Today, after much delay and opposition, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand’s Military Justice Improvement Act (MJIA) will be finally be debated and voted on by the Senate. This bill is extremely important and would challenge the status quo culture of rape and impunity ravaging our armed forces. This seems like an obvious solution. But sadly, it has been, and still is, an uphill battle.
As I write this blog post, the Senate is debating the MJIA. As we’ve covered before, the MJIA is a very sensible bill that would move the decision to prosecute out of the hands of the Chain of Command and into the hands of an independent military prosecutor. Given that over a quarter of people sexually assaulted are assaulted by someone in the chain of command, the current system, which requires survivors to report their assault to their superior within said chain of command, is counterproductive an dangerous. The military is creating a system in which rape survivors must report their rapes to people who are friends with the rapists, or the rapists themselves. This obviously inhibits reporting. Logic tells us this. And so does the fact that 62% of those who did report perceived some retaliation for doing so.
So, it only took statutory rapist, self-defecating, draft dodger Ted Nugent a month to find the quote he thinks vindicates him for having called his president a subhuman mongrel. Drumroll please…. “So Obama called blacks mongrels on the View. Well well well” tweeted a comma-shy Nugent. So, what’s the deal? Did President Obama indeed call “blacks” mongrels? Well, it turns out he did, indeed, say, “We are sort of a mongrel people…. I mean we’re all kinds of mixed up.” So, now the question becomes, did Obama call “blacks” mongrels? Yes and no. He was referring to African Americans initially, but Obama explicitly said the same applied to white people: “That’s actually true of white people as well, but we just know more about it.” But let’s, for argument’s sake, say Obama had really been speaking exclusively about Black people. Would that legitimize Ted Nugent’s use of the word. Not at all. First of all, there is the whole question of the identity of the speaker. But I’m not going to focus on this because I’m sure anyone dense or dishonest enough to think this is a gotcha moment for Obama is incapable of or unwilling to recognize the difference between a Black person using the N word, and a non-Black person using it; the difference between a gay man using the f word and a straight person using it etc.
What is undeniable and not up for debate is the fact that Obama and Nugent meant profoundly different things when they used the mongrel. Ted Nugent is a proud Obama-hater, who vowed that he would be dead or in jail if Obama won re-election. (I thought you were a man of your word, Ted.) When he called Obama “mongrel” he was being overtly and unmistakably critical (for argument’s sake, I’ll use the word “critical” as opposed to hateful, racist, derogatory, offensive etc). How do we know? Well, besides his record of Obama-victory-based death or prison threats (or teases, to me), the immediate context of the quote makes Nugent’s perspective crystal clear: “I have obviously failed to galvanize and prod, if not shame enough Americans to be ever vigilant not to let a Chicago communist raised communist educated communist nurtured subhuman mongrel like the ACORN community organizer gangster Barack Hussein Obama to weasel his way into the top office of authority in the United States of America.” So, he’s lamenting that Obama has not be voted out (or worse), calling him a gangster and, here’s the big kicker, subhuman. There’s an unspoken rule which governs the world that says that any word directly preceded by “subhuman” is not being used in a nice way. Now, compare this to Barack Obama’s use of the word. The only way for Obama’s use of the word to be at all comparable, would be if Obama had openly stated his opposition to African Americans previously or at the same point. If he had lamented being unable to galvanize people against African Americans and kick them out of the country. This is even more far fetched when we take into account that Obama was talking about white people, too. Now, for Nugent to have any leg to stand on, Obama would have had to have expressed a hatred of black people and white people and actually all people, since almost all people are mixes. Please note, Obama does not use the word “subhuman” or any other Hitlerian nomenclature in his appearance on the View. So there’s that, too.
Join us for a night of laughter from the left as NYC’s top progressive performers and pundits deliver comedy and commentary with political punch.
Featuring: John Fugelsang Katie Halper Scott Blakeman Frank Conniff Ken Schultz and Julianna Forlano
FREE admission. Great bar and menu. An audience of like-minded lefties.
Doors at 7:30pm
@ Jimmy’s No. 43 (43 east 7th)
We’ll be joined by our friends at Downtown East for Progress, who will share information about their current campaigns related to affordable healthcare, immigration reform, gun control and climate change.
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has worked long and hard–and faced daunting opposition–fighting against the military’s sexual assault epidemic and culture of impunity. But, according to one Republican Congressman, Sen. Gillibrand’s plan is “certainly not an issue of sexual assault,” but rather a combination of sour grapes and a desire for attention.
