See more Ron Howard videos at Funny or Die
Thursday, October 23, 2008
nerds for Obama!
Alert reader James Hass asks: "Nerd alert? Or is it just people in our thirties that would sort chuckle at this?"
His daughter draws good
even if he does say so himself.Oh, but apparently he can't say so in a professional capacity.
Librarian fined and censured for saying nice things about his daughter's illustrations
Asinine in action.
go UCSF
I don't think UCSF has a mascot like UCB does. But still, love all bears.
Here is an amazing letter from Gino VanGundy to the UCSF student paper Synapse. It's a great read and I heartily recommend the click-through.
Here is an amazing letter from Gino VanGundy to the UCSF student paper Synapse. It's a great read and I heartily recommend the click-through.
go Bears
More good news from Cal. Opinion piece in the campus paper.
Update: this is actually from UC Davis. (I though it was the Berkeley paper.) Even better.
Update: this is actually from UC Davis. (I though it was the Berkeley paper.) Even better.
UCB not B H8n
Pepperdine's Law Professor (and Dean) make them look like they support the nastiness that is Prop 8. Legally, the Univerisy can't come out and say that they have an official position either way. The official response was pretty weak, and does nothing to mitigate the damage. It's a lame press release sent to those who complained, and it was nigh near impossible to find on their website but here it is. The "meat" in their response is merely this: "Pepperdine would like to underscore that the professor exercised his right to free speech in appearing in the ad, and that the views expressed are his own. They do not represent a Pepperdine position. Pepperdine University cannot and does not endorse candidates or ballot initiatives during election campaigns."
A spokeperson also added, "We have no balls."
Enter into the fray this morning, Robert J. Birgeneau, Chancellor of UC Berkeley.
He's bound by the same legal constraints that the University may not make a specific endorsement one way or another on ballot initiatives, but as the Pepperdine Law Professor and the Yes on 8 campaign pushed the legal limit to the line maliciously, Chancellor Birgeneau walks the line with his head held high.
Props to you Chancellor.
And hey, why hasn't the economic impact of this not entered the greater discussion before? Or was it so fleeting that I missed it.
A spokeperson also added, "We have no balls."
Enter into the fray this morning, Robert J. Birgeneau, Chancellor of UC Berkeley.
He's bound by the same legal constraints that the University may not make a specific endorsement one way or another on ballot initiatives, but as the Pepperdine Law Professor and the Yes on 8 campaign pushed the legal limit to the line maliciously, Chancellor Birgeneau walks the line with his head held high.
Props to you Chancellor.
Chancellor Birgeneau informs campus of likely impacts of Proposition 8
22 October 2008
BERKELEY — As Chancellor of UC Berkeley, I am writing to inform you of the likely impacts on our campus of the passage of Proposition 8, a ballot initiative that would eliminate the right of same-sex couples to civil marriage in the State of California. Of course, all members of the Berkeley community must exercise their own best judgment in deciding on how they wish to vote on this ballot measure.
In June of this year, the California Supreme Court reaffirmed the constitutional right to marry for same-sex couples. This ruling supports UC Berkeley’s commitment to equity and inclusion by recognizing the family relationships of all members of our campus community, including lesbian and gay faculty, staff and students.
Proposition 8 is in conflict with the principles of equity and inclusion to which our campus is committed. Berkeley supports the full inclusion and equal treatment of all members of our community and we have affirmed the position that any treatment of individuals that is not equal and inclusive is discriminatory. In denying a fundamental civil right, passage of Proposition 8 would undermine these principles, not just for our LGBTQ community, but for all racial, religious and cultural minorities and would harm the university as a whole.Inclusion provides the rich diversity of intellectual life and creative learning that are at the heart of this great university. Inclusiveness is a specific strategic advantage that allows us to attract and retain talented people who could easily choose to move to other parts of the country. For example, in Massachusetts, home to Harvard and MIT, who are among our greatest competitors for faculty, same-sex marriage has been legal for some years. It is recognized in states such as New York, home to Columbia and Cornell, who are also major rivals for top faculty. The constitutional right to marry in the State of California enhances UC Berkeley’s ability to attract and retain the very best students, staff and faculty, with the promise of equal treatment under the laws of our state. Social theorist Richard Florida has shown that the economic success of American cities is based on their ability to attract a “creative class” of “talented people who seek an environment open to differences.” Proposition 8 will harm the social conditions in our state that promote creativity, justice, and prosperity.
Although you must judge for yourselves how to vote, as you consider your ballot on November 4, 2008, I would urge you to take into account the impacts that passage of Proposition 8 would have on our campus community.
Robert J. Birgeneau
Chancellor, UC Berkeley
And hey, why hasn't the economic impact of this not entered the greater discussion before? Or was it so fleeting that I missed it.
neighborhood news
Around the corner, an empty Cala Foods has been squatting for about five years now. It's a nasty corner on Haight and Stanyan at an entrance into Golden Gate Park.
it needs developing. Something nice, clean, and preferably where I can buy ice and/or ice cream any time of day or night. But without loitering, drugged-out street urchins. (One would not buy produce from Cala for fear of contamination by The Great Unwashed who wandered aimlessly with a penchant to filthy fondle.)
Attempts have been made to develop the space, but unless it is a free needle and defecation salon, the Haight Ashbury Neighborhood Coalition won't allow it. (See previous HANC rant here.)
Urged on by the SFist, I wrote the city planning guy to voice my opinion some months ago, and to his credit, he wrote me back. Sure, it was some months later, but I received a personal response with answers to my concerns. That leaves me somewhat hopeful for City Hall. I would post the e-mails here but I seem to have cleaned them out of my mailbox. Basically he said everything is on track, proceeding at the normal (and slow) pace with no interference as has been otherwise reported. All seems a go to put a residential building with a Whole Foods anchor and subterranean parking on the spot.
So, in 690 Stanyan news, from Curbed SF:
Update (Also from Curbed SF):
This Victorian, fully renovated as a monument to blandness, is just around my corner. It is selling for a measly $1,875,000. Three bedrooms, two and half baths.
And my parents wonder why I rent.
it needs developing. Something nice, clean, and preferably where I can buy ice and/or ice cream any time of day or night. But without loitering, drugged-out street urchins. (One would not buy produce from Cala for fear of contamination by The Great Unwashed who wandered aimlessly with a penchant to filthy fondle.)
Attempts have been made to develop the space, but unless it is a free needle and defecation salon, the Haight Ashbury Neighborhood Coalition won't allow it. (See previous HANC rant here.)
Urged on by the SFist, I wrote the city planning guy to voice my opinion some months ago, and to his credit, he wrote me back. Sure, it was some months later, but I received a personal response with answers to my concerns. That leaves me somewhat hopeful for City Hall. I would post the e-mails here but I seem to have cleaned them out of my mailbox. Basically he said everything is on track, proceeding at the normal (and slow) pace with no interference as has been otherwise reported. All seems a go to put a residential building with a Whole Foods anchor and subterranean parking on the spot.
So, in 690 Stanyan news, from Curbed SF:
Friends and neighbors can read the comments on the Curbed site if they wish.
Hark! We spot a rendering: Behold the work-in-progress that is 690 Stanyan Street, Whole Foods' much-discussed foray in to the big RE. (Read: design subject to change.) The four-story, 115,400 square foot mixed-use building with a Whole Foods at ground level and 62 condos situated above it -- 26 studios, 20 one-bedrooms, and 15 two-bedroom units -- is set to replace theden of iniquityCala Foods currently squatting at the corner of Haight and Stanyan Streets.
Update (Also from Curbed SF):
Straight from the source, we have a few more details on the impending project at 690 Stanyan Street (which will catch hell, no doubt, at tomorrow's today's planning commission meeting). Please do note:Also around the corner: More Beige Than Your Grandmother's Closet- 411 Shrader Street.
· What are being touted as luxury "condos" -- including by us (sorry) -- are actually 62 "good old fashioned" rental units.
· There are also 3 bedroom units available
· Just for the record, Whole Foods is not an equity partner in the project; they are merely the anchor tenant. Quoth our source: "Don't know why people think it is *their* real-estate or why people think they care much about the architecture."
This Victorian, fully renovated as a monument to blandness, is just around my corner. It is selling for a measly $1,875,000. Three bedrooms, two and half baths.And my parents wonder why I rent.
transit tale
Ah, MUNI.
From the SF MetBlog, and of course the Best of Craig's List:
Open letter:
To the tranny that blew that guy on the 49 bus last night
Public/pubic transportation in the City.
