Category Archives: burn the patriarchy

the end of kristi noem

Posted on by
4

Like you, I was curious how the ‘patriots’ at Free Republic would respond to the story of South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem killing her 14-month-old puppy, Cricket.

It’s possible you’re unaware of this story. It’s included in Noem’s soon-to-be published autobiography, No Going Back: The Truth on What’s Wrong with Politics and How We Move America Forward. She suggests the young wirehair pointer was “untrainable” and “less than worthless as a hunting dog.” So she took the puppy to a gravel pit and shot it. And as long as she was in the shooting animals mood, she also fetched a smelly billy goat, took it to the gravel pit, and shot it too. Fewer people are concerned about the goat.

Cricket’s killer

Okay, maybe you weren’t really interested in how Freepers responded to the story. Maybe you hadn’t even given Freepers a moment of thought. Hell, you’d probably prefer not to think about them at all. And who could blame you? But because FreeRepublic is one of the more vitriolic and zealous branches of the MAGAverse, I’m inclined to see them through a canary-in-the-coal-mine lens. They can be predictive of MAGA behavior. So I periodically check in to see what these folks have to say about current events.

I assumed they’d defend Noem’s puppycide, and for the most part, they did. There was also a sizable anti-puppycide contingent. What surprised me (though it shouldn’t have) was a third group; people who were either pro-puppycide or puppycide ambivalent BUT were adamant that Noem’s problem was openly confessing to her puppycidal behavior. There were a LOT of ‘If you’re going to kill puppies, DON’T talk about it comments. In the interest of brevity, I’m only going to include this single example of this group:

How she could be so dumb to write about killing a puppy basically is beyond me.
by toddausauras

The discussion thread I reviewed was called This is The End of Kristie Noem Even if Trump Picks Her, so much of the ‘analysis’ and opinion was dribbled through a filter of her viability as a candidate for Comrade Trump’s vice presidential ticket. Maybe 15-20% of Freepers agreed that killing a puppy was, all by itself, disqualifying. Here’s a representative sample:

She can’t handle a simple 14 month old dog.
by NoLibZone

Noem said she “hated that dog” and deemed it “less than worthless”.
She killed it out of hate. And then she wrote about it in her book as if it were a perfectly normal thing to kill animals you hate. That is textbook sociopathic behavior.
by 10mm

Anyone that does something like this, and thinks it makes her seem like a leader, is a POS. Trump needs to pick a man, and skip the backward notion of women in high office. They try to hard to seem strong enough, and fail to realize that leadership and strength require thought as well as action.
by MagaMatt

While unlike Pit Bulls and some others, I think a wirehair pointer would quickly find adoption, and which should have been her choice. And where is the man of the house in all this?
by daniel1212 (Turn 2 the Lord Jesus who saves damned+destitute sinners on His acct, believe, b baptized+follow HIM)

A number of anti-puppycide Freepers seem to think Noem’s willingness to kill a puppy (and let’s not forget the male goat) had something to do with being a woman. I wasted some time trying to work out the misogynistic logic there. I mean, are they arguing that the puppycide could have been averted if only a strong man had been around to prevent her hysterical reaction? Or that killing a puppy is okay if a man does it? I gave up trying to reason that out; that way madness lies.

Cricket

The majority of Freeper responses fell into the pro-puppycide category. Some felt shooting the dog was acceptable though unfortunate. Most, however, defended her, arguing it was actually necessary for her to execute the puppy (and the goat). Predictably, some Freepers found it amusing; some actually reveled in the cruelty of the act. Here is a representative sample:

Puppy? Let me know when you adopt a “puppy” that attacks and eats your children.
by Responsibility2nd

A lot of people don’t understand that dogs aren’t only pets, some are actually working animals that are expected to do a job and their owners depend on their ability to do that job for their livelihood, and that if they can’t do their job their owners don’t have the resources either time or money to keep them as pets.
by Truthsearcher

She killed a dog?
Maybe the postal workers union will endorse her.
She may even become “Cat Fancier” magazine’s “Woman of the Year.”
by x (She’s only killing the dogs the illegals can’t be bothered killing.)

