Dear Blog,
I apologize for ignoring you all summer. I don't really know where the summer went. I think I spent most of it anxiety-ridden and annoyed.
I'm glad I sense autumn in the air.
Honestly, blog, I kind of forgot you existed. I posted some blogs over on the ol' myspace. Which while I enjoyed taking a few laps around the sarcasm track I started obsessing over who would read it and what people would think. That is so very not "zen".
I have all this art building up inside of me and for some reason I keep putting it off. This is not helping anybody.
I can't decide if I like my life or not. I don't think I do. But I feel obligated to stay where I am. I hardly am capable of paying rent these days and yet I think if I quit my job I wouldn't be able to pay rent. Hmm....
I wish I had the balls to be a squatter. But then what would I do with my laptop?
I hate how jaded I am here. I hate that because I am a woman I cannot engage with strangers. That is something to blog about.
All in due time,
J.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Saturday, May 3, 2008
Death by Capitalist Culture
Death By Capitalist Culture
In the past three days I have shed a lot of tears. Unashamed and certainly warranted, though not necessarily understood by others. Why? Well I've cried for Deborah Jeane Palfrey who appeared to have committed suicide at her mother's home after being sentenced to up to 55 years in prison for running a "high-end prostitution ring". Today I cried when the three year old filly, Eight Belles, was euthanized on the track at Churchill Down after coming in second in the Kentucky Derby. Why wouldn't people understand my tears? Well, for one I had no personal attachment to either woman or filly. I didn't know them, or anyone who did. For a lot of people that's enough reason to not get upset over things. I can understand that, but I'm not wired that way. I tend to empathize with the world.
Why did I cry for them? I cried because nobody should have to resort to suicide. I cried because I've been there, I've believed it's the only way out of the pain and confusion this world can bring. I cried because it might not have been suicide, someone (or several people) might have been so afraid of the information she had about them that they were compelled to take her life away. Though really, she was going to prison so essentially the justice system already took her life away, they needed to take her voice away. To ultimately silence her for their own security. Either way, this should never have happened because she should never have been given that sentence. Hard criminals who actually hurt people are given more lenient sentences than that. I cried because our culture-civilized capitalist society- continues to be allowed to suppress and kill. Nobody is free, stop fooling yourselves!
I cried because we continue to destroy anything for the sake of money. A 17hh three year old filly was pushed beyond her body's limit. Two of her fetlocks (ankles) were shattered after she gave her all in a strenuous "prestigious" race. She was a BABY, her bones were not done growing! Yet we push these horses for the glory and flash of "tradition". Not to mention the millions of dollars. No of course we can't wait until they're matured, of course we have to start working them under saddle as yearlings! Make money now, who cares if they're broken down at five years old? Horses are dispensable. Just buy another one!
So when are the masses going to wake up? Sex workers don't hurt anybody, in fact more harm is done to them on a regular basis. Thoroughbreds are living complex creatures with intelligence and personalities who happen to be able to run fast. Why don't we, as a culture, find a way to appreciate their entire beings instead of simply treating them as machines? I'm sure you can find a way to continue to gamble and make money without ruining millions of animals in the process.
We deserve better. We're all connected. Whether or not you are a sex worker, know any, have contact with any, whether or not you work in the racing industry, ride horses, or have ever even been around them... harm done is harm done to all. It permeates throughout the collective consciousness and everyone believes it's just the way it is, nothing can be done about it.
NO.
Things can change. We are the change. And no this is not an Obama campaign. Think for yourself. Question everything. Align yourself with whatever you believe and do something!
In the past three days I have shed a lot of tears. Unashamed and certainly warranted, though not necessarily understood by others. Why? Well I've cried for Deborah Jeane Palfrey who appeared to have committed suicide at her mother's home after being sentenced to up to 55 years in prison for running a "high-end prostitution ring". Today I cried when the three year old filly, Eight Belles, was euthanized on the track at Churchill Down after coming in second in the Kentucky Derby. Why wouldn't people understand my tears? Well, for one I had no personal attachment to either woman or filly. I didn't know them, or anyone who did. For a lot of people that's enough reason to not get upset over things. I can understand that, but I'm not wired that way. I tend to empathize with the world.
Why did I cry for them? I cried because nobody should have to resort to suicide. I cried because I've been there, I've believed it's the only way out of the pain and confusion this world can bring. I cried because it might not have been suicide, someone (or several people) might have been so afraid of the information she had about them that they were compelled to take her life away. Though really, she was going to prison so essentially the justice system already took her life away, they needed to take her voice away. To ultimately silence her for their own security. Either way, this should never have happened because she should never have been given that sentence. Hard criminals who actually hurt people are given more lenient sentences than that. I cried because our culture-civilized capitalist society- continues to be allowed to suppress and kill. Nobody is free, stop fooling yourselves!
I cried because we continue to destroy anything for the sake of money. A 17hh three year old filly was pushed beyond her body's limit. Two of her fetlocks (ankles) were shattered after she gave her all in a strenuous "prestigious" race. She was a BABY, her bones were not done growing! Yet we push these horses for the glory and flash of "tradition". Not to mention the millions of dollars. No of course we can't wait until they're matured, of course we have to start working them under saddle as yearlings! Make money now, who cares if they're broken down at five years old? Horses are dispensable. Just buy another one!
So when are the masses going to wake up? Sex workers don't hurt anybody, in fact more harm is done to them on a regular basis. Thoroughbreds are living complex creatures with intelligence and personalities who happen to be able to run fast. Why don't we, as a culture, find a way to appreciate their entire beings instead of simply treating them as machines? I'm sure you can find a way to continue to gamble and make money without ruining millions of animals in the process.
We deserve better. We're all connected. Whether or not you are a sex worker, know any, have contact with any, whether or not you work in the racing industry, ride horses, or have ever even been around them... harm done is harm done to all. It permeates throughout the collective consciousness and everyone believes it's just the way it is, nothing can be done about it.
NO.
Things can change. We are the change. And no this is not an Obama campaign. Think for yourself. Question everything. Align yourself with whatever you believe and do something!
Monday, April 28, 2008
Sharing the bookish love.
Five random books from my well-loved bookshelf:
- Gaining: The Truth About Life After Eating Disorders by Aimee Liu.
"The first group: Overcontrolled, includes most restricting anorexics and a minority of bulimics. They avoid social contact; tightly control their appetites for food and for sex; limit their pleasures; and withdraw from excitement, sensation, and risk... the second group: Perfectionistic, includes most bulimics and a minority of restricting anorexics. These are the conscious 'good girls' who aim to please, excel, and conform. They worry about the details but are often so fearful of making a mistake that they can't get their work in on time... the third group: Undercontrolled, is split about evenly between bulimics and anorexics who binge and purge. Their emotions are intense, their behaviors impulsive, they tend to fly into rages instead of expressing their anger passively or turning it inward, and they desperately seek relationships to soothe themselves." - Gaining, p. 37.
Everything about this book is insightful and an absolutely necessary read for everyone; not just people who have experienced eating disorders first or secondhand.
- The Midnight Disease: The Drive to Write, Writer's Block, and the Creative Brain by Alice W. Flaherty.
- The Dragon Doesn't Live Here Anymore: Living Fully, Loving Freely by Alan Cohen.
- A Language Older Than Words by Derrick Jensen.
- The Female Brain by Louann Brizendine, M.D.
I'll keep doing these periodically until I run out of books. And I assure you, my selection is random. Normally I'm much more chart-y and meaningful than that but...it was pretty much "which ones fell on the floor first".
Until next time...
-Jacque
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Third time posting this. I've gone from infuriated to angry to not happy.