From the SF MetBlog, and of course the Best of Craig's List:
Open letter:
To the tranny that blew that guy on the 49 bus last night
Public/pubic transportation in the City.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
and in professional hockey/sex toy news
This in from my nephew. Via Facebook. He's fifteen. A crazy sports fan who is probably disturbed that his gay San Franciscan uncle is commenting on this story on his wall.
How much would you love to see a similar headline in an American paper?
Swedish hockey fans delay match with dildo downpour
How much would you love to see a similar headline in an American paper?
Swedish hockey fans delay match with dildo downpour
sometimes you need a good cry
I defy you to watch this and not at least get a little misty.
Via BoingBoing, a video of Big Bird singing at Jim Henson's funeral.
Via BoingBoing, a video of Big Bird singing at Jim Henson's funeral.
more Prop 8 news
In the ugly Prop H8 news today:
Same Sex Marriage: the Worst Argument in the World
by Howard Schweber
The Huffington Post
Public schools become focus of gay marriage ban
from the AP wire
Mormons donations account for 77% of all money raised for Yes on Prop 8
from the blog Inside, Looking Out
And from a lively discussion questioning church's tax-free status when they spend so much money on political actions/propositions, a link to the IRS rules about this--which some churches may be actively on continually violating without consequence.
The discussion continued:
Same Sex Marriage: the Worst Argument in the World
by Howard Schweber
The Huffington Post
Last week the Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that the state must extend the legal status of marriage to same-sex couples. Their argument involved a determination that homosexuals constitute a quasi-suspect class -- a question the U.S. Supreme Court has gone to nearly incredible lengths to avoid addressing -- but I'm not really interested in that at the moment. Instead, it's the dissenting arguments that intrigue me. Debates about same-sex marriage seem to inspire really, really bad arguments, and I thought I would take a moment to review a couple of them...
Public schools become focus of gay marriage ban
from the AP wire
A girl in pigtails bounds into the kitchen after school and asks her mother to guess what she learned that day. "I learned how a prince married a prince, and I can marry a princess," she exclaims to her mortified mom.
This television advertisement for a ballot initiative that would ban same-sex marriage in California urges voters to "protect children" by approving the measure.
There's not a word about education in Proposition 8, but what public schools will be required to teach about same-sex marriage has emerged as the central issue in the campaign.
The measure's supporters warn that teachers will be forced to tell young children about gay marriage if the measure fails on Nov. 4.
Opponents of the measure say that's deceptive because schools already are required to teach tolerance of gays and lesbians, and the ballot measure won't change that...
Mormons donations account for 77% of all money raised for Yes on Prop 8
from the blog Inside, Looking Out
Fred Kager, who runs the Californians Against Hate website which provides a detailed (and publicly available) list of contributors who support Proposition 8, revealed today that Mormons have donated a staggering 18.6 million to deny same-sex couples the right to marry. That’s 77% of all total documented donations. Mormons also account for 88% of all individual money raised.
Mormons, instructed by their leaders in Salt Lake City Utah, are leading the charge to take away the rights of same-sex couples, both here in California and Arizona.
And from a lively discussion questioning church's tax-free status when they spend so much money on political actions/propositions, a link to the IRS rules about this--which some churches may be actively on continually violating without consequence.
The ban on political campaign activity by charities and churches was created by Congress more than a half century ago. The Internal Revenue Service administers the tax laws written by Congress and has enforcement authority over tax-exempt organizations. Here is some background information on the political campaign activity ban and the latest IRS enforcement statistics regarding its administration of this congressional ban.
In 1954, Congress approved an amendment by Sen. Lyndon Johnson to prohibit 501(c)(3) organizations, which includes charities and churches, from engaging in any political campaign activity. To the extent Congress has revisited the ban over the years, it has in fact strengthened the ban. The most recent change came in 1987 when Congress amended the language to clarify that the prohibition also applies to statements opposing candidates.
Currently, the law prohibits political campaign activity by charities and churches by defining a 501(c)(3) organization as one "which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office." (emphasis theirs) ...
