Thinking it Through

Mitch and Beaker

Hat tip Open Left:

The Internet Bible: The Fall of Eve

Given my recent encounters with religion, this seemed somehow appropriate

Via

That Oldtime Religion

The sidewalks were packed today as I was walking back to my office after class. My U is a busy place anyway, but today there were people selling paintings and clothing and books and jewelry and hellfire and damnation. Yes, the fundies were out with a big sign that read:            and a woman screaming at the top of her lungs about sex, spreading your legs, losing your virginity, boys getting girls drunk and having sex with them and then the biggie anal sex: "If you are having anal sex people you are on the road to homosexuality."

It was at that point that I interrupted the rant to ask a question. "Why," I asked, "are you obsessed with sex and with homosexuality? And you just said something about the road to homosexuality. I'm not familiar with that road, can you point it out on a map?" The mass of humanity moving on the sidewalks stopped, and people turned to listen. I hadn't asked the question to get attention or in the hope of actually engaging in a conversation; I did so because I could not let her claim just hang in the air. However, since I had their attention, I figured what the hell. The woman with the sign, of course, was taken aback by my question, and once she gathered her self she claimed she had no obsession with sex. "Well," I said, turning to the notes I had taken during the short time I had been listening, "in less than a couple of minutes you talked about drunken sex, wild sex, sex and drugs, sex at parties, sex with multiple partners, sex with someone of the same sex, fornication, men plying women with liquor so they can have sex with them, masturbation, and anal sex. All you've talked about is sex, sex, sex. So I am asking why are you so focused on sex? Why aren't you talking about poverty, for instance, or helping one another through difficult times, or whatever? What's your problem with sex?"

As one might expect, she began quoting the Bible and telling me about the evils of premarital sex and then moved onto promiscuous sex, and sex on TV and in movies, and, of course, the dangers of homosexual sex.

Again I interrupted her: "I get it, you're talking about sex. Sex, sex, sex. But what I'm asking is. . . , well let me ask a somewhat different question: why does sex bother you enough to bring you out here to talk about it. I might agree that there is sex on television and in movies; I might even say we're inundated with sex in media. But I don't feel moved to stand out here and tell people what I think about it. But here you stand next to your sign talking about sex with a bunch of people you don't even know. From my perspective you're more focused on sex than is anyone else standing here." I then turned to the crowd and asked, "Am I right?" I was greeted by cheers and a few "amen sister"s! I then continued walking back to my office.

This isn't the first time I've come upon such a scene, and as long as I am associated with college and university campuses, it won't be the last. Usually one of three things happen: 1. everyone walks by and ignores the fundies; 2. some stop and take in the sideshow for a little while and then go on their way; 3. a crowd gathers and soon hellfire and damnation reign down on the crowd while they shoot barbs at the fundy. Nothing is ever accomplished, and I doubt anything ever will be.

I have, though, continued to think about how often in I've encountered people on college campuses standing in a major thoroughfare yelling about the evils of sex. I suppose for them, college campuses are the modern representatives of Sodom and Gomorrah.

And while it may be true that more often than not, my students are scantily clad and texting about their last or next hookup, getting them to talk about sex--its role in patriarchy, the relationships between sex and power, and the ways in which sexuality is marked in this country--is next to impossible. In class students might point to sex on television and in movies as some sign of how open "today's society" is about sex. But I would not be doing my job if I didn't challenge that notion, just as I challenged the woman today to stop the litany and explain why she was moved to come here and warn us about the evils of sex. I might agree, for instance, that there is "a lot" of sex on television and in movies; I might even agree with the notion that we're inundated with sex in media. But at the same time I'd argue we're a really prudish and sexually repressed society. Very few Americans talk about sex openly even with their own partners and sex education, well, it's almost non-existent. In fact, Americans are still influenced by those Puritan and Victorian values about how people should be ashamed of their own bodies, and there continues to be a great deal of stigma concerning sex, sexuality, and nudity. And all that's wrapped up in those “traditional Christian values” (as defined by fundamentalist Christianity). In fact, that's why that woman was out there with her sign telling us we're all sinners; the more fundamentally religious people are the more they are sexually repressed especially in relation to nudity and sexuality. And to quote Alanis Morissette, "isn't it ironic. . .dontcha think? A little too ironic. . .and yeah I really do think" that it's ironic that a woman would stand before someone in a pink bunny suit (see pic) and a bunch of college students and proclaim the evils of sex. That she would feel authorized to do so.

I'm reminded of the other day when I was working from home and the door bell rang. I went toward the door, and through the security screen I thought I saw my former house keeper. So, I went to the door and said "hello." It wasn't my house keeper; it was a jehovah's witness who began to "share some inspiring words from the Bible." I tried to be respectful as I told her I was interested, but she continued. And I thought, "what the hell? I am in my own home and yet she feels she can stand here and impose her beliefs on me. I hold a variety of strong beliefs, but I don't feel compelled to go door-to-door (or stand on a university campus) and impose them on others. So why the hell do other people think it's ok to foist their beliefs on me?"

"Festival of Whites" aka CPAC

Jon Stewart nails it:

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
CPAC 2010 - Rage Within the Machine
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

Me and Dino Down by the Old School Yard

I just read a blog post from the Chronicle of Higher Education (subscription may be required to access, but I think blogs are accessible) reporting on a University of Texas/Texas Tribune Poll whose results show that

Nearly a third of Texans believe humans and dinosaurs roamed the earth at the same time, and more than half disagree with the theory that humans developed from earlier species of animals.

I wish this astonished me, but given what I read this Sunday about the Texas Board of Education's ideas about the curriculum that ought to make up history, social studies, and government classes it doesn't surprise me at all. My guess is that most of the people polled are Texas high school graduates. Hell, they were probably honors students.

The poll questions were developed by David Prindle, a University of Texas government professor who is quoted saying the "results recall a line from comedian Lewis Black." According to Prindle, Black "did a standup routine a few years back in which he said that a significant proportion of the American people think that the 'The Flintstones' is a documentary. Turns out he was right. Thirty percent of Texans agree that humans and dinosaurs lived on the earth at the same time." If only this were a joke.

My guess is that my state's high school graduates will soon come to the same sorts of conclusions. As my state seeks to make up a huge budget shortfall, it continues to see cutting funds for public education as the best approach to making up the deficit. Of course, they think charter schools are fine, but those pesky public schools are seen as a real problem.

Once they've effectively cleared the country of public schools, I wonder how long it will take for the wingnuts to begin petitioning for the end of public higher education?

Perhaps we need to find a way to help Governor Perry get his wish? Helping Texas secede may be our best hope.

Update: just in case you think I am kidding about the emphasis on charter schools and home schooling in my state, The State Press has this piece about the AZ legislature's move to help home schooled kids get scholarships!

Health Care May Not Be Dead

These posters say so much about the current state of what passes for health care in this country.

I am outraged that America seems to have bought the Republican's lies about any and all attempts to reign in costs, provide access and coverage. Lately I have been thinking we'll be lucky to pass anything of substance.

However, Chris Bower's report today at Open Left gives me some hope. Volunteers for their "group journalism event" are making calls and now have on the record commitments from 21 Senators to use reconciliation to get a health care bill passed, and 9 Senators "have signed onto the Bennet letter to include a public option in health care reform."

We need to get this done, and the Repugs have made it clear they're not going to support any bill no matter how good it is for the people they claim to represent. If this thing actually gets to a vote, they may decide they do not want to be on the record for being on the wrong side of history. But more and more I am convinced they simply do not give a shit about anything other than bringing down the Democrats. That the American people fail to see that these guys are a bunch of self-serving SOB's doesn't bode well for our future. For the moment, however, I need to hold onto some sort of hope, and this is it.

Feeling It

This is an amazing performance, and the song pretty much sums up my mood:

Yard Dick

A FaceBook friend alerted me to this story in the Arizona Republic titled "Tree carved in shape of a penis in Tempe offends some." Although I rarely read local news, I felt compelled to check this one out.

According to a neighbor named Susan Wood (I kid you not), the tree died and was a bit of an eyesore. Then the home owner carved the dead tree into a penis: "Neighbors say the tree was dead and unattractive before it was carved up. The wood now rises over the side of a cement wall in the owner's backyard where it is visible to people walking by."

The homeowner has been issued a violation for having a dead tree. I guess there's no city ordinance covering penis shaped trees. Can you imagine? "We want you to remove that penis tree dead or alive." I mean, this is the old west, right?

Since the article didn't include pictures, I went to google images and search "tempe dick tree" and here's what I got on the first page: I'll leave it to you to decide which is real deal.


Update: there is now a video:



and a pic from ABC Channel 13, WZZM:

Belief is a Powerful Enemy

Maybe I am getting a little paranoid, but I am beginning to see science deniers and fundies everywhere I look and hear them on almost every channel and airwave. I don’t know what rocks they’ve all decided to crawl out from under, but I would really like them to crawl back. They’re beginning to reach critical mass, and they are destroying more and more of this country everyday. I fear if we don’t do something soon to combat the hate, ignorance, and demagoguery they’re spreading, everything this country stands for will be lost.

So yes, I have lost all patience with the fundies and science deniers. I’ve given up trying to talk with them. What’s the use? They refuse to live in a reality-based community where science, evidence, and facts hold meaning. Faced with a video, audio, and written record of their hypocrisy, they deny its relevance or truth. Shown years of scientific evidence that proves the earth is millions of years old, they deny its factual basis and instead present a literal reading of a text that has been translated and revised so many times that we cannot even trace its origin. The earth isn’t millions of years old as the rocks, and sediment, and bones, and carbon dating and so many other discoveries have taught us. No, it’s 10,000 years old because that’s what the Bible says. Evolution is just as much a contested theory as is the myth of creation, global warming is a scientific conspiracy, the founders of this nation were Christians, blah, blah, blah.

OK, I get it. Everything I have learned is wrong, and everything the fundies believe is right. But what I don’t get is this: if their beliefs represent an all-powerful truth, why do they fear others questioning them? Why are they hell-bent on destroying public education, stifling learning, and forcing others to believe as they do? I'm not a scientist, but I know a few, and I can't name one who fears people questioning the results of scientific study; in fact, they welcome such challenges. It’s one of the ways we learn new things, make new discoveries, and rethink things we thought we understood. If someone wants to debate whether it’s better for a nation to feed those who do not have enough to eat, and clothe and shelter them and provide them with health care, or to establish a free market economy in which the haves get to have more and more while the have-nots lose whatever they have, I am happy to accommodate them. Come on, let’s chat. What’s to fear? If someone has a better argument to make, I am willing to hear it. And not only will I listen, I will consider what others have to say.

But that’s not the case with the fundies and science deniers. They cannot tolerate other points of view. They need to control the narrative, so much so, in fact that they’re now trying to rewrite American history and our foundational documents. It’s not enough for them to destroy public education and erect the Christian version of the Madrasa (a.k.a. charter schools) all over the US. No. They have to reach back in time and erase the liberal philosophies that led our forbears to break free from the tyranny of England.

Now, I am not saying the work of our forbears was perfect and should not be questioned. Their thinking was flawed in a number of ways, not the least of which can be found in Article 1, clause 3 of the US Constitution where they declared that the states’ representation in congress and the taxes paid by their citizens would be calculated based on the numbers of white, land-owning men to which would be added “those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons.” Which is to say that propertied white men and even indentured servants were citizens, while “all other Persons” (i.e. black people, women, and Native Americans were not). If we had not questioned this definition of citizenship and made necessary changes in the 14th, 15th, and 19th amendments to the US Constitution, this would still be the case. Thus far, we’ve had 27 amendments to the US Constitution, and, we will likely have to amend our Constitution once again to right the wrong done by the recent SCOTUS decision to allow corporations to buy politicians and elections (Citizens of US vs Federal Election Commission). So that will make twenty-eight amendments over 222 years. Our forebears were flawed, but the were pretty damn smart when it comes to representative democracy.

But I digress. My point is this: most of us don’t think we have to rewrite history to make it fit with our beliefs. But the fundies do, as the story in today’s New York Times Magazine makes painfully clear. The all-powerful Texas Board of Education is in the Fundies’ control (thanks a lot Ralph Reed) and are in the process of developing new social studies curriculum guidelines “that will affect students around the country, from kindergarten to 12th grade, for the next 10 years” (36). Among the many changes being made is the inclusion of Margaret Sanger and her followers as promoters of eugenics, requiring “that language be inserted about Ronald Reagan’s ‘leadership in restoring national confidence’ following Jimmy Carter’s presidency and that students be instructed to ‘describe the causes and key organizations and individuals of the conservative resurgence of the 1980s and 1990s, including Phyllis Schlafly, the Contract With America, the Heritage Foundation, the Moral Majority and the National Rifle Association’ “(36). And, since Texas’ $22 billion education fund “is among the largest educational endowments in the country,” what they want is what textbook publishers provide. Thus Texas’ new social studies guidelines will shape the textbooks students have access to in Virginia, and Connecticut, and Michigan, and Wyoming, and Oregon, and Florida, and Oklahoma, and New York, and. . . . I think you get the picture. In fact, the only state whose students who might escape these guidelines is California, but given the golden state’s economic woes even its commitment to a quality education might be destroyed by Texas’ view of social studies. (California has the largest textbook market, but the state has long had such specific standards about what its students should learn that few other states adopt its curriculum. As a product of California’s public schools, I can attest to the quality of the state’s curriculum standards.)

In addition to the above, school board members have also voted to have students taking US government classes “to identify traditions that informed America’s founding, ‘including Judeo-Christian (especially biblical law)’ and to ‘identify the individuals whose principles of law and government institutions informed the American founding documents,’ among whom they may include Moses” (37). While the board members couch these changes as addressing concerns about standards of education, what actually drives them is the desire to force Christianity onto the founders and into public school curriculum, the separation of church and state be damned. Oh, and about that establishment clause. That really wasn’t about the absolute separation of church and state. What is was really about was the importance of weaving together church and state (I must admit to being unable to present this argument clearly because frankly it makes no sense to me whatsoever).

According to those who rule the Texas Board of Education, America was founded on the principles of Christianity, the founders were Christians, the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution espouse Christian doctrine and that America was destined to be the city on the hill, the light that serves as a beacon of hope and Christian charity. Just to be clear, most of the founders were Deists who espoused liberal philosophies, as I learned in my American literature courses, that city on the hill and beacon stuff comes from William Bradford’s On Plymouth Plantation and not from the Declaration or the Constitution, but hey, since facts and evidence don’t promote your claims, declare them worthless and move on, right?

So, what’s next you ask? Well, in March, the Texas School Board takes up a more focused examination of American government. I’m sure I will be surprised when I read that while Moses was parting the red sea, he created came up with the idea of checks and balances, but what he really meant was that Congress needs to be sure to check the Bible before it makes any law and must be sure to find a way to balance the wrathful god of the Old Testament with the kinder god of the New Testament when it demands the death of all non-believers.

Given these changes, I’m ready to go. Where’s the closest line?