Disqus - Friends of fancycwabs

Re: The Social Conservatism Of The Damned

latts — Tue, 01 Mar 2011 17:50:14 -0000

Well, yeah-- pretty much all political conservatism is based on complaining about others' morals, expectations, culture, and general behavior, and especially comparing unfavorably to one's own. Moral vanity is the core character trait of conservatism, IME, whether citing glibertarians of middling accomplishment who insist they're being 'punished' by taxation, or the sweetest & most sincere anti-choicers who honestly believe their religion and personal musings about the nature of the soul contain enough Truth to necessitate state enforcement of their philosophy. They all display embarrassingly inflated self-regard in one way or another, and it took me years to put my finger on why I just couldn't really be impressed by otherwise-okay individuals.

Re: http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/tapped_archive?month=03&year=2011&base_name=barbour_on_medicaid

latts — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 17:12:45 -0000

The fellow citizens being disparaged aren't the ones who vote for Haley Barbour, if they vote at all; they're the negative examples used to illustrate consequences of unsanctioned behavior, or on Sundays (mornings and evenings) and Wednesday nights the best opportunities for good ole Baptists to show the neighbors and Jesus just how very compassionate they are through private charity (but never taxes, which don't count on the heavenly scoreboard). Either way, though, the less fortunate serve primarily as a foil for the self-righteous, and they elicit mostly contempt, condescension, and resentment-- not least for being widely assumed to be the real problem with the state's abysmal quality-of-life stats.

Re: The Conservative Vision

latts — Thu, 03 Mar 2011 14:14:36 -0000

Y'know, I'm very fortunate to have been able to move all conservatives to the casual-acquaintance/family-obligation* margins of my life. At least I don't have to pretend that my esteem for them even approaches their own deluded self-regard. And no, I don't miss them.

*a few of the older ones are mostly decent, but just not able to cope with decades of changes. Under-65 cons: never worth the time or effort.

Re: The End Of White America

latts — Fri, 18 May 2012 00:14:59 -0000

I can certainly understand why-- I'm downright pasty, but would rather not be associated with a lot of the whites in this country. Maybe someone finally confirmed my great-great grandma's rumored NA origins... being southern & white is just embarrassing these days.

Re: Why Simple is Better for Old-Age Insurance Programs

latts — Fri, 31 Aug 2012 12:53:20 -0000

I've often thought we should have some Harry & Louise 3.0 ads showing them sifting through glossy brochures and trying to predict which way their parents' health would turn so they could choose the least awful plan... "this one's better on heart problems, but if his PSA indicates cancer we'll have to come up with $10K or so." Yes, it'd be even worse for those of us who would have to deal with it alone in our old age, but the burdens of caring for aging parents would become, much, much worse, especially when the elderly parents live in different states.

Re: We Are More Alike Than We Think

latts — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 13:24:06 -0000

I think this is exaggerated at best, but there's a core truth in there: conservatives are generally more social animals than liberals. Liberals tend to be more introverted & iconoclastic, but project their higher impulses onto politics and the basic structure of society. Conservatives, OTOH, can be extremely warm and generous with in-groups and do genuinely seem to want to be kind to individuals in most cases, but absolutely want a crude and punitive political structure to express their lower impulses; it's a win-win in that their expressions of nuance (see also: gay/nonwhite friends, "I have") reflect favorably on them personally but do very little to actually improve the prospects of those out-groups, thereby reinforcing a superior (and unjust) moral & social position for the 'nice' conservative. Liberalism tends to accept & bypass human weaknesses in both the self & others, and tries to arrange the broader structure to minimize the problems that result.

All that said, I sometimes envy conservatives social instincts while deploring their self-serving & destructive principles, but in the political realm, public character counts, and conservatives' public character just ain't impressive. In a more connected, open world, this matters in terms of personal character, too.

Re: We Are More Alike Than We Think

latts — Thu, 13 Dec 2012 13:24:36 -0000

Oops, wrong spot. Sorry.