The joyful chicken killer.
Chicken Lives Matter.
How many eggs did Cricket produce?
by kiryandil

One of the biggest hopes America has of not going full-Islam is Americans’ love of dogs.
Regardless of how much sense can be made of her killing a dog, it won’t fly with the vast majority of dog owners.
We supposedly need some soccer moms to vote for Trump. Soccer moms are not going to vote for a dog-killer.
by who_would_fardels_bear

Noem did the right thing shooting the dog. You’re highly sensitive aren’t you?
by Macho MAGA Man

I find nothing wrong with killing a dog that wont hunt. or a nasty goat.
and a billy goat that is mean could hurt someone if it got out. and you can eat it.
by Ikeon (My only issues with stupid people are, they encouraged to talk and post stupid opinions.. )

I would like her even more if she made slippers from cricket’s pelt.
by Wilderness Conservative (Nature is the ultimate conservative)

These examples don’t show the actual scope of the Freep responses to Noem’s puppycide. There were several comments comparing shooting a puppy to abortion. Some ignored Noem and the puppycide altogether and just advocated other potential VP selections. And some comments had no obvious connection at all to the topic being discussed. But it wouldn’t be FreeRepublic without a bit of random casual racism, so I’ll add one more comment.

She had to have some Indian blood, as seen from the high cheekbones.
by nwrep

Noem, responding to folks to the anti-puppycide crowd, referred to this and other stories in her book as “real, honest, and politically incorrect.” Seriously, politically incorrect. As if there was a political stance involved in killing an adolescent dog.

It’s to be hoped that the title of her book is prophetic. Let’s hope there’s no coming back for her. Let’s hope the Freep discussion thread was accurate, that this IS the end of Kristi Noem.

EDITORIAL NOTE: We need to burn the patriarchy. Burn it and bury the ashes with a wooden stake driven directly through where its heart should have been. Then burn the stake. Burn the patriarchy and salt the earth where its ashes are buried. Keep salting the earth for generations. Then nuke it from orbit. Then tea and biscuits.

the bull goose loony of asshole culture

Posted on by
2

The Trump re-election campaign is basically a defense of Asshole Culture. It’s clearly NOT a traditional presidential campaign. It consists almost entirely of Trump shouting various iterations of the Asshole Culture credo (if ‘credo’ means what I think it means).

The Asshole Credo? I’m glad you asked.

I do/do not want to do this thing. I don’t care if it helps/hurts other people. You can’t make me do or not do this thing. I will go way the fuck out of my way to create a disturbance sufficient to make others miserable in order to do/not do/stop other people from doing this thing. I am Asshole, hear me roar.

I wrote about Asshole Culture back in 2021, detailing how my understanding of the Republican Party shifted from seeing them as a Fuckwit Collective to advocates of Asshole Culture. I used to believe they did cruel stupid shit because they were too stupid to grasp that what they were doing was cruel. It became clear to me that many of them did cruel stupid shit because they’re cruel. Not just cruel, but performatively cruel. In your face cruel. Visibly and vocally cruel, without any fear of consequence.

Trump is campaigning on the theme of A Celebration of Asshole Culture. His claim of Absolute Immunity is grounded in Asshole Culture. His mockery of Joe Biden’s stutter, his deliberately insulting language about judges and prosecutors, his honoring of the January 6th Insurrectionists, his racist comments about immigrants, his contention that he’s the victim of reverse racism, his hateful depiction of E.Jean Carroll, his absurd gestures toward Christianity, all of his blatant lies — these are all manifestations of Asshole Culture.

And Trump? He’s the bull goose loony of Asshole Culture.

Trump’s entire presidential campaign is, down at the cellular level, based on the idea that he should be able to fart in church and enjoy the discomfort of other churchgoers without any consequence. Own the libs, insult eggheads, denigrate experts, mock the disabled, taunt minorities, malign women, intimidate those who disagree with you, fuck your feelings — these are the centerpieces of Asshole Culture.

Policies? Trump doesn’t need them. He doesn’t want them. He doesn’t understand them. He just wants to do whatever the fuck he wants to do at any particular moment. He insists on his right to be the supreme asshole.

That’s the open secret of his political success. Trump’s followers wish they could be as much an asshole as Trump is. They wish they could be as openly objectionable, as blatantly abhorrent as Trump is, and escape responsibility for it as much as he has. They don’t care that he’s a liar, a crook, a cheat, a hypocrite, an asshole; they just want him to be able to get away with it. Because then maybe they can do the same. Did he cheat on his taxes? Did he cheat on his wives? Did he pay hush money to porn stars? Did he try to steal an election? Fuck yeah!

