Sponsored Links

Tags >> Politics

 

The French have struck a blow for women’s rights in the Muslim world, by banning the burqa and niqab in France.  That’s what they say anyway.  My question is, how can you say you’re encouraging women’s right by telling them what they can and can’t wear?  

The burqa, according to wisegeek.com is: is a piece of clothing that covers a woman from head to foot. There is an opening for the eyes, but the rest of the body, except the hands, are covered. The burqa is usually made of light clothing, and is essentially outerwear for some Muslim women in some regions. It is worn when women leave their homes, over their indoor clothes. It's not worn indoors in the presence of family.  The niqab on the other hand:  is a combination of head covering and scarf, or a one piece scarf that covers everything but the eyes. It usually flows down to midback to cover a woman’s hair, and may flow down to midchest in the front. The niqab can be worn with the burqa, or with other clothing as part of modest dress for Muslim women.  I’ve seen women wearing burqas and niqabs.  They are hard to miss even in a predominantly Arab Muslim country.  While burqas are an easy target for the French, I call bullshit on their reasoning for banning the burqa.  

Yes, the burqa is a symbol of women’s oppression in Afghanistan.  It is also becoming a symbol for Muslim women against what they’re seeing as the West’s attack on Islam.  They’re choosing to wear the niqab or the burqa not because of a, perhaps extreme, interpretation of the Qur’an, but instead because they’re being told what they can and can’t wear.  How is that any different than those supposedly abusive husbands?


To Jan Brewer

Posted by: Jessenovels

Tagged in: Politics

Jessenovels

 

 

I got heated up this weekend  with the new law that allows police to racial profile latinos or any illegal immigrant , and  search them for papers. A lot of republicans are calling this the steps to protect America. Protect America from what? immigrants aren't to blame for the U.S Goverment down fall. 

 

Jan Brewer claims this will only target people they arrest for a crime. Well, that means they can pull over anyone who spits on the floor, or throws a bubblegum wrapper on the ground, who just looks plain old tan. Arizona wants other States to take it's lead, they claim this will make more jobs and put money back into our pockets. Hey, I know someone who said that too, his name was Adolf Hitler.

 

 Ms.Jan Bewer, you may say you're not pro-hate, but when you start arresting people out of the blue, taking them from their homes and off the streets without warning, you and everyone from your party are the creators of hate and neo-nazism. Call it whatever you want, helping your people, thinking of America, the truth is that you are just putting the old racist seed back into the future generation.

 

Have we as a nation sunk so low, that now people like Jan Brewer and the Tea Party look to blame innocent people just to save their own hides. We fell into a hole because of greedy fat cats that sold out the poor as they always do. Banks who robbed people blind each day. How can you stand there Jan Brewer and lie to the people who put you in office a lot of them Latinos. Don't sugar code Hate with " God Bless America "

 

 I don't want this issue to go unheard, because all it takes is one State and before you know it hate and racism will be back like baseball and apple pie. Don't let this happen people, we can not sit by and just hope everything will be okay. This is not the time to be Republican or Democrat, not when something as this is out there. Are we willing to let the times of segregation return? This is a country that is founded on:

 

Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free

 

 Tweet, post, call, do what you must to get this bill over turned. We have the power to change this. Thank you for your time.

 


Google v. Italy

Posted by: Pearce

Pearce

 

Round Two


 

 

 

As of last week, three Google executives were found guilty of violating privacy laws in Milan, Italy.  The case hasn't gotten too much attention, but it might shape the way international and Internet laws are handled in the near future.

Apparently, a video of Italian students bullying an autistic child ended up on Google in 2006.  Italian police let Google know, and the company removed the content.  Google also says that it did what it could to help police identify those who were shown in the video as well as the individual who uploaded it.  The result?  The uploader and other students were sentenced to 10 months of community service.

The Italian courts then indicted four executives from Google for defamation and violation of privacy laws.  Three of the four were found guilty of violation of privacy, and all four were found not guilty of defamation.

 


Oops! Our Bad!