Re: Targeting the Money Behind Guns Works

latts — Tue, 18 Dec 2012 13:35:52 -0000

I think the more correct understanding of what Amanda says is that gun companies, like most successful corporations, know their customers and potential customers... hence the "man card" Bushmaster ads that have surfaced recently. It's pretty obvious, after all, and your list basically confirms it as well.

One problem I've had, and I think it gets at Amanda's [generally correct, IMO] generalizations as well as your reference to their DNA, is that culture and character are not completely identical things, but each informs the other. I happen to find right-wing culture rather offensive in almost every way and I tend to distance myself from its adherents, but that doesn't mean that I consider everyone that's part of it as offensive as the culture itself. There's always an asterisk in my dealings with them, in the sense that I'll seldom value their broader worldview, but that doesn't mean that I can't appreciate individuals' better qualities either. The culture's a problem and it colors, but doesn't completely define, each individual character.

That said, conservatives do tend to get butthurt when I don't share their overly high self-regard, but I can't do anything about that and still be honest.

Re: Anti-Feminist Press Crows Over Book Celebrating Domestic Abuse, Then Finds Out How Bad It Can Get

latts — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 15:00:52 -0000

I think the 'reconciliation,' such as it is, involves both being seen as defiant, unnatural rejections of women's proper role, which is subservient and delighting so much in the trappings of femininity that inferior status isn't as disturbing. Allowing themselves to be subordinate and channel their energies into being pleasing, would 'cure' them, in nutburgerland.

Re: Anti-Feminist Press Crows Over Book Celebrating Domestic Abuse, Then Finds Out How Bad It Can Get

latts — Fri, 11 Jan 2013 18:22:14 -0000

They're all enforcers, though-- charges of hypocrisy always roll off wingnuts' backs because the hypocrites 'earn' the right to transgress through their service to the cause or outright socioeconomic privilege. And as a bonus, their followers can imagine their own worldview is nuanced because clearly they don't insist on absolute lockstep compliance... it's a crazy outlook that's only consistent in being completely self-serving.

Re: Planning Your Wedding Before Meeting Your Spouse, and Other Subtle Narratives Rejecting Love

latts — Tue, 29 Jan 2013 10:40:10 -0000

I agree with this, and sometimes it's not even a clear choice of boring security vs. thrills; it's learning that even a fundamentally good relationship still has some challenges and that no one's really a perfect complement to oneself. My own relationship-- a fairly late one, as we were bracketing forty when we met-- is probably boring by a lot of people's standards, but we trust each other a lot, are similarly affectionate, and are very compatible wrt values & worldviews even though we arrived there from different places. So yeah, I guess in a sense we both 'settled' in the sense that we've both had more exciting past relationships, and we each almost certainly envisioned a different type of partner, but personally I'll take being deeply valued as an individual (and reciprocating, of course) over the kind of romantic devotion that fizzles out or takes a darker turn.

WRT the article, meh. I personally think it's silly to plan to that extent, and especially to admit it publicly when the crazy/pathetic narrative is just screaming, but I can't say that I haven't developed pretty strong opinions on everything from wedding accoutrements to real estate to birthing practices over the years, just from observation. My computer has notes & links & photos of everything from sofas to kitchen flooring to wedding flowers (to be fair, that one's only since the relationship started looking like a keeper) to places I'd like to travel someday. Maybe that's weird, but I like to gather info even knowing that circumstances will probably not allow me to get everything I want. Just like relationships.

Re: Plan B Vending Machines Approved By FDA

latts — Wed, 30 Jan 2013 14:53:35 -0000

Then it's kinda weird that a synthetic form of the same hormone (progesterone) that the body produces after ovulation, specifically to encourage implantation & sustain a pregnancy until the placenta is functioning is ALSO the active ingredient in Plan B. Look up "corpus luteum."

Having a uterine lining insufficient for implantation is generally a consequence of *not ovulating*, because the body only signals for a real buildup once the egg's released. IOW, finding poor conditions for implantation after using Plan B means that... it worked by preventing ovulation. Exceptions are due to individual women's hormonal issues, and a lot of women actually have to supplement with progesterone to avoid miscarriage.

I swear this is becoming one of my online soapboxes, thanks to low progesterone being a problem among my female relatives. People don't know shit about hormones, apparently.

{oops, clicked wrong reply... this is for the sanctimonious doofus above}

Re: Texas GOP Peddling Anti-Choice Conspiracy Theories

latts — Thu, 07 Mar 2013 12:52:13 -0000

Yes, profits are usually called something like 'net gain' and have to go back into the business (sometimes as salaries, but at least those are more transparent than bonuses, stock options, etc.) or be kept as cash reserves-- they just can't be pocketed by stakeholders. I haven't checked to see exactly how PP is classified, but nonprofits have pretty stringent requirements for 501(c) status, usually have annual audits, and are subject to lots of financial disclosure. I guess anti-choicers also assume that PP is like the mob, with its real business dealings and alleged huge profits in the shadows. Nitwits.

Re: Heartless Right Wing Response to Gun Victims Demonstrates Emptiness of Their Arguments

latts — Thu, 18 Apr 2013 14:14:55 -0000

IIRC, something like ten percent of guns confiscated in Chicago due to use in crimes were originally purchased in Mississippi, which isn't exactly next door. They're willing to supply the guns while squalling about scary Chicago gangbangers, the irony of which is lost on them. Having lived in Mississippi, I'd prefer risking a relatively quick demise in an urban environment to having the life slowly choked out of me by deep-south ignorance, resentment, & hypocrisy.

Re: Republicans Aren’t Hypocrites. Try “Old-Fashioned Sexists”.

latts — Thu, 09 May 2013 10:48:43 -0000

I've been saying for years that the right wing doesn't want examples; they want enforcers. Conservatives are depressingly easy to understand once you realize that they see everything as positioning within social hierarchies... most know they'll never reach the top rungs, but they can always ensure that someone else will be on the bottom.

Re: Reminder: Someone Was Murdered

latts — Fri, 28 Jun 2013 15:29:20 -0000

Yeah, I thought that leaving the deep south for a medium-sized city would at least spare me the self-important fantasies of low-ranking white dudes, but alas, they've been enabled & unleashed to drag the rest of the country down with them.

Re: Concerning “Crackers” | Political Animal | The Washington Monthly

latts — Fri, 28 Jun 2013 17:34:52 -0000

I'm from Mississippi & I seem to remember this rhyme, of unknown origin: "I'd rather be a n****r and work like heck/ than be a poor Georgia cracker with a long red neck." FWIW, I never really used 'cracker' but often use 'redneck,' possibly because I could have easily been either but made personal choices not to be. It's certainly more insulting for me to use either term than it was for Trayvon Martin, simply because at this point in my life I've acquired higher social standing than a 'cracker' would & I'd be punching down.

Zimmerman does have a darker complexion than I do, though, so I probably would have stuck with 'creepy-ass freak' instead of making any racial observations. But I'm also a woman, so a man of any race stalking me like that would have been scary for entirely different reasons.

Re: Is Politics Now Just an Endless War of All Against All?

latts — Mon, 01 Jul 2013 13:15:18 -0000

Historically, no-- I was glad to be rid of the fundies & militarist types of the deep south but figured that they were so nutso it hardly mattered when they dominated a bunch of rural and/or bottom-ranked states that only mattered on the margins anyway. Now, I'm a lot less charitable because they've got a lot of media strength & the rural states are more powerful than they should be, so things look a lot more apocalyptic than when I crossed out of Mississippi & was just glad to be able to breathe. I think there should be a legitimate conservatism, acting for an advanced nation mostly as a braking mechanism, but this ain't it-- the pathologies of the perpetually-angry base have infected the entire structure.

