Bulimia is not helping anyone, anytime, anywhere. This kind of illogical framing of arguments is why substance abuse and self-destructive behavior runs rampant in the GLBTQ community. People want to make excuses instead of seeking help or to avoid being honest with their friends and helping them.
Scene: A hospital, a pallid “queer” lies hooked to an IV Enter: A visitor too cheap (or possibly vegan) to bring flowers Visitor: “Heeeey, my goddess, how you doin’? Sorry, I didn’t stop you from hanging out with that sociopath who encouraged you to drink your pain away. I thought it was how you did self care, honey. We still besties?”
The term “self care” has been completely twisted and perverted into meaning everything and therefore means absolutely nothing. Nothing.
Here’s my question: What metric tonnage of balls do you need, to write this song’s opening lines?
By the time this album came out, Fiona Apple was a joke. It was one of our finer moments, as a nation: Take a very young woman who’s experiencing a media blitz, note that she’s had some major traumas in her past, note that she’s not great at discerning the difference between “reporter” and “BFF,” and then just go to town on her. And, I mean, the speech. Did you hear the speech? Oh, my God, did you hear that one radio show parody of the speech, it was so funny, what a stupid fucking speech. What a stupid fucking girl, with her fucking speech. She’s so disgusting. Crazy, I heard. Well, you know. It was a crazy speech.
And here’s Fiona Apple, sitting down, and she decides that her song’s first line is going to be, Here’s another speech. To be precise:
Another speech you wish I’d swallow
Another cue for you to fold your ears
Another train of thought too hard to follow
She starts her song by daring you not to listen. Other musicians facing PR crises or failures have done this: Kanye West, just to note the most obvious example, had “Runaway” after Taylor Swiftpocalypse. This is the same song as “Runaway,” in a lot of ways: Yes, I fucked that up, and I fucked it up because I am fucked up, and it hurts to be this fucked up, sorry. A song about your relationship with your audience, framed as a song about relationships. But where Kanye calls himself a douchebag and then commands you to celebrate him, Fiona just repeats your own words back to you, then tells you how she feels.
On its most basic level, When The Pawn is an album about the right to define yourself. The title is a poem she wrote after reading coverage of herself in SPIN. When the pawn hits the conflicts: It’s all right there. She’s the pawn, the kid doing wind machine dances and being fed to the wolves. We were the conflicts, the people who pushed her into position and then condemned her for where she stood.
Half of the album is Fiona calling herself names or beating herself up: “How crazy I am,” “I know I’m a mess,” “I’m gonna fuck it up again.” And the other half of it, of course, is Fiona outright furious that you would dare to call her those same names, or hold the same low opinion of her that she apparently holds of herself: “So call me crazy,” “keep on calling me names,” “and I do know what’s good for me.” Nearly every song on the album revolves around these basic questions: What you think of her, whether you’re right, and if you’re right, what that person has to say. It means something that the last song on the record is called “I Know,” that its last words are don’t need to say it. The whole album has been relentlessly about language and perception and definition, and it ends with her giving up on words. But before we get there, for as long as it takes to play this thing through, she’s reclaiming her own subjectivity, even as she’s relentlessly excoriating the flaws and failures in her own vision. It’s a brave thing to do. And it’s especially brave to do it when you already know people are rooting for you to believe the worst of yourself, to fall apart, or to fail.
“To Your Love” is — like “The First Taste,” sorry — not a big moment in Fiona Apple history. But it does define a tremendous amount of what this girl was going to be capable of, from then on.
Interesting — my pet Fiona/Kanye theory was that “Fast As You Can” and “Runaway” arrive at the same place via wildly different routes, in a fascinating way.
A pimp is someone who makes money from another’s prostitution. A madam is a female pimp. Whether they call themselves managers, brothel owners, escort agency owners — they are all pimps. As a survivor of ten years of trafficking/prostitution, I have a right to use this word. If someone poisons another in cold blood, it doesn’t matter if they call themselves a life extinguisher or claim they’re an innovative longevity re-allocation businesswoman. They’re still a murderer. A pimp is still a pimp, no matter what name they peddle.