Posted by: Pearce

Tagged in: Science , Politics , Movies , Horror , Eye Candy

Pearce

 

I must preface this piece with the following, as it is quite well-deserved:  Timothy Olyphant, you are amazing.  You look so different in every single film, and you get into each part so well that I often don't even realize you're playing the (super hot) protagonist until I run to IMDB.  You are a fantastic actor, and I applaud you.  Oh, and I must reiterate the utter and complete hotness.  Seriously.  You are unbelievably hot.  Call me.

 

I was looking forward to seeing The Crazies for a long, long time.  For those not already aware, this incarnation of the film is actually a remake of a version released in 1973.  It's been moved from Pennsylvania to Iowa, but it is, in fact, a remake.

The Crazies is about how incredibly stupid and incompetent the government can be.

 

 

 

Semi-spoilers may follow.

 

Politics aside, the government manages to royally screw up the transportation of a biological weapon (for which it apparently royally screwed up the creation of a vaccine or a treatment).  It then proceeds to screw up its incredibly stupid transportation fiasco.

 

 


 

 

For the benefit of humanity, I had a research chemist put together a "how-to" manual for secret government programs that unleash diseases on their own populations because they apparently hire complete idiots.  I call it "Biowarfare Oopsies for Dummies."  Content is his.  Photos added by me.

 


 

So the Tubes have been buzzing with, of all things, an interview with some Eighties Doctor Who figures who have copped to sticking political allegories in the storylines during Sylvester McCoy's era.  Particular attention is paid to one serial called "The Happiness Patrol"*, which is now revealed to be an attack on Margaret Thatcher's politics.  (Except for the giant candy monster, which is just there to be hilariously bad.)

 

A couple of problems here.  One: as a revelation, this is about as revelatory as "Gene Roddenberry was a secular humanist!".  If it shocks you, well... hi, welcome to Earth, hope you enjoy your stay.  "The Happiness Patrol" as anti-Thatcher allegory was picked up on at the time--it's not a difficult interpretation.

 

Vote Labour or THE KANDYMAN EATS YOU. 

 

Two: in fact--Sylvester McCoy's claims notwithstanding--as an allegory, it's as subtle as a pink elephant. "The Happiness Patrol" serves just as well as an example of why Doctor Who shouldn't do allegories: they're terrible at them.  See also "The Sunmakers" (anti-tax), "The Green Death" (environmentalism), "The Two Doctors" (vegetarianism), and, from the new series, "Aliens of London / World War Three" (anti-Iraq war).**  It's notable that none of these are universal fan favorites today; consensus is pretty strong on the merits of most stories, and the best-liked stories ("Genesis of the Daleks", "The Caves of Androzani","The Curse of Fenric", "The Empty Child/The Doctor Dances", and whatever favorite of yours that I haven't listed here because otherwise this would be a really long list) tend to not have obvious takeaway Aesops.

 

Three, what do the pearl-clutchers allege that Doctor Who was trying to accomplish?  Mass riots in the streets?  Britain's prepubescents marching on Whitehall?  Because that didn't happen.  Okay, so they were trying to inculcate a dislike of Thatcher and her policies, so that Britain's children would grow up to vote Labour... because these children would, somehow, be raised in a pro-Tory vacuum otherwise?  "The Happiness Patrol" was broadcast in 1988,  public mood had turned against Thatcher by the Nineties, and IMHO the changing of the public's opinion of her government is best explained by the failures of said government.

 

Four, I have a serious problem with the unspoken assumption under all the handwringing, which is that Doctor Who should have been impartial.  What the hell does this mean?  Should they not have done stories that... I don't know, commented on the world in any way?  This is fiction's jobAll stories are about the world in which they're made, and science fiction is always at least as much about the present as it is about the future.  The BBC should only ever make TV that everyone will agree with?

 

Which, finally, is impossible anyway. Showrunners have no control over what interpretation people give to the stories.  If Russell T. Davies says that the episode "Bad Wolf" was intended as an homage to reality TV, and bazillions of fans think it's a satirical critique of reality TV, who's right and who's wrong?

 

 

* IMHO, you're not missing much if you sit this serial out.  It's one of those Eighties serials where the world sucks and the special effects are terrible and the soundtrack is synth-tastic.

**And, of course, lots of others.  Trust me, you'll be able to tell which.

 

(Kandyman image yoinked from the Doctor Who Image Archive.)

 


 

 

Bunny Captain KirkThose of you who havebeen around here for a bit maybe acquainted with our resident purveyor of snarky movie recaps, Fluffy Bunny.  You may not know that Fluffy (otherwise known as Lisa), besides having a great wit and writing for us here, makes her living as a self-employed artist. She is based in Orlando, and also has an internet shop, F-Bod Studios, where she offers both her art and her gift of snark for us to enjoy.

 

I've always been impressed by her, making a life for herself with her art and wit -- and all on her own terms.  Like many self-employed folk in recent years, Lisa had to make the choice between food and shelter  and health insurance. (I know how this feels, too -- my Beloved and I have been Galactic designself-employed for years, and now pay more per month to ensure our family of four than we do for housing, and we've reduced our coverage every year. It's only by the grace of God (and the fear of losing our children's future to catastrophic illness and financial ruin) that we remain among the lucky insured.) 

 

 

It's not a new thing -- lots of people in America have had to make that choice. More and more every year. Consider this fifteen-year-old clip from The Simpsons:

 

  You need to a flashplayer enabled browser to view this video 

 

 

 

Recently Lisa was rushed to the hospital with heart palpitations. Soon she discovered that her  heart is fine, that her condition is easily treatable and not currently life-threatening -- but it could easily become so without surgery.

 

Basically, she has uterine fibroids that cause such severe bleeding every month that she is dangerously anemic. So anemic that her organs don't get enough oxygen, and her heart becomes stressed trying to push what hemoglobin she has around to everywhere that needs it. She's on iron supplements, but whatever she manages to build up is lost every 28 days. The only treatment that can help at this point is a hysterectomy. 

 

 

No big deal, right? It's a fairly routine surgery, and one her gynecologist will gladly do for $2700.00 up front, which Lisa simply doesn't have. She's exhausted the options available to her through hospital programs (and they are more than willing to let her pay off her recent $8,000.00 bill over time). But she falls in that sweet spot financially -- the one between being well-off enough to afford medical care or health insurance on her own and being poor enough to qualify for medicaid or other state-funded programs. 

 

Dryad

 

So Lisa, our own Fluffy Bunny, is stuck waiting for a relatively simple health problem to become a life-threatening one -- which it definitely will long before she can save up the $2700 for the surgery. AND once it has to be done in an emergency situation, the cost will likely be much higher, not only for her. I used to work for the government, and I've seen it happen a lot, something treatable, left untreated, ends up ruining people financially and causing the health care system to absorb the rest of the cost. 

 

This is a good thing for exactly no one. Especially not for my friend, and you can help her. betty

 

This article is scattered with images of her art, her wit, and her livelihood. And now I'm going to beg you to help raise money for Fluffy's operation. Spread the word! If we can get enough people to donate a dollar or five, maybe we can save her the expense of another ER visit or however many it takes until they decide she's close enough to death to warrant an emergency operation.  Things being what they are, I know few of us are in a position to give large amounts. But if you donate a little and help us spread the word, we can help.   

 

Together, we can help.  I'm even putting a up this handy button, to make things easy. It's for a PayPal account dedicated to Fluffy's Bye-Bye Woman-Part That is Killing Me Fund. (The Human Fund is the actual name that comes up, and everything donated goes straight to her.)

 

Also, if any of the designs or slogans scattered around this article catch your fancy, you can buy them on a variety of products here. She's got some freaking awesome t-shirts.

