Did You Raise Your Kids Not to Kill?

 

I wanted to talk about the deaths of two children, but for a while I wasn't sure how. 

Brianna Ghey was murdered by teenagers because she was a trans girl. Nex Benedict died after an assault after a year (at least) of bullying because he was trans masc/binary. There are people who would claim that these children somehow died because of something called "gender ideology".  If some "force" didn't make them think they were trans--wouldn't they have just not stuck out and then been killed for that? 

The so-called "gender ideology" people are pissed off about is the idea that you are okay to be yourself. The gender ideology that they say is so fucking stringent and dogmatic is--let people live being what they feel they are, and don't fuck with them for it. They can express femininity or masculinity or not really identify with either. They can dress how they will and express their feelings about who they are and what they like without oppression.  How they dress, and whether they are gay or straight or ace or what they want from their one, great beautiful precious life is up to them.  

That life is theirs, and they should be able to live it to the fullest. 

And all society has to do in return is not punish them for existing as themselves. Call them by their names.  Let them live. Let them tend to their bodies as their own vehicles for living in. Just don't oppress. The same rights you would extend to anyone else and not one different thing. 

Texas GOP are Making Special Choices

 

Apparently, the Log Cabin (I always fight my fingers not to type "Log Closet") Republicans are a little bit mad that the Texas GOP shut them out of their little get together. Like, yeah you can be disappointed but how are you surprised? Did Gov. Abbott not just criminalize basically treating trans kids at all? Make families where trans kids exist basically have to consider where they will move? In a state where the Governor basically puts a target on LGBT families, (the threat is real everywhere) are Gay Republican Texans thinking they are up above this mess? 

Tell you what, the "besieged" party that has been running Texas for the past couple decades thinks the answer is letting the queers know they are abnormal.  Forget what you think you know about what ails the state-- it's at least a little bit about LGBT people and maybe the whole weather thing is about prayer. (I'm just saying--same religious signifying, now with more scapegoating.) Could Texas Republicans do actual things that matter policy-wise for their citizens?*

Hahahahah-nope. They want a constitutional convention to prevent the federal government from stopping them from being as shitty as they want to be for marginalized people. They would greatly prefer no one ever taught their kids non-Confederate-loving history and worry the church is threatened by education existing. 

And Proud Boys attacked Dan Crenshaw of all conservative people as being John McCain with an eyepatch because their golden White Supremacist media god Tucker Carlson told them to. That's fucking crazy. 

But again--not surprising. The thing with a monster is, if you feed it, it grows, and that is what happens when you feed fascism. It grows. And that means that eliminationism becomes a fact, and the "management" of political figures by violent correction becomes a fact. When you encourage conspiracy theories, the truth becomes hairy. When you scapegoat, anyone can come under the onus. When you enable bullying, the bully boys become the only government that exists. And they suck. 

That means people need to make better choices while choices are still available. 

* (Yes, if they chose Beto O'Rourke and give him some Democrats in the State leg. Otherwise, probably not, all things like this considered.) 

UPDATE: I know full well they put some bullshit about wanting to secede from the Union and not accepting Joe Biden as their president into that document. But in the grand scheme of things, there's less they can immediately do about that shit than they can about fucking up marginalized peoples' lives and so on. And I know there are people who are like "Let Texas secede." Yeah, well, let me tell you about the people who don't vote Republican/don't vote at all. They don't deserve that life. It's a shame to suggest it. But yeah, the only out I see is the people make the stupids go away by taking their asses out of office. 

UPDATE: I know it's kind of fucked up that I didn't even reference the election denialism and the implied secessionism, but after the Tea Party and Birtherism, that's kind of old hat, isn't it? The Big Lie invalidates Biden because Biden is an old white guy and you can't pretend he wasn't born here. But I take for granted all Republicans believe that any Democratic president is somehow, some way, invalid. President Clinton's first term was supposed to be problematic because he didn't have a majority, with there being a third party candidate (that was trashed when he decisively won his second term, and the Whitewater investigation had to get nastier). And when Obama had Bin Laden taken out and issued his birth certificate, you know, Benghazi became this major thing. Republicans don't believe Democrats should exist be in office. I believe one of their pundits once said a fewliberals should be kept around in cages to remind people of what we were like but I can't remember who it was at the moment. Probably Ann Coulter.

"Free" Florida and "Don't Say Gay"

 

I don't talk a lot about the identity I simultaneously have and don't express. I'm queer. I'm a straight-married bi woman. I don't have a lot of experience as a queer person because I'm basically massively introverted and if you're a stacked femme-presenting female, dudes ask after you and that's easy enough. But I don't read as straight out in the world exactly, either, and I'm pissed about the idea that people need to be shoved back in the closet. Which is what Florida's "Don't say Gay" is about. 

"Don't ask, don't tell" was discontinued in the US military in 2011. I was a bi person in college when this was initiated in the US military in 1993, and was somehow the enlightened option. This was after the ACT-up/Queer Nation demonstrations regarding AIDS and the decision of GOP administrations (Reagan and Bush) that queer people had no lives that straight (Christian) people were bound to respect. 

The Devil is a Liar

 

After a month of harassment because of having been falsely accused, with her daughter, of having somehow manipulated the vote count in Georgia, Ruby Freedman received a weird visitation from, of all people, Kanye West's publicist, who purported to be working for someone important on behalf of the government, demanding she confess to a crime she did not do or things would get very bad for her. She left her home at the recommendation of the FBI, and within 48 hours, there were MAGAs protesting outside the door of her home.

For a lie. This was a lie that started in the bowels of right-wing media (Gateway Pundit, who is getting sued now and I hope that shitty bullshit factory is tilled under and the ground salted) . This was a lie that ended up getting repeated by Rudy Giuliani and Donald Trump, himself (both of whom should be sued until so broke that federal prison seems like a luxury care home to them). This was a lie that could have resulted in the deaths of these women, who were only honestly being part of a great process called democracy and the damn valuable right to vote in this country. 

And for a lie, these women could have faced violence, and did face personal upheaval. Because Mr. Trump was a sore loser and because Kanye West was only trying to help a powerful man stay powerful. Kanye West is definitely, as a wise man once said, a jack-ass. 

Donald Trump lost his election, because, among other things, he is a liar, he was already impeached once, he fouled up the COVID-19 response with sheer ignorance, his for the most part not-bad jobs record was entirely wrecked in 2020, and he instigated constant drama. We've seen how Trump operates via intimidation: vide Alex Vindman, Marie Yovanivich, anyone who doesn't do his bidding. Look at how he treated Jeff Sessions or John Kelly once they crossed some sore nerve of his. 

The thing is, Ruby Freedman is a private person but represents so many election workers who have been threatened because of just this very big lie, that threatens these election workers immediately, but threatens our whole election integrity, ultimately. It's a widely and authoritatively debunked lie, but one right-wing idiots have been spreading for years without conscience. I mean: logic--how do you how many votes you need and where without knowing turnout in advance? The whole thing is too chaotic to rig effectively and you'd need an operation way larger than you could maintain opsec for. 

Facing an irrational and implausible confrontation with this absurd demand upon her character, Ruby Freedman insisted upon her integrity. The devil is a liar. And she did not lie. 

You know what? Mainstream media needs to make this the front page news-Trump is a liar, and he nearly got this woman and her daughter killed with his lies. They need to talk about Mark Meadows and the insurrection PowerPoint. The reality of the coup attempt is real, newsworthy, the only thing I want to talk about, the thing Fox News avoids when Laura Ingraham blank-facedly talks to Trump and he lies about gas prices and think the debt ceiling deal is going to be used on SCOTUS (when simple majorities put his justices on the bench--like, duh). 

(And I will never get over that we had an attempted coup--and it was for this fucking dullard. I've blown more intelligent things out of my nose than this windmill cancer, Greenland-curious, toilet-flushing, Sharpie brandishing, mother-trucking Space Force creating, ever-golfing, tax-evading, pussy-grabbing SOB and I would never endorse one of my boogies for ever-loving president.)

But it fits with the larger picture--get a confession of voter fraud, and stop the January 6 count. Discredit the results. 

They had a plan. This is part of it. And it stinks to high heaven. 

TWGB: The Eastman Problem

 

I just want you to think about John Eastman for a minute, because in ordinary times, that's a name you never would have known. There is no reason to. A John Eastman would just be a cipher, a small man with some strong ideas about how government can perpetuate itself, but, of course, he's a kind of crank. 

But in the world in which we live, he taunted the VP of the US for not violating the norms of his office, telling him the Capitol riot was his fault, literally, like a bully smacking Pence for hitting himself. Why was Pence hitting himself? 

That's a big problem. I don't fathom how deep Claremont and Federalist Society counts for just this minute, but I know it's a big deal. But I definitely see it as something to think about--why is such a cranky idea as Pence's ability to change the election given credibility? Why listen to Eastman's far-fetched notion (in rather the way Sidney Powell, Rudy Giuliani, and others' wild claims of voter fraud were listened to?)

Because he said Trump won. It's what separates Eastman from the losers--the willingness to say a thing so untrue that no objective reality easily permeates the bald-facedness of the lie. Trump wanted to hear that there was a way that he won.

But what Eastman represents for our purpose is the fact of the collusion, There was a reason for every communication and act that day. John Eastman tells us it was to make Mike Pence grow a spine for Trump,. I think was a stupid ask, and side with Pence that he did not do it, because that day wasn't about Mike Pence's fidelity to the Constitution, but the failure of so many to consider what small d democracy was about. 

So many people who would lie for Trump. It needn't make you think, even. But you should think about that. 

Time Person of the Year: The Silence Breakers

Find out why the Silence Breakers were chosen as TIME's Person of the Year 2017 #TIMEPOY https://t.co/jOS7zksnw7

— TIME (@TIME) December 6, 2017

I think they got this exactly right. A quick look around at some of the stories and columns of the day tells why--

Weinstein's Complicity Machine : People went out of their way to cover up and abet a powerful Hollywood insider for years.

This editorial by Gretchen Carlson (who should have been profiled by Time, as having been the one to finally bring down Roger Ailes).

This disturbing story from a recent accuser of retiring Rep. John Conyers, who appears to have made a chilling threat demonstrating just one reason assault/harassment victims don't come forward.

A new account regarding Senator Al Franken, which demonstrates why even "Nice Guys" don't live up to expectations.

This allegation from Janet Porter, senatorial candidate Roy Moore's spokesperson, that his accusers are the real criminals, showing how even some women don't believe other women.

And there is so much more. It is horrible to know how many people have suffered abusive behavior in silence--it is good to see so many not being silent anymore.

Everywhere and Nobody Sees It

I don't really follow Hollywood stuff, other than watching movies based on comic books  or that have other genre appeal to me. I guess I knew/didn't know there were rumors about Harvey Weinstein because I read Defamer, but that kind of gossipy know/didn't know state isn't the same as thinking a person is a predator, because know/didn't know is the Schrodinger's Cat of pervert. I might not, based on this information, be alone with a person or would tell a friend not to be alone with that one in a "thing in your teeth" or "toilet paper on your shoe" kind of way, but I wouldn't necessarily say "This is a guy who needs to straight up be locked up".*  I'm not the world's biggest carceral state backer in the first place, but also, there's a benefit of the doubt we give men with that reputation, after all. That lady-killer shit.  That pimp player.  You just don't exactly know. Do they force themselves, or just have the kind of charm money definitely might/could buy? 

The Ronan Farrow investigation about Harvey Weinstein, on the other hand, is the confirmation of rumors that basically doesn't happen with situational abusers like this often enough. It's like what happened with Bill Cosby, where there were just too many stories--eventually, after a kind of floodgate opened. Or Roger Ailes. Or Donald Trump, if he didn't somehow get elected president. People who take advantage of others find their ways of doing it quietly and while isolating their targets. They create ways of not getting told on, including bullying and threats of retribution. And they have a great sense for who one can fuck with, and who one can't. They don't let their shit bubble up in front of "nice society". They victimize people who don't have power, and then I guess just hope their victims don't find themselves with the power to speak out, eventually.  

And it might help to understand that men can get sexually harassed too, and find themselves dealing with questioning themselves, how they could have responded, and why they didn't report. If someone like Terry Crews, who is physically impressive and someone you would feel so certain could handle himself in any kind of confrontation,  can speak to the powerlessness that situation can put someone in, it paints a picture of how this kind of abuse can be everywhere, and people just don't try to see it. It also shows how much privilege can be a factor.

Bob Dole! Boeing! Carrier! Flynn Jr!

It seems like we can sort of clear up whether the Trump "congratulations" call from the Taiwanese government was a faux pas or pre-panned, now--it had been prepared months in advance with the assistance of paid lobbyist, former Senator Bob Dole, which does contradict the surprised "They called me!" Tweet PEOTUS Trump had made.

This seems like a case of poor communications--was the incoming Trump foreign policy transition team unaware that this would probably be found out? (After all, transient team members are being held to some fairly strict guidelines that includes a non-disclosure agreement--as well as a ban on lobbying, so they might not have realized this would become transparent via a document trail.) But this may actually be a trend--

Take a recent Tweet made by Trump regarding the cost of Boeing's Air Force One contract, which had an effect on Boeing stock. It wasn't actually accurate, and lead to speculation that the Tweet was in response to criticism regarding free trade that Boeing's CEO had made. It's a concern that one Tweet could have that kind of effect on stock prices--and be inaccurate. People need a president who understands that his or her communication can no longer be deemed "casual" and doesn't play games.

I've pointed out that the Carrier deal seems to have been over-hyped, and that the media needs to really investigate claims made by Team Trump. United Steelworkers leader, Chuck Jones, put it a bit more bluntly than I did, accusing Trump of "lying his ass off", which resulted in Trump responding, via Twitter, in kind, resulting in the union leader receiving threats. Trump's original Carrier claims wre inaccurate, and Jones' comments represent a difference of opinion--but Trump's reckless communications regarding a single citizen could have dire effects. (But this is of a piece with Trump's previous response to criticism, for example, from journalists.  And journalists who have run afoul of Trump have received death threats.)

We've seen just recently that inaccurate or outright fake information can have potentially disastrous consequences, with the shooting that took place in a DC-area restaurant.  A member of the Trump transition team actually had been responsible for furthering that nasty, lurid bit of conspiracy theory. However, VP-elect Mike Pence, when questioned about this, responded as if Michael Flynn, Jr. never had been part of the team (he was fired, but certainly had been part of the transition).  This type of deception is anything but innocent--when people in authority regularly lie, people might begin to get the idea that our institutions simply aren't to be trusted, but without some kind of trust in our institutions, their efficacy is sorely diminished.

Donald Trump represented himself as a straight-shooter, but this hardly seems to be the case. If he is to govern effectively, though, he needs to show greater respect for the truth, even if it comes at the expense of the narrative he wants to feed the public.

Senator Sessions Is Not Sure

I've pointed out the misogyny of the Trump campaign with respects to Secretary Clinton before, but I think it's helpful to note that there is a strain of misogyny in general (I mean, take Mike Pence, please!) that reveals itself in subtle and not so subtle ways. But this isn't peculiar to the Trump campaign at all--look, things like trying to redefine rape to only refer to forcible rape, or rejecting any kind of enforceable equal pay bill, have been mainstream Republican thought for awhile.

It's just that, as with the Trump Effect in terms of bullying, Islamophobia and racism, it's likely that the way Trump off-handedly talks about grabbing women "by the pussy" will be simply assumed to be ordinary. Take that nice family man in the picture above with his very special "She's a cunt, Vote Trump" shirt. He's wearing that and I'm sure he doesn't care who sees it. People have brought their children to this rally, and he thinks it is fine and dandy for the word "cunt" to be splashed out before the eyes of young people. This is another word for "pussy". These are somewhat vulgar slang terms for female genitalia. He is there to support a candidate for president who has suggested that it is ok, if one is rich and famous, to grab women by just this body part. Just reach out and touch someone. Maybe because you are moving in on them "like a bitch". And want to fuck them, even though they are married people?

Is that what he's raising his kids to think? That it's ok for his sons to be "pussy-grabbers", use the word "cunt" out loud in public, and be carefree fucking about? That it's ok for his daughters to have their pussies grabbed (probably by their employers, and if they don't like it, they can change jobs) and possibly be called "cunts"? (You'd hope not. But that isn't what he's wearing on his shirt, is it?)

But why should I rag on this anonymous John Q. Citizen and his profound lack of taste, when I can talk about the honorable gentleman from Alabama, Senator Jeff Sessions? Who simply does not know if he would characterize grabbing someone in the pussy as being a sexual assault. Why, whatever do the laws on the book say? Oh me, oh my, how do we ever sort out whether grabbing a person by the crotch without their consent is wrong?

Am I supposed to entertain the notion that, were an individual to aim their mitts at the crotch of any of the persons of female identity within Senator Sessions' household, he would not actually know whether he was honor bound to sock the blighter in his miscreant face? It seems to me that if put to the real-world test, he would consider it cowardly if he didn't throw down on a molester--but maybe he's confused about whether women are just public sex toys that sometimes do housework and answer the phone. I certainly hope he doesn't think the latter, and as culturally one is taught to respect women, he would assist any human being who was getting rough and unwanted handling--because that's just the decent thing to do! But when confronted with the choice in the hypothetical "Does this answer hurt my candidate?" sense--really? Suddenly because vocally molestation-positive Trump is at the top of the ticket, Sessions doesn't know whether crotch-grabs are ok?

This is Trump's "leadership" in action. His example is "go low".  And he takes people down with him.

EDIT: No, really. This is an open question for conservatives now. Is it ok to grope people? Who knows?

Huckabee's a Few Chips Short of a Bag

Via Steve Benen, I actually don't think there is anything surprising about Mike Huckabee wanting a boycott on Frito-Lay for their partnership with the It Gets Better Project. It might not look presidential to get into a fight with a bag od Rainbow Doritos, but from where Huckabee stands, in the polls and in life, the culture war is what it's all about. The striking point isn't the hypocrisy between Huckabee's support for a boycott in the instance, while calling a similar sort of strike on Chick-Fil-A over their support for anti-LGBT groups economic terrorism--that's just expected. I mean, all's fair in love of one's own voice and the culture war, am I right?

No. The striking thing, leaving aside the exception that Huckabee takes with potty-mouth and dis-respecter of religions, Dan Savage, for hurting religious fee-fees, is that Huckabee disapproves of the company's involvement with the It Gets Better Project, which focuses on supporting LGBT kids in the face of bullying, and was formed in reaction to a wave of LGBT kids committing suicide in despair of their situation. On some level, Mike Huckabee does not agree that LGBT kids should be supported even when they are facing the prospect of being bullied to death.

One could try to break down, specifically, what part of this mission bothers him. Is it that life is made bearable for LGBT youth, who he has a callous lack of concern for? Or is it that he simply feels that harassing a "sinner" to their breaking point is the God and Constitution-given right of any Christian child (and their parents)? Does that even matter?

For a child contemplating their sexual orientation or gender identification, this isn't a trivial matter, no matter what an ignoramus like Huckabee thinks. A young person is struggling to become an adult, and they don't just have the regard of their peers to consider--but the treatment they might face from an unenlightened school faculty, or from their own parents. Kids have been turned out of their family homes because of their identity. This isn't about some "name-calling" or fragile adolescent feelings--this is a matter of life or death for LGBT kids. This is about them being able to survive their vulnerability.

So am I saying Huckabee's signing on to this boycott is basically supporting picking on the vulnerable? You know, I think I am.

This Is a Pride to Remember

The great news that we (LGBTQIAAP or QUILTBAG folks) got this past Friday, that SCOTUS affirmed that same-sex marriage bans were unconstitutional, somewhat overshadowed an interesting case in New Jersey that found that conversion therapy--that snake oil peddled to desperate parents and young people who believed that gay could be prayed away, or made to go away with some obscure science--was a fraud.

I've always hated this, being just a little queer and a lot pro-science, because it's a perversion of the latter and a crime against people who are the former. The history of anti-gay conversion therapy is a very dubious one, and seems to rely an awful lot on trying to torture the sexual feelings of a healthy person away. It's been long understood to be a dangerous lie, which does more harm than good to the people who undergo such so-called "therapy"--but that doesn't mean people still aren't suffering in part because of what that type of therapy entails because we live in a society still pretty ignorant about what it means to be LGBT*. They still frame the debate in terms of actions and lifestyle choices, without seeming to understand that harmlessly loving a same-sex partner and growing old together really isn't a weird witchcraft that poisons the cattle--it's just people doing what is right for them.

Mike Huckabee is Pretty Gross

Former AR Governor Mike Huckabee (R) had some interesting comments to in reference to Caitlin Jenner and trans people in general:

“For those who do not think that we are under threat, simply recognize that the fact that we are now in city after city watching ordinances say that your 7-year-old daughter, if she goes into the restroom cannot be offended and you can’t be offended if she’s greeted there by a 42-year-old man who feels more like a woman than he does a man.”

Huckabee continued saying saying he wished someone told him in high school he “could have felt like a woman” and shower with the girls.

“Now I wish that someone told me that when I was in high school that I could have felt like a woman when it came time to take showers in PE,” said Huckabee. “I’m pretty sure that I would have found my feminine side and said, ‘Coach, I think I’d rather shower with the girls today.’ You’re laughing because it sounds so ridiculous, doesn’t it?”

A transwoman, regardless of her age and whether she was assigned as male at birth, is not a man. She is not presenting as a man. She is in a restroom to use the restroom, which is what a 7-year-old or any-other-year-old person is doing. The assumption that some middle-aged gender non-conforming person is in the restroom to specifically be offensive--is what is really offensive.

Note that Mike Huckabee, who recently was all about forgiving Josh Duggar for touching his little sisters, is broadcasting his fears about genderqueer people without  any sense of understanding about who they are and why they express alternative  gender expressions from their birth assignment. He's never looked into the facts. He doesn't seem to know, for example, that there really is no epidemic of problematic trans behavior (particularly not related to "restrooms"). 

O'Reilly's War

FOX Mushroom Farm is probably not doing star manure-shoveler Bill O'Reilly any favors by not putting him on a bullshit short-term temporary suspension--just throwing that out there. At present count, he has about seven or eight former colleagues calling b.s. on his accounting of his experiences covering the Falklands War. He's gone so far as to threaten a NYT reporter with "everything I have" over the issue.  A time-out might defuse attention on this issue for the network and their star, but right now, he is totally being a story. Journalists (real or FOX News) tell stories--but it isn't helpful for them to become them.

