Showing posts with label Lesbian rights. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lesbian rights. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 10, 2010

I Heart Tina Fey

Tina Fey, on the occasion of winning the Mark Twain award for comedy, took on the myth that having any women in politics is good regardless of whether they enact anti-woman policies.

Right-wing women, said Tina Fey last night, are great for all women, "unless you don't want to pay for your own rape kit...[or] you're a lesbian who wants to get married to your partner of 20 years."


I know there has been some criticism of Ms. Fey in the feminist blogosphere lately- but I think we can all agree that this comment is badass.

Thursday, April 9, 2009

Gay Marriage Legal in Four States

Given the events of the past six months, I'm surprised that the legalization of gay marriage by both Iowa and Vermont, joining Massachusetts and Connecticut to become the third and fourth states respectively, did not get more press. Maybe it's flown under the radar or been swept under the rug in lieu of the economic crisis, which is more evidence to my belief that Americans care more about their money than anything else.

Maybe it's because I haven't been watching the right channels, but the only coverage I've seen was one brief mention on MSNBC, as well as coverage in my local newspaper in the World & Nation Section. What makes me wonder, is just why this isn't getting more coverage, given how hot an issue it was as recently as recently as late February, and I don't really see it cooling off this quickly.

But I'm going to go out on a limb and make the assumption that this is because gay marriage wasn't legalized in New York or California. It was legalized in Iowa and Vermont. Three of the four states that allow it are in New England. I've lived in New England for all but ten months of my life, I visited Vermont multiple times as a child, and to this day, I still don't think I've ever actually met someone from Vermont. In other words, just like the natural disasters in Fargo, no one really cares about something significant if it doesn't happen in a major city or state.

Bias against small towns and lesser-known states and every bank in the country going bankrupt are really the only explanations I can think of as to why really just don't give a crap about this. Truth be told, even if Iowa and Vermont passed these laws way back on November 4th, the same day California banned it, I don't think anyone would be talking about it. It would all be about how Prop 8 passed in California and how it's a crushing defeat for gay rights.

Either way, at least it has the right people talking.

With all this being said, I'm glad we can add two more states to the list, and I'm glad one of them isn't within driving distance of my house. I take pride in living in the most progressive part of the nation, but seriously. It's time the other states got on board. I don't want to delve too far into the religious reasons for people supporting bans on gay marriage, but when you're picking and choosing certain passages from a book as openly sexist as the Bible and ignoring the stuff that makes you feel uncomfortable (my favorite is Leviticus 15: 19-24; go look it up), it makes me think you're just not cool with boys kissing each other.

Here's to hoping the other forty-six states get on board, so we can have equal rights for everyone.

One quick plug. My friend Jon recently started a blog called The Liberal Maniac, a catchy title if I've ever heard one. And really, it speaks for itself. It's a look at progressive politics from someone who knows what he's talking about. Anyway, he's invited me to contribute to the blog, so starting tomorrow, I'll also be a weekly contributor over at his fine site. So keep your eyes open. And likewise, he'll be linking back here to Female Impersonator. I encourage you to take a look and feel free to leave a comment. He loves comments.

Sunday, March 29, 2009

Limbaugh thinks "dikes" in Red River flooding HILARIOUS



Transcript:
“I heard some top-of-the-hour news, and it made me feel uncomfortable. It’s about the flooding in Fargo, North Dakota, brought on by the melting snowpack and the icepack. [Reading from news item]: ‘As the Red River threatens to overflow, they’re filling in the dikes.’ Isn’t there a more appropriate word? Do we have to say, I mean, we don’t have any dikes here. The ‘dykes’ are over there. … They’re filling in the dikes. Couldn’t we change that to ‘they’re filling in the contingencies’ or something? … We really need to change that word. … Hey, would you dykes in North Dakota give me a call and let me know how the flooding is going?”

Hey a-hole, those dikes are saving lifes and saving property, probably put in place by people who don't appreciate your humor. I bet some of those people are even lesbians (dykes, some may say) and gay and bi and trans and allies and straight.

So shut the f up until you graduate 6th grade, mmmkay?