 


My New Year's Resolutions

Posted by: Nightsky

Tagged in: Politics , Editorial

Nightsky

 

In 2010, I resolve to no longer engage in arguments such as "Can you imagine what the media reaction would be, if a member of The Other Political Party had done this?" with the implication that the media would have just crucified one of Our Guys and therefore is biased in favor of The Other Guys.  Because, really, what kind of argument is that?  No matter how biased the media seems to be, or how hypocritical Those Other Guys are, imaginary scenarios aren't just not proof of it, they're... I don't know, whatever the polar opposite of proof is.  Un-proof, maybe, or anti-proof: something so stupid that it makes one want to stop arguing with the person who presented it on the grounds that people who support hypotheses with persecution fantasies out of their own febrile imaginations have failed logic forever.

 

Also in 2010, I resolve to write a generic, all-purpose response to those "women discover geekdom" articles, so as to save me valuable time to finish the media jukebox I'm building in the garage.


Behold: ECOGATE!

Posted by: Pearce

Tagged in: WTF , The Sky is Falling , Science , Politics , Lifestyle

Pearce

 

So you know how everyone from Al Gore to Leonardo DiCaprio has been telling us we're all gonna die for having massive carbon footprints?  And you know how we've been subjected to this drivel for years upon years whilst they zoom about in private jets to meet up in exotic cities for conferences instead of telecommuting to help save the earth?

 

I've said it before, and I'll say it again:  there are billions to be made by "going green."  That's no exaggeration.  Many people are willing to pay out the nose for something that seems more eco-friendly.  Don't even get me started on the concept of eliminating incandescent bulbs.  Yes, there are (limited) options besides CFLs as alternatives, but CFLs cause severe headaches in a significant portion of the population.  Would Obamacare like to provide me with some Vicodin for hugging some trees?

 

 

 

Guess what?

 


Piracy and Fangirls

Posted by: A Nonny Mouse

A Nonny Mouse

 

Pirate.  Depending on you look it brings up images of Jack Sparrow and Captain Hook or four dorky looking guys in Sweden.  Or maybe bands of murderers in Somalia.  Either way the point is that piracy exists and it's illegal, but is it the end of the world as we know it, like the media conglomerates would have us believe?



The answer is yes and no.  Certainly the large pirate systems like in Russia and China aren't helping and they should be the real targets of the MPAA and the RIAA.  Unfortunately, due to the obvious fact that those operations are in Russia and China and not in the US where the RIAA and MPAA have bought off enough politicians can force them to shut down, the piracy continues.  It's definitely hurting their bottom line and anything that hurts the bottom line of the mega media conglomerates usually ends up being bad for us geeks.



But wait, didn't I say yes and no? 

 

I did, and it's the no that I really want to talk about.  Here's the thing, what most companies want is viral marketing.  The whole word of mouth phenomenon that made My Big Fat Greek Wedding and The Sixth Sense such a run away hits at the box office.  They want everyone and their sister talking about movies, music and all the things, that lets face it, we'd be talking about anyway.  This usually isn't a problem for mainstream shows.  Shows like Grey's Anatomy and Law and Order already have a good fanbase and people talk about them all the time.  Hell, the industry talks about them all the time.  Someone in Grey's sneezed, we totally have to talk about it.  That's a great thing, since that means that those shows get advertisers and time and bigger budgets and better writers and well, you see where I'm going with this, even if you happen to hate the show. 

 

Where this is a problem are what the networks and the industry call "genre shows."  Those a the ones like Buffy the Vampire Slayer, X-Files, and Firefly.  They're the quirky shows that are awesome but probably are not going to generate mainstream appeal.  Unfortunately for us geeks, that's most of the shows we watch.  This is a problem as networks that create the shows, not to be confused with the networks that air them as they're two totally different entities, are leery of genre shows in an already iffy market.  If a show has been "green lighted" so to speak it might only get twelve episodes to prove itself worthy.  That can be difficult when the creator doesn't know if they'll be getting another season or hell even another four or five episodes to create.  So how do you generate a buzz when you have a production company that's leery, a television network that's leery, but the creator thinks this is the next greatest thing since sliced bread?