Some of you may recall that Sen. Gillibrand tried to pass the Military Justice Improvement Act (MJIA) of 2013, which would have removed the decision to prosecute sexual assault and rape from the chain of command and put it into the hands of an impartial military lawyer. Unfortunately for Gillibrand, all amendments to the 2014 defense spending were dropped, due to annoying “partisan politics” or Republican intransigence and Democratic foldability.
Gillibrand’s MJIA, however, will have another chance when it comes to the Senate floor this March.
But there’s tons of opposition from both parties. Because Kirsten Gillibrand seriously needs to just calm down, am I right? I mean, she is getting way too emotional and hysterical and subjective when it comes to the whole rape in the military thing. Yes, the Pentagon itself estimated that there were 26,000 cases of sexual assault in 2012. Fine, that does seem like a lot. And the Pentagon also found that only 3,374 cases of sexual assault were reported. So, OK, there’s some under-reporting going on. And, yes, maybe something should be done. But Gillibrand’s Military Justice Improvement Act plan is just absurd! Her critics argue that the plan is unnecessary, too “extreme” and won’t be effective.
The MJIA, in fact, isn’t even about sexual assault. It’s all about Kirsten. Rep. Michael Turner, an Ohio Republican and co-chairman of the Sexual Assault Prevention Caucus, said:
She seriously misrepresents the circumstances of the Defense Department, because she ignores the legislation that was passed…. I think at this point, it’s certainly not an issue of sexual assault, it’s just an issue of the senator wanting to promote her solution that has already lost. I think she’s getting a whole lot of attention for a debate that’s over.
Seriously, Kirsten. Turner is over it. Shouldn’t you be? What is so important about the chain of command any way? Well, under the chain of command status quo, a victim of rape or sexual assault reports the crime to his her or superior. This means the person deciding how to proceed with the case will know the person reporting the crime. If the perpetrator of the crime is in the same unit, which is the case for 25% of women and 27% of men who are victims of sexual assault, that means that the superior will know the perpetrator or, even worse, will actually be the perpetrator. In other words the current system makes it so you may have to report your rape to your rapist. And if you think the system doesn’t exactly encourage people to come forward, you’re right. It silences them. According to the Department of Defense, among the women who did not report experiencing unwanted sexual contact, “47% said fear of retaliation or reprisal prevented them from reporting. 43% heard about negative experiences from other victims who had reported. 50% thought nothing would be done.” And their fears were well-founded; 62% of the women who did report their assault experienced retaliation. So, an overwhelming majority of victims decide to stay silent. And the majority of those who make the brave and painful decision to report their rape or assault are punished for doing so. This system encourages silence at best–and revenge at worst.
Critics of the MJIA including, disappointingly, Sen. Claire McCaskill, who is even threatening to filibuster it, claim that it won’t help those who experience sexual assault in this military. That’s an interesting argument. But I think I’ll trust the opinions of the actual survivors of military sexual assault. Like Paula Coughlin, US Navy, who said:
It has to come out of the chain of command, because the chain of command has really become impotent. The chain of command is vested in protecting itself, and so often, the perpetrator of the assault is in the chain of command.
Or Sarah Plummer, US Marine:
Having someone within your direct chain of command handling the case, it just doesn’t make sense. It`s like your brother raping you and having your dad decide the case.
Or Trina McDonald, US Navy:
The people that were involved in my assaults were police personnel, security personnel, higher-ranking officers, the people that I would have gone to and reported.
Unsurprisingly, the MJIA has also been endorsed by several organizations consisting of and representing people who have actually served in the military, like Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA), Service Women’s Action Network, and Protect Our Defenders. But what is surprising is that even some military high-ups admit systemic failure. Like Commandant of the Marine Corps General James F. Amos who said, “Why wouldn’t female Marines come forward? Because they don’t trust us. They don’t trust the command. They don’t trust the leadership.”
As for the drastic and extreme nature of the bill–because, you know, a sexual assault epidemic should be met with mild solutions–somehow the plan is moderate, logical, obvious and sensible enough that it has garnered support from Senators from both parties. Get ready for this… Republicans Rand Paul and Ted Cruz actually agree with Gillibrand on this one. You may feel weird agreeing with people like Rand and Ted, I know I do. But politics makes strange bedfellows. So, let’s do what we can to push for the MJIA. You can sign this petition. And look here to see if your Senator is on board and if not, tweet them and call them and tell them to vote for the Military Justice Improvement Act!
Does this video look familiar? If it does, you’re either 100 years old, like me, and remember seeing Robert Palmer’s “Simply Irresistible” on the TV, or it’s become a kitsch throwback. This video, however, by Ingrid Michaelson, for her catchy new “Girls Chase Boys“ song makes some major improvements; is a lot less white and a lot less gender-binaried, lucky for us. But you don’t need to have lived through the 1980s to enjoy the video and all its hotness.
Lyrics after the jump.
New York-born and raised and based indie-pop singer-songwriter Ingrid Michaelson explains that her song started out about a break but became something more:
Girls Chase Boys started out as a break up song but took on a deeper meaning as I continued writing. More than just being about my experience, its focus shifted to include the idea that, no matter who or how we love, we are all the same. The video takes that idea one step further, and attempts to turn stereotypical gender roles on their head. Girls don’t exclusively chase boys. We all know this! We all chase each other and in the end we are all chasing after the same thing: love. I hope you enjoy it! AHHH!
It’s a heartwarming statement about how regardless of gender or sexuality, we’re all miserable.
Lyrics
All the broken hearts in the world still beat Lets not make it harder than it has to be Ooooooh it’s all the same thing Girls chase boys chase girls
All the broken hearts in the world still beat Lets not make it harder than it has to be Ooooooh it’s all the same thing Girls chase boys chase girls
I’m a little let down, but I’m not dead There’s a little bit more that has to be said oh oooh you play me, now I play you, too Lets just call it over
All the broken hearts in the world still beat Lets not make it harder than it has to be Oooooh its all the same thing Girls chase boys chase girls (x2) Chase girls chase boys chase boys chase girls
Im a little bit home, but I’m not there yet Its one to forgive but its hard to forget Don’t call me, I won’t call you, too Lets just call it over
All the broken hearts in the world still beat Lets not make it harder than it has to be Oooooh it’s all the same thing Girls chase boys chase girls (x2) chase girls chase boys chase boys chase girls
I got two hands one beating heart And I’ll be alright I’m gonna be alright
Yeah I got two hands one beating heart And I’ll be alright, I’m gonna be alright Gonna be alright
All the broken hearts in the world still beat Lets not make it harder than it has to be Oooooh it’s all the same thing Girls chase boys chase girls (x4)
Pop quiz: which country mandates that employers give women breaks to nurse their babies? Kazakhstan? Or Canada? Where is it easier to get an abortion? Argentina or Bolivia? I bet the answers will surprise you. Check out this excellent interactive chart, which looks at laws (or the lack thereof) on abortion, property rights, harassment, discrimination, domestic violence, work and more, country by country.
The Guardianused World Bank and UN data to create “a snapshot of women’s rights across the globe. Select a region and hover over a country to see how it has legislated for violence, harassment, abortion, property and employment rights, discrimination and equality. Click on a country to tweet a message on the figures. Country data can be viewed in relation to its population size and those of its neighboring states. Click the centre of the circle to return to the beginning.” (It took me a while to figure that last one out because I jumped to the infographic and skipped over the intro. Hopefully, you’re reading this, and won’t make that mistake.) Now get to interacting here.
FYI, OECD stands for Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development and refers to the countries that signed the Convention on the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
The next time someone tells you there’s no such thing as rape culture, ask them if they’ve tried “Date Grape Koolaid.”
The Daiquiri Factory (clever, I know!), in Spokane, Washington, sparked protest and support when it named its grape-flavored daiquiri (sounds delicious, I know!) “Date Grape Koolaid” (clever, original, funny, disgusting, I know!). But the story doesn’t end there. Like so many instances of rape culture, the initial incident almost pales in comparison to the way those who perpetuate rape culture double down, attack the people who call them out, and ultimately cast themselves as the real victims. Their adamant denial of the existence of rape culture, their lack of empathy, their display of privilege and their denigration of rape survivors are evidence of the very rape culture they claim doesn’t exist. This is what it looks like on Facebook.
Here is the Facebook post which the Daiquiri Factory put up last week announcing their drink specials, which included Date Grape Koolaid:
Here are some of the responses the ad elicited (most of which have been removed): “Date Grape Koolaid is not a clever or funny name. It is offensive and condones sexual assault.” Another person wrote, “I am disgusted and mortified by your jest at sexual assault…. I can only hope that you will wise up and change the name of your drink. It was wrong of you to name your drink ‘Date Grape Koolaid’ and the fact that you keep referring to it as a joke makes it even more degrading and offensive.” When one woman commented, “I can’t believe more people haven’t picked up on this. Date Grape Koolaid? With date rape statistics higher than ever and even worse in a college town, this is clearly a dangerous mentality to perpetuate,” the bar replied, “You know why they haven’t because they’re smart enough to know that this is not what it is meant.” Here the Daiquiri Factory tells people to stop being so negative and reading into everything!
