You Took the Words Outta My Mouth: Miss California vs. Gay Marriage

By now, you've probably heard that although Miss California loves living in a country where everyone gets to make free choices (like the choice to have bigger boobs!), she'd like to be a part of limiting (or continuing to limit) the choices of the GLBT community. Mainly the whole icky marriage part, but she probably wouldn't say no to putting the kibosh on the Matthew Shepard Act that, if passed, will give states federal funds to prosecute hate crimes. I could totz she her agreeing that Shepard's attack was less of a hate crime and more of a whoops-a-daisy robbery. So to sum up, Miss California is pretty much a huge bag of hot useless air and thus has been invited by the conservatives from the National Organization for Marriage (least adorable NOM of all time) to come to DC and spread her intolerance.

If you're not familiar with NOM, check out this fear mongering campaign video where lots of white people (and a few tokens) are terrified of the one thing that will never happen if GLBT people marry: getting their rights trampled and/or infringed on. Gay marriage for these "Left Behind" extras is like a horrifying amalgamation of Voldemort, The Running of the Bulls, and being forced Clockwork-Orange-style to watch "Religulous" with Bill Maher. Seriously, people, right now your worst fear is your kid going to school and learning about civil rights? That's the big problem in your life? It sounds like a little house foreclosure would clear that irrationality up, right quick.


So that is what Miss. California is worried about. And to avoid taking a trip to word vomit village, I'm just gonna direct you to The Superficial, where they took the words outta my mouth:

So, let me get this straight, Jesus is cool with fake tits, morally bankrupt beauty pageants and constant media whoring, but not gay marriage? Huh. I never really pictured JC as a homophobic douchebag from Orange County, but that seems to be the message these days. Keep spreading the Good News, Carrie!

Also as I was writing this, Samhita over at Feministing put up a bit about the connection to feminism:

Her blatant homophobia just adds to the already established straight, cis-woman and white standard of beauty necessary for pageants to exist and to perpetuate the illusion of binary genders.

Wowie zowie! How apt that I listened to the Lunachicks while showering this morning...

Senator Kerry and the "Girl Effect"

I know it's been a few months under this new leadership, but I still get pretty bowled over when politicians publicly champion women's rights and not in a we-should-respect-women-by-not-letting-them-have-abortions-or-birth control kind of way. First our amazing new Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announces that the rights of women will "always be central to our foreign policy."

Then our new President Obama creates a first ever Council on Women and Girls led by Obama's senior aid, Valerie Jarrett. Signed into law on International Women's Day March 8th, the council will, according to Jarrett, "examine all the programs at the federal level that touch on women and girls and we're going to work to coordinate and make sure that each of those programs is doing everything that it could do to help support women and girls." So awesome that it's tear inducing:



Now today, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass) chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee has an excellent piece published in the Washington Times discussing the state of women and girls around the world and highlights the importance of investing in our futures. Here are his main talking points:

It's up to all of us to ensure that this economic crisis does not become a global women's crisis, too. At moments like these in developing countries, women are asked to bear the brunt of the hardship. When food is scarce, economists have found that women and girls are pressured to forgo their share altogether so that men and boys have enough to eat. In the same way, we must now make sure that women workers aren't pushed aside as businesses downsize and that daughters aren't taken out of school as families search for extra income

I find it so refreshing to hear the political discourse shift from how we should cut the rights of women globally to how to champion them instead. I am always sensitive, however, to how we discuss global women's issues as to not sound like the great western world sweeping down to save the poor eastern women from their backwards society. I think this is a great piece, though. What are your thoughts? Read the entire commentary here.

Thanks to Colin for the link

And You Thought She was Ridiculed for the Babies...

So Octomom is kinda a weird freakshowesque name, right? It makes Nadya Suleman, her babies, her body, and her life seem othered and creepy to the max. In trying to come up with a more palatable, yet media-clever name did Octopussy ever come to your mind? No? Only Vivid Entertainment? Well, kudos to you Vivid. When Us Weekly got all in my face with Octomom's 8 sexless years, I was thinking that the exploitation train had run its course, but then, choo! choo! Here I find out you, Vivid Entertainment, are all set to pay her a million bucks if she stars in a porno taking on 8 guys! You may be clever, but you'll still have to pay TMZ (Too Much Zomg-assholeness) for your even sweeter tagline: "Octomom is used to having multiple people inside of her at once."