But pimps don’t like that word. So these founders and leaders of ‘sex worker activist’ organizations say they’re sex workers. They appropriate the identity of those they use and exploit. It’s a bit like a plantation owner in blackface pretending to be one of the slaves they oppress. They’re trying to steal our survivor voices.
Douglas Fox, the main ‘activist’ at the International Union of Sex Workers, claims to be a male sex worker. But he and his partner John Dottery were featured as the owners of a large UK escort agency in the British documentary ‘The Escort Agency.’ On a website he co-edits Fox states his partner owns an escort agency and argues ridiculously that pimps are ‘sex workers.’ He also states ” The fact that paedophiles produce and distribute and earn money from selling sex may make them sex workers.”
James Baldwin wrote “The victim who is able to articulate the situation of the victim has ceased to be a victim: she has become a threat.”
I had no idea how threatening my voice was until I started to make it heard. None of us trafficking and prostitution survivors did, until we started to write about the brutality we’ve experienced and these big players within these pimp-dominated ‘sex worker activist’ groups started to do everything they could to silence us and deny we exist. Survivor bloggers are cyber-stalkedvia Facebook, email, twitter and hateful blog comments. Our email accounts are hacked and private information that could endanger us is tweeted or revealed elsewhere online. Spiteful emails about us are sent to people we work with.
I’d like to give you a glimpse of this intense cyber-bullying, using myself as an example. I’m not asking for sympathy; I want to show you what survivor activists go through when we break the silence.
“the fact that ‘love your body rhetoric shifts the responsibility for body acceptance over to the individual, and away from communities, institutions, and power, is also problematic. individuals who do not love their bodies, who find their bodies difficult to love, are seen as being part of the problem. the underlying assumption is that if we all loved our bodies just as they are, our fat-shaming, beauty-policing culture would be different. if we don’t love our bodies, we are, in effect, perpetuating normative (read: impossible) beauty standards. if we don’t love our individual bodies, we are at fault for collectively continuing the oppressive and misogynistic culture. if you don’t love your body, you’re not trying hard enough to love it. in this framework, your body is still the paramount focus, and one way or another, you’re failing. it’s too close to the usual body-shaming, self-policing crap, albeit with a few quasi-feminist twists, for comfort.”—look at the medusa straight on.: on “loving your body.” (via vladislava)
Ugh I was trying to delete all but the first comment and the comment of the person I reblogged this from but fuck trying to fix Tumblr’s formatting, ANYWAY, this is a reblog of a post about looking up one’s name on Googlism, with some of my results:
molly is gother than you
molly is my mantra
molly is greedy licking the pink excited clitoris of her sunburnt
molly is in need of a loving home in colorado
molly is based on the actual rattenbury murder case
molly is just like any other girl her age
molly is in isolation now so we have to wear gowns and gloves whenever we are in the room with her
molly is a true follower of christ and has decided to come out against these g
molly is bad enough to warrant a strong “please stay away” warning
molly is convinced that her gentleman tom will provide for her nevertheless
molly is a original mermaid jewelry charm cast in 18k gold
molly is one of those rare women that is naturally beautiful and she doesn’t need any help to present her sexy appearance
molly is in a whole different category
eleanor is one of those shows that has been around for a while
eleanor is an effort by the identrus member banks to define a payments initiation standard that encompasses both simple payments and more exotic instruments
eleanor is equipped with a motor
eleanor is on a rest cure at the country estate of her old friend isobel and her philandering husband
eleanor is one of the “cleanest towns in west virginia
eleanor is unique in that it’s different from anything else in the world
eleanor is dragged kicking and screaming into her second marriage to henry of england
eleanor is a woman of power and masterminds a war against france
eleanor is in every other way a traditional gaff rigged schooner
eleanor is approximately 3 1/2” by 2” and effie is 2 1/4” by 1 1/2”
eleanor is guaranteed one carousel ride by statute
eleanor is followed by a detective to track her whereabouts with charles and anyone else
eleanor is sitting on a chair in a fancy lady’s room
big thanks to reddit user CaspianX2 for typing all this out!
