Cynical Proverbs 7:25

"You can't judge a book by it's cover"

OK this one does have some basis in reality. One day I bought this new line of toilet paper. And right when I was in the middle of using it, I realized it was Ann Coulter's new book. Oopsie! See how easy it is to make that mistake?

In any case, you shouldn't judge a book by it's cover. You should also judge it by it the kiss-ass, bought-off reviews and celebrity endorsements on the laudatory jacket. So if you first meet a potential dating partner and he or she isn't recommended by Booklist, then forget it!

Cynical Sincere Proverbs 7:18

Yep it's time for more of that gosh durn "original thinking" I've heard so much about, as I come up with my own sayings that you'll eventually be bored by through years of overuse resulting in these genuine words or wisdom being caustically mocked by the Internet (wow what kinds of asshole would end up doing that, anyway?) Oh right the quotation:

"The problem with America is that it refuses to treat equal rights as special privileges like it's suppose ta."

Cynical Proverbs 7:11

"With great power comes great responsibility"

This, of course is the widely-known quote of the Spider-Man mythos (which you know, because if you ever seen the Peter Parker story in any media, you'll hear this little manta drilled into your mind ad nauseam.)

Which is weird because as this world has demonstrated time and again, the entire point of getting power is to insulate yourself against responsibility. Duh! Responsibility is for the little people. Power is the gated community designed to make sure responsibility gets arrested for trespassing if it gets anywhere in their realm. Geez, Spidey, maybe you should bitten by a bit of radioactive common-sense.*

*Calm down fanboys, I'm a Spider-Man enthusiast. Really.

Note to Whoopi: Bill Cosby has already slipped "innocence" a Mickey

Whoopi Goldberg's refusal to own up to her mistake on this issue and double-down on her questionable defense of Bill Cosby diminishing innocence (like like those Republicans who refuse to back down from bad ideas because they value stubbornness over rational thinking) reminds of another annoying factor that's been hovering around this scandal and in need of a slight vocabulary alignment: the mindless repetition of "innocent until proven guilty." Now, this is generally a wonderful (and critical) component of our justice system, but a few things need to be considered to put the phrasing into the proper context.

For one we already have plenty of "proof." In addition to the numerous testimony of victims coming forward (which as pointed out previously is a form of evidence) with very similar story's we now have Cosby's own confession (in a court of law, even!) What more "proof" does Whoopi need? Does she need to go into his bedroom and see the act itself with her own eyes? Although somewhat understandable, people like Whoopi are confusing a conviction with guilt. They tend to be related but not always. For instance, the statute of limitations for many of Cosby's accusers has already expired (he's been at it for decades, remember?) For other's we've seen that he simply buys them off. So the unlikelihood of Cosby being convicted and jailed for these crimes is not an indication that we simply ignore the increasing evidence against his profession of innocence. And that's just in a court of law. Imposing that strict guideline on public opinion (which needless to say is not a trial) is particularly silly. The public isn't using irrational, arbitrary reasons for their opinion about Cosby's guilt. It's why prominent Cosby defender Jill Scott had to recant her defense and admit that she was rallying for the wrong side: Cosby's confession confirmed that it was no longer rational to do so, since this is Cosby being convicted by his own words.

Update: Demonstrating that sometimes shaming can be used for the power of good, evidence and good sense has made it's way through the stubbornness of Whoopi's relentless defense of Cosby, and she confesses, that yeah, those accusations may have some merit after all. She even acknowledges a point I made here about the statute of limitation laws factoring into why Cosby is not being found "guilty in a court of law" (Whoopi's main point of contention about the issue.) In fact, to give Whoopi some credit for finally turning away from excusing the inexcusable, I'll cite from the article linked and let her have the word on this:

“I have to say I thought that, yeah, here’s all the information, take his ass to jail,” Goldberg said. “I find out from you [Abrams] that that’s not possible. So I can’t say any more ‘innocent until proven guilty,’ because there’s no way to prove it. We are the only proof that folks have.”