If you're done gagging on your utter disgust let's move on to some finer points about this new chapter, eh? If you read the comments on TMZ (because why be satisfied with only boiling rage when you could totz escalate to white hot) many interneters are already calling for the state to come repo her kids 'cause being in porn makes you an "unfit" parent. Let's first ignore the fact that she has yet to even reply to Vivid, much less make a video. Also of note, the idea that being involved in sex work or porno makes you an unfit parent is, uh, not legally accurate, nor real fucking life accurate. (To aid in learning what child abuse actually is and how someone can for real get their kids taken from them, I'm including this link to DC's Child Protective Services page. And let me add that "exposure to" means making them watch/look at it, not family involvement.)

So people already hate Nadya Suleman for a variety of reasons (drain on society! crazy! bad mother! unnatural! poor! and the list goes on...). Most upsetting to me is the feminist backlash, seen most grotesquely over at Bitch, where many commenters were playing fast and loose with what reproductive choice meant to them:

I want to just scream it: just because you can have babies doesn't mean you should! It's a grave thing. There's a whole lot you can fuck up here. And yeah, poor women having children have been bullied by the media way too much and have been judged unfairly. So it's hard to come right out and say, Listen lady, what you are doing is asinine and irresponsible. But I can't support this kind of behavior. It's stupid.

That's right, pro-choice is all about choosing abortion, not the choice to decide the size of your family, psssh. So I'm thinking that if some feminists are willing to throw their values under a bus at the sight of 14 kids (!!!) and join all the other aforementioned haters the response to this will-she-won't-she porno debacle is going to be ugly. Keeping in mind of course, that unlike being pro-choice, being for or against the sex work industry divides us feminists like nothin' else. (Sweet how we do it to ourselves, huh? Who even needs republicans at this point?)

Personal opinions about how responsible she is aside, let's pop on our feminist lens and examine how she was persecuted for her choice to expand her family and think about how her choice to be in porno will be treated. Please note my astute use of italics for the word "choice," because I think this entire ordeal perfectly illustrates a major problem with how people view women's involvement in sex work and what kinds of choices women have for lucrative work. Let's assume that "Octopussy" is the only offer she has right now to make gobs of money. With everyone bitching left and right about her irresponsible broke-ass sucking money from the taxpayers (right from your hardworking Joe-the-Plumber pockets!) this million dollar venture would look like a great idea to get the bucks she needs to support her family for life and perhaps quiet the death threats for a bit. Nope! Everyone hates porn too, so now she's a huge child abusing whore, even though this was her best opportunity to make money like everyone wanted.

I think there are women who choose different kinds of sex work for their own pleasure or interest, but often it's a monetary fueled decision, a decision they technically chose, but from what list of options? I make about 35k a year and I've had my BA for years. I'm not entry level, but it's hard to make a lot more in non-profit work. If I was faced with 1 million dollars upfront for one sex video and 30k spread over a year...totally tempting even though I don't reeeaally want to do something like that. But with the stakes so high, it's no longer a balanced choice, especially if I'm in debt, or trying to get car repairs, or catch up on rent, and even less balanced if I had 14 babies. When the options are limited to little or no money and heaps and heaps of money, what options are there really?

Honestly, I don't think Ms. Suleman would take Vivid's offer anyways, the outcry would be deafening, and she's in a unique position to make some dough with other non-gangbang projects (though probably not millions, + health care, dental, etc). Though, I think it's important to pay attention to the angry mob that is being created. Tearing this woman down for her reproductive choice because it was deemed that she is too broke for kids, and now furthering the cry to arms by blaming her involvement in a porno that she doesn't technically have anything to do with as of yet - even though it would make her plenty of money to take care of her family and no longer be the dreaded "drain on the system." Seriously, what do we want from this woman?

Most importantly, if everyone is going to get so damn mad, why don't we direct our anger at the fact that women can make 1 million bucks fucking for 88 minutes but have no other ways to make that much money that fast. We could even take it down a notch since a million is kind of a ridiculous sum, but what about a thousand? A friend of mine dances, and she makes almost a thousand dollars a night. At the end of the week she could pay off my credit card that I've been struggling to make minimum payments on forever. In no other profession can women make such large sums money as quickly. So get frustrated not at the women making their living, but at the society that allows this money monopoly to happen even as they condemn it.

And everything else aside, I just want to reiterate my sentiment from the first paragraph again. Vivid Entertainment, and TMZ you are disgusting fucking asshats.

Fad-tastic: Missing the Point of Vaggie Tales

On Valentine's Day I wrote about how my involvement with The Vagina Monologues throughout college helped shaped my perspective on violence against women, sexuality, feminism, and my own body. I also touched on how a lot of people don't embrace the show in the same way, sometimes with thoughtful feminist criticisms, but most of the time the negative reviews have the cultural analysis of an old sweat sock,"OMG! VAGINAS! LESBIANS! TAMPONS! SEX! This play is motherfucking crazzzzy!!1111!!!" Well add "WTF? DOUCHING IS AWESOME!!!" to the pile of poor arguments against the play. Writen this time by a California State University student, a self-professed feminist who at least admitted to liking the play, but not as much as she loves smelling good.

Instead of joining in with the many approving “Yeahs” coming from different women in the audience, I sat in troubled silence while thinking of my liking of products that would fall in the vagina-hating category. In contrast to the woman in the monologue that exclaims she wants to “taste the fish, that’s why I ordered it,” I firmly believe that if you smell anything fishy, you’re more than likely past due for a shower. Not finding myself agreeing with much in the monologue, I quickly became terrified by the shock that maybe this meant I wasn’t the progressive feminist I had felt myself evolving into. Does my love for smelling good, constantly indulging in Victoria’s Secret Love Spell lotion and Chanel Chance perfume, make me another woman cheated to live a life of incessantly buying into constraints set by a patriarchal society?

This commentary is one "I couldn't help but wonder" away from being the cheesiest most surface level assessment on the planet. To base a review of the play not on the larger message, but on one's picking at a single line of dialouge, unraveling it like an old sweater, is unfocused and bad analysis. Especially since the writer's only point is that she wants the feminist freedom to wear perfume no shame strings attached, missing the orginal context of the line which is about how douching is lame-o.

Which brings us to what a young, and unseasoned feminist/writer this girl is. I can only hope this rambling viewpoint is her first foray into both. Perhaps with more years of education under her belt, she'll be able to see the "My Angry Vagina" monologue for its true purpose: an outlet for women to healthily show their frustration at products and expectations that are required of us and our vaginas, yet never have either in mind. It is not an attack on one's choices or preferences.

For example, everyone is entitled to smell of whatever fragrance they desire guilt-free, be it Chanel or "rain." The voice of "Angry Vagina" is not enraged over picking out your signature scent, but rather the fact that douches are created too make women feel bad, embarrassed, and secretive about their vaginas. They are not created with women in mind. Douche products are made with chemicals that can harm your vagina, robbing it of it's natural chemistry and lubricant, all the while ensuring your MALE partner doesn't have to suffer through eating out your supposed garbage hole. It's the companies marketing these products that are attacking femininty, not this monologue. As a "progressive feminist," I wish this girl would also be enraged that some agency is making money by telling her that her twat stinks. Besides, her neck area might be Chanel-tastic, but unless she's aiming the sprayer between those lower lips, I bet her vagina still smells well, vagina-y...and I hope someday she comes to learn and appreciate how that is 100% okay.

October is National Domestic Violence Awareness Month or How I Learned to Wear Purple During a Month Berating Me With Pink

You may not see Domestic Violence Awareness Month under the pink glare that Breast Cancer Awareness Month is casting, but I assure you it's happening. Even though both worthy causes have shared the "awareness" spotlight for more than 20 years, breast cancer has exploded as a year long cause that has re-claimed the color pink thus reclaiming our hearts. This has indirectly encouraged all companies ever to exploit cancer for bigger sales.

While I agree on the evil aspect of the gross over-marketing being more about the companies making a profit, than spreading goodwill, I also think it's hard to argue with the amount of talk, press, donations, and excitement pink garb generates. I'd love it if Coach started selling purple bullshit key fobs with purple C's and charms and shit. You know why? Because 9 out of 10* women in all of fucking America is walking around with some damn Coach product. So if they are going into the Coach store or going onto their website they will be confronted by breast cancer awareness immediately! Then they will buy said product ("it's pink!") and tell their friends, and viola! Instant talky talky about a serious issue that maybe those people wouldn't have thought to talk about before.

Do you know when you're confronted with Domestic Violence Awareness? If you're on a college campus (sometimes), or y'know, when you are personally affected. Not great options there, and also, DV orgs and victims don't get sweet promotional deals from BMW. Other than basic community outreach, and silly rubber bracelets, DV is not being hyped, and even though purple is the "it" color this fall, no one is wearing it with abuse in mind (anti abuse that is). No one is like "OMG! I just got this purple D&G dress from Nordstrom and 25% of my purchase goes to domestic violence prevention!" That scenario has absolutely never happened. People are not talking about DV, but there is a whole lot of silence and misunderstanding. And every day that people don't talk openly and matter of factly about violence against women this silence extends to the victims and survivors who often take it as a cue to keep quiet about their experiences.

So what about all these people that aren't sitting through a school presentation or have been personally affected? People who want to help friends or family and don't know how. Friends or family who don't notice their loved one is even in a DV situation. Us Weekly when they ask Ana Ortiz why she tolerated the abuse. The millions of people that unknowingly use that kind of speech, leaving out the abuser, and blaming the victim, asking " why didn't she leave?" instead of "why is he abusive?" The victims in abusive relationships that don't realize it, or know it, but have no resources for help. All of these people (and everyone else who doesn't fall into these scant catergories) need to be as aware of DV as they are of breast cancer in order to break this deafening silence surrounding violence against women. If selling them purple glitter eyeshadow is the way to do it so be it!

Breast Cancer and Domestic Violence are two epidemics that mainly affect women. Two epidemics that can lead to death. They both affect our communities, our families, our friends, they are equally important and I'd like to see them happily co-exist together. So since one is clearly the front-runner right now cough cough cancer...maybe DV could get a leg up? A shout out on the National Breast Cancer Awareness Month website perhaps? Just sayin'. Think about it breast cancer advocates, this could be the beginning of a beautifully marketed relationship.

So Domestic Violence Awareness Month doesn't get its own website (wha wha), but you can read about it on the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence website, and while you are there, check out what you can do to make a difference!

My small part (other than working at a DV shelter) will be attempting to put up a new article about DV or DV awareness every day. It's a tall order, but I have my very own laptop now, so really, what's holding me back? For today, check out what's going down in my hometown area, Cleveland!



*This is a statistic I made up for the benefit of my blog based on my observations while walking around places where other people are.

UPDATE: There is now a website up for the 2008 Domestic Violence Awareness Month. You can view it here. I'm not gonna lie, it's way meager.

Way to Go Joe!

The text message arrived at 3:41 am this morning confirming that Joe Biden is indeed Barack Obama's running mate for Vice President!

So if you'll notice the blog directly below this one, uh yeah, I totally called that. Cnn should probably hire me as senior political analyst now.

Also this weeks convention looks like it will be very pro-woman rights according to NOW president Kim Gandy. With Joe Biden championing ending violence against women, what I believe is the biggest issue affecting women and girls, I think this administration has a chance to create a huge positive step in the right direction for women's rights. We may have lost Hillary, but I don't think women have lost their voice.

Women Can Make Their Own Choices? Whaaaaa?

First off, I whole heartedly agreed with my friend when she sent me this link and said, "The love hate relationship with Jezebel continues..." Jezebel has often left a bad taste in my mouth because they seem to not be able to decide if they're into feminism or if they're the kinda chicks who think it's hilarious to rag on other women for making dumb girly choices that no self respecting chica should, a la Female Chauvinist Pigs style.

This time, however, they have definitely touched on a topic that needs more publication and acceptance, to birth or not to birth. AKA Being content fulfilling your womanly duty to the world, or becoming a dried up, cat toting pariah. In this story, the 24 year old woman who chooses to get sterilized finds there is not a happy middle ground for those of us who don't see a "Baby on Board" sign hanging in our future-mobiles.

Honestly, I'm not totally into the mommy thing (mostly because I love spending my money on things like fancy organic food and make-up instead of children), but that's cool because I'm totally accepting and supporting of those who love the pitter patter of little feet. However, I also like to trust and encourage those who aren't looking to fill the world with more unwanted, neglected kids. Additionally, I expect others to also trust women to make decisions that are right for them and their bodies (silly me).

