conuly: (Default)
A Haven for the Deaf Draws Federal Scrutiny Over Potential Discrimination

http://nyti.ms/10mcy0Z

Read more... )

No Rich Child Left Behind

http://nyti.ms/184oVX2

Read more... )
conuly: Quote from Veronica Mars - "Sometimes I'm even persnickety-ER" (persnickety)
Here's one on Texas schools being required to teach the Bible. I'm sure it'll collapse soon enough.

You know, my father was from Texas. It was a big part of his identity. He's actually buried over there. Must be spinning in his grave. I wouldn't be surprised if he got up and started walking to march on the capital either!

And here's one about a bunch of whiners complaining that people wonder WHY, exactly, they felt the need to bring guns to a presidential event.

"I still have some freeeeeeeedoms!" they declare. I think the following comment sums it up:

Let's make sense of this. Wear a John Kerry shirt to a Bush rally and get arrested. Carry an assault rifle to an Obama rally and you are a Freedom Fighting Revolutionary.
conuly: Quote from Heroes by Claire - "Maybe being different isn't the end of the world, it's just who I am" (being different)
Taken from ABFH

I find the behavior of the "adults" in this article to be unconscionable, reprehensible, and pretty fucking close to evil.

Pretty recently, when talking to somebody else about the Ann M. Martin book "Inside Out", written a good 20 years ago about a family with an autistic child, I said the bar was set really low. If there's no outright malice in the book (and there isn't, in my recollection), I'm not going to condemn it. Hell, I'm just glad nobody there advocates killing the kid, which is about as bad as things are some days. And with that said, I still am managing to be appalled at the total lack of civility described in the article. I always say not to look at the comments, and today I am following my own advice. I am sure no good can come of it.

I am sorry for the lack of substance to this post. I'm just so... I'm not happy. Sometimes, it's almost enough to make me wish I believed in a god, any god, vengeful or just. I'd feel better knowing that people get what's coming sooner or later.

As long as I'm loosely on the subject, here's a post about biased research regarding autistic children.
conuly: (Default)
Wait... hasn't slavery already been abolished?

Well, the short answer to that is not exactly.

So yes. Let's get on that and free the slaves. I don't really have anything else to say on the subject that isn't self-evident, like "because slavery is kinda wrong, you know".
conuly: (Default)
I'm copying this wholesale from [livejournal.com profile] griffen. Basically, if you have ever wanted the chance to beg people not to send a 19-year-old kid to his certain death for being gay, now is your chance.

As the entry I stole this from says:

"You send a bazillion emails every day, what is one more?

Take a few to contact the UK Home Office, if you would, to suggest that sending a 19-year-old gay man back to Iran, after his partner was hanged there -- after naming him as his partner for the 'homosexual acts' that got him killed -- is not in line with freedom or liberation etc. The kid's father has said if the government doesn't kill the young man, he'll do the job himself.

Kid's going to get sent back to Britain from Holland in the next 72 hours, and from there deported back to Iran to swing at the end of a rope.

It's two minutes, people. Send an email. Consider it the birthday present you never sent to me. Then post it on your blog and we'll be caught up for all those Christmases too. Do it.
"

Emails go to public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk. Phone number is *probably*, if google is helping me today, 020 7035 4848.

If you happen to be a potentially voting member of the British population, be sure to mention that in your email, or if you don't have a British accent, tell them when you call.

Edit: Another link. When you make your phone call or email, be sure to include mention of Pegah Emambakhsh, who is in a similar situation. If anybody can give me a better phone number or email, I'll update again.
conuly: (Default)
Here.

Read more... )

Deniz has a friend Jonathon. And she was telling me the other week how "Jonathon says he's a girl sometimes, but I know he's really a boy". (We'd been talking about hair length.)

And here I was trying to explain that sometimes kids say that and it's just pretend, and sometimes they say that and it's that we're wrong about whether they're a girl or a boy - but I don't know, I may have gone right over her head.

*frowns a bit*

Come to think of it, it was when she was playing with Jonathon all the time she'd say things like "You can't be a pirate, girls can't be pirates" (or superheroes, or firefighters, or whatever), nevermind that *she* was pretending to be a pirate (or whatever). Of course it was a coincidence - kids do play with this sort of thing at that age, they're sorting it all out - but now I've got it stuck in my head.
conuly: (Default)
I mean, if it's not black children being told not to sit on the back of the bus, then it's black people being told they're not welcome in a church anymore.

Or it's a hundred thousand other things that are telling me that maybe, just maybe, it's time to pack a bag. Pity I have obligations here. And no passport. I should really get on that last one, shouldn't I?

Children.

Mar. 21st, 2006 10:36 pm
conuly: (Default)
They're not dogs. That's why we generally don't make shock collars for children.

On the same subject (but not nearly as severe), your typical three or four year old child doesn't need to get high-fives and GOOD EATING!!!!!! for munching on some glorified potato chips. Either they're hungry, and they eat, or they're not hungry, so they don't. (Or they're hungry and they don't eat, which sucks, but assuming you haven't made something you know they can't/won't eat, that's probably a temporary situation.)

Praising a kid for eating. Eating snacks, of all things. Now I've seen everything.
conuly: (Default)
Once again, a useful entry by [livejournal.com profile] kevinleitch.

The whole idiocy is summed up in one comment down the page (which I'll further sum up here): Target is spending a whole lot of money in a lawsuit, when it'd cost barely anything to get a competant web designer to alter their site. At the same time, they're not only losing money from blind customers (and, quite probably, their indignant families and friends who know better than to use inaccessible sites) but they're creating general ill-will which will cause them to lose even *more* money - or, at least, to gain less than possible, which is almost the same thing.

Brilliant move, Target.
conuly: (Default)
First things first, [livejournal.com profile] fugaciouslover has a discussion loosely related to the Holocaust that some of you may be interested in, asking "how much is too much?"

Danish comics anger Muslims, and related conversation.

Read more... )

And on a Muslim funeral home.

Read more... )

An editorial on the Wilmington coup in 1898

Read more... )

*sighs*

Nov. 14th, 2005 12:52 pm
conuly: (Default)
Historically, people have invented work songs. Whether or not people actually sang while they worked is up to interpretation, but I suspect at least some people did. It sets a nice rhythm, and it keeps you from being bored stiff while doing boring, repetitive tasks.

So I'm sitting here trying to figure out why a song invented and sung by black slaves is now offensive to black people. Yes, it's talking about slavery - that's what the people were doing when they sang it.

Of course, the comments to the story are enough to make me weep. Sure, white males, they're the most discriminated group in America. Uh-huh. Go tell me another one, why don't you?

Or how about "As far as the 81 year old aunt who has a bad back due to cotton picking, she had a choice to pick the cotton, slavery was banished long before she was born." Riiiiiight. And what else, pray tell, was she to do? Are we to believe she chose that job because she prefered it to the other options? Or maybe her option was to have no job, not pay the bills, starve.... Great. That's a choice, all right!

It's like people just turned off their brains....

Oh, and on the subject of "things Connie doesn't get", when we're in class reading an excerpt from "Kaffir boy", and somebody asks what the word "kaffir" means, and we've been using that damn word all class, and I define it, correctly as the Afrikaner equivilant of "nigger", don't tell me not to use the word "nigger" unless you're saying to everybody else "don't use the word kaffir". I'm not calling you a nigger, or any other sort of slur. I'm using the word as a definition, because that's what the damn word means. I know it's a charged word, but I'll be damned if I'm going to revert to childhood and start calling things "the n-word". I guarantee you that I'm never going to use the word in anything other than a quotative (or, apparently, definitive) fashion, and you know that, so....
conuly: (Default)
Secret CIA prisons?

Read more... )

It's at the BBC, too, as well as many other news sources of varying reliability.

I don't even know enough to know if these articles (regardless of the prisons) are good news (yay for the media doing their jobs!) or bad (um, secret prisons?)
conuly: (Default)
First, the conservative boycott. I never had one of those dolls, but I wanted one. Or all of them.... And I don't agree with this boycott, so I think I may call to give my *support* for their choice. Not buying a doll to support them, though - kinda lack money, y'know? Perhaps I'll make a donation to the other group involved personally....

I saw the article in [livejournal.com profile] liberal. Now, ignoring the entire rest of the thread, the commenter here makes a good point - liberals boycott stuff *all the time*. Why aren't conservatives allowed to do the same thing for their values? Sure, that being the liberal comm, many people disagree with the values behind that boycott, but it's not like the conservatives are bombing the American Girl store or anything. They're just... calling to complain and refusing to buy their products (man, I wish I had the money to refuse to buy AG products :P). Not really the height of evil here.

I had the same thought a year back. There had been, within a few hours of each other, two posts in [livejournal.com profile] feminist about protests regarding abortion. One person had pictures of her and her kids marching to support abortion, and another had a news article which had pictures of people on the other side marching *against* abortion, some of them with kids. And the first person was congratulated for having her kids with her, but the second group of pictures was "shameful", doing that to little kids.

Why?

It's not like the anti-abortion group was bringing their kids along to be evil, they were doing it because of a lack of a sitter and to teach their kids their values - just like the first group!

But no, it was *such* a different thing. Or something.

Gah.

(Regarding the tag, the right to protest is a civil right)

Profile

conuly: (Default)
conuly

May 2017

S M T W T F S
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 252627
28293031   

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 25th, 2017 10:39 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios