“

Participants rated their sexual orientation on a 10-point scale, ranging from gay to straight. Then they took a computer-administered test designed to measure their implicit sexual orientation. In the test, the participants were shown images and words indicative of hetero- and homosexuality (pictures of same-sex and straight couples, words like “homosexual” and “gay”) and were asked to sort them into the appropriate category, gay or straight, as quickly as possible. The computer measured their reaction times.

The twist was that before each word and image appeared, the word “me” or “other” was flashed on the screen for 35 milliseconds — long enough for participants to subliminally process the word but short enough that they could not consciously see it. The theory here, known as semantic association, is that when “me” precedes words or images that reflect your sexual orientation (for example, heterosexual images for a straight person), you will sort these images into the correct category faster than when “me” precedes words or images that are incongruent with your sexual orientation (for example, homosexual images for a straight person). This technique, adapted from similar tests used to assess attitudes like subconscious racial bias, reliably distinguishes between self-identified straight individuals and those who self-identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual.

Using this methodology we identified a subgroup of participants who, despite self-identifying as highly straight, indicated some level of same-sex attraction (that is, they associated “me” with gay-related words and pictures faster than they associated “me” with straight-related words and pictures). Over 20 percent of self-described highly straight individuals showed this discrepancy.

Notably, these “discrepant” individuals were also significantly more likely than other participants to favor anti-gay policies; to be willing to assign significantly harsher punishments to perpetrators of petty crimes if they were presumed to be homosexual; and to express greater implicit hostility toward gay subjects (also measured with the help of subliminal priming). Thus our research suggests that some who oppose homosexuality do tacitly harbor same-sex attraction.

”

— New study indicates homophobia is often a result of repressed homosexual feelings, validating what Freud posited in his concept of “reaction formation,” in which we lash out against others’ expressions of what we loathe in ourselves. (via explore-blog)

(Source: , via riotingfeminist)

3:51 pm  •  19 May 2013

hamdoullahcava:

Muhammad Ali on the Vietnam War Draft

(via angryasiangirlsunited)

3:49 pm  •  19 May 2013

thepeoplesrecord:

Meet The Red Brigade: formed in November 2011 to fight back against a growing number of sexual attacks on women in the city of Lucknow, India

The male tormentor of the young women of the Madiyav slum did not spot the danger until it was too late. One moment he was taunting them with sexual suggestions and provocations; the next they had hold of his arms and legs and had hoisted him into the air.

Then the beating began. Some of the young women lightly used their fists, others took off their shoes and hit him with those. When it was over, they let him limp away to nurse his wounds, certain that he had learned an important lesson: don’t push your luck with the Red Brigade.

Named for their bright red outfits, the Red Brigade was formed in November 2011 as a self-defense group for young women suffering sexual abuse in the northern Indian city of Lucknow, 300 miles south-east of Delhi. Galvanised by the gang rape and murder of a 23-year-old medical student in Delhi last December and the nationwide protests that followed against a rising tide of rapes, they are now gaining in confidence.

From a core membership of 15, ranging in age from 11 to 25, they now have more than 100 members with a simple message for the men who have made their lives a misery: they will no longer tolerate being groped, gawped at and worse. Their activities are a lesson in empowerment.

Men who fall foul of the Red Brigade can first expect a visit and a warning. Sometimes the Red Brigade will ask the police to get involved, but if all else fails they take matters into their own hands. Their leader, 25-year-old teacher Usha Vishwakarma, has her own experience of the daily danger faced by many young women in the country. She was just 18 when a fellow teacher tried to rape her. “He grabbed me and put his hands round me and tried to open my belt and trousers,” says Usha, sitting in the bare-brick front room of her small house. “But I was saved by my jeans because they were too tight for him to open, and that gave me a chance to fight, so I kicked him in the sensitive place and pushed him down and ran out of the door.”

No one at the school took her accusations seriously, telling her to forget it and stop causing trouble. The experience left her traumatized and for two years she did nothing. But little by little her confidence came back. In 2009 she set up her own small school for local girls in an outbuilding next to her family home. Yet all around her, she says, she saw more and more young women suffering the same abuse she had faced. And it was threatening to wreck the chances of her young female students.

“Parents were telling girls to stay in their homes so there would be no incidents. They said, ‘if you go to school, boys will be troubling you, so stay home and there will be no sexual violence’,” says Vishwakarma. “But we said no, and we decided to form a group to fight for ourselves. We decided we would not just complain; we would take a lead and fight for ourselves.” They bought red kameez (shirts) and black salwar (trousers) and began to plan the fightback. “We chose red because it means danger and black for protest,” says Vishwakarma.

There is much to fight back against. “It is in the minds of men that girls are objects and it has been like that always,” says Vishwakarma. “Religion shows women as very powerless and that whoever is strong can do anything.”

They have started martial arts training so that the men do not have a physical advantage over them. Pooja, Vishwakarma’s 18-year-old sister, laughs as she recalls the reaction of the boy they grabbed in the street when his taunts became too much. “We all stopped and turned round and we surrounded him and grabbed his arms and legs and he thought it was a joke, but we were not kidding and four of us lifted him in the air and the others started to hit him with their shoes and fists,” she says.

The rough justice the Red Brigade metes out might seem extreme to western sensibilities, but many Indian women are making it clear that they are no longer prepared to put up with endemic abuse. That much is clear from the crime figures: reports of molestation in Delhi are up 590% year on year and rape reports by 147%. The rape cases have hit tourist numbers, which were down 25% in the first three months of the year – 35% fewer women are travelling to India. The Red Brigade say sexual abuse is a part of daily life for young women like them. They all have stories of abuse, attempted rapes and daily harassment. “This is what happens in India,” says 16-year-old Laxmi, one of Vishwakarma’s lieutenants. “These things happen all the time. All of us know this, so don’t let anyone say otherwise. This is why we have formed the Red Brigade.”

Seventeen-year-old Preeti Verma nods in agreement. Her family are too poor to have a toilet in the house, so she has to go out into the fields, she says. Every time she went out, the man in the neighbouring house threw stones at her to try to scare her into jumping up. “He wanted to see my body,” she says. “I told him: ‘What are you doing? You are shameless, don’t you have a mother and sister in your house?’ But he replied that his mother is for his father, his sister is for her husband and that I was for him.” She told Vishwakarma, and the man received a visit from the Red Brigade and another from the police. She has had no trouble from him since.

“We’ve caught a lot of men recently,” says 17-year-old Sufia Hashmi. “I joined up because men always used to pass comments on me and touch my body, but now we beat them the men cannot do anything and they run away. You feel powerful and you feel good.”

On the way back to the slum, the rickshaws pass a public park and for a moment these tough young women show themselves for what they really are – children forced to grow up fast. They beg and plead to stop. “Please, please,” they say, their eyes gleaming in excitement. Shrieking gleefully, they race off towards the swings, slides and roundabouts. Later they stroll back through the market, eating ice-creams, heading for their homes. The sun is low in the sky, the shadows long. The men watch sullenly as they pass. No one risks a word.

Source

Saw this on Al Jazeera this morning. I’m sure it’s gone around Tumblr in some form before.

(via callingoutbigotry)

5:35 pm  •  18 May 2013

nativnuance:

Blue Corn Comics.

(via angryasiangirlsunited)

3:17 pm  •  18 May 2013

blackinasia:

blindjewwanderinginthedesert:

(Image Description: a blind black woman and a blind Klansman walking across a crosswalk. The original tumblr post’s author supplies the title of Love is Blind”.)

xomadamecupcake:

bankuei:

Let’s talk about The Kumbayah Myth.

In the Kumbayah Myth, racism will just stop if everyone just started acting nice to each other, and the only reason we still have racism is that people are silly.

Part of the Kumbayah Myth is the erasure of history, violence and power.  In this falsehood, either no one is really at fault, or, actually, EVERYONE is at fault, so everyone is equally bad.   This actually exists only to make white people feel better and never have to change their behaviors.

Go look at Without Sanctuary and maybe read up on The Reconstruction and come back and tell me it’s all equal and IF ONLY Black people were nicer shit would have been different.

Now, let’s talk about this picture I linked.  It says, “Love is Blind” and has a blind black woman and a blind Klansman walking across the street holding hands….

Well, even the symbolism fails, because:

a) The black woman is basically minding her own business

b) The blind Klansman DRESSED UP AS A KLANSMAN- even blind he still HATES PEOPLE.

c) AND WE’VE JUST EQUATED A BLACK WOMAN, by nature of simply BEING A BLACK WOMAN as equivalent to a murderous terrorist.

Oh.  Ok.  If only those damn Black women would stop being so Black, the KKK wouldn’t HAVE to lynch, murder and burn them in self defense. 

You know, tit for tat, right?

But let’s keep going- the only reason, at least, we’d see this picture working is because HE DOESN’T KNOW SHE’S BLACK.  Otherwise, he’d push her into traffic and claim, “I’m blind! I didn’t know what was happening!”

What the world needs is not more hugs.  It needs you white people to stop killing people of color.  It needs for you to stop defending murderers.  It needs for you to stop equating dark skin as violent threat, and therefore, justifiable homicide in self defense.   It needs for you to recognize that YOU, collectively, pull this shit, and no, it is not “equal”, there is no “reverse racism”.

Love is not blind.  Hate is blind- it refuses to see what it does, it demands no one speak of it or say a thing.  And it kills and conveniently forgets a moment later.

Then demands hugs and holding hands and singing kumbayah, and wonders why everyone is so mean to it.

This argument is like, legit going on in my Facebook right now. ALL OF THIS. JUST ALL OF IT. 

All of the above commentary, plus a little extra. In addition to everything said above, which I support the sentiment of entirely, this picture and the above commentary really bother me on a whole host of levels because of the way they use visual disability. The original poster (bankuei) states that the image depicts ““Love is Blind” and has a blind black woman and a blind Klansman walking across the street holding hands.” 

Why does this bother me? Well, let’s start with four general reasons. These reason can also be read as a general commentary about ableist language and how incredibly damaging it really is even when it gets used by others in the battle against other ‘isms’. I would like to believe that there was no malicious, no ableist intent, on the part of the original tumblr post’s author (bankuei), but ableism is still ableism even without intent and it is just as damaging. 

First complaint. This language is really ableist. LOVE is not BLIND. Seriously, an emotion does not have a physical disability. Please stop using my disability as a synonym for “lack of prejudice/discrimination”. The blind face a ton of prejudice and discrimination and guess what, just because you are blind does not mean you completely miss prejudice or racism or any other ‘ism’ when it occurs. Enough said. Please stop using ableist language. It’s not symbolism or an analogy  It is ableist. 

Second complaint.  She doesn’t know he is a Klansman because she is blind? Both the author and the individual who made the image fall victim to this type of logic. If you think race (in the case of the woman) or a radical, oppressive political identity (in the case of the member of the KKK) are something a blind person misses because they are blind, you do not understand visual disability at all. Seriously, the ways these identities have been worked into language, the ways we interact with each other, the ways we navigate the world, etc. are incredibly nuanced and complicated. You do not need to be able to physically see them to know they exist. This complaint is especially true if you consider the original post’s comment about “love” and the implied relationship. Sight is not the only way a person would be able to understand someone else’s identity or proclivity to be an oppressive, violent scumbag and this is especially true as relationships form across time. Completely ignoring how blind individuals can and do navigate the world, the author takes their ableism in their analysis a step further; “The blind Klansman DRESSED UP AS A KLANSMAN- even blind he still HATES PEOPLE.” WHAT DOES THAT EVEN MEAN!?!?!?! Please stop privileging sight as a key component of navigating identity, identification, and the world as a whole. 

Third complaint. The creator of this image is ableist. The two figures are depicted on a crosswalk in front of a red car about to finish crossing the intersection (upper right of the image) and about to pass behind a gray car that has just finished crossing through the intersection and is now beyond the cross walk (bottom left of the image). Hmmm…so is that red car running a red light? Highly unlikely considering the gray car just made it through the intersection itself. Maybe they both ran the light. Or maybe the two caricatures just walked out into oncoming traffic without waiting for a red light. Yeah, hahahahaha. Super funny. Another really good one because hey, blind people cannot cross the street! Hahahaha, no wait, that’s messed up. Please stop depicting images of blind individuals not being able to carry out basic mobility tasks (and yes, this is another really common theme). 

Fourth complaint. Not only is the language and the imagery itself ableist, but the author uses this ableism as a means to another end: addressing racism. The original post states that if the KKK member knew his companion was Black, ”he’d push her into traffic and claim, “I’m blind! I didn’t know what was happening!”” Yeah, because someone who is blind cannot possibly know there is traffic there unless they can see it clearly! I mean hey, they already just walked into oncoming traffic, right?. Ha, great joke; I am rolling on the floor laughing. In an attempt to address that this Klansman is a scumbag and is obviously racist, you just made another ‘blind joke’.But using ableism as a tool against racism doesn’t stop there. It gets taken a step further when the author claims that LOVE isn’t BLIND, HATE is BLIND. Really? That’s the conclusion? I am pretty confident that hate itself does not have a visual disability. In an attempt to address one ‘ism’, you just used another and threw another community under the bus (so to speak). Please do not use ableist language in an attempt to illustrate why this image is racist as all hell. 

In conclusion:

Dear World,

Please do not use ableism in your social justice battles.   I wholeheartedly support the sentiment in the original post. The author is right on in many ways. But horribly wrong in others. Let’s not push each other’s heads under water in our own attempts to not drown under oppression. Thank you for listening. 

This additional commentary from blindjewwanderringinthedesert is so very important. We can not use and perpetuate another form of oppression (here- ableism) to address another (here- racism). Thanks so much for adding on and clarifying this, as it is so important and is a point that many people in the SJ community (myself included) can be so prone to miss. 

(Source: )

3:14 pm  •  18 May 2013

“So many fashion “rules” are simply sets of guidelines to managing the connotations of womanhood. The shorter the skirt, the lower the heel. The smokier the eyes, the more neutral the mouth. The tighter the pants, the more billowy the shirt. The more colorful the top, the plainer the bottom; the bigger the earrings, the smaller the necklace; the bolder the nail polish, the shorter the nail. I’ve seen all of these “rules” written out in fashion magazines and the like (which isn’t to say that there aren’t plenty of contradictory “rules” or guidelines on how to best break those rules, but these are generally considered to be within “good taste” instead of being fashion-forward), and what stands out isn’t so much the rules themselves as the fact that they’re presented without explanation. You’re supposed to know inherently why you wouldn’t pair a short skirt with high heels, a loud lipstick with a dark eye.
Now, some of these rules make a certain amount of visual sense: If you’re trying to showcase a gorgeous pair of earrings, wearing a bunch of other jewelry will just compete for attention. But other rules make visual sense only because we’ve adopted a collective eye that codes it as “right”—anything else betrays our sense of propriety. A micromini with four-inch heels? Coded as tramp. It doesn’t matter if the visual goal is to lengthen your legs, or if the woman next to you garnering not a single sneer is wearing a skirt just as short with a pair of low-heeled boots. You’ve failed to manage the stigma of womanhood correctly. You haven’t made the right choices, the right tradeoff. You haven’t found that ever-present marker of “good taste”: balance. And while there are all sorts of stigma attached to womanhood, none is so heavily managed and manipulated and contradictory and constantly on the edge of imbalance as sexuality.”

—

Autumn Whitefield-Madrano, “Wearing Stigma” (via eibmorb)

I always hated the “rule” that you can’t wear boobs AND legs - one or the other. You know how many times I used to want to wear a miniskirt with a tank top? It can get hot!

(via fuckyeahfeminists)

(Source: crankyskirt, via the-last-recall)

1:10 am  •  18 May 2013

“The fact that certain members of the oppressor class join the oppressed in their struggle for liberation, thus moving from one pole of the contradiction to the other… Theirs is a fundamental role, and has been throughout the history of this struggle. It happens, however, that as they cease to be exploiters or indifferent spectators or simply the heirs of exploitation and move to the side of the exploited, they almost always bring with them the marks of their origin: their prejudices and their deformations, which include a lack of confidence in the people’s ability to think, to want, and to know. Accordingly, these adherents to the people’s cause constantly run the risk of falling into a type of generosity as malefic as that of the oppressors. The generosity of the oppressors is nourished by an unjust order, which must be maintained in order to justify that generosity. Our converts, on the other hand, truly desire to transform the unjust order; but because of their background they believe that they must be the executors of the transformation. They talk about the people, but they do not trust them; and trusting the people is the indispensable precondition for revolutionary change. A real humanist can be identified more by his trust in the people, which engages him in their struggle, than by a thousand actions in their favor without that trust.”

—

Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed (via mehreenkasana)

#Paulo Freire sums up white saviors

(via cielito-lindo)

@Dennis, if you still[?] read my tumblr. This is a much more eloquent way of saying what I was/havebeen trying to in regards to people of privilege only talking about issues and about oppressed groups instead of to them. [For example, the two of us talking about QUILTBAG issues… which again, I am happy to have and do enjoy, but is not always the most “helpful” or good thing we can do.]

(Source: ubuntuliberation, via titotito)

12:58 am  •  18 May 2013

“There is nothing shameful about needing help to function. Whether it’s help in the form of medication, therapy, support groups, mental health hotlines, or the inbox of a friend— it’s okay to need a crutch to lean on. It doesn’t make you any less capable or competent. It doesn’t make you weak. And it doesn’t make you a failure. It makes you human. It’s makes you a person who is wounded and searching for a way to heal. It makes you someone with the courage to acknowledge that they have needs and the strength to get those needs met. And although it may be true that not everyone needs these things to cope, it’s a lie to think that everyone else can function without support. No one gets through life without some form of help. No one is impervious to the struggle and strain and heartbreak that come with taking up space. We all have a difficult time coping, and at some point, we all need help. You are not an exception. You’re important and you matter. Your life matters. And if asking for help is going to make things more manageable, if it’s going to ease your pain and help you fight the darkness you carry, then you have every right and reason to get support. Always.”

—

Daniell Koepke (via internal-acceptance-movement)

this is the one lesson God keeps teaching me and reteaching and reteaching again. i can’t believe half of my undergrad life is over. my grades and accomplishments are… not so great… but i have learned this. it’s really hard sometimes, and like everything else i learn, i forget a lot and need reminding. but this. this. this. this is so important. 

(via titotito)

10:57 pm  •  17 May 2013

A list of parenting action items, created in the hope that we can raise a generation of children who have less rape and sexual assault in their lives…from toddlers to teens.

10:40 pm  •  17 May 2013

“Imagine you’re at a party. A guy offers you a drink. You say no. He says “Come on, one drink!” You say “no thanks.” Later, he brings you a soda. “I know you said you didn’t want a drink, but I was getting one for myself and you looked thirsty.” For you to refuse at this point makes you the asshole. He’s just being nice, right? Predators use the social contract and our own good hearts and fear of being rude against us. If you drink the drink, you’re teaching him that it just takes a little persistence on his part to overcome your “no.” If you say “Really, I appreciate it, but no thanks” and put the drink down and walk away from it, you’re the one who looks rude in that moment. But the fact is, you didn’t ask for the drink and you don’t want the drink and you don’t have to drink it just to make some guy feel validated.”

—

The art of “no,” continued: Saying no when you’ve already said yes. (via 2ition)

“Why can’t you take no for an answer?” is one of the most powerful questions you can use in a social situation: suddenly, it’s your harasser’s manners on trial, not yours. Say it in the mirror. Say it to assholes. Say it a lot. Feel awesome. 

(via roachpatrol)

(Source: captainawkward.com, via titotito)

10:13 pm  •  17 May 2013

yellow-turbanfacing:

You know-

We don’t just hate things like whitewashing, yellowface, redface, blackface, brownface, etc because they depict and promote horrible stereotypical representations of us and the way you think we look,

We don’t just hate them because they are the remnants of horrifically racist practices that were legalized and condoned,

We don’t just hate them because they are systematic ways of purposefully excluding us from being represented in the media,

We don’t just hate them because people STILL defend their use on grounds of ‘authenticity,’ whatever that means,

We don’t just hate them because people STILL think we look like that,

We don’t just hate them because they mean that we STILL live in a White world, where we’re all the deviations from the norm, the weird ones,

We don’t just hate them because their mere existence means that you will never see us for who we are but only for the commodified version of what you think we are,

We hate them because they promote the idea that no matter how high we rise, no matter how good we are at what we do and how well we represent ourselves, there will always be a white person who can do anything we can do better than we can- there will always be a white person that can depict us better than we can depict ourselves.

We hate them because when we do get in, when we finally get to show ourselves to the world, who we are is horrifically warped and neatly packed into a simplified, stereotyped version of us.

We hate them because they continue to exist and continue to be promoted and supported by the media and legions of racism apologists.

THAT’S WHY WE HATE THESE THINGS. 

WE DON’T HATE THEM JUST BECAUSE OF THEIR PAST,

WE HATE THEM BECAUSE OF WHAT THEY MEAN IN THE PRESENT-

THAT WE’RE STILL, DESPITE WHAT PEOPLE THINK, NOT PAST RACISM,

THAT WE’RE STILL BEING UNFAIRLY TREATED AND REPRESENTED,

THAT WE STILL LIVE IN A WHITE WORLD IN WHICH WE ARE STILL INCAPABLE OF REPRESENTING OURSELVES

AND THAT ALL OF THIS

IS 

STILL

GOING

ON

AND 

IS

STILL

BEING

ENDORSED

BY

THE 

MEDIA.

Don’t apologize for things like whitewashing, yellowface, redface, blackface and brownface. 

HELP END THEM.

(via angryasiangirlsunited)

8:22 pm  •  17 May 2013

hamburgerjack:

DYSAETHESIA AETHIOPICA: atriptothemorg: failedblackwoman: IDK how casting Bagels Cucumbers as…

atriptothemorg:

failedblackwoman:

IDK how casting Bagels Cucumbers as Khan isn’t disrespectful to Gene Roddenberry tbh. 

That man fought networks tooth and nail to have people of different races on his show. He fought long and hard to have an interracial kiss on TV. 

My grandmother does not like Sci-Fi, but you better believe her ass was watching Star Trek, you know why? Because it was one of the few places you could see a black woman on TV. And she had an important job! She was important! She wasn’t just in the background. 

Shit, as fake and hokey as Chekov’s accent was, he made sure there was a russian on the show, why? BECAUSE HIS VERSION OF THE FUTURE WAS ONE OF DIVERSITY AND PEOPLE GETTING ALONG KINDA SORTA. 

NOT LIKE THE OTHER TREKS TRIED TO PRESERVE THAT MESSAGE

OH

WAIT

THEY

DID

(No I don’t know about the dude doing the Blue Steel back there, I barely remember Enterprise it’s boring)

“It’s about the actors performance.”

MAAAN, fuck that noise.

No, it’s not, there are HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of actors out there of Indian descent. You’re telling me that Binglebangle Coochiebutt was better than all of them? Show me the tapes, I gotta see that. Show me them auditions that I’m pretty sure they didn’t even do because casting a white dude is easier than being not a bastard.

People of color already struggle when it comes to seeing ourselves in the media, and before you go “But he’s a baaaad guy.” No one is saying that PoC can’t be cast as bad guys. It’s that we’re cast as the same kind of bad guys each and every fucking time. Mindless, one note, stereotypical. 

Khan was different, he was smart, he was strong, he was cunning, he was layered. He garnered the respect of his enemies he was that fucking great. AND HE WAS BROWN. AWESOME SAUCE YEEEEEAAAAAH. 

But nope, let’s cast a white dude because who gives a shit about diversity. HAHAHAA WE HONOR U GENE RODDENBERRY BY WHITEWASHING. 

P.S I’m just gonna link this cause shut up I do what i want. 

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/01/showbiz/tv/tv-kids-self-esteem

fucking preach 

(via fuckyeahfeminists)

8:03 pm  •  17 May 2013

ifyoutrysometimes:

So in light of the terrible and illegal conditions in Kenneth Gosnell’s Abortion Clinic as well as more recent accusations leveled against Douglas Karpen who ran an abortion clinic in Houston, the Anti-Abortion movement has been galvanized, citing these two cases as sure signs that the abortion industry is actually a death factory. And while what happened at these two clinics was no doubt horrific and terrible, it still stands that most abortions occur within the first two trimesters and that the situations which would give rise to Gosnell’s and Karpen’s acts are extremely rare. Also the question of what drove women to go to Gosnell and Karpen’s clinic is rather overlooked. Questions of the availability of women’s health availability should be raised but have not.

But aside from those questions, the response to these two incidents draws parallels to our recent gun control debates especially in the wake of Sandy Hook and other major mass shootings.

Read More

7:16 pm  •  17 May 2013

Recently, the U.S. Census Bureau released their report on the  Current Population Survey November Voting and Registration Supplement, that studies demographic voter turnout in the most recent presidential election cycle.

The big news from this report was that for the first time ever, African American voter turnout rate exceeded the white voter turnout rate—66.2% versus 64.1% for a presidential election and increased from 2008 to 2012. However, what got lost in this news was that although Asian Americans did vote at the highest percentage to re-elect President Obama than any other group at 73% , was that Asian Americans also have the lowest voter turnout amongst all races, at 47.3% of registered Asian American voters (2nd lowest was Hispanics at 48%). But I guess this is old news after the four presidential election cycles.

This is not big news to me anymore. When I first got involved in 2004 by volunteering in politics, I was shocked to see that lack of Asian American volunteers in the San Francisco Bay Area (which overall, is approximately 25% Asian / Asian American demographically – of course, not all are U.S. citizens). I was also saddened in 2008, when I blogged, San Mateo Presidential Straw Poll – Where are you Asian-American?  That is one of the major reasons I am so involved, interested and blog about politics – to compensate to some degree the lack of involvement of other Asian Americans who are not interested, involved and as well, who don’t sadly, don’t vote. As Disgrasian.com would put it, Asian Americans who are eligble to register but aren’t and those who are registered but don’t vote,  “You’re a disgrace. To the race.”

If you look into the details of the report (.pdf), in 2012, Asian Americans constituted 3.8% of the entire eligible electorate and 2.9% of the voting age population. It’s not surprising that in a presidential election where there is an incumbent president running for re-election that voting rates (except for African Americans) were down.

For me, there is almost nothing more important being a citizen in a democracy than exercising your right to vote. With rights, there comes responsibilities, and I think citizens should exercise their right (and in my opinion, responsibility) to vote. If you have complaints about your local, county, state or national politics and government and don’t vote, you have no right to complain!

Demographically, according to Pew and other studies, Asian Americans are the most educated and the most affluent, and these attributes usually correlates to higher voting rates – but apparently not for Asian Americans. I find this really sad and pathetic and demonstrates our apathy. As Asian Americans are not involved in our country through our fundamental right to vote, is it no wonder why we may be portrayed as “perpetual foreigners?” Maybe there are a lot of Asian Americans like the ones that Akrypti has described in her post, What It Means To Be a U.S. Citizen (which I whole heartedly agree with), but I can’t imagine enough to explain the difference between Asian Americans and non-Hispanic whites and African Americans.

And this doesn’t just bother me for Asian Americans. One of the major reasons why I found former CEO of eBay Meg Whitman’s run for Governor of California in 2010 so pathetic was that she had rarely voted in her entire adult life. Why would anyone bother to vote for Whitman for the highest public office in California if she didn’t even bother to vote herself?

I encourage all U.S. citizens, if you’re eligible to register to vote, please register (i.e. 18 or older). If you’re registered to vote, please vote! Otherwise, why bother living in a democracy since voting is the purest expression of what a democracy is all about.

4:05 pm  •  17 May 2013

theyalwayswantyoutoproveit:

futurejournalismproject:

White Men, Everyone Else: Gender and Ethnic Diversity on Cable News

Media Matters spent the month of April reviewing evening guests on cable news. The results, unfortunately, don’t surprise: CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC “overwhelmingly host male and white guests.”

Read through for the details as the watchdog group breaks down the numbers for each network. We learn, for instance, that “Out of 1,677 total guests, CNN had the largest proportion of men — 76 percent — during the month of April;” and “Fox News had the largest proportion of white guests — 83 percent.”

Hat tip to Chris Hayes, whose show is the most diverse in cable evening news. And getting there isn’t very difficult. “We just would look at the board and say, ‘We already have too many white men. We can’t have more,’” Hayes told Ann Friedman at the Columbia Journalism Review back in March. “Really, that was it.”

Images: Diversity On Evening Cable News, via Media Matters. Select to embiggen.

and at the end of the day, native people and other genders still don’t exist.

^^that.^^

(via pocproblems)

4:01 pm  •  17 May 2013