The discussion continued:
I believe the limit on lobbying, which is what they're doing, is $1 million. However, if you read the IRS definition on lobbying, both the Knights of Columbus and the Mormons are, "attempting to influence legislation if it contacts, or urges the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or if the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation." - specifically the last phrase.Unfortunately, these groups have powerful lawyers on their side so it will be difficult to stop them.
shaking words like a Boggle box
Recently, I got to enjoy the wandering, hipster wandering mass in the Mission that is LitQuake's Lit Crawl.
The masses themselves were not that enjoyable, and certainly not the parking, but the readings were cool. I joined some of the Witches and the Maidens in the celebration of the word—well, the word of James.
James was invited to read at the event at the Elbo Room, and was given the honored position of the final reader. The cavernous space was packed, surely beyond legal capacity, and literally rubbing shoulders with fellow literary enthusiasts spoke volumes to the cumulative brain power of those who choose to be San Franciscans.
I got to visit with Writer Nicole a bit, which is always nice. And an exceptional treat was that I got to rabble rouse with Maiden-Adjunct Nicole. Who brought her boyfriend (jealous!). Nicole introduced us, "Wilson, this is Brian. Brian, this is Wilson."
"Hi. Nice to meet you."
"Hi. I'm silently judging you."
Sometimes it's good to be up front about these things.
Brian, with an i (I checked), also brought his former roommate Ryan (visiting from SoCal) and they had a camaraderie bordering on adorable (Brian and Ryan) but stopped just this side of gay.
I liked them.
Luckily for us, our original perch was bar-adjacent. Shaking drinks, pouring ice, and rattling bottles, the bar staff were the only ones making noise. The crowd was focused on the readers. Trying to minimize the disruption by ordering a drink, I just handed the bartender one of my drink cards.
Yes, I have calling cards that read simply
Wilson Hardcastle
Mandarin & Soda
Every other time I have produced this card (usually when it is too loud to be heard), bartenders have been impressed that I have my cocktail preference preprinted on a calling card. This also often results in a free drink.
This bartender was perplexed, spoke loudly, and basically caused a scene. "What is this?!" He cried, holding the card in one hand and flipping the card with the other. "Why are you giving me this?"
If I thought this were a gay event in a straight bar or if there were any outward signs of my gayness, I would have thought he was displaying some form of gay panic. However, this was such a straight event and crowd, and I was lamentably dressed without flair, I had to conclude he was either illiterate or just a douche. Or maybe just severely myopic.
After I ordered orally, I pointed out that I was trying to be quiet in respect for the reader and that my order was printed on the card. He was suitably abashed and mixed our drinks with a heavy pour—something quite rare in my experience in straight bars.
Overall, the night was a great success, bolstered by the late summer warm weather outside.
James' reading was entertaining and very well received. He read the second half of a short story he has been working on—which was great for those of us who heard the first half at a previous reading.
When he polishes it, I hope he publishes it. At least online. I'd love to link to it here. It's a great local romp, and is even better when read aloud.
I love story time. Maybe I should host my own salon one night of my clever wordy friends. Maybe something December and fireside.
Who wants in?
The masses themselves were not that enjoyable, and certainly not the parking, but the readings were cool. I joined some of the Witches and the Maidens in the celebration of the word—well, the word of James.
James was invited to read at the event at the Elbo Room, and was given the honored position of the final reader. The cavernous space was packed, surely beyond legal capacity, and literally rubbing shoulders with fellow literary enthusiasts spoke volumes to the cumulative brain power of those who choose to be San Franciscans.
I got to visit with Writer Nicole a bit, which is always nice. And an exceptional treat was that I got to rabble rouse with Maiden-Adjunct Nicole. Who brought her boyfriend (jealous!). Nicole introduced us, "Wilson, this is Brian. Brian, this is Wilson."
"Hi. Nice to meet you."
"Hi. I'm silently judging you."
Sometimes it's good to be up front about these things.
Brian, with an i (I checked), also brought his former roommate Ryan (visiting from SoCal) and they had a camaraderie bordering on adorable (Brian and Ryan) but stopped just this side of gay.
I liked them.
Luckily for us, our original perch was bar-adjacent. Shaking drinks, pouring ice, and rattling bottles, the bar staff were the only ones making noise. The crowd was focused on the readers. Trying to minimize the disruption by ordering a drink, I just handed the bartender one of my drink cards.
