I'm back from my trip and will be writing more about that on my public blog soon. For now, however, I'd like to announce that CRIT 4 is now online. I'm also looking for submissions for the next issue and for anyone who would be interested in blogging on themes related to CRIT for a new project.

When I first heard about the undead outbreak that began yesterday, I started zombietracker so that people could warn each other about the movements of zombies and exchange tips on how to combat them. Without warning, however, LJ deleted the community. Of course, I immediately opened up a support request. The first response I received said that the levels of gore described in some posts was deemed unacceptable and that the interests listed (such as zombies) seemed to suggest support for that sort of carnage. I sent a response stating that I had listed such interests so that people looking for information about the threat could find the community. Minutes later, I received a response offering to reinstate the community in exchange for fresh brains sent to the Six Apart office. I'll let you draw your own conclusions from that.

The Detroit Free Press website has an article about a book written by a PhD candidate who has been diagnosed with Asperger's; the focus of the text is on ending the bullying that is often experienced by those with Aspie traits. Unfortunately, that sort of bullying is only going to end when we overcome an attitude displayed in the article itself.

In the first chapter, Dubin tells of how in the fifth grade two kids he knew left him handcuffed to a swing at nearby Poppleton Park. They taunted him until his father peered outside the Dubins' nearby home and intervened. The ruse: They were playing cops and robbers. Those with Asperger's often have an especially tough time knowing when someone is not telling the truth.

In this passage, trouble detecting another's lie serves as explanation for torment. The cause of the bullying is located within the victim, not the perpetrators. Why is this acceptable?

This is one of the problems with medical model psychology. Once you receive a "diagnosis", you are marked so that anything that goes wrong in your interactions with others is assumed to be part of your already labeled wrongness. The behavior and mentality of those called normal, by contrast, remains unexamined.

Part of the solution to this is to make mental "normalcy" a marked category, to interrogate the concept, find its edges and its center. To this end, I'm going to start a new academically oriented journal (though appropriate art or non-academic will not necessarily be rejected) that will take an interdisciplinary approach to the study of minds that do not qualify for "diagnoses". I plan to have the journal be open access, with articles appearing as they're accepted in a blog format, along with a print annual. Ideally, I'd like to submit at least the academic work to a blind review. If you would be interested in a spot on the editorial review board (or any other role in making this journal a reality), please email your CV to NormalMinds_at_gmail.

Since Thursday, the Great Fire Wall has been blocking all Flickr images, though most of the site remains accessible. There is speculation that the reason is that images related to the anniversary of the Tiananmen Square uprisings had appeared on the site. (Though the timing would be right, I doubt that it has anything to do with the minor revolt in Zhengzhou, as there are very few Flickr users in the area).

What about this situation made me think of the recent LJ suspension debacle? According to a San Francisco Chronicle article, Jain Hua Li, a spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, said he hadn't heard of Flickr until told about it in a conversation with a Chronicle reporter, and then suggested that the blocking may be because Chinese authorities are trying to protect children from racy images. It's all about protecting the children, right? Remember what Mr. Berkowitz said in news: "We are trying hard to keep LJ a community where free speech and the protection of children and victims and others can coexist." Of course, Berkowitz's statement is a bit ridiculous given that "protecting children" (even if that, and not presenting a clean mainstream image to advertisers/investors, is the actual goal) in a forum of, by, and for adults necessarily involves restriction of speech. You can see why I'm suspicious of his statements about there being "no perfect solution."

One of the possible motives behind LJ's mass suspension was fear of losing advertisers. For those of you who would like to contact these advertisers regarding this issue, a list can be found here. My suggestion is this: let the advertisers know what happened, inform them that LJ hasn't followed through on the promise to restore all inappropriately suspended journals, and explain that you will not be patronizing any companies that advertise on Livejournal until those promises are kept and until measures are put into place to prevent this from happening again.

The focus of the article this comes from was blogging as journalism, but I think it applies to recent events on LJ:

With blogging, an awkward term, we designate a fairly beautiful thing: the extension to many more people of a free press franchise, the right to publish your thoughts to the world.
Wherever blogging spreads the dramas of free expression follow. A blog, you see, is a little First Amendment machine.

An individual or group of individuals (profile information claims the latter) with a proclaimed fundamentalist agenda has been creating journals for the purpose of attempting to get groups deleted. The current incarnation is kingdoms_eye

Kingdoms_eye is a group of five individuals working to better the internet by uncovering predators and reporting them to the proper authorities. We watch and report violators who participate in the following:

*Pro-pedophile apologetics and support circles
*Pornography without proper age-verifying measures in place
*Incest, whether fictional or real
*Rape, fictional or real
*Hate Speech against Christians
*Speech that incites Terrorism and anti-American sentiment

They've joined communities that were formed in protest against the recent suspensions, including censoredcontent and whydoesljcensor, various Harry Potter slash communities, and dark_christian, a group dedicated to keeping track of Dominionism. Really, we should thank people who act out this way, as all you have to do to see that this about censoring people who are different, and not about protecting children, is take a look at that profile.

EDIT: Aww, they've added me as a friend. I love having friends. I mean, I really love them. ;) Oh, and kingdoms_eye, would you care to answer my question about terrorists who bomb abortion clinics over here since you haven't yet answered it on your turf yet?

EDIT: Let's give them a proper LJ welcome, shall we? luvkingdoms_eye

EDIT 3: Last two posts signed YHBT (You Have Been Trolled). Heh. Well, at least it's good to see that people still aren't going to tolerate this crap, because it could've been real. *sheepish look*

This post suggests that it may not have unsuspended all of the fictional journals. If LJ wants to win my trust back, they're going to have to post a list of which journals they left suspended and why. Given the profit motive that seems to be in play here (whether you go with the IPO hypothesis, the threatened-ad-revenue theory, or some combination thereof), the threat of lawsuits would surely be enough to keep them from lying too blatantly in such a public statement.

I'll probably still be using this for some friends-only stuff and occasional rants or what have you, but my more public blog will be blog.elizabethkateswitaj.net from now on. I've also made an author site at www.elizabethkateswitaj.net to make it much easier to stalk me track down my work.

Also, I have yet to set up my blogroll, so if you have a non-LJ blog that you'd like me to link to, please let me know.

A lot of what people are posting as part of the Friday Protest against censored content is going to be enjoyable smut. This isn't. This is an early scene in a novel I'm working on that's a fictionalized account of some of the worst things that happened to me while I was in New York. This scene takes place many years before.

Knowing what I'm doing, and seeing a scene that I, as an author, believe is necessary may give you an idea of why I think it's important to stand up for the rights of people in fandom to write things that others find repulsive (I know it's not a legal free speech issue, but I also know that if we let companies believe that we accept censorship from them, it's likely to spread, and most means of mass transmission are privately owned). If fandom is protected, than I am protected.

I've cut this out of consideration for the survivors on my f-list who might face triggers in it-- and because I don't think it's very well written, as it's still in first-draft form.

( Read more... )

For those of you who haven't been following the journal-deletion story, CNET has a fairly detailed story about it, including this very telling quote from Barak Berkowitz, CEO of Six Apart: "Our decision here was not based on pure legal issues. It was based on what community we want to build and what we think is appropriate within that community and what's not." Six Apart didn't build the LJ community: users did.

Six Apart bought our playground-- and, you know, when people were up in arms over that purchase, I withheld judgment. I wanted to believe we'd still have the Livejournal that believed in giving its users a free-speech platform; I was wrong. When the so-called plus accounts appeared, I felt a bit uncomfortable, but since the user got to choose, I wasn't too outraged. I was wrong. Threatened loss of advