digression, complete with cocaine abuse and rampant alcoholism: Fear and Loathing in Fort Myers, Florida. ) The short version: Down and out in California, I had burned all my bridges and had nowhere else to go. With trepidation, after years of a stand-off, I called my father. Desperate. I figured, this is the LAST POKER CHIP, and I cashed it.
He asked me where I was. He would send me a plane ticket.
"You know what they said in the Air Force? Everybody in California is either a hot rod or a queer."
Ah, a new obsession had taken hold.
~*~
I spent many years in radical feminism, as many of you know. I listened to radical feminists talk about transgendered people as traitors to the cause ("upholders of the gender binary!") for decades, literally. I read books and attended festivals in which this prejudice, transphobia, was acceptable, and just like my father's hatreds, it was part of a segregated and protected world-view. I imbibed it for a long time, as I imbibed the words of my father. It was remarkably the same--my father lived in a white rural enclave, where the actual subjects of his hatred had become almost mythic. Similarly, the trans women considered the Bogeyman, were not crashing the gates that I could see. Where were they? Why are they so dangerous? I held to the party line that trans women were in fact men invading women's spaces, yet also knew that exclusivity is usually the result of being exclusive. For example, my father, finally surrounded on all sides with modernity, put his extreme racism under wraps as he grew older and properly understood that such talk was no longer tolerated in polite company. But the queer-hating took its place, with a vengeance.
THIS, I realized, is the same as it was before: he doesn't actually know any of them, does he?
I didn't see the similarity. Not at all. I had never met a trans person, and you know what? To my knowledge, I still haven't. NEVER. I discovered that I worked with one trans woman, long ago, after the fact.
At the time, I was not aware, not being deemed one of the safe people to tell.
~*~
And now, we come full circle to your humble narrator, spittin image of her daddy, terrifyingly enough.
Because, yes, that does scare me. But there is more.
There is a quiet, haunting scene in the movie The Brooke Ellison Story: After Brooke is injured (and becomes paralyzed), she has a dream of dancing. This is not presented as a bleeding-heart, disability-sympathy story, but as a simple matter of fact. She is spinning, spinning, spinning...the dream slowly disappears and Brooke wakes. And Brooke Ellison knows: she is not going to do that. That will not happen.
And I have always wanted to spin. I have wanted to spread justice and righteousness, I have stormed statehouses, demonstrated against presidents and political parties; I have been teargassed. I have carried signs, signs, signs, more signs than anyone should have to carry. I blog about human rights. That is my version of dancing; I would like to SPIN. That is what I wanted. To LIVE the Social Gospel; to spread the Word. I wanted to do it well.
And at some point, like Brooke, we have to say: that is not going to happen. I do not have the ability. I can do something else, but I can't do that.
I have hit the wall, as I said.
For some of us, brainwashing, conditioning and indoctrination runs very deep. I honestly find myself wondering how I have come as far as I have (Better angel/Tinkerbell always reminds me!) with such a background. The fact that I can hear Christmas carols and think of racist jokes from my father, usually amazes the priests I have told. They blink in amazement. They reinforce my feeling that yes, that is rough. That was harsh. (One priest told me he considered it child abuse.) I have only overcome much of this conditioning by making it a priority and living in a racially-mixed area/building (whites are the minority in my building and apartment complex). But in terms of transgendered people? I have not made them the priority I should, and still, as of this writing, have never IN PERSON interacted with any trans people that I was aware were trans. [4]
When I put the ideology of feminist-transphobia aside, I felt a certain freedom: I do not have to hate these people anymore! It is very freeing and for a Christian, a sense of almost-delirious happiness floods in. Hate is unequivocally evil, and when permitted to love, at long last? It feels like a balm to the spirit. And it is. But this balm, this happiness, was about me and how I felt. Not about them.
And now, I have hit the wall. The delirious happiness of falling in love and honeymooning is over, time to pay the bills. And the hard work has proven very difficult for me to do, or even admit that it needs doing.
