eumelia: (exterminate!)
Not because of the events themselves. One of the things I enjoy about facebook is seeing all the things I don't have time to do or I'm too lazy to attend fly by and be spoken about by those who did go and enjoy themselves.

I'm going to an events I found on Facebook this evening, hopefully accompanied by a friend, but also maybe not.

I'm going to listen to a panel at the Tel-Aviv LGBT Centre regarding the discriminatory paragraph on the blood donor's restriction guidelines. As with the rest of most Western countries in the world Israel also restricts gay men and men who have sex with men from donating blood due to being a "risk group" for HIV/AIDS.

So, I'll be going this evening to hear a panel on the subject. The speakers are going to be a representative from the QUILBAG outreach branch of the Israel AIDS task force, a researcher from an education and youth organisation movement and the chair of the MADA (the Red Star of David, our version of the Red Cross/Crescent) blood bank.

I'm looking forward to it, as a regular donor and queer person, it's one of my regular peeves that I talk about when discussing institutionalised homophobia and an issue I try to discuss with the blood technicians; most of the time they're like "we're just doing our job, we have no control over policy" which is fair, but irritating and sometimes I actually manage to have an interesting discussion with some of them (usually women technicians) and during one of those conversations I was told that the Israeli policy is part of a world wide policy recommended by the Red Cross - something I'd not known at the time (this was about three years ago, I think).

It's worth starting discussions with people who poke you with needles, I say.

In any event, yesterday, I posted the event on Facebook and put out a general request of "who's coming with me?".

The discussion that transpired irritated me to the level of KEY-BOARD-SMASH!!!!!!.

I'll spare you the details as they're not that important and interesting. Not to mention, they're in Hebrew. However, there was something that was written that made me double take and got my ears roaring.

There was agreement (total, I might add) that the restrictive paragraph was discriminatory and wrong, but the gay community (at this point we were talking about gay men specifically, because they're the group that's eschewed from being able to donate) contributes to its image.
That there is a culture of casual sex and one night stands in the gay community that isn't as widespread like in straight culture - casual sex and one night stands create a higher risk of infection.

My mind, it was blown. My blood, it was boiling.

I tried, really really hard to explain, why that kind of statement is homophobic and victim blaming. No dice and this discussion went on for hours on and off. It even went on to say that some women are to blame for sexism.

Fucking hell.

Now, the thing is, the person saying all that, I don't know 'em very well, but I like 'em and they like me as well and we're becoming friends and the discussion itself is interesting, but I'm finding it very hard to keep an even keel and cool head in light of this espousing of bullshit.

Hence the aforementioned KEY-BOARD-SMASH!!!!!!.

Facebook is stress causing in this case. I can tell you that if someone had said this crap to my face in person I'm pretty sure I would have thrown something heavy at that person's head.
And left the room with a door slam.
I'm dramatic that way (my officer's nick name for me during my Army service was Melodrama).

I know I haven't given y'all nearly enough info regarding what was actually said in the discussion for you to actually have an opinion on who was right, but honestly, I don't care.

I'm sick and tired of being in a position in which the basic humanity of individuals of a certain group needs to be proven as actually worth while, existent and ratified. Especially when I'm the company of so-called straight allies and friends - yeah, in case it wasn't obvious, the person I was commenting back and forth with is straight - there was another participant and their input didn't make want to, once again, KEY-BOARD-SMASH!!!!!!.

I think I'll go check if I have company this evening.
eumelia: (oh snap!)
Due to a lot of circumstances, I went to see The Social Network last night, while with a head cold, a heavy heart and weary bones which I will tell you about at a later date.

I didn't listen to the hype, or tried not to, and went to see it because of the reason I generally go see movies in which I don't know any of the actors (other than Justin Timberlake, who a real turn off for me, I find him so unappealing as a persona) is the director.

David Fincher, he who did Fight Club, which was a work of sheer brilliance and in a funny way almost an antithesis to The Social Network when you think about it.

In any event, my reaction to the film was "Excellent script, awesome music, okay movie".

The script, by one Aaron Sorkin is possibly the saviour of this movie and could get the Oscar nod, because like all of his writing, it is witty, fast, funny and entrenched with double-triple meaning and force - the words are very much the driving force of the movie - with good reason, as the movie is about a bunch of boys writing code - think Hackers only without the 80's get up and nefarious 80's greed.

Start-Up Greed is the protagonists right, don't you know.

A bunch of boys writing code, making money and getting (or trying to get) laid. Can't say I've never seen it before, but because it's a biopic and based on a True Story and all that, it is supposed to give it an extra edge. Maybe.

I wasn't moved by the film, as I've read others who were. It was funny in parts, the music - as I said - was awesome, but hey when you've got Trent Reznor on board it can't be all that bad.
I wasn't moved because I felt absolutely no sympathy, empathy or one iota of identification with any of the main characters. No one. Certainly not Zuckerberg who, as portrayed by Jesse Eisenberg has one expression to his name... apathy (and skeeviness, yikes).

Total and utter apathy and I must say that's the feeling one get throughout the movie he simply does not care about anything, other than showing his superiority over anyone and everyone, something I would normally be all for, because I myself am a pretty condescending ass-hole when I want to be (or inadvertently) but as a characteristic of the main character I was less than moved, not to mention that he was just boring to watch.
(I was also less than impressed with the fact that we were supposed to sympathise with him at all, especially at the end, when he's shown to be "just another lonely nerd holding on the girl who got away". No, it's creepy)
I haven't seen Zombieland but was told by my friend, with whom I went to see the film and had seen Zombieland that Eisenberg had pretty much the same expression and inflection here as he did there.

I'm not impressed.

Andrew Garfield was by far the most entertaining, also the most sympathetic character, which isn't saying much really. I got the feeling that Eduardo Saverin was no less of an ass-hole than Zuckerberg, but simply had better face-to-face people skills.

The less said about Sean Parker the better. Seriously?

I'll conclude by saying that this movie is much ado about nothing. I went to see it because it does encapsulate a part of culture in which I am entrenched, but the story it tells is a boring one. The hype is about the subject matter, the execution was not bad, but I've seen much better movies when it comes to this type of drama. I've also seen much much worse, but really now? Oscar buzz? As I said, maybe for the script, the editing, the technical stuff etc, because those really were good and they really do save the film.
As the performances were pretty much... meh.

As a piece of fiction it was derivative, as a piece of social commentary it falls flat and as for its quality of entertainment... I might download the soundtrack.

Thanks Sean!
eumelia: (master politician)
Let it be known, that I will never cross post any entry made of Livejournal using these new Facebook and Twitter buttons. I will not violate an f-lock in place.
It is my wish that people do not do this in my Livejournal as well.

Public entries are public and thus are available for the whole Internet to read and while I appreciate the courtesy of asking permission or being informed when I'm linked somewhere, I am aware that it is a courtesy.

Let's move on.

Via [ profile] rm I read that Livejournal hatched a deal with Facebook.
This is upsetting, because it means that even if the LJ staff didn't die after the stampede of "No" that's been happening over the past couple of days, their hands are most likely tied by contract and the cross post feature is here to stay.


However! Not all hope is lost! Via [ profile] 51stcenturyfox you can work around the feature, detailed in her post.

You'll note that when you comment on my LJ, the twitter and facebook options are not there, you too can be rid of them by following the instruction in [ profile] 51stcenturyfox's post or just read what I copied from her (which I did without permission, I hope she doesn't mind!).

Okay! Take this chunk o' code:

.b-repost-item, FORM#qrform > TABLE[style="border: 1px solid black;"]:last-child TD[style="vertical-align: top; text-align: right;"]:first-child { display: none !important; }

Cut and paste it into the bottom of your custom CSS stylesheet box, which is here.

In your options, you can't have custom comment pages disabled. So under: Disable customized comment pages for your journal, choose "No"

If someone posts all comments to facebook or twitter by default it won't work, but it gets rid of those friggin' choices on your journal for most people, at any rate.

I've implemented it and find it absolutely fine! No accidental cross post from anyone! Huzza!
eumelia: (verbiage)
A story broke out yesterday, regarding former female soldier of the IDF, Eden Abergil, who posted photos of herself on Facebook with detained Palestinians tied and blindfolded captioned:
"Army... Best Time Of My Life :) "

This has been making headlines two days in a row, who would have thunk it, that a stupid young woman's narcissism and obtuseness would raise more awareness about the inhuman treatment of Palestinians by the IDF than Breaking the Silence ever could, or the picture and story of a crying Palestinian boy

The worst thing about this is, of course, that she has no idea that she did anything wrong.
This quote really encompass the way the Army desensitizes us from feeling any compassion towards those we've been indoctrinated to not view as human:
"I still don't understand what's wrong," [Eden Abergil] told Army Radio on Thursday, saying that the "pictures were taken in good will, there was no statement in them."

"Good will" is actually supposed to be in "Good faith", but the translations sometimes go a bit too literal, in good faith, as in without the intent to cause any harm.
Of course, she didn't want to hurt anyone, she didn't consider the props of her military experience as remotely human.
Of having any will of their own. Of having any ability to consent to these photographs or to being the backdrop of this person's best days and on what was most likely their worst.

The real problem is, it's hard for me to lay the blame solely on Abergil's shoulders, in her point of view she treated the Palestinians with decency and perhaps, compares with the horror stories that have come out of Hebron, Gaza and the villages around the West Bank settlements, she really did.

The problem is, that this is a norm. The fact that this is a norm, dehumanising prisoners, treating them as props, having absolutely no perspective as to what it means to be in a position in which you are sitting with a bunch of blindfolded and tied up men, taking pictures for your amusement and treating that time as beautiful, is a terrible truth we have to contend with.

The truth is that the IDF does terrible things. Things that traumatise Palestinians and Israelis alike.
Call me naive, but when I read about soldiers who attack Peace Activists handing out flyers I'm inclined to believe that this kid is feeling that he's being judged by them (and he is by virtue of being part of the IDF that is under critical scrutiny by us Peacniks) and lashes out at what he perceives an attack on his Brothers in Arms, his meaning for living at the moments. National Pride may be a part of it, but that's a very rationalised argument and one usually given in retrospect.

Aside from that, there is a gender angle here of course, because this is a female soldier and female soldiers, are very much fetishised. PR campaigns for the IDF will always use pretty blonde soldiers, this article from Sociological Images (Potentially NSFW) paints the picture much better than I ever could.
Female soldiers should be "like men", but not too much, because they need to be desirable as well.
These are the acts of a "proper" female soldiers. You can bet that if it were a male soldier, the amount of air time and articles written on this would be drastically less. Not that the act would have been any less terrible, but it would be perceived as less, after all, this is not something new.

For me personally, my time in the Army was a time of great boredom and the making of friends. Some of my closest friends are people I met in during my service. I have many friends who did not serve.
I feel no shame in having done my time, had I known then what I know now, I would have refused and caused a great deal of pain and disappointment to my family.
eumelia: (Default)
I'm such a sheep.

I got a Twitter.

However, much like Facebook, it may not be around for long.


eumelia: (Default)

June 2015

 12345 6

V and Justice

V: Ah, I was forgetting that we are not properly introduced. I do not have a name. You can call me V. Madam Justice...this is V. V... this is Madam Justice. hello, Madam Justice.

Justice: Good evening, V.

V: There. Now we know each other. Actually, I've been a fan of yours for quite some time. Oh, I know what you're thinking...

Justice: The poor boy has a crush on adolescent fatuation.

V: I beg your pardon, Madam. It isn't like that at all. I've long admired you...albeit only from a distance. I used to stare at you from the streets below when I was a child. I'd say to my father, "Who is that lady?" And he'd say "That's Madam Justice." And I'd say "Isn't she pretty."

V: Please don't think it was merely physical. I know you're not that sort of girl. No, I loved you as a person. As an ideal.

Justice: What? V! For shame! You have betrayed me for some harlot, some vain and pouting hussy with painted lips and a knowing smile!

V: I, Madam? I beg to differ! It was your infidelity that drove me to her arms!

V: Ah-ha! That surprised you, didn't it? You thought I didn't know about your little fling. But I do. I know everything! Frankly, I wasn't surprised when I found out. You always did have an eye for a man in uniform.

Justice: Uniform? Why I'm sure I don't know what you're talking about. It was always you, V. You were the only one...

V: Liar! Slut! Whore! Deny that you let him have his way with you, him with his armbands and jackboots!

V: Well? Cat got your tongue? I though as much.

V: Very well. So you stand revealed at last. you are no longer my justice. You are his justice now. You have bedded another.

Justice: Sob! Choke! Wh-who is she, V? What is her name?

V: Her name is Anarchy. And she has taught me more as a mistress than you ever did! She has taught me that justice is meaningless without freedom. She is honest. She makes no promises and breaks none. Unlike you, Jezebel. I used to wonder why you could never look me in the eye. Now I know. So good bye, dear lady. I would be saddened by our parting even now, save that you are no longer the woman I once loved.


-"V for Vendetta"


Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags


RSS Atom
Page generated Oct. 19th, 2017 07:12 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios