Feminism Catch-All (with FAQ)

momgamer wrote:

No. Crap like this law is why the filibuster exists. It's an important balance to the tyranny of the majority that comes from this sort of parliamentary system. It's not meant to "stop" legislation and it really hasn't here. If you can pull it off, it's meant to make the legislative body go through one more hoop to make it clear that not everyone agrees with them. SB5 will be ready and waiting for next session.

What is going to stop a group of people who are determined enough, to repeat this every single time the law they oppose is coming up.

Serious question: Why is it someone else cant just speak for hours after the first one gives up? It sounded like she was prevented from continuing at some point, with 'noise makers' carrying the torch the rest of the way.
But couldn't you split the filibuster up between multiple people?

In case you missed last night's Texas chaos, this is a fantastic writeup of what happened & why it mattered: https://medium.com/p/cb900fa4f14b

That was an amazing read; thanks Edwin!

Shadout wrote:
momgamer wrote:

No. Crap like this law is why the filibuster exists. It's an important balance to the tyranny of the majority that comes from this sort of parliamentary system. It's not meant to "stop" legislation and it really hasn't here. If you can pull it off, it's meant to make the legislative body go through one more hoop to make it clear that not everyone agrees with them. SB5 will be ready and waiting for next session.

What is going to stop a group of people who are determined enough, to repeat this every single time the law they oppose is coming up.

Serious question: Why is it someone else cant just speak for hours after the first one gives up? It sounded like she was prevented from continuing at some point, with 'noise makers' carrying the torch the rest of the way.
But couldn't you split the filibuster up between multiple people?

If the majority is doing things that polarize the situation that badly and that people disagree enough to make this sort of statement, then it would behoove them to do exactly that. It's their job. I know I'm reading between the lines here, but I think you're confusing part of this with what we call a veto, which really does kill the bill, but that comes from the governor/president after it's been passed, not the floor. And even that can be overturned by voting.

This was a rather unique circumstance where doing it at just that moment could effect the most delay and make the biggest statement. In the course of regular events, all it does is mean they have to table it long enough to re-present it, and vote again. It's a couple days work, they've made their point, and then it's in the hands of someone deciding to take it to court. When that happens, you get stuff like the overturning of California's Prop. 8. It takes a heck of a long time, though.

This isn't anyone's first choice. This is frelling hard. And it costs the person who uses it in political capital both within the legislative body and their constituents. Someone already fire-bombed her office in Ft. Worth, and that was before the filibuster even succeeded. If it's abused, it can draw censure and monetary fines from the regulatory bodies, in this case it would the Texas Senate Ethics Committee.

Nope - no substitutes. It has to be one person. They get no breaks at all, not even to sit down; they have to stand completely unsupported the whole time. They have to talk the whole time. In Texas, they have to talk about the bill and nothing else. They have three chances for someone to catch them in a derail, and each one of them brings multiple opportunities for the opposition to kill the filibuster. They have to vote if whatever the person said was actually off topic, then when the third strike happens, they get to vote for cloture.

The 13 hour "time limit" people have been talking about wasn't imposed on her by rules, but by how long was left in the session from when she started. They can keep it up, to the extent their physical body can stand there and keep talking without even a potty break. The only way the person filibustering can get even a partial break is if someone manages to get a cloture vote on the floor and the person can stop talking (but not sit down) while they sort it out.

That's what you saw last night. She was actually prevented from continuing almost 2 hours early. The Lt. Governor, who is the head of the Texas senate much the same way Vice President Biden is the head of the U.S. Senate, decided that she'd mentioned something that wasn't germane (despite the fact that the subject in question was part of the provisions of the bill) and counted that as her third strike.

Problem is, one of the other two "strikes" wasn't actually about the topic - it was about an instance where someone helped her straighten a back-brace she was wearing so it constituted a violation of the physical standing with no help/support from her colleagues rules. Her colleagues called B.S. on that, the whole floor had a good old argument as to whether or not her derail constituted a strike, then they got into it about whether or not that counted as the third strike for derailing (by their rules, it should have only been the 2nd).

Then once the Republicans got that declared by some serious skullduggery by the Lt. Gov and some of their members, they had to get a motion to vote on cloture on the floor. Said skullduggery was so blatant even they barely managed to get five people from their side to second that in writing. Then they all had to argue that out. Once they finally got the motion filed, they started calling roll at like five minutes 'til. That's when the crowd figured out something was up and started raising Cain. They kept it up until several minutes after midnight.