So, why does this woman have to catch so much heat for opting for sterilization? Her mother actually cried when she found out. Cried! A lot of the issue seems to be around her age, but since when is 24 considered too young to make life decisions? If at 24 people can make the life-altering choice to join the armed forces; go to undergrad, graduate, medical, or law school; get a tattoo of a Looney Tunes character; get hitched; or pop out as many rugrats as a uterus will allow, can't we also decide to get sterilized?

Well eff that. We woman are going to birth children if we want them, or we're going to have lots worry-free pleasure focused sex just for fun, or we'll do both because we know better than anyone else what's best for us! Most importantly, we don't become useless when we don't have kids. It's time to get used to that. In the mean time, keep the tears for all the kids that have been born, yet are mistreated, unloved, and forgotten...there's a lot of them and we don't need anymore.

Thanks to Lisa for the link!

You Know What's NOT Feminist? Refusing to Take Responsibility for Your Orgasm!

I have to confess that although I do not enter into the danger zone that is website message boards very often, I sometimes can't help but scroll down and read a few (or a few dozen) comments. For me, message boards have the same train wreck appeal that an episode of Jerry Springer does, I know reading them will be mind numbingly annoying, but I'll be damned if they aren't entertaining. My latest skip through the interwebs led me to the message boards of Facebook's "Feministing" group. The Feministing website is my favorite online hangout, and because I'm a FB group junkie, I eagerly joined up on there as well. Unnecessary? Absolutely. I popped on today to see if there's really anything on it to benefit from, or if I would be better off dumping it to make room for the bazillion other capricious, masturbatory groups I need need need to join. Then, against my better judgment, I got roped into some misguided feminist's thoughts on sex and sex work (you think "misguided" sounds cruel now, but just wait until you try to follow her train of thought from pole dancing to guys who can't "eat pussy" in just a few sentences).

I was hooked by title, "Can Sex Work Manifest Feminism?" Presumably, from reading her thoughts, she's wondering if sex work can be feminist...though it's not really fair of her to pose this as a query because she's already got the answer, and it's a big fucking (or not fucking in this case) NO! Of course, to be fair she is posing one of the hardest questions for the movement because it is one of our biggest dividing lines. There's no fantastic way to win here. Either one is anti and comes off as not validating women's choices, thus infantilizing them, as well as looking like an advocate for censorship...or one is pro and in championing a women's choice one starts to ignore all of the preordained factors (patriarchy, anyone?) that led to the decision which often make it more of an only option than a choice.

Honestly, I don't like to get worked up for either argument, as both sides can have valid points when argued well. Although, I tend to support options that will be safest for women and their health. Therefore, as long as prostitution, porno, and pole dancing have willing (not forced), adult participants, I think the responsible thing to do is to support our sisters in the sex industry and help them get better rights and representation. Just check out the mavens with moxie over at $pread magazine. This is a publication written and produced by current and former sex workers that seeks to "build community and destigmatize sex work by providing a forum for the diverse voices of individuals working in the sex industry." Women who through grassroots activism demand better treatment by the government, their male co-workers, and their clients?! Don't tell me these ladies aren't feminists.

My other gripe with this message board posting is when it awkwardly transitions from the sex work issue to her unhappy sex life. For many paragraphs and other postings she vents her frustrations with the males in her bed and their inability to tickle her fancy. Crappy sex is for sure a major reason to loose your mind, and a dude who is more than willing to push your head down on his without so much as glancing at your lady cat deserves to be kicked to the curb, no doubt. However, when a woman can count the number of partners who have chowed down on her girly bits, poorly at that, while implying that her list of gentlemen callers stretches around the block I can't help but wonder (yikes all this sex talk is making me channel Carrie Bradshaw) if maybe someone isn't speaking up and schoolin' like she should.

I'm not laying blame on this gal or any of my lusty lady friends, and I'm certainly not siding with i'll-take-my-bj-without-the-cunnilingus-please guys. However, this whole argument she makes brings up an important point that I find myself considering a lot: how much do we women blame our male-dominated culture/society for those bad in bed boys and how much personal responsibility are we willing to take for our orgasm?

Look, whatever kind of sex you're having, it requires two people and just wanting it to be good is not gonna cut it (uh, duh, remember your first time?). It's one thing to sleep with selfish assholes (did he really not seem like a selfish asshole before the clothes came off?!?!), but it's another to assume that a guy who really cares about you automatically knows your ins and outs like a Google map. There's a lot going on down there, and although we're used to poking around and knowing what's hot and what's not, the guys may need a little tutoring. Should they ask? Hell yes, but not asking doesn't make them private enemy #1, especially if we're not telling. If we're not asking for what we want and telling our partners what we need, aren't we partially to blame for bogus buggering? In addition, if we're not comfortable with asking, telling, teaching, learning, shouldn't we be asking ourselves why we're jumping into the sack with this person, instead of asking why are all men selfish slackers?