Yes, I have calling cards that read simply
Wilson Hardcastle
Mandarin & Soda
Every other time I have produced this card (usually when it is too loud to be heard), bartenders have been impressed that I have my cocktail preference preprinted on a calling card. This also often results in a free drink.
This bartender was perplexed, spoke loudly, and basically caused a scene. "What is this?!" He cried, holding the card in one hand and flipping the card with the other. "Why are you giving me this?"
If I thought this were a gay event in a straight bar or if there were any outward signs of my gayness, I would have thought he was displaying some form of gay panic. However, this was such a straight event and crowd, and I was lamentably dressed without flair, I had to conclude he was either illiterate or just a douche. Or maybe just severely myopic.
After I ordered orally, I pointed out that I was trying to be quiet in respect for the reader and that my order was printed on the card. He was suitably abashed and mixed our drinks with a heavy pour—something quite rare in my experience in straight bars.
Overall, the night was a great success, bolstered by the late summer warm weather outside.
James' reading was entertaining and very well received. He read the second half of a short story he has been working on—which was great for those of us who heard the first half at a previous reading.
When he polishes it, I hope he publishes it. At least online. I'd love to link to it here. It's a great local romp, and is even better when read aloud.
I love story time. Maybe I should host my own salon one night of my clever wordy friends. Maybe something December and fireside.
Who wants in?
feelin' the love
A couple of years ago, I made a mix CD for a friend's birthday—Lorenzo, aka "Zo"— The disc was called Zo-Zo a Go-Go.
The set was a hit, and everyone requested copies. That morphed into a new three-CD set: HoMo a Go-Go. (Everyone knows the gays have the best party music. And I put perhaps way too much thought and time into the selection of tone, bpm, and order of the tracks.)
These have been recopied and shared far and wide, while while I did not produce any of the music (merely compiling them under fair use), it was immensely flattering. Some folks, particularly those in more creative or insane workplaces, use them as the soundtrack for deadlines, spontaneous drunken office parties, or institutional motivation.
As I crank through this work day, it warmed to receive this random e-mail from an editor's desk at magazine down south:
"Ellen is crazy and needs some homo-a-gogo."
The doctor is in.
The set was a hit, and everyone requested copies. That morphed into a new three-CD set: HoMo a Go-Go. (Everyone knows the gays have the best party music. And I put perhaps way too much thought and time into the selection of tone, bpm, and order of the tracks.)
These have been recopied and shared far and wide, while while I did not produce any of the music (merely compiling them under fair use), it was immensely flattering. Some folks, particularly those in more creative or insane workplaces, use them as the soundtrack for deadlines, spontaneous drunken office parties, or institutional motivation.
As I crank through this work day, it warmed to receive this random e-mail from an editor's desk at magazine down south:
"Ellen is crazy and needs some homo-a-gogo."
The doctor is in.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
a good example of setting a bad example
This is just effed up.
This weekend San Francisco saw, among other things, the Nike Women's Marathon.
So there's, Arien O'Connell, who considers herself a strong, decent runner but nothing particularly special, runs the best time of her life. Personal best.
And runs the fastest time against any other runner by a good eleven minutes.
But the officials didn't, and won't, identify her as the winner.
No trophy, no prize money, no spectacularly awesome school teacher Cinderella story.
They won't recognize her as the winner, while noting that she had by far the best time, because she didn't take a twenty minute head start with the self-identifying "elite" runners. They didn't even think to look at the times of the "regular" runners.
As the story says, "It doesn't get much simpler than a footrace. All it takes is a starting line, a finish line and a clock. You fire the gun and the first person to the end of the course is the winner."
Once their own records identified the error, they should have made it right. Instead, what we're left with, instead of a women-empowering and inspiring story, is that in our race, if you try your very best, and you succeed-- we'll still make sure you're a loser if you aren't considered "elite."
This weekend San Francisco saw, among other things, the Nike Women's Marathon.
So there's, Arien O'Connell, who considers herself a strong, decent runner but nothing particularly special, runs the best time of her life. Personal best.
And runs the fastest time against any other runner by a good eleven minutes.
But the officials didn't, and won't, identify her as the winner.
No trophy, no prize money, no spectacularly awesome school teacher Cinderella story.
They won't recognize her as the winner, while noting that she had by far the best time, because she didn't take a twenty minute head start with the self-identifying "elite" runners. They didn't even think to look at the times of the "regular" runners.
As the story says, "It doesn't get much simpler than a footrace. All it takes is a starting line, a finish line and a clock. You fire the gun and the first person to the end of the course is the winner."
Once their own records identified the error, they should have made it right. Instead, what we're left with, instead of a women-empowering and inspiring story, is that in our race, if you try your very best, and you succeed-- we'll still make sure you're a loser if you aren't considered "elite."
Monday, October 20, 2008
Bodily Self Determination & Law
This message came though a work Listserv this morning. It's a bit lengthy for a blog post, but I thought it was interesting reading, and information sort of typical to IJS-- it has sex, politics, religion, academics, and good reasoning. Have at it.
......................................................................................................................................
......................................................................................................................................
With Prop 8, the right of two persons of any gender to wed is contested; and this is rallying the UCSF LGBTIQ community -- we are thinking of our friends, ourselves, the future of societies here and elsewhere.
I remember when I interviewed lesbian scholar/author Priscilla Alexander in New York City in the late 1990's; she said that she believed that LGBT movement should be inclusive of sex workers. It always struck me - and still does -- as a thought-provoking argument. Certainly a number of sex working people are lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender, and from my own experience doing street-based research in San Francisco, I am aware that the two communities are overlapping, and share issues related to the right of adults to have consensual sex. From this same research,and from doing HIV prevention work, I have learned that criminalization of adult consensual activity benefits no one. The memory of the sodomy laws that criminalized a number sex acts between consenting adults is still very recent history, as is the celebration that followed the Supreme Court decision, Lawrence v. Texas, which finally struck those laws down.
What follows is part of an Open Letter which I wrote to Friends/Quakers on this issue:
In considering decriminalization, it is instructive to engage a comparative law perspective. For example, in New Zealand, decriminalizing sex work has not resulted in an increase in the number of practitioners but in an increase in the ability of those workers to seek assistance from authorities in response to acts of violence. Great Britain passed a law determining that juvenile prostitution would no longer be punished, although clients were to continue to be prosecuted. By law, then, criminalization is not used as a pathway to services. Rather than receiving services through the mode of incarceration, youth involved in prostitution are brought directly to locations where they get free assistance with housing, job training, and education. As a social scientist who has conducted research with homeless and migrant youth in San Francisco for over a decade (1992-2002), and is currently completing a manuscript on the topic, I see the practical good that can come from such a change in legislation.
Criminalizing adults for consensual sexual activities makes little sense. Criminalization drives people further underground, increasing reliance on exploitive and sometimes dangerous modes of support. As evidenced repeatedly, jail and prison often have a deteriorative affect on an individual’s overall life trajectory. With decriminalization, it will be possible for workers to utilize the mechanisms that assure fair labor practices and occupational health and safety. In my course on legal and political anthropology, I teach university students about the history of San Francisco peep show workers who unionized and negotiated for better and safer terms of their labor, enabling them to eventually create a worker owned shop. The difference in the dignity they experienced as workers -- and later as worker-owners -- was substantial. This organization was possible because they were working in a legal part of the sex industry. The right of workers to organize is fundamental to a just society. As the lore of the Barbary Coast suggests, San Francisco has long been known for its sex work. Individuals who chose this service work need to be accorded worker rights, as they have been through progressive legal change in a number of countries that have chosen decriminalization.
At a UC Berkeley symposium, data was presented showing that the amount of money per year expended to prosecute and jail sex workers was equivalent to the amount of money it would take to enable each one of the prosecuted workers to attend four years of college. Criminalization, and offering people services through the criminal justice system, is not an efficient way to provide opportunities, under pain of increased penalty. The San Francisco Department of Public Health has committed itself to supporting a harm reduction approach that assists people while honoring them as decision making individuals. Decriminalization is the first step to creating more open routes of access to services for adult sex workers. The decriminalization initiative is separate from existing laws criminalizing the practice of kidnap, extortion, forced migration, forced labor, child labor, and abuse. Decriminalization will improve the ability of authorities to investigate and prosecute these criminal actions. For example, victims of trafficking will be more likely to come forward and contact authorities, knowing that they will not themselves be criminalized.
We speak, as Quakers, of the economic draft, and its disproportionate effect on societies’ most vulnerable people – those without economic resources and those subject to multiple discriminations. The people who suffer the most from criminalization are the most vulnerable workers – those who have the worst working conditions and the fewest resources: street workers. As Friends considering this issue we must look not only at the intent of the law but at the impact of the way that it is carried out – distributive justice. When the Exotic Dancers Alliance and the SF Dept. of Public Health originally opened the St. James Infirmary, it created a safe zone for all sex workers, especially street workers to seek judgment-free medical services. Decriminalization will help to remove the stigma and fear of legal reprisal, which inhibit sex workers from accessing legal and health services. In this sense, decriminalization is a public health issue as well as an issue of conscience. Given the commitment of Friends to social and economic justice, I would hope that Friends would consider supporting this ballot initiative in the November 4th election.
Sincerely,
Amy Donovan
random shots from my phone
After brunch yesterday, Coco, Shilpa and I stopped in Best In Show to say "hey" to Roland. Coco, sporting a new super-short and super-cute haircut, gasped when she saw this pinkish rubber chicken dog toy.
"Oh my God." She said, "There's a woman at my gym who looks just like this!"
And as long as we're on the random, someone marked up the pumpkin decoration at our table at Twin Peaks:
It reads "I ♥ Cher!"
Someone else added, "For reals."
And just for fun, yet another drinkie pose from the Shilpa.
Sometimes there is nothing better to do on a cold overcast Sunday than to sit in the window of Twin Peals with your good friends, catching up, commenting on the passers by, and staving off chores.
Final random photo from the phone, I noticed this in the window of a yarn/knitting shop and was nonplussed.
Coco and Shilpa educated me that it's a fight breast cancer thing. Still, it was a bit unexpected to see in the shop window with no context.
The nipples in the oo's are a nice touch.
"Oh my God." She said, "There's a woman at my gym who looks just like this!"
And as long as we're on the random, someone marked up the pumpkin decoration at our table at Twin Peaks:
It reads "I ♥ Cher!"
Someone else added, "For reals."
And just for fun, yet another drinkie pose from the Shilpa.
Sometimes there is nothing better to do on a cold overcast Sunday than to sit in the window of Twin Peals with your good friends, catching up, commenting on the passers by, and staving off chores.
Final random photo from the phone, I noticed this in the window of a yarn/knitting shop and was nonplussed.
Coco and Shilpa educated me that it's a fight breast cancer thing. Still, it was a bit unexpected to see in the shop window with no context.
The nipples in the oo's are a nice touch.
more on H8
Pepperdine suffered a shirtstorm when one of their law professors became the misleading spokesdouchebag for a Yes on 8, lending the credibility and implied support of Pepperdine University to his message. It became a HUGE deal at other California Universities, and the Pepperdine PR department was caught off guard. They demanded the Yes on 8 haters remove the reference to Pepperdine, which the Yes on 8 people said they would.
What the Yes on 8 haters actually did was continue to run the ad with the Pepperdine tag for another couple of weeks, then merely added a tiny asterisk to the add claiming that the title "Pepperdine Law Professor" is "for identification purposes only."-- which is the legal minimum required. (Someone where I work pulled a similar stunt and we were at "Girl, Hold my gold!" status over here.)
Legally, Pepperdine can't say they are for or against any political measure. They're pissed that this faculty member is trying to imply their support when they are legally prohibited from stating their position against.
So the asswipe is beholden only to the Dean of the law school. Which means he'll probably get a promotion. Pepperdine's law school Dean is Kenneth Star.
On the upside: someone has made an animated response to the ridiculousness of the ad.
Love it.
What the Yes on 8 haters actually did was continue to run the ad with the Pepperdine tag for another couple of weeks, then merely added a tiny asterisk to the add claiming that the title "Pepperdine Law Professor" is "for identification purposes only."-- which is the legal minimum required. (Someone where I work pulled a similar stunt and we were at "Girl, Hold my gold!" status over here.)
Legally, Pepperdine can't say they are for or against any political measure. They're pissed that this faculty member is trying to imply their support when they are legally prohibited from stating their position against.
So the asswipe is beholden only to the Dean of the law school. Which means he'll probably get a promotion. Pepperdine's law school Dean is Kenneth Star.
On the upside: someone has made an animated response to the ridiculousness of the ad.
Love it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)