There was a lot of confusion among the watchers, and the Senate as well. That roll call was the cloture vote, not the bill. Their rules require that it be a roll call vote (it's sort of like taking attendance at school). They got that done, and then they started in on the actual bill, which due to the rules also had to be a roll call vote a second time through. They completed that while people were yelling. The vote on the bill was entered into the system at 12:02, which was after the official end of the session.

To bring this back into a feminist vein, I think it's important to point out here how blatant the misogyny on the Senate floor was. All the women who were there were ignored, marginalized, and talked over so many times. They took it for hours until Sen. Van de Putte lost her temper so eloquently.

Even that parliamentarian trying to help the Lt. Governor keep things straight got the dirty end of the stick where he would cut her off.

That's the reality most women face trying to get anything done. This is what we've been trying to say here, over and over.

*sigh*

Rick "dumbass" Perry is calling another special session to take up the bill again.

JC wrote:

*sigh*

Rick "dumbass" Perry is calling another special session to take up the bill again.

As expected. Now he's got 30 days to get it from the floor through a vote. And the opposition have 30 more days to change hearts and minds and fight it.

And I'm sure someone is already drafting the first lawsuits about it, too.

So some of you may know the name Emily Morganti if you have ever written on games. She goes to spam now, because I have not done that kind of writing in well over 5 years. I think she got my info when I got put on the press list for Telltale.

Anyhow she is also now PR consulting for some events relevant here.

http://www.iamagamer.ca/

http://www.siliconsisters.ca/ - oddly enough not pornography.

Jammin' for Change: July 12-14 Game Jam Will Challenge Gender Stereotypes in Gaming
150 developers, designers, artists, and students will create games with female protagonists in first ever iamagamer event in Vancouver, B.C.

VANCOUVER, B.C. - June 26, 2013 - iamagamer, a new organization that arranges game jams around social causes, seeks to challenge gender stereotypes in gaming with their inaugural event kicking off July 12 in Vancouver, Canada. This collaborative development marathon will bring together game developers, designers, artists, and students to create video games with female protagonists, from scratch, over a 48-hour period.

To be held at Vancouver's Centre for Digital Media, this unprecedented event will dispute the prevailing opinion that video games are for guys and that games with strong, female lead characters will not sell (as observed in a recent Gamasutra article), sending a message that such stereotypes are not only incorrect, but have a negative impact on the industry.

Since its initial announcement, the event has grown in popularity with several satellite sites around the world and many remote participants signing on, bringing total "jammers" to more than 150 worldwide. The organizers seek to create a fun, collaborative, and energy-filled opportunity for individuals in the video game industry and beyond to come together around a common cause and create something that they believe in.

For more information about iamagamer and the upcoming game jam, please visit: http://www.iamagamer.ca.

For more information about the motivations underlying the jam from the founder and organizer, please visit: http://zanytomato.tumblr.com

For the Gamasutra article referred to above, please visit: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/1...

Visuals: More than 150 game designers, digital media artists, gamers and visionaries in one room, working on projects in real time (48 hours isn't very long to develop and complete a project!) passionate about equality in gaming. There will be lots of coffee, food and creative antics from the tired, but enthusiastic, participants. (There may even be participants snoozing.)

Interviews: Dr. Kimberly Voll, iamagamer Founder and Organizer and Senior Faculty, Centre for Digital Media. (Kimberly will additionally be on-site and can facilitate interviews with participants for media.)

When: Starting July 12 at 6 p.m. through July 14 at 6 p.m.

Where: Centre for Digital Media: 685 Great Northern Way

On-Site Contact: Kimberly Voll ([email protected], 778-996-2235)

And, of course, there's Taiwan's take on it.

Rubb Ed wrote:

And, of course, there's Taiwan's take on it.

Politics is f*****g awesome!

The thing was nearing midnight when I got up, checked my Twitter feed and took it all in, piecing the night's events together. It's incredibly inspiring and heartening to see that Sen. Davis pulled it off, that she had an incredible amount of support. I just hope that it gains momentum and that people flock to the polls when the time comes. It's so sad to see a low turnout on Election Day.

Also loved Taiwan's take on it, thanks for posting, Rubb Ed!

Shadout wrote:

What is going to stop a group of people who are determined enough, to repeat this every single time the law they oppose is coming up.

Stop electing them to Congress.

Maq wrote:

Stop electing them to Congress.