Here's an even bigger question: why are we women letting guys give us bad head? I'm sick of women being the victims of bad sexual experiences. It's time to take a stand here, and demand better, and giving up giving head is not the way to get our point across. (It's not fair to withhold sex to get sex, if a guy did that to us I'm sure we'd have even more to say about that.) So guys have no problem telling us that we're using too much teeth, and if we don't want to "go into the bathroom and masturbate after we've had sex," why aren't we telling them the equivalent? They want to know, and until we teach them what's what down there, they are either going to continue grop around like blind mice or avoid the whole thing all together. And for those who sit through class and still refuse to do the work, fail those d-bags, and tell 'em this group project just became DIY.

So Thesaurus.com is Kind of a Jerk

I usually love the helpful intellect of Thesaurus.com, but I was a little pissed when I found that one of their synonyms for the word "woman" is "siren." Like the sirens from Greek mythology that would lure sailors to them with their beauty and song, tricking the men into their death. Nice. So, watch out for women, our main goal is to beguile men out of youth, money, and happiness.

(Other words suggested by Thesaurus.com : vamp, sorceress, femme fatale...seriously who comes up with these?)

I'm Not Sexist, I Voted for Hillary

Many supporters see Hillary Clinton loosing the democratic nomination as one more injustice to be tallied on that bitch of a glass ceiling that, though now cracked in 18 million places, is still holding women back after all this time. And we finally seemed so close to equality. So close to seeing a strong, capable, outspoken, liberal woman in the spotlight. A talented woman finally getting the respect she deserved. And now, we feminists have no leader...no great hope...

Wait, what?!?

Why have all the feminists seemed to have forgotten that other strong, capable, outspoken, liberal woman in the spotlight known as Michelle Obama? She has been in this race as long as Hillary, but once HRC stood aside, all eyes (and what jerky eyes they are) were on Michelle. From being Barack's "Baby Mama" to being labeled time and time again as an "angry black woman," Michelle has been taking it from every side, in much the same way as Hillary. This time, however, it's not only about being a woman, but being (dun dun dun) a woman of color, This allows for a whole new wave of insults, and injustice, the likes of which not even Hillary Clinton has seen.

So, why the silence, ladies?

I'm not the only one who finds the sudden clamming up of America's great feminist voices suspect. Over the weekend Mary C. Curtis had a few thoughts on the matter as well (from The Washington Post):

"What does Gloria Steinem think? She was out front with her support of Clinton, promoting the importance of a female president. She has even endorsed Barack Obama. What's her reaction now that the knives are out for another strong woman?

How about Geraldine Ferraro the former vice presidential nominee whose racially tinged denunciations of Barack Obama sparked a media firestorm?"

She goes onto say how she has long considered herself a feminist and once "cheered" Steinem's words, " I'd like a little of that solidarity back now, not suspicion because someone of my race defeated someone of our sex."

As both a life-long feminist, and Hillary supporter, I have noticed the large gap in our media where the justified howls of sexism against Hillary used to reside. Now feminists far and wide seemed to have stepped down, licking their wounds, discouraged in the trenches. I can only assume, feeling as though they've lost the fight, they are laying low. But why now? The show isn't over . The second act, ripe with the intersectionality of race and gender, is just beginning. Since we first started fighting for suffrage, mainstream feminism has been criticized for ignoring women of color. Criticized for acting as though the problems facing all women were that of the suburban, middle-class, white women. Now, here we are possibly on the verge of the fourth wave, still dealing with the ghosts of our fore mothers. Don't get me wrong, without their triumphs we wouldn't have the rights we do, but because of their missteps we find ourselves still unable to look beyond our own self-interest. Unable to be okay enough with our loss to stand together and make sure to prevent another.

We either care about these issues or we don't. Ignoring Michelle for the next 4 months is not only going to keep that glass ceiling we beat on for the last year and a half whole, it might even mend a few of its cracks.

And while we're at it, let's send a little love Cindy McCain's way.