It shouldn’t come as a surprise that Asshole Culture is rooted in patriarchy.

EDITORIAL NOTE: We must burn the patriarchy. Burn it to the ground, gather the ashes, piss on them, douse them in oil and set them on fire again. Burn the patriarchy, then drive a stake directly through the ashes where its heart used to be, and then set fire to the stake. Burn the fucker one more time. And keep burning it, over and over. Burn it for generations. Nuke it from orbit. Then have tea and pastries.

i should know better

Posted on by
6

It’s been a while since I’ve held my breath and visited the mephitic swamp that’s FreeRepublic. But I was curious to see how Freepers would react to Comrade Trump’s massive fine for committing fraud in New York State.

I mean, I knew, of course, that they’d be outraged. They’re always outraged about something. What I was curious about was the direction their outrage would take. Generally, Freeper outrage falls into one (or more) of five categories. 1) They’re picking on Trump unfairly, 2) Trump is too big/powerful/strong/manly to be bothered by being nibbled on by ducks, 3) Trump will have his revenge, 4) It’s a Deep State conspiracy, or 5) Blame it on women, black folks, pedophiles/perverts, communists, Satanists, etc.

To my disappointment, not one Freeper mentioned Satan. However, they almost universally agreed Trump was being victimized unfairly. Here are a few folks who figured Trump will just shrug off a half a billion in fines:

Trump could easily take out a loan against Mara-Lago since it is valued at over a billion dollars.
by Newbomb Turk

He just made $4 billion in his truth social tech stock today, I’m sure this verdict had nothing to do with it. I’m sure his poll numbers ascended as well.
by FrdmLvr

Of course it will be dismissed. Trump isn’t going to pay a dime.
by Georgia Girl 2

But even if Trump could easily pay off those unfair fines, Freepers agree that Trump himself is absolutely blameless. He’s being targeted by people who hate him because of reasons (they’re not MAGA, they’re black, they’re overweight, they’re stupid, they’re perverts, they’re sadists, they’re less than human).

once this is appealed to a NON-DEMOCRAT court, it will be tossed out like the garbage it is.
by ThePatriotsFlag

Since a lot of horrible people are in positions of authority based on Kolor, kink, and Kin…and not on merit–we need a law stating government officials can not read statements written by others–or by themselves.
A half page of notes can be allowed.
It was sickening listen to that idiot Letitia James read a statement written by someone else that made her sound intelligent. Well, kind of intelligent considering what she was saying wasn’t rational.
by GOPJ

[They think the verdict] will make they women wet and the men wishing they could get hard. They love the idea of an “enemy” suffering greatly. There are tens of millions of them. Their sadists who would be thrilled to watch any one of us tortured to death. Does anyone here really want to share the nation with these animals?
by Wpin

But obviously, there’s a shady cabal behind all of Trump’s misfortunes. It’s simply not possible that Trump himself could be to blame.

New York is just the means to an end. Obama is behind all of this.
by Daveinyork

Good chance they’ll put Trump in jail and kill him.
by sopo

Regardless, Trump will eventually triumph. He’ll have his revenge. True American Patriots will stand up in numbers too big to ignore and fight for him. They’ll make those bastards pay.

Heard PISSED OFF Truckers for Trump are starting a boycott of deliveries to NYC. They started with 10 a few hours ago and now they’re up to 20 committed. It’s spreading! GO TRUCKERS!!! SPREAD THE WORD!
by RoseofTexas

Trump will have the judge arrested. Problem solved.
by nonliberal

We are about at the point where these lawless monsters be openly defied. We are entering second amendment territory. These are no longer legitimate courts. Once the legitimacy of the courts goes down and anybody that the powers that be want to throw into jail can be done so…it’s over….and it’s on….
by TalBlack

There you go. Truckers will starve Manhattan. Judge Engoron will be jailed. There will be Second Amendment solutions for Trump’s enemies.

There are reasons I rarely visit FreeRepublic these days. It’s not the consistent vitriol and ugliness that keeps me away, though that plays a part. And it’s not because of the level of ignorance and stupidity in their comments. I avoid FreeRepublic because visiting the site tends to make me react to its followers in much the same way they react to everybody else.

I become judgmental. I mock them. I feel a certain amount of disgust for them. I see them as uninformed backward rubes. Because there’s no way an intelligent, thoughtful person can believe Barack Obama orchestrated Trump’s fraud trial, or that a group of truck drivers will punish NYC, or that Trump is in any way a patriot. I read their comments and I think, “You hateful, pathetic, fuckwitted suckers.”

I dislike feeling that way about other people. I want to feel compassion for people who are so oblivious and gullible. I used to be able to do that. Now, not so much. I don’t visit FreeRepublic very often because I find their hate and bitterness and disregard for others is infectious. And I’m gradually losing my resistance to it.

EDITORIAL NOTE: This is a good time to remind everybody that we need to burn the patriarchy to the ground. We need to douse that poisonous plant with kerosene and set fire to it. We need to gather its ashes, piss on them, drop napalm on them and burn them again. Burn the patriarchy, then drive a stake directly through the ashes where its heart used to be, and then set fire to the stake. Burn the fucker one more time. And keep burning it, over and over. Burn it for generations. Then read a good book.

the women’s march — seven years ago

Posted on by
2

Seven years…seems like a lifetime. Donald Trump, with the aid of Vlad Putin, had been installed in the White House. Women decided to protest.

It was really that simple—which is to say it wasn’t simple at all. It was a spontaneous desire to protest, but it took incredible coordination by a group of volunteers. The original plan to march in Washington DC expanded to other major cities, then to more modest cities, then to small towns. In fact, there were satellite protest marches across the globe. There are no truly accurate numbers, but it’s estimated that in the US more than five million people marched that cold January day. That was a little over 1% of the US population. It was, in the end, the largest single-day protest in US history.

The crowd began to gather. We hoped to get 6000. We got 26,000.

A couple of women in Los Angeles had an idea to create a hat that would not only help marchers stay warm, but would also be a visual statement of protest against a man who bragged women would allow him to “grab them by the pussy.” The pink pussy hat idea was flawed (it didn’t represent women of color or trans women) and was later abandoned as a form of protest, but on that day it provided a singularly powerful visual and emotional impact. It was, in a way, a sort of counter MAGA red baseball cap. The hats were also an example of the fundamental opposition to Trump; the vast majority of the pink pussy hats were made by hand by volunteers—often by personal friends of the marchers themselves.

Listening to music; waiting for the speeches to start.

I marched in Des Moines, Iowa. Originally, the organizers thought we’d have a couple of thousand marchers. Later, they hoped to have maybe 6,000. Then they thought it was possible for 10,000 to show up. According to the local newspaper the final estimate was approximately 26,000. (I wrote about the march and the pussy hats a couple days later.)

Oh Jeez

It was mostly women and girls, but a lot of men showed up as well. All ages. It was as racially diverse as Iowa gets (which, let’s admit it, isn’t terribly diverse). Abled and disabled. We gathered at the Iowa state capitol building. There was music, there was food and hot coffee, there were speeches, there were spontaneous chants, there was singing, and then we…well, marched. I use the term ‘march’ rather loosely. We basically hiked around the capitol grounds. Because this is Iowa, the march itself was far more polite than the signage and the chants; we didn’t block the streets, we didn’t get into any punch-ups with the very few counter-demonstrators, and we didn’t leave a mess for other folks to clean up.

Patriarchy is for dicks.

I suppose the march officially ended when we’d returned to our original location, but few people left at that point. It may have been anger and concern that sparked the march and brought us all together, but once we’d gathered there was a pervasive sense of togetherness that everybody seemed reluctant to dismiss. There was a sense of hope, a feeling that if we all acted together—if we all worked for each other—we could mitigate the harm we fully expected to come from a Trump administration.

Not in the White House

We were so innocent. Trump was—and still is—worse than we could imagine. He’s done more damage than we thought possible. He had—and still has—more support for his authoritarian, anti-democratic, racist, misogynistic, vindictive agenda than we could conceive. I don’t think any of us had any idea of just how ugly, how hateful, how mean-spirited Trump’s supporters would be. We certainly didn’t anticipate how persistently and aggressively they’d attack long-held civil rights and liberties. We were so terribly innocent.

We’ve put away those hats, but we’ve kept the righteous anger.

It’s been seven years since the March. And we’re tired. Physically tired, emotionally tired, spiritually tired. We’ve put away our pussy hats (I still have mine—made for me by a friend, Kim Denise—stashed in a drawer), and rightly so because they weren’t inclusive. Our confidence in the benefits of protest has eroded; our confidence in our system of governance has been abraded by constant aggressive assaults by right-wing hate.

Bash the Fash

It’s fucking hard to be optimistic. The March itself, which was a buoyant expression of righteous anger and determination, has become a prolonged grind. It feels like the coming election will determine whether it’s possible for the US to recover from Trumpism.

Believe it.

So it doesn’t matter that we’re tired. We know what we need to do. We don’t need to gather together in person and march again, we don’t need pussy hats, we don’t need clever signs or chants. What we need is pretty simple. We need to gather together in spirit and tell Trump and all his enablers and supporters to go fuck themselves.

Just like the March itself, it’s that simple. Which is to say it’s not simple at all. But it’s necessary.

the iowa caucus as smoke detector

Posted on by
8

Let me say this first: I actually live in Iowa. I’ve been here steadily since 2008. I’ve participated in the Iowa caucus system. And people, I’m telling you it’s worthless.

Wait, that’s not entirely true. The Iowa caucus has value…to the news/entertainment media. Why? Partly because it’s quirky and quaint; it’s basically a 19th century system. Partly because it gives the media good visuals; you get to see candidates visiting farms and small town diners and county/state fairs. You get to see photos of them eating a corn dog or standing by a cow or smiling at somebody wearing bib overalls. And it has media value partly because it’s the first contest of the ridiculous process the US has for nominating presidential candidate. The news media has made the Iowa caucus ‘important’ because it thinks…and perhaps they’re right…that viewers love this stuff.

But except as a form of news entertainment, the Iowa caucus system is a pretty shitty way to select a nominee to represent a political party in a campaign for POTUS. It’s shitty in several ways.

  • It’s shitty because it’s held in fucking January, when it’s almost always bitterly cold. That discourages participation.
  • It’s shitty because it’s held in the evening and requires people to attend physically. If you work the second shift, you can’t attend. If you have child care issues, you may be unable to attend (although some parents do bring their kids…who then have to sit through what is often a long process that’s excruciatingly boring to kids). If you don’t have reliable transportation, if you’re elderly, if you’re disabled, you may be unable to attend.
  • It’s shitty because it can take a long time. People gather at the caucus site (which might be a church or a school or even somebody’s house) then listen as somebody representing each candidate (and sometimes there are several candidates) tries to convince the attendees to support their candidate. After those speeches, people physically separate themselves in groups. I’m NOT making this up. Candidate A supporters go to that corner, Candidate B’s people to another, and so on. If a candidate doesn’t have enough supporters to be considered viable, there’s a period of persuasion in which the more popular candidate’s supporters try to get them to join. There’s a whole supporter-poaching system in place. After all that physical shuffling around is done, they physically count the number of supporters in each group, and apportion delegates based on that.
  • It’s shitty because this unwieldy process happens in EVERY precinct of each of Iowa’s 99 counties. And they’re almost all run by volunteers. In other words, this is largely an amateur hour process.
  • It’s shitty because the population of Iowa is…well, not representative of the US as a whole. There are about three million people living in Iowa. About 85% of them are white; 7% Latino; 5% Black. Do the math.

So what we’re talking about here is an antiquated, inherently unfair system that doesn’t represent the nation as a whole and is conducted largely by amateurs, but is massively promoted as important by the news/entertainment media. It’s also worth mentioning that the Iowa caucus system isn’t very predictive. Since 1972, it’s basically been a coin toss whether the caucus winner became the actual nominee. Only 55% of the Democratic Iowa caucuses winners became the party nominee; 43% of GOP winners became the Republican candidate. (I should also point out that the Iowa Democratic Party has mostly abandoned this system; they’ll still hold a physical ‘caucus’ but will also allow mail-in and early voting.)

The success rate since 2008, when I moved back to Iowa, has been pretty accurate for Democrats, but absolutely dismal for Republicans. Democratic caucus winners were Obama (2008 and 2012), Clinton (2016), and a tie between Buttigieg and Sanders (2020). GOP caucus winners were Mike Huckabee (2008), Rick Santorum (2012), Ted fucking Cruz (2016), and Trump (2020).

