My cousin has apparently nailed it with "THE FLASH is an embarrassingly bad movie." I didn't see The Flash, don't plan to. I'll go into that in a moment but a few in our family did see it and they agree with Stan. And while doing my morning -- more mid-morning on Saturdays -- walk, I got multiple texts from friend's who'd see Stan's post and said he nailed it.
Why won't I see The Flash?
Don't I know that Michael Keaton is in it!!!!
Yes, I do know that. And I do like Michael Keaton. You know what else I know, though? I know that Michael Keaton played Batman in BATGIRL. Remember that? Didn't stop the sexists and racists at Discovery from killing the project the minute they took over Warner Bros.
Which reminds me, you also caught Stan's "SUPERMAN & LOIS dumps all actors of color" -- right? All that praise the show sucked up for having a diverse cast and then they go and fire all the actors of color. Six actors fired.
Please read C.I.'s "Transphobe Matt Taibbi" which says so much and, as usual, she's the one who has to step up and say it:
By the same token, I'm damn tired of having to repeatedly point out the Whiteness of it all. And I'm tired of seeing African-Americans, for example, only brought on the show when you want to do a segment on racial issues. I'm 100% behind Karen Hunter on that. It is insulting. People of color are effected by the economy, they're effected by school practices, by healthcare, by everything in the world. This notion that you White podcasters only to need bring on a person of color when it's a 'race' issue is ridiculous.
And you're the same ones, please note, that accuse others of 'identity politics.' You're the ones hissing and booing something that is nothing other than basic fairness. But when you're Jimmy Dore or whomever (and it is not just Jimmy Dore, this is not pick on Jimmy Dore) and you only bring on an African-American because you've decided to slam Kamala Harris and you need a Black face to hide behind?
You're the one practicing the very behavior you claim is "identity politics."
Matt refuses to speak with transpeople. He'll speak to the people who hate them. He'll joke and fun with those people. But, from all everyone's saying, he only wants to speak to trans people and experts on trans issues if he can attack them. It is bigotry. It is an uneven playing field. It is prejudice.
It's like prejudice
For the color of your skin
Prejudice for a woman
Prejudice for an animal
Like the elephant of the plain
Of the plain
For greed not need
Lead the killing hand on
Young ones full of spark
A wave of birds across the park
Sliding, riding free
Elephant child hiding
Behind a tree
For an animal
Like the elephant of the plain
-- Laura Nyro, "Lite A Flame (The Animal Rights Song)" -- best version appears on LAURA: LIVE AT THE BOTTOM LINE.
All trans people are trying to do is live their lives. For that basic thing, they are being attacked and persecuted. And Matt Taibbi and the others think it's funny. It's not funny. And it gets more dangerous every day for LGTQ+ people. If you're not standing up for them, you're not helping. And if you're justifying hate merchants, you're actually harming.
I don't have time for it. And those who have not addressed real issues don't deserve to be up here. Yeah, I know Mayim thinks she's made up for her mistake. She hasn't. She knows that and she knows I have no interest in noting her. So if I'm doing that with people I actually know, you YOUTUBERS who think you should be noted -- better think again. If you can't do the basics to stop the spread of hate, you really shouldn't claim to be left or have any platform because your doing nothing of value and certainly nothing to help.
It's only going to get worse the longer idiots like Max Blumethal's wife think they can mock transgender people.
So basically, in terms of what and who we can and will note right now: it's BLACK POWER MEDIA, Karen Hunter, A-Z, MY BLOODY VALENTINE, DEMOCRACY NOW!, SHERRI!, Jennifer Hudson, QUEER NEWS TONIGHT, Nina Turner, etc.
I wouldn't have thought Matt Taibbi would be a transphobe and that he would ridicule trans people while they were under attack. I was wrong. So, sorry, everyone's going to have to prove where they stand from this point forward. I can't -- we can't -- make the mistake of assuming 'So and so's left so we know they won't be a hate merchant.' Nope. Some are on the grift train and know they can make more money with hate. That's nothing new. It's always been that way. The overlords of conservatism have always been well funded, most discover that in college when they note how the small GOP clubs have better funding than the larger Democratic clubs. It's always been that way. And many have always been happy to sell their souls instead of stand up for the rights of all.
And I also recommend an essay by Dr. Warren J. Blumenfeld (LGBTQ Nation):
It began for me back in 1987 when I first learned that one of my favorite writers and personalities had died in France at the relatively young age of 63. James Baldwin, essayist, novelist, poet, playwright, activist, hero to many including myself, expatriated to France where he lived much of his later life.
He was attracted to the cultural and political progressivism of the Left Bank, where he could escape the pressures of Jim Crow racism and the enormity of heterosexism in the United States, and where his creative energy could soar. His numerous works directly tackled issues of race, sexuality, and socioeconomic class with unflinching and inescapable honesty, and with a clear indictment of the corrupt systems of power that dominated his native land.
Reading and listening to multiple obituaries on the day Baldwin died, I distinctly remember a particular reporter recounting an anecdote in Baldwin’s life that has stayed with me and has given me permission to feel my own similar feelings ever since.
Sometime in Baldwin’s life, a white news reporter apparently asked him the question, “What do Negros want from white people?”
Without hesitation, Baldwin responded, “You ask the wrong question, which should not be what we want from you, but rather, the question should be, ‘Can we forgive you?’”