Here, they tell a critic it’s all in her head:
Here, the bar tells people upset with a drink special that turns date rape into a pun that they are not only warped and imagining things, but “supporting HATE”:
The bar also offers some free self-help after-school-special advice about the power of positive thinking, failure and success!
Here, the bar tells a critic, who, presumably referenced her own rape, that she hasn’t actually been raped.
People take to the Daiquiry Factory’s Facebook page to support its intransigence and criticize those who oppose drinks with rape-based names. Here, jokes with not funny rape punchlines are shared!
You know how Republicans like to say Democrats are the ones obsessed with abortion because they’re the ones who keep talking about it? (While Republicans just try to make it illegal or inaccessible)? Or how racists like to say to people talking about racism that they’re the racists because they’re the ones who keep talking about it (while the real racists just say or do racist things)? Well, here’s the Date Grape equivalent:
People organize a protest against the bar’s name choice. An organizer of the protest, Taylor Malone, tells reporters:
As someone who has survived rape twice, the most recent one being three months ago, it tells me and other survivors that our experiences don’t matter and that people either don’t believe us or don’t care about us and that all we are is a punch line… would hope they would apologize and change the name….At this point, with all of the backlash against the name and the response from the owners it doesn’t seem like that’s likely.
The bar responds by vowing not to back down:Then they disrespect those who are uncomfortable with the drink’s name, continuing to make light of rape and showing off how much Date Grape-based fun they are having.
Here’s another reminder of how committed the bar is to their rape-themed drink:
In case anyone missed how much fun the people at the Daiquiri Factory were having over Date Grape drinks and how little they cared about the people upset by them, here’s their Superbowl Sunday posting reveling in their victory:
When the story picks up national attention, the Daiquiri Factory realizes that, far from victimizing anyone, they themselves are the victim of a media which is so irresponsible that it fails to cite Urban Dictionary. They declare that they are the victims of slander! They are being silenced by a media that insists on…reporting things that happen.
Here, the bar engages in a campaign to raise awareness about the two-pronged oppression they face from the media and protestors. They use humor to mock both enemies of freedom:
Daiquiri Factory mocks the overly sensitive feelings of their critics, offering a group therapy session happy hour. Those protesting clearly “need help.” Thought disordered protestors are invited as well as “sheeple,” because obviously you have to be a band-wagoning sheep with no mind of your own to find anything wrong with this delightful drink.
I’m just waiting for the persecuted Daiquiri Factory to organize a fundraiser for their cause. Luckily, protestors really have created petitions asking that the bar change the name of the drink. You can find them here and here.
Correction: this post initially included the following as an example of pubic support of the bar and the idea that rape is funny.
I have since been contacted by Nathan Lansing, who has informed me that his comment was made in a satirical tone and. He was upset at lumped together with”misogynists and rape-culture advocates.” I apologize for misrepresenting Mr. Lansing, especially as someone who has been attacked by people who did not get my satire, which I thought was obvious.
Comedians Katie Halper (@kthalps) and Heather gold (@heathr) discover that Morning Jew is pretty clairvoyant. We see how our predictions about Bridgegate and WoodyAllenGate play out. And we’re proud to share some great hate mail.
The Australian musical comedy duo Sparrow-Folk exposes, literally, the menace that is public breastfeeding.
Nurse-flashing wasn’t a term. Until now. When I invented it. But it’s a serious problem. It is when a woman shoves her breast into your her baby’s face in public. Luckily, this self-indulgent nutritionistic practice is getting called out. Last month, for instance, the notoriously boob-phobic and modest establishment called Victoria’s Secret told a customer she could not breastfeed her baby in the dressing room. Though technically private, a dressing room is, apparently, a sacred and boob-free space. But don’t worry. The sensitive employee provided excellent customer service by suggesting that the woman breast feed in a more appropriate venue: the end of a very long alley, where nobody would see her.
Below Australian musical duo Sparrow-Folk confesses that mothers revel in ruining people’s days with their “tits.”
So, it only took 
katiehalper.com 