You’ll notice that the Iowa GOP has consistently chosen evangelical Christians as candidates. Or at least candidates who claim to represent evangelical Christians, because Trump? C’mon. What that suggests (or screams out loud) is that evangelical Christians aren’t really that interested in Christianity. They’re less concerned with spirituality and morality, and more concerned with racist and sexist ideology. It’s not about religion; it’s about willfully blind obedience to a cult leader.

Ain’t nobody painting their tractor for Biden.

My point, if you can call it that, is that Trump’s massive victory in yesterday’s Iowa caucus isn’t terribly meaningful in terms of who’ll win the 2024 election. Notice that every GOP Iowa caucus winner since 2008 LOST in that year’s election.

I’m not saying we should shrug off Trump’s win. It’s evidence that the GOP has solidified itself as an authoritarian, anti-democratic, Christianist political party rooted in racism and sexism rather than conservative principles or policies. The fact that they represent such a large chunk of the US population is fucking terrifying.

But I think it’s important to remember that Trump’s power is a product of hate, resentment, and fear fueled in large measure by a news and entertainment media more interested in marketing than in reportage. Half of his power is a media-fostered illusion. The way the GOP Iowa caucus is reported feeds that illusion.

So don’t disregard the caucus result any more than you’d disregard the alarm on the smoke detector in your home. It could be a legit warning. But it’s more likely to mean the battery needs to be changed. Pay attention to what happens in Iowa, but don’t let it panic you. It’s mostly just noise leading to anxiety.

Wait. That’s my point. I knew I had one. I’m glad it snuck in at the end.

EDITORIAL NOTE: Just another reminder that we must burn the patriarchy. Burn it to the fucking ground, gather the ashes, piss on them, douse them in oil and set them on fire again. Burn the patriarchy, then drive a stake directly through the ashes where its heart used to be, then set fire to the stake and burn the fucker one more time. And keep burning it, over and over. Burn it for generations. Then nuke it from orbit. Then drink whiskey and have wild monkey sex.

bi-generation?

Posted on by
5

Okay, first thing, if you’re expecting this to be about a generation of bisexual people, you can just stop now. It’s not about bisexuality. Well, not specifically. I mean, it’s about Doctor Who, so it could be argued that bisexuality is sorta kinda implicit. I mean, The Doctor (and yes, Whovians (and also yes, Doctor Who fans are often called Whovians, get over it) always refer to Doctor Who as The Doctor, get over that too) is an alien who’s been both male and female and has been attracted to both men and women, so…yeah.

I understand, not everybody is a fan of Doctor Who. If you’re one of those folks, then you might as well take a nap, on account of this is totally about one of the esoteric aspects of The Doctor. I’m talking, of course, about bi-generation.

If you’re NOT a Doctor Who fan and, for some inexplicable reason you’re still reading this, allow me to explain the regeneration business. There’s obviously a practical aspect to it. The show is 60 years old; the original Doctor Who has been dead for almost half a century. In order to keep the show going, a new Doctor had to be introduced. Rather than just toss in another actor and pretend he’s the same person, the writers introduced the concept of regeneration. When The Doctor is fatally injured or their body is failing for some reason, they go through a transformation process—their cells renew into a different physical form, which results in a new body. Their memory remains mostly intact, but the new Doctor has a unique new personality. This is regeneration.

It’s happened 13 times in the course of the show. We expected it to happen a 14th time, when the new Doctor (played by Ncuti Gatwa) would be introduced. But instead of a classic regeneration, we were subjected to bi-generation. As The Doctor (played by David Tennant) prepares to die, he’s supported by two women, one on either side. The regeneration process begins, then…nope. It just…stops. Everybody is confused. The Doctor asks those supporting him to pull (on his arms), and hey, bingo, he splits in two. Sorta kinda.

I mean, where there was The Doctor, now there are two Doctors—one a pale skinny Scotsman (Tennant), the other a muscular Black man (Gatwa). I didn’t notice this at first, but The Doctor’s clothes are also divided; Gatwa gets the shirt, tie, shoes, and underpants. Gatwa also gets to ask the question that EVERYBODY is thinking: “Now, someone tell me what the hell is going on here!”

Putting the bi in bi-generation.

What the hell is going on is something completely and entirely unprecedented. As a fan, you have to ask, why did the writers do this? Why would they introduce a new form of regeneration? In my opinion, there are solid narrative reasons for the bi-generation business. Consider that The Doctor, in various incarnations, has been around a LONG time. They’ve saved civilizations and destroyed them, they’ve rescued billions of people and seen (or caused) billions to die, they’ve fought monsters and they’ve been monsters, they’ve loved companions and seen them die (or leave or get abandoned). Because of this, The Doctor has the universe’s worst case of PTSD and survivor’s guilt ever. Let’s face it, the Doctor is massively fucked up.

By tossing in this bi-generation, the writers have done two very important (for the fan base) things. First, they’ve given the new Doctor a clean slate. Gatwa has The Doctor’s memories, but isn’t burdened by the guilt. It also allowed Gatwa to skip the post-regeneration ‘Wait, who am I now?’ confusion that normally accompanies a new Doctor. He starts fresh, confident, eager, enthusiastic—and Gatwa’s delight in being Doctor Who is apparent and infectious.

Second (and probably more important for the fans), the old Doctor gets a chance to heal—to live a somewhat more normal life, to have something like a family, to be relieved of the obligation to fix every fucking thing that goes wrong, to just relax. There’s something healing about seeing Tennant sitting down to a meal with his expanded chosen family. It’s just really nice to know his end isn’t traumatic.

BUT (you knew there was a ‘but’ coming, didn’t you), I’m a wee bit disconcerted by one thing in particular. As I said at the beginning, Whovians always refer to The Doctor as The Doctor. Not just any Doctor, but THE Doctor. Because The Doctor is singular. There’s only one The Doctor.

Until now. How can Ncuti Gatwa be The Doctor when there’s another Doctor Who loafing about in Donna Noble’s garden in Chiswick? Personally, I’m more than willing to abandon the singular The and refer to the 14th Doctor as the Doctor, so long as I get to imagine the old Doctor sitting around at night with Wilfred Mott, drinking tea from a thermos and looking at stars through a telescope.

it’s the same coin

Posted on by
2

I’m almost never busy. I don’t live a busy life. But this is one of those rare instances when I’m working under a deadline. So of course RIGHT NOW there’s a LOT of really awful and really interesting and really important stuff happening everywhere. Stuff I’d ordinarily be writing about because, as you know, I have thoughts about things.

The most awful thing is the terrorist attack by Hamas on Israeli civilians. No matter how much a person might support the rights of Palestinians, no matter how much a person might despise the treatment of Palestinians by the Israeli government, no matter how much a person might understand the frustration and anger and boiling hatred Palestinians may feel toward Israeli policies, there’s absolutely no possible justification for an attack designed to slaughter civilians. And there’s no possible reason to celebrate such an attack.

But this is why terrorism exists, and why it works. Oppressed people strike out–not directly against the government that oppresses them, because they don’t have the military power to harm the government. They strike where they can do the most damage, and they do it KNOWING it will result in two things: 1) outrage against them and their cause, and 2) a massively one-sided retaliation. The retaliation always reveals the social and political conditions that sparked the terrorism.

Right now people are talking about Gaza. Right now, a lot of people are gleeful about the demolition of Gaza, because ‘they’ deserve it. But many people are also hearing for the first time Gaza referred to as ‘the world’s largest open-air prison.’ We’re seeing in the starkest possible light, the people who allow their anger and resentment to turn to brutality–the terrorists and the retaliators.

And because I’ve said This is why terrorism exists and why it works, some people will argue that I’m validating the attack by Hamas. So let me repeat this: There’s absolutely no possible justification for an attack designed to slaughter civilians and there’s no possible reason to celebrate such an attack. I could also say–and it would be equally true–that brutal oppression works. We’ve seen that in totalitarian regimes throughout history. That’s not a justification of brutality.

Brutality works for the brutal, terrorism works for the terrorists, racism works for the racists, patriarchy works for men, cruelty works for the cruel, selfishness works for the selfish. In all cases, ordinary decent people are the ones who suffer.

This is all deeply ugly. So it’s important to remember this: the Israeli government doesn’t represent all Jews. It’s important to remember this: Hamas doesn’t represent all Palestinians. It’s critically important to understand that oppression and terrorism the opposite sides of the same coin.