What people call “Obamacare” is actually the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. However, people were calling it “Obamacare” before everyone even hammered out what it would be. It’s a term mostly used by people who don’t like the PPaACA, and it’s become popularized in part because PPaACA is a really long and awkward name, even when you turn it into an acronym like that.
Anyway, the PPaACA made a bunch of new rules regarding health care, with the purpose of making health care more affordable for everyone. Opponents of the PPaACA, on the other hand, feel that the rules it makes take away too many freedoms and force people (both individuals and businesses) to do things they shouldn’t have to.
So what does it do? Well, here is everything, in the order of when it goes into effect (because some of it happens later than other parts of it):
Already in effect:
It allows the Food and Drug Administration to approve more generic drugs (making for more competition in the market to drive down prices)
It increases the rebates on drugs people get through Medicare (so drugs cost less)
It establishes a non-profit group, that the government doesn’t directly control, to study different kinds of treatments to see what works better and is the best use of money.
It makes chain restaurants like McDonalds display how many calories are in all of their foods, so people can have an easier time making choices to eat healthy.
It makes a “high-risk pool” for people with pre-existing conditions. Basically, this is a way to slowly ease into getting rid of “pre-existing conditions” altogether. For now, people who already have health issues that would be considered “pre-existing conditions” can still get insurance, but at different rates than people without them.
It renews some old policies, and calls for the appointment of various positions.
It creates a new 10% tax on indoor tanning booths.
It says that health insurance companies can no longer tell customers that they won’t get any more coverage because they have hit a “lifetime limit”. Basically, if someone has paid for life insurance, that company can’t tell that person that he’s used that insurance too much throughout his life so they won’t cover him any more. They can’t do this for lifetime spending, and they’re limited in how much they can do this for yearly spending.
Kids can continue to be covered by their parents’ health insurance until they’re 26.
No more “pre-existing conditions” for kids under the age of 19.
Insurers have less ability to change the amount customers have to pay for their plans.
People in a “Medicare Gap” get a rebate to make up for the extra money they would otherwise have to spend.
Insurers can’t just drop customers once they get sick.
Insurers have to tell customers what they’re spending money on. (Instead of just “administrative fee”, they have to be more specific).
Insurers need to have an appeals process for when they turn down a claim, so customers have some manner of recourse other than a lawsuit when they’re turned down.
New ways to stop fraud are created.
Medicare extends to smaller hospitals.
Medicare patients with chronic illnesses must be monitored more thoroughly.
Reduces the costs for some companies that handle benefits for the elderly.
A new website is made to give people insurance and health information.
A credit program is made that will make it easier for business to invest in new ways to treat illness.
A limit is placed on just how much of a percentage of the money an insurer makes can be profit, to make sure they’re not price-gouging customers.
A limit is placed on what type of insurance accounts can be used to pay for over-the-counter drugs without a prescription. Basically, your insurer isn’t paying for the Aspirin you bought for that hangover.
Employers need to list the benefits they provided to employees on their tax forms.
Any health plans sold after this date must provide preventative care (mammograms, colonoscopies, etc.) without requiring any sort of co-pay or charge.
If you make over $200,000 a year, your taxes go up a tiny bit (0.9%)
This is when a lot of the really big changes happen.
No more “pre-existing conditions”. At all. People will be charged the same regardless of their medical history.
If you can afford insurance but do not get it, you will be charged a fee. This is the “mandate” that people are talking about. Basically, it’s a trade-off for the “pre-existing conditions” bit, saying that since insurers now have to cover you regardless of what you have, you can’t just wait to buy insurance until you get sick. Otherwise no one would buy insurance until they needed it. You can opt not to get insurance, but you’ll have to pay the fee instead, unless of course you’re not buying insurance because you just can’t afford it.
Insurer’s now can’t do annual spending caps. Their customers can get as much health care in a given year as they need.
Make it so more poor people can get Medicare by making the low-income cut-off higher.