Now that would be lovely.
Voter behavior doesn't seem to work that way :/

Seriously Taiwan? That was...
awesome.

Here's your daily reminder that a woman's accomplishments will always be questioned just because she's a woman:

Kyle Petty says Danica Patrick is "not a race car driver".

The short version is Danica Patrick has had more success in 15 years than Petty had in 40. But if you want a longer breakdown of all the reasons why Petty must think Patrick is "not" a race car driver, read the very entertaining article.

Relatedly, if you're interested in women and racing, check out TrueCar Racing or #SteelOvaryNation. (And Rallye Baie des Chaleurs is this weekend, allez Nathalie Richard!)

I liked the grousing more when it was about her unfair advantage for weighing less than most NASCAR drivers. And then others stating that her slighter frame meant there was less down force on the wheels, and she would lack the grip to pass in the corners.

Also, drivers are going public with how off base Petty is and how much of a racer Ms. Patrick is.

KingGorilla wrote:

I liked the grousing more when it was about her unfair advantage for weighing less than most NASCAR drivers. And then others stating that her slighter frame meant there was less down force on the wheels, and she would lack the grip to pass in the corners.

That argument is made even dumber based on the fact that they must add weight to the car to compensate for a light driver. It's in the rules, and was before she ever raced.

If you've never understood why all rape victims don't "just report" the crime, Gina Tron captures the reasons well: http://www.vice.com/read/i-got-raped...

That is seriously depressing. It's horrible enough that most rapist get away scott free, but to walk away from the trial knowing he'll NEVER EVER get punished for his crimes... that's too much.

dejanzie wrote:

That is seriously depressing. It's horrible enough that most rapist get away scott free, but to walk away from the trial knowing he'll NEVER EVER get punished for his crimes... that's too much.

Trust me, it sucks most badly.

sh*t, I just realized I put this in the wrong thread. Sorry.

Troubling developments and shocking revelations from Texas: it turns out Wendy Davis once had different hair!

SpacePPoliceman wrote:

Troubling developments and shocking revelations from Texas: it turns out Wendy Davis once had different hair!

I love this quote:

Somehow, during the past two decades she has been transformed from a frumpy, pleasant looking but plain-faced, flat-chested brunette with thick, messy hair, into a buxom blonde with excellent facial features and sleek, long, perfectly coiffed hair, like she stepped straight out of Vogue.

So we see what's on their minds when they consider the merits of a person.

So google search has failed me unfortunately. Because yesterday I saw the most amazing and appropriate bumper sticker.

It was depicting the sexy sitting silhouette girl that is most often seen on truck mud flaps. The only difference was someone added the off hand to the silhouette and it was holding an open book.

Now if that isn't to the point in a simple and effective manner, I don't know what is.

Nevin wrote:

So we see what's on their minds when they consider the merits of a person.

I bet she smells different too!

fangblackbone wrote:

So google search has failed me unfortunately. Because yesterday I saw the most amazing and appropriate bumper sticker.

It was depicting the sexy sitting silhouette girl that is most often seen on truck mud flaps. The only difference was someone added the off hand to the silhouette and it was holding an open book.

Now if that isn't to the point in a simple and effective manner, I don't know what is.

Something like this?

http://www.cafepress.com/mf/21709671...

SpacePPoliceman wrote:

Troubling developments and shocking revelations from Texas: it turns out Wendy Davis once had different hair!

My wife and I recently looked over photos for my mom's upcoming memorial. Dear Christ I was a fat f*cking kid. I also managed to find some photos of my folks when they were dating, my dad with his scraggly 20 year old beard was most amusing.

In other news, a woman who knows a large part of her job is a beauty contest, makes sure her hair and make up look good. Mitt Romney fake tans, and the GOP still gives serious consideration that an air headed beauty queen from the mid west should be president. And Chris Christie is too damn generously proportioned to be taken seriously.

SpacePPoliceman wrote:

Troubling developments and shocking revelations from Texas: it turns out Wendy Davis once had different hair!

Someone should ask Gov. Chris Christie his opinion of Davis' makeover.

Something like this?

That's it! You sir, rock!

SpacePPoliceman wrote:

Troubling developments and shocking revelations from Texas: it turns out Wendy Davis once had different hair!

It's amazing how people who really don't like the concept of feminism are really the only ones who actually believe feminism has anything to do with someone's looks, but somehow manage to purport that it's apparently something core to the concept.