I realize it is because as stated above, racism became so culturally unacceptable, even my father had to give it a rest, at least in public and among certain folks. But transphobia IS acceptable. The segregation and the unofficial laws remain steadfastly in place. There is no all-out assault to equal the assault on racism. It is different.[5] We are now scratching the surface, and I see how deep it goes. In myself, too--maybe in myself, most of all. And I didn't even know it, as I would have told you at age 15 that I had successfully repelled my father's pernicious influence. Right!
51 years of social conditioning is a long, long time. Perhaps when my father is gone, when I am gone, and there will be freedom, after the old guard and the old ways have finally died. But in the meantime, I wonder how far some of us who have been so thoroughly tainted can realistically ascend, no matter how hard we try. (I still have no transgendered friends in real life, for example.)
It may not be possible. I am not going to spin. That is not going to happen.
~*~
And so, I apologize to my transgendered friends for my offenses, for insulting them, for repeating my clueless brainwashed blather wholesale when exhausted and not paying close attention. But where, I wondered, did it come from? How could this be? And I know: there are some things that we will never be able to transcend. Some damage is, unfortunately, permanent. We may compensate for it, we may learn new ways to deal, we may try "recovery" and yes, we may improve. But it is also likely that these things will be perpetually difficult, a constant trial, always confusing. I am willing to take on this trial, but please know, my friends, it is not easy, since I didn't even know it would be necessary in the first place. I thought I had it in the bag! Ha.
St Ignatius Loyola once wrote about the difference between sin's effects on the righteous and unrighteous. He told us to imagine a house. The unrighteous house is loud, there is much going on, much riches and opulence, and the door is wide open. When the thief arrives [6], nobody notices. He enters and takes what he wants. He does extensive damage and leaves, not discovered until long after.
The righteous house is locked. It is tended and taken care of. When the thief arrives, there is a great clatter and noise, as he pounds on all the windows and doors. He wants in, and to get in, rocks the house to the foundations, rattles the rafters, howls. It is far more noticeable than the thief's arrival at the unrighteous house. It is terrifying and scary, but the occupants of the righteous house don't let him in.
The righteous occupants are afraid to stick their heads out. The fear, the unnerving memory, the echoes of the noise, all remain. And yes, they will remain for awhile.
And so, I apologize too, for my great noise.
~*~
[1] A CLOCKWORK ORANGE was written by Anthony Burgess, a devout Catholic. During Alex's indoctrination (the object of which is to make him non-violent), he is forced to watch violent movies after taking a drug that makes him physically ill. By accident, music by his favorite composer, Beethoven, is playing during the movies. Afterwards, Beethoven makes him physically ill also, as a side effect.
I think this is a reference to "sins of omission" and "sins of commission"--one result of evil is that memory of evil then spreads to pleasant memories, like music, art, scenery, etc.
[2] Being from an all-white area, my father didn't at first realize that I had what is called a "black" name, but later actually met a black woman with my name. He accused my mother of naming me that just to piss him off.
[3] The last place this was on public display, that I can remember, was the infamous tape of former LA police officer Mark Fuhrman during the OJ Simpson trial. In tapes played during the trial, Fuhrman bragged about being a cop kicking the asses of 'dangerous black gang members'--and made himself look like a bad mofo while using the n-word hundreds of times. (I recognized the tone of this bragging immediately and had major deja vu.) The actual purpose of these stories (some true, some exaggerated) was to impress the author making the tape, Laura Hart McKinny. Unfortunately for Fuhrman, the whole world ended up hearing the tapes, and it likely cost the prosecution the trial.
[4] I am aware that I have interacted with transgendered people without realizing it, as we all have.
[5] Perhaps because we all have a gender, we think we know what gender is, and therefore what it should be for other people. After all, we have found what "works" for us, with a little tinkering and style adjustments, so why can't they?
[6] This is from Luke 12:39; the Bible often refers to incarnations of evil as "the thief," as did Bob Dylan and Jimi Hendrix.
[7] The title of this post is from Sylvia Plath's poem "Daddy."
Posted by
Daisy Deadhead
at
3:28 PM
Labels: bigotry, Brooke Ellison, Clockwork Orange, disability, family, feminism, GLBT, Indiana, marriage, Ohio, politics, race, racism, religion, Saints, St Ignatius Loyola, transgender, you know who you are