Steve M. describes the wagon-circling that conservative media are engaging in--I think this is very awkward of them (and really--Alger Hiss?*) O'Reilly's fault in recounting his Argentinian experiences doesn't really have an ideological basis, and his reporting in the "No-Spin Zone" should certainly account for something if the byword of "Fair and Balanced" is to have any meaning at all, no? He's simply being called an inaccurate reporter who is exaggerating and got on everyone's nerves. That's not about politics. That's about their experience of working with him.

Homophobia and The Religious Wrong

I couldn't resist clicking on this link at Huffington Post when it labelled an interview with Franklin Graham "One of the Most Homophobic Things We Have ever Seen".  In a world where batshit evangelicals assert that Disney movies and popular children's novels are out to turn people gay, and where hate-pimps like Scott Lively advocate the murder of LGBT people, you really have to go out of your way to be "the most homophobic" anything.  But I would say this is pretty gross:

 "Gays and lesbians cannot have children," Graham commented. When Funk pointed out that they could adopt, he retorted, "Yeah, they can recruit."

          He went on to imply that gay adoptions are tantamount to exploitation of children:

You can adopt a child into a marriage, but you can also recruit children into your cause. I believe in protecting children, OK? From exploitation, all exploitations.

During the interview, Graham insisted that he was simply speaking out the way his father once did, despite the unpopularity of his views.

And here is why I find that appalling:

 This straight couple is charged in the murder of a four year old boy because the mother alleges that she thought her child was gay.  She murdered her own small child. Because she thought he might be gay. 

Parent of the Year material, obviously.

Mitt Romney Got Away With It. Probably a lot.

Jason Horowitz's WaPO piece revealing young Mitt Romney as a "prankster" whose version of pranking involved one one occasion, walking a visually-impaired teacher into a door and on another, involved physically assaulting another student with scissors in the company of a mob, actually turned the screw for me. My original perception of Romney was "clueless"--I though he suffered from just a bad case of privileged boobery combined with a mild empathy-impairment. I upgraded my estimate to: "and a gutless coward, too" as the only explanation for his squishy weaseling on the issues not long ago. But that article just made me see a sociopath. That wasn't the behavior of a dumb kid making mistakes. That was a pattern of preying on the weak and thinking their weakness was amusing. It was intolerance of differences. And I don't think he learned thing one from his experiences because no one bothered to teach him that it was cruel, or wrong.

From the article:

A few days later, Friedemann entered Stevens Hall off the school’s collegiate quad to find Romney marching out of his own room ahead of a prep school posse shouting about their plan to cut Lauber’s hair. Friedemann followed them to a nearby room where they came upon Lauber, tackled him and pinned him to the ground. As Lauber, his eyes filling with tears, screamed for help, Romney repeatedly clipped his hair with a pair of scissors. 

(Snip) 

The incident transpired in a flash, and Friedemann said Romney then led his cheering schoolmates back to his bay-windowed room in Stevens Hall. 

Friedemann, guilt ridden, made a point of not talking about it with his friend and waited to see what form of discipline would befall Romney at the famously strict institution. Nothing happened.

It's noted later in the article that Lauber was expelled for smoking.  They are very different things, after all. Administering a beating and a haircut at the head of a mob is very different thing when you are the son of someone very important from smoking while being a victimized kid of someone....probably not quite as important. I think the lesson young Mitt would have really learned is all too clear--


Whether he acknowledges how and what he learned is, of course, not quite a task Mr. Romney is up to.

:Be an Ally and a Friend

Recent events, like the suicides of Tyler Clementi and Seth Walsh remind us of how very serious the problem of feeling isolated, picked-on and unsupported can be for gay young people.

I want to believe most people don't actually suck, and are like the people in this ad. I think schools and workplaces should be safe from gender/orientation-based judgements. I think people should be seen for who they are and what they do, and not random perceptions drawn from stereotypes and ignorance.

I know that's a lot. But that what I hope is our future.