That's where the piracy comes into play.  Back when Dr. Who and Battlestar Galatica were resurrected and brought back to the small screen, it was only being shown in England.  This is because of marketing and rights and all that.  Fans of the show in England were raving about them, about how awesome and cool they were and like all good fangirls, the fangirls in the US and else where in the world said "gimme!"  The English fangirls did just that, bless their fangirl hearts, using technology like bittorrent, sendspace and plain old DVD creation.  They send over the product so the fangirls overseas could salivate. 

 

 And what happened when those shows finally did air in the US?  They had the highest ratings of any show on the Sci-Fi channel ever.  They were huge hits because the fangirls knew what the product was, but instead of watching in on their computer screens this time they could watch it on their huge (or not so huge -- that entirely seems to depend on if there's a man present in a house) television screens.  They wanted to support the show that they already loved and so watched and made sure the ratings were good.  Dr. Who and Battlestar Galatica are only the start of this phenomenon.  Torchwood had similar results as well.  Going the other direction, Supernatural has had some stellar ratings when it's finally aired overseas because of US fangirls sharing out the content.


All of this is great, but there is a definite danger to downloading content off the Internet.  The production companies right now don't seem to be correlating the data between downloads and ratings.  Or if they are, they're not saying anything.  Why?  Mostly because of how trademark and copyright is in the US.  They have to fight to protect their copyright and trademark or lose them.  That would be bad on many different levels, no matter what the average fangirl thinks.  So of course, they're going to go after piracy.  Also, don't forget there are very very large operations outside the US, where copyright laws are vastly different and it's much more of a gray area.  By going after the users, they're hoping to stop the producers.  Which is all well and good but not helpful.



Still, things are looking up.  There's been a rash of legal sites going up over the last few years that give access to shows and extra content.  Right now most of them seem to be country specific, meaning that the CW doesn't allow you to come into their site without an US based IP address.  This also pertains to Amazon.com and iTunes.  Both of those companies, while they allow you to download your fix, won't allowed you to do so if you're overseas.  Which, coming from someone that's a US citizen that usually works overseas, sucks big donkey balls.  The reason is pretty basic.  Overseas downloads don't count toward ratings and it's ratings that advertisers like to see.  More advertisers, more money from the network that's airing it, which means more money for the production company that's producing it.  Since advertisers are usually different overseas, the US advertisers don't really care how popular Chuck is in Spain.


Chin up though, this is a step up from where we were just four years ago.  With the economy spinning, we might just see more innovation as the major production companies and networks struggle to keep their businesses alive.  Here's hoping to the day that everyone can get the show they want, when they want it, regardless of the country.

 


Two Days Before The Day After Tomorrow

Posted by: Pearce

Tagged in: Science , Politics , Editorial

Pearce

 

Let me start by saying that I love Deceiver.com.  It's full of entertaining posts and comments and covers more than just pop culture.  Although pop culture kinda sets itself up for this sort of thing.  My favorite of their recurring themes is "We're All Gonna Die From Global Warming!"  Anytime this title pops up, I know what I'm about to read is going to be both informative and priceless.

 

Y'see friends, I have a tree-hugging older sister who thinks Michael Moore is the Messiah.  Every time the family gets together for the holidays, I have to sit through another long, loud lecture about the global warming and the trees and the Republicans and the lunar cycle and whatever the latest craptastical "documentary" happens to be.  Last holiday, it was "Wal-mart:  The High Cost of Low Prices," which I found myself unable to sit through without the urge to fling things at the television (as often occurs during moments of severe emotional response ranging from stupid non-answers in political debates to seeing my high school lab partner on Law and Order).  At any rate, she is in love with Michael Moore and Al Gore and would probably have ten thousand of their children and then make them go plant trees in the rainforest and picket around Wal-mart's corporate headquarters or something.

 

But I digress.  We're all gonna die from global warming.  And in an effort to save us from ourselves, the House has passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act.  Said bill does some nice things.  Sort of.  It creates a bank to hand out clean energy development loans.  If put into effect, this will likely end in catastrophe.  Or have we forgotten  so quickly how well this whole "bailout" concept worked?

 

 


Polls

Techie Femmes of TV













Results

Who's Online

We have 52 guests online