Hello Mary Lou, Update 2 (4-27-2018): Well the good news is that we no longer have to confuse conviction with guilt because now that ol' Bill have been convicted of Cosby-ing at least one woman (out of, like, 60) we can stop misusing tired "innocent before proven guilty" rhetoric and come up with fresh new strawman arguments to rationalize sexually assaulting unconscious women (maybe a piece of false equivalency between a poor black teenager and a man who exploited his "beloved father figure" privilege and imagery to get away with raping his way through every other women without consequence for years perhaps?)

That's NOT where your pudding pop goes, Bill Cosby!

I am not at all surprised by the recently unsealed court transcripts that said that, yeah, Bill Cosby did try to ply women with drugs in order to sexually take advantage of them. I mean at this point I think it would be harder to find women who haven't been taken advantage of by Mr. Cosby. I still admit to being disappointed by this conformation of Cosby's morally repulsive actions and the fact that he has been able to get away with this for so long by paying his victims off (But only if she remained a sufficiently educated rape victim, because Cosby's's not going to let a little thing like sexual assault get in the way of a little sanctimonious moralizing.) However it's always disheartening when a man that was so admired within America in general and the Black community in particular has fallen so far from the "image" he maintained. I talked a bit about my somewhat confused feelings about this on another post:

I never had any "hero-worship" toward Cosby, but as a black man (which of course means that I'm the sole voice of Black America), I did have admiration for him. Keep in mind that this was at a time when Black people were depicted as jive-talking buffoons and ill-tempered thugs...when we were featured at ALL (Hee, "the more things change" huh?) His show gave America a different (and sorely needed) look at a little-seen slice of the African-American experience. When you grow up in a society that constantly tries to limit your options, things like that can mean a lot.

So no, I'm certainly not going to "defend" Cosby here (Hey, when a woman doesn't want you to put you "pudding pop" near here her "Jello cup", you better well listen to her, buddy!), but I'd be lying if I said I didn't have any admiration for other past achievements (Incidentally this is also the take I use regarding the Founding Fathers.). It's not enough to get him off the hook for "Cosbying" his way through a swath of women though.

Of course Cosby himself, hypocritically contributed to the "jive-talking Blacks" stereotype himself by chastising African-Americans who didn't follow the edicts he determined they should have, like listening to that rap music (which gives them the brain damage) or not going to college, or (gasp!) failing to keep their pants up (something that Cosby apparently had trouble doing himself.) By the way, that loud beeping noise you heard is the irony detector going off. Unfortunately by trying to preserve a "positive" image of African-Americans through condescending self-righteousness "How Proper Black People Should Act", Cosby just instead validated the false narrative of the "Good Blacks" who deserve rights and freedom from abuse and "Bad Blacks" who don't (and we've seen some of the damage that type of mentality can cause.)

A few other annoying point about this disgusting system of abuse. First regarding this particular incident that I linked, there is something important to keep in mind for those who say that this doesn't "prove anything." As I said on a message board:

Let's stop here for a minute to point out that having sex with a woman without her consent is rape, REGARDLESS of whether they took the drugs willingly or not (from the way most of the women describe the situation, I'd say they were drugged without their knowledge. However it just needs to be pointed out that Cosby wouldn't get off the hook if that were the case, since the point was that they were passed out past the point of consent in either case.)

Even before the court documents came out there was plenty of reason to doubt Cosby (and his somewhat vehement defenders.) One of the most irritating defense was people trying to invoke the ol' "her word versus his" tactic, the typical bane of rape cases. Now usually one of the reasons rape and sexual assault charges are so difficult to get is a lack of collaboration. The Cosby situation however, demonstrates the importance of the victims coming forward because it establishes a systematic pattern of behavior so the stories can then collaborate with each other (and for all the "not enough evidence" naysayers, let's remember that testimony is a form of evidence. There is a reason lawyers try to get so many sources of it.) The voices are now amplified, something that is needed when dealing with the wealthy and powerful (It's why class-action suits are a thing. Money has a bad habit of drowning out people's voices so they need to be particularly loud.) So it's not "his word against hers" but "his word against hers. And hers. And hers. Oh and hers. etc." Each new accuser that pops up is another dent in the credibility of America's favorite trifling Black scold father figure.

Update: And now poor Cosby will have to scold people people without his fancy honorary degrees in Condescension and Quaalude Distribution because some schools are rescinding them. Here's Fordham University's statement on the matter:

"That Mr. Cosby was willing to drug and rape women for his sexual gratification, and further damage those same women's reputations and careers to obscure his guilt, hurt not only his victims, but all women, and is beyond the pale," the statement read.

Pride goeth before a victory: SF Pride baby! Now with pix!

Edited to add...well, you'll see...

It's time again for that Technicolor wonderment San Francisco's Gay Pride. You know the event that's like if  you took Mardi Gras, a frat party, a rave, a cosplay convention, a street faire, and a parade put into a blender and wrapped in a gaudy glittery rainbow-colored she'll (and being Pride, served at $10.50 a pop.) I continue to be astounded by this event, even after being packed like a sardine on a BART train that took my almost an hour just to get on. (BART must stand Bad at Regulating Traffic. They have like a trillion customers for the day but the utilize only a weekend schedule? Come on now!) But Gay Pride is a such a blast it's usually worth dealing with the huge crowds, loud and sometimes obnoxious kids, and overpriced rainbow draped knickknacks and costumes so outlandish that even Lady Gaga. Plus, to pander to the growing illiteracy of the internet, for this post I've finally saved up 1,000 words and traded them for pictures! Yes, nothing shows off the wonder of Pride like awkward, poorly-cropped, unfocused photos (sorry, Annie Leibowitz I'm not.)  I'm having a little trouble using the picture editing system with this stupid thing right now, so pics will have to come later. Sorry guys.)

And this is why I still get a sense of awe and...well...pride at Pride. Even though I've been to these before, it's amazing how massive the gathering is. I think there were more people at this year's event then ever before. Despite my earlier complaint about crowds, there is a unspoken bond of temporary camaraderie amidst large groups of people who are like you (or at least openly willing to accept people like you). When you are part of a group that's encouraged, nay, persuaded to remain "invisible" and "unacknowledged," having such a blatant visible presence gives a sense of unity (and safety). There is power in numbers.  I also continue to be amazed at the different types of people that were at Pride. When I was growing up their was a perception of the gay community consisting primarily of buff upwardly-mobile white men, which made someone like me feel even more awkward and alienated from people. To see a wide range of enthicities, body types, ages, religious orientations and interests, marching, partying with each other, promoting their various causes shows that the LGBT community us far more vast than the stereotypes suggest. We are in fact everywhere, even if it doesn't always seem that way. However we do have events like Pride to remind us of that fact, which is why I'll always have an appreciation for the event.

I know that (piggybacking on the gay marriage issue I posted about earlier) there is criticism of Pride events as pointless large scale parties that gives a false sense of status about our lot muffles a lot of the issues that still need protest and activism to fight against. And to be fair, there is some truth in that accusation. Then again there were activist groups that wee represented at Pride too. BlackLivesMatter was there and groups calling for the release of Chelsea Manning. Also, so what? Sometimes socializing CAN be an act of protest in and of itself, particularly when a segment of society demands you remain marginalized at best and unseen as worse (something that becomes particularly apparent when we look at Gay Pride events around the world such as Turkey) That's one of the principals behind he rainbow flag. Something that bright and vivid is going to be noticeable and stands out (Especially when it's in the form of skimpy hot pants). Who says we shouldn't have the chance to defy society's expectations and be bright and vivid too? (I won't be in multicolored Lycra though, I promise!)

Update: One group that unfortunately was not represented at San Francisco was ISIS's sex toy division like CNN reported it was in London. Now to be fair to CNN, if you've seen the size of some of those things, you can understand how they might confuse them for Weapons of Mass Destruction. Still I hope San Francisco rectifies this situation next year and invites "terrorists" so that Gaystopo can finish terrorizing  Real American with our oh-so penetrating weapons.
Update 2 Electric Boogaloo: Updated to remove a link to a Taiwanese event that I am now convinced was NOT a gay pride event but the misinterpretation of some conspiracy-theory nutcase. Usually I would be wise enough to see through stuff like that and I apologize for naively helping to sow confusion about a tragic event.

Love has won: Your guide to same-sex marriage

I'm sure everyone has heard the big news about how the Supreme Court has established the Constitutional right of same-sex couples to marry and have this union recognized nationwide. Yes us gays have finally succeeded in "shoving gay marriage down society's throat" and spurting their sticky concepts of equality and liberty all over it's face. Obviously there is only one adequate response to the gays and their incessant need to be treated like equal Americans and have their love legally recognized as much as any Kardashian brand synergistic PR stunt:

Yah!

I'm sorry. Let me try for an expression far more refined and appropriate for the situation:

It's about fucking time!

While we celebrate this achievement in human rights and do our hard-fought and much-deserved victory dance in front of those who thought that a portion of people could be treated as second-class  citizens, it's important to consider a few things by looking at the past, present and future of the gay marriage fight.

(Past). First of all, here's a quick summary/timeline of the gay liberation movement in the US to see what we had to struggle against to get to this point.

Let's be clear: this is not something that was just " granted " to gay people out of the blue. Don't let the fact that the turn-around on gay marriage has been gradual fool you that this happened apropos of nothing. (Let us remember that if was only roughly 12 years ago to that that our nation decriminalized what consenting adults did in their own bedrooms. And only about 7 years ago that "liberal" California passed the discriminatory, unconstitutional Proposition 8. A proposition that the majority of Californians would vote against now, incidentally.) If there is a public shift of opinion on this issue, it's because we refused to remain invisible and silence our voices.  We stood firm for our rights and refuse to back down. Gay people had a lot to struggle against and we fought back. Activism and challenging discriminatory practices does work, don't let "PC" accusations tell you otherwise. Yes it may do so more gradual than many would like, but it's all the more reason to start pushing back against oppression now.

(Present). Here's a very good thorough analysis of the why the Supreme Court made the decision it did.

Again it's important to note that that same-sex marriage was not simply "given" to us by the Supreme Court as a "present", but a a recognition of a right that (via the 14th amendment) should have never been denied in the first place. This was about ending legally sanctioned discrimination against gay relationships for purely arbitrary and irrational reasons (no, "eww gross! I think the gays are icky" is not a sound legal justification.) This is just a reminder that clear-headed people should NOT pander to or enable bigots, because their rhetorical inconsistencies will not withstand a challenge.

(Future). And of course as the repeal of Jim Crow laws has demonstrated, this victory this means that gay people will never face discrimination or repression of their rights ever again! (Insert an Eyeroll of Disbelief so strong I think it's actually affecting the tides.) We've already gotten pushback on this issue from Texas and Louisiana. (Because when you're a lawmaker, "laws" are optional now?) And expect to see more "religious freedom" bullshit flung around by primates who think the god of their choice gave them a legal "right" to impede everyone else's. Not to mentioned that buried under the celebratory nature of the gay marriage ruling is the fact that many gay people in many states are still vulnerable to abuse and discriminatory practices with few means of legal or societal resources. There's still work to do. It's not "over" despite what the naysayers might whine about (hint: you can speed up the process by NOT denying people their god damn rights.)  So yes, supporters of equal rights should celebrate, but not be tempted to settle into complacency because this should be only one of many victories.

But still,

Yah!