So while I don't want a prudent, slightly stick-up-the-ass conservatism to disappear, I'd be perfectly happy to lose the Tea Partiers, religious right, and anything to do with right-wing talk radio-- they improve no one's mind or character, and usually make them, and by extension the country, much, much worse.

Re: Is Politics Now Just an Endless War of All Against All?

latts — Mon, 01 Jul 2013 15:19:08 -0000

And if the Al Gores of the world did live in off-the-grid caves & refused to travel anywhere, the right would then mock them relentlessly for that. Heads they win, tails we lose-- always, because they're jerks and bullies at their cores.

Re: “Getting Over” Jim Crow | Political Animal | The Washington Monthly

latts — Tue, 02 Jul 2013 11:58:54 -0000

"But I also know that behind the veneer of civility a significant percentage of white southerners, particularly but not exclusively those born before the civil rights revolution was consummated, don’t and probably never will think of black folks as equal to them in anything other than original sin, and still consider black folks the basic “problem” that politics exists to 'solve.'”

This, a thousand times. The irony, of course, is that maintaining a structural underclass diminishes the potential and actual achievement of the more privileged classes as well-- it's very easy for whites to be comfortable in the deep south as long as they conform in matters of religion, race, & politics. For those of us who've moved on, sometimes we hear a hint of longing from old acquaintances and patiently dispel most of the myths regarding living expenses & crime, only to hear "that sounds great, but I just couldn't do it." And sometimes the hardest part of leaving is trying to figure out the new rules elsewhere, and the feeling of being adrift when you realize there just aren't that many rules when people don't care about your church or who your family is. Hidebound, hierarchical cultures serve everyone badly, even the individuals who seem to benefit.

Re: “Getting Over” Jim Crow | Political Animal | The Washington Monthly

latts — Tue, 02 Jul 2013 15:14:45 -0000

Heh... I guess this struck a nerve. I'm just gonna say that there are excellent reasons that Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, non-urban parts of Texas & Georgia, etc. are really crummy places to live by pretty much every quality-of-life measure-- it's not the presence of a darker-skinned population dragging down the averages so much as a self-satisfied & unimpressive white population that's merely mediocre because hey, they can always claim to be better than someone else, right?

Like I said below (above?- not sure about the sorting), lots of white southerners are scared to move on without that unearned privilege. That's baked-in racism, which is much more damaging than the rudeness of racial slurs.

- signed, someone from the most recent school-to-prison pipeline scandal, where the locals don't understand why feeding kids to law enforcement for wearing the wrong socks to school was a problem

Re: “Getting Over” Jim Crow | Political Animal | The Washington Monthly

latts — Tue, 02 Jul 2013 15:16:21 -0000

It's called "being a decent human being," but I doubt you'll look it up.

Re: “Getting Over” Jim Crow | Political Animal | The Washington Monthly

latts — Tue, 02 Jul 2013 15:25:26 -0000

Originally from Mississippi & didn't move until after college, actually. Never been to MA, but I'd rather be homeless in South Boston than comfortable in my hometown-- at least the conversational & cultural opportunities would be better.

Re: “Getting Over” Jim Crow | Political Animal | The Washington Monthly

latts — Tue, 02 Jul 2013 15:27:23 -0000

Aw, shucks-- naw, just the raw inspiration of having lived in Mississippi until my early twenties.
Which is to say that if Jesus did return to earth, I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be hanging out with the people who insist he's their BFF.

Re: “Getting Over” Jim Crow | Political Animal | The Washington Monthly

latts — Tue, 02 Jul 2013 15:42:49 -0000

Boston is a great city with a history of real patriotism, while the old Confederacy was treasonous. No place is perfect, but I'd take my chances in places with some world-class schools and a high overall standard of living instead of the quasi-feudal preferences where I was born, thanks.
BTW, how could you possibly know whether I've ever lived in any of the other places?- between my siblings, the spousal unit, & myself, they've actually all been places of residence. And I'm connected by marriage to Massachusetts as well.