Small businesses get some tax credits for two years.
Businesses with over 50 employees must offer health insurance to full-time employees, or pay a penalty.
Limits how high of an annual deductible insurers can charge customers.
Cut some Medicare spending
Place a $2500 limit on tax-free spending on FSAs (accounts for medical spending). Basically, people using these accounts now have to pay taxes on any money over $2500 they put into them.
Establish health insurance exchanges and rebates for the lower-class, basically making it so poor people can get some medical coverage.
Congress and Congressional staff will only be offered the same insurance offered to people in the insurance exchanges, rather than Federal Insurance. Basically, we won’t be footing their health care bills any more than any other American citizen.
A new tax on pharmaceutical companies.
A new tax on the purchase of medical devices.
A new tax on insurance companies based on their market share. Basically, the more of the market they control, the more they’ll get taxed.
The amount you can deduct from your taxes for medical expenses increases.
Doctors’ pay will be determined by the quality of their care, not how many people they treat.
If any state can come up with their own plan, one which gives citizens the same level of care at the same price as the PPaACA, they can ask the Secretary of Health and Human Resources for permission to do their plan instead of the PPaACA. So if they can get the same results without, say, the mandate, they can be allowed to do so. Vermont, for example, has expressed a desire to just go straight to single-payer (in simple terms, everyone is covered, and medical expenses are paid by taxpayers).
All health care plans must now cover preventative care (not just the new ones).
A new tax on “Cadillac” health care plans (more expensive plans for rich people who want fancier coverage).
The elimination of the “Medicare gap”
Aaaaand that’s it right there.
The biggest thing opponents of the bill have against it is the mandate. They claim that it forces people to buy insurance, and forcing people to buy something in unconstitutional. Personally, I take the opposite view, as it’s not telling people to buy a specific thing, just to have a specific type of thing, just like a part of the money we pay in taxes pays for the police and firemen who protect us, this would have us paying to ensure doctors can treat us for illness and injury.
Plus, as previously mentioned, it’s necessary if you’re doing away with “pre-existing conditions” because otherwise no one would get insurance until they needed to use it, which defeats the purpose of insurance.
“I consider this an act of war by the U.S. government against my individual inalianable rights as a creation of God. I note my right to property as the area of transgression. Thus, I no longer consent to the governing body of the United States and do not recognize its authority over my person.”—
a disgruntled upper-middle-class White “libertarian” male, on SCOTUS’s affordable care act ruling.
not sure which part i like more, the part where he calls what amounts to a new tax as “an act of war by the US government,” the part about his being a “creation of god” (lol forever and ever), or the part where he rejects governmental authority over his person. i can’t wait to see you give up your US citizenship and move elsewhere, guy.
The Supreme Court ruled this morning that President Obama’s health care reform can move forward, with some complicated caveats around the expansion of Medicaid. The take home point of the ruling: The controversial “individual mandate” to buy health insurance is constitutional, because the penalty for not doing so is a tax and the feds have the power to tax you.
Colorlines.com’s economic justice contributor Imara Jones will have an in-depth analysis of the ruling and its impact tomorrow. In the meantime, here’s some quick context on one of the stakes: the number of people who don’t have access to health insurance.
As of the 2010 Census, 256.2 million people were living in the United States without health coverage. People of color have long been grossly overrepresented among those millions, particularly Latinos.
Percentage of race/ethnic group uninsured in 2010
Hispanic origin — 30.7 percent Black — 20.8 percent Asian — 18.1 percent White, not Hispanic — 11.7 percent
[Note: Colorlines.com reports official data on “Asians” when available, but it’s important to recognize thesignificant concerns about the accuracy of that data, because it clumps widely disparate Asian immigrant communities.]
The Affordable Care Act is based on the premise that system-wide health care costs are driven up by the fact that uninsured people inevitably enter the health system at some point, and their care is significantly more expensive as a consequence of having been locked out of it until crisis. Put differently, the idea is that a system that ignores the needs of 256 million residents will collapse upon itself.