Before I go on to write in an eloquent, well-thought-out fashion I just want to say that the NY Post is a despicable publication and Cathy Burke is a douchebag for writing this article: http://www.nypost.com/seven/04222008/news/regionalnews/hookers_laid_bare_on_show_107500.htm" about the woman who was interviewed by Diane Sawyer on 20/20 about Prostitution in America.
First of all, "hooker" is a derogatory term. It would be completely unacceptable for a reporter to write a story about a certain race, culture, or group of people using a parallel term (i.e. "fags" in an article about gay men). Why should we, the society that reads these publications and enforces these values daily, allow this? Unless you are a hardcore hater of sex workers (in which your opinion is invalid to rational discussion as the opinion of homophobes warrant no basis in the LGBT movement) you should be angry about this. You don't have to agree with the idea of sex work, you don't even have to have an opinion either way (Americans seem to love wallowing in apathy), but it's very important that you pay attention. Pay attention to what is being fed to you. Think for a second, would you want to be portrayed in the media in such a harsh, black and white context without even being given the dignity of proper terms appropriated to your job/culture/race/gender/etc.? In this article the word "hooker" is used to describe Debauchette (the name she uses to identify herself on her public blog) four times. It alternates throughout the story with "blogger" and "she". The correct term would be escort if she was specific about the work that she does, otherwise "sex worker" would suffice.
For those unfamiliar, the story broke out when Debauchette blogged, in her personal public blog, that she was in fact the woman in the Diane Sawyer interview. That even though she was hidden in shadow with her profile and voice manipulated, her mother recognized her.
Okay. Take a moment and think about this, why is this news? Why is the mainstream media even printing articles about this? America's obsession with "scandal" is ridiculous. The culture appears to feed off of it, therefore the media dishes it out as fast as possible and completely disregards the notion of truth or the act of discretion. Certainly one could argue that Debauchette put it out there in a public medium. Well, that's just it. She broke the story in her own words in her own space. Beyond that, what goes on between her and her mother is private and why should anyone even care to know the "juicy" details?
Because people want to know about sex workers. Because people are fascinated by the subversive. Because people get a thrill out of living vicariously through those who live outside of the system. Because people like to know when others will or will not be accepted, especially when they aren't quite sure themselves what is and is not acceptable.
Finally, regardless people's salacious "need to know" mentality or our society's fucked up viewpoints, this was just a downright shoddy piece of journalism. Not only did they reinforce a derogatory term, they made assumptions about the content posted in the blog. By publishing those assumptions they turned them into false facts. The article quotes; "The unfortunate revelation didn't quell her passion for the job, however.
'Later in the day, I saw Gabriel . . . He told me to take my clothes off, and this made me smile . . . While we undressed, I thought about how good this is,' she blogged."
She never stated that Gabriel was a client, they assumed this. In a later post she clarifies this point and expresses that he is not. Perhaps Cathy Burke and the NY Post didn't even consider that a sex worker would have intimate relations outside of their job. They also completely skewed the content, perhaps because "pro-slut" isn't appropriate for a public paper. The exact quote is; "And later in the day, I saw Gabriel, another blissfully pro-slut individual. He told me to take my clothes off, and this made me smile, which made him smile. While we undressed, I thought about how good this is, even if I have to battle my urge to shut down." I'm curious as to why they took out "which made him smile". Perhaps I am incredibly cynical, but I think it's because they wanted to continue to show her as this one-dimensional self-obsessed sex-obsessed hooker (she doesn't even deserve to be considered a woman).
So great job Cathy Burke for furthering the puritanical judgmental asinine culture that America is wrapped up in. I hope you enjoy your work and life as much as Debauchette enjoys hers, even if she may have to fight some battles and deal with some hardships that you couldn't even begin to imagine.
First of all, "hooker" is a derogatory term. It would be completely unacceptable for a reporter to write a story about a certain race, culture, or group of people using a parallel term (i.e. "fags" in an article about gay men). Why should we, the society that reads these publications and enforces these values daily, allow this? Unless you are a hardcore hater of sex workers (in which your opinion is invalid to rational discussion as the opinion of homophobes warrant no basis in the LGBT movement) you should be angry about this. You don't have to agree with the idea of sex work, you don't even have to have an opinion either way (Americans seem to love wallowing in apathy), but it's very important that you pay attention. Pay attention to what is being fed to you. Think for a second, would you want to be portrayed in the media in such a harsh, black and white context without even being given the dignity of proper terms appropriated to your job/culture/race/gender/etc.? In this article the word "hooker" is used to describe Debauchette (the name she uses to identify herself on her public blog) four times. It alternates throughout the story with "blogger" and "she". The correct term would be escort if she was specific about the work that she does, otherwise "sex worker" would suffice.
For those unfamiliar, the story broke out when Debauchette blogged, in her personal public blog, that she was in fact the woman in the Diane Sawyer interview. That even though she was hidden in shadow with her profile and voice manipulated, her mother recognized her.
Okay. Take a moment and think about this, why is this news? Why is the mainstream media even printing articles about this? America's obsession with "scandal" is ridiculous. The culture appears to feed off of it, therefore the media dishes it out as fast as possible and completely disregards the notion of truth or the act of discretion. Certainly one could argue that Debauchette put it out there in a public medium. Well, that's just it. She broke the story in her own words in her own space. Beyond that, what goes on between her and her mother is private and why should anyone even care to know the "juicy" details?
Because people want to know about sex workers. Because people are fascinated by the subversive. Because people get a thrill out of living vicariously through those who live outside of the system. Because people like to know when others will or will not be accepted, especially when they aren't quite sure themselves what is and is not acceptable.
Finally, regardless people's salacious "need to know" mentality or our society's fucked up viewpoints, this was just a downright shoddy piece of journalism. Not only did they reinforce a derogatory term, they made assumptions about the content posted in the blog. By publishing those assumptions they turned them into false facts. The article quotes; "The unfortunate revelation didn't quell her passion for the job, however.
'Later in the day, I saw Gabriel . . . He told me to take my clothes off, and this made me smile . . . While we undressed, I thought about how good this is,' she blogged."
She never stated that Gabriel was a client, they assumed this. In a later post she clarifies this point and expresses that he is not. Perhaps Cathy Burke and the NY Post didn't even consider that a sex worker would have intimate relations outside of their job. They also completely skewed the content, perhaps because "pro-slut" isn't appropriate for a public paper. The exact quote is; "And later in the day, I saw Gabriel, another blissfully pro-slut individual. He told me to take my clothes off, and this made me smile, which made him smile. While we undressed, I thought about how good this is, even if I have to battle my urge to shut down." I'm curious as to why they took out "which made him smile". Perhaps I am incredibly cynical, but I think it's because they wanted to continue to show her as this one-dimensional self-obsessed sex-obsessed hooker (she doesn't even deserve to be considered a woman).
So great job Cathy Burke for furthering the puritanical judgmental asinine culture that America is wrapped up in. I hope you enjoy your work and life as much as Debauchette enjoys hers, even if she may have to fight some battles and deal with some hardships that you couldn't even begin to imagine.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Thursday, March 20, 2008
I Hold These Truths To Be Self-Evident:
Truth is undeniable yet often deceived. Truth screams silently for our attention but we often face it head on with our eyes closed, or with a searching gaze in the wrong direction.
We readily give our attention to art. A sense of comfort in the ridiculous and sublime, the abstract and the concrete. A sense of knowing, pretentious veil of shallow understanding steeped in the manure pile of intellect.
Lies scream quite loudly for our attention, sometimes even masking themselves as truths. We often fall prey to their schemes and disenchantments. We believe there is only art and lies...
for the truth is so tender we quake in its appearance.
It's time to step forward and acknowledge what we all know intrinsically.
This is where I will elaborate on the truths of life I hold to be self-evident and evident to all within the collective consciousness.
As we are all one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)