EDITORIAL NOTE: We must burn the patriarchy. If you’re wondering what the patriarchy has to do with the situation in Israel and Gaza, then you don’t really grasp the extent to which patriarchy infects culture. We need to burn it to the ground, gather the ashes, piss on them, douse them in oil and set them on fire again. Burn it and keep burning it, over and over. Burn it for generations. Then nuke it from orbit. Then have tea and cookies.

the answer is: buffy & veronica

Posted on by
1

“Name a television show that changed you.” That sort of question gets asked all the time in social media, mainly by folks who want to generate some discussion. I generally ignore those questions. I thought I’d ignored that one too, when it came up a few days ago. But apparently I didn’t, because I’ve been thinking about it at odd moments when my brain isn’t occupied with other bullshit.

And hey, after a few days of episodic thought, I came up with two shows that…wait. You know, the whole notion of a television show actually changing somebody seems ridiculous. On the other hand the notion of a book changing somebody seems (to me, at any rate) perfectly reasonable. But I don’t know…I mean, they’re both narrative forms and only an idiot would deny the power of a narrative. So, okay, there’s no reason a television show/series can’t have a powerful effect on somebody. Whatever point I was going to make at the beginning of this paragraph is clearly bullshit. So never mind. Let me try that again.

After a few days of episodic thought, I came up with two shows that have had a profound effect on me. Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Veronica Mars. The former is about a high school girl who becomes the Chosen One whose purpose in the world is to kill vampires and demons and general ‘forces of darkness,’ which (as Buffy says) is a job of work for a high school kid. The latter is about a high school girl who becomes a private detective, solving crimes and helping innocent (and semi-innocent) people.

“I’m telling you, having a secret identity in this town is a job of work.”

Yeah, I know, the premise of each of those shows is absurd. Also yeah, I know, some of you may be saying to yourself, “A guy who watches girl hero television shows? What’s with that?” My response to that is a) hey, they’re really good shows and b) grow the fuck up.

Here’s the thing. Yeah, Buffy and Veronica are high school girls (at the beginning of each series) who are tough and snarky, who defend ordinary folks against bad folks, and who have to deal with gender and high school issues while also dealing with much larger problems. But what makes them singularly influential (to me, at least) is that they’ve both been through a world of shit and they’ve adapted to that by no longer caring very much what other folks think about them. They’re aware of peer pressure, and it still carries much of the gravitational pull that influences most of their peers. But they’ve each found the strength to shrug off that gravity and deal with the world they live in on their own terms.

“Why can’t the evil just get jobs like the rest of us?”

But that comes with a cost. They each suffer the isolation and alienation that comes with being different. They each learn to assemble a cohort that serves as a sort of family or support group. And then they’ve each learned that in some/many ways, they’re also isolated and alienated from that cohort. And as painful as that is, they continue to cope and occasionally to actually thrive.

Another thing about those shows: they each include a father figure who is realistically complex. Buffy has Giles, her Watcher; Veronica has…well, her dad. They try to help; they try to protect; they try to NOT interfere too much, and they routinely fuck up. Realistically fuck up. Because they’re conflicted; society suggests they should behave in a specific male parent way that generally interferes with the agency of their children BUT they also want to encourage their children to be their true selves. Anthony Head and Enrico Colantoni manage to bungle their parental responsibilities without completely destroying the trust of their kids. Their relationships are often painful, but always sort of beautiful.

So yeah, those two television shows were massively influential to me. The fact that Buffy and Veronica struggle against vampires or criminal sociopaths is sort of irrelevant. What matters is they mostly hold onto their personal integrity in a world that seems almost designed to destroy it. What matters is Buffy and Veronica build a mostly workable relationship with their own selves. If that makes sense.

Buffy Summers and Veronica Mars offered lessons in how to hold onto your true self when the world around you tried relentlessly to disrupt that. They gave good television.

THE USUAL EDITORIAL COMMENT: Yeah, the patriarchy. Got to incinerate it. Stake it to the ground, douse it with an accelerant, light it up. Burn it to ashes, bury the ashes, piss on the the burial site, then salt the earth above it so that nothing will ever grow there again. Then have a glass of wine. I recommend a Gewürztraminer.