I clearly understand that the ways people of color experience racism are very different from the ways queer people experience heterosexism and cissexism. Nonetheless, Baldwin’s rejoinder to the white reporter hit me like a pitcher of ice water in the face, waking me and releasing the anger I had attempted to stuff inside when I was growing up during the late 1940s through 1960s as a differently-gendered young person residing in a hostile country.
So many questions gushed forth from me, all inspired by Baldwin, questions in which the term “you” refers to systems of power, domination, and privilege.
Can we forgive you, the psychiatric profession, for the atrocities, the colonization, the “professional” malpractice, the defining, the so-called theories of causation, the biological and psychological pathologizing of sexual and gender transgressive people, and the attempts to change us that you have perpetrated over the preceding centuries in the name of “science”?
Can we forgive you for the so-called “Eugenics Movement” of the mid-nineteenth century through the twentieth, and still continuing today in some circles within the medical and psychological professions, proposing and addressing, in starkly medical terms, our alleged “deficiencies,” “deviancies,” “abnormalities,” and “mental disorders”?
Can we forgive you for the mid-last century involuntary hospitalizations, the electroshock therapy “treatments,” and, yes, the lobotomies?
Can we forgive you, the religious institutions, for defining us as “inherently disordered,” as “contrary to God’s will,” as “sinners,” as “perverts,” as “heretics,” as “Godless,” as “deceived” and “depraved,” as a “corrupting force on civilization and on the family,” as “contrary to the laws of nature,” and for saying that our relationships “will tear down the very fabric of society”?
Can we forgive you for your abusive “religious counseling” and “conversion therapies” to remove us from the so-called “evil gay lifestyle”? Can we forgive you for your bogus and dangerous “reparative therapy”? Can we forgive you for the defrocking, ex-communications, purging, and banishments? Can we forgive you for turning our loved ones against us and for making us internalize your lies?
Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
A grim picture of the US and Britain's legacy in Iraq has been revealed in a massive leak of American military documents that detail torture, summary executions and war crimes.
Almost 400,000 secret US army field reports have been passed to the Guardian and a number of other international media organisations via the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks.
The electronic archive is believed to emanate from the same dissident US army intelligence analyst who earlier this year is alleged to have leaked a smaller tranche of 90,000 logs chronicling bloody encounters and civilian killings in the Afghan war.
The new logs detail how:
• US authorities failed to investigate hundreds of reports of abuse, torture, rape and even murder by Iraqi police and soldiers whose conduct appears to be systematic and normally unpunished.
• A US helicopter gunship involved in a notorious Baghdad incident had previously killed Iraqi insurgents after they tried to surrender.
• More than 15,000 civilians died in previously unknown incidents. US and UK officials have insisted that no official record of civilian casualties exists but the logs record 66,081 non-combatant deaths out of a total of 109,000 fatalities.
The numerous reports of detainee abuse, often supported by medical evidence, describe prisoners shackled, blindfolded and hung by wrists or ankles, and subjected to whipping, punching, kicking or electric shocks. Six reports end with a detainee's apparent deat
The Biden administration has been saying all the right things lately about respecting a free and vigorous press, after four years of relentless media-bashing and legal assaults under Donald Trump.
The attorney general, Merrick Garland, has even put in place expanded protections for journalists this fall, saying that “a free and independent press is vital to the functioning of our democracy”.
But the biggest test of Biden’s commitment remains imprisoned in a jail cell in London, where WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been held since 2019 while facing prosecution in the United States under the Espionage Act, a century-old statute that has never been used before for publishing classified information.
Whether the US justice department continues to pursue the Trump-era charges against the notorious leaker, whose group put out secret information on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Guantánamo Bay, American diplomacy and internal Democratic politics before the 2016 election, will go a long way toward determining whether the current administration intends to make good on its pledges to protect the press.
Now Biden is facing a re-energized push, both inside the United States and overseas, to drop Assange’s protracted prosecution.
Russia’s trumped-up “espionage” charges against Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich for his newsgathering activities mirror those brought against Julian for his newsgathering and publishing. The last US reporter to be prosecuted by Russia for “espionage” was Nicholas Daniloff in 1986. The playbook did not originate in America, but America has sunk to Soviet standards and revived it. It won’t stop there. That is why the Assange case is the greatest threat to press freedom worldwide.
Julian’s US accusers use “espionage” as shorthand for “journalism”. They do not allege that Julian was acting on behalf of—or colluding with—any foreign power. The WikiLeaks publications expose the killing of tens of thousands of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan; document evidence of torture and assassination squads; and reveal at least one potential war crime involving the slaughter of Reuters employees in Baghdad. The facts of the case are well-known and uncontested: the source, Chelsea Manning, was a US army whistleblower who acted on her conscience. She was sentenced to 35 years. The sentence was commuted by Barack Obama on his last day in office.
Julian acted for the public’s benefit, and he is accused—of conspiracy to publish, and of receiving, obtaining, possessing and communicating “national defence” information—under a statute from 1917. The classification system was only invented 35 years after that law was written. There is no US “Official Secrets Act”. “National defence” information is whatever the US government says it is.
The video above has a little bit of a discussion of the interview that we included last time where BLACK POWER MEDIA interviewed Cornel West. The video below is Renee Johnstone sharing her take on the interview.
Why that is, you'll have to ask yourself. I don't know you. And seriously doubt that I'd want to at this point.
In the burning heat
Hanging on the edge of destruction, oh
You can't stop the pain of your children crying out in your head
Oh, they always said that the living would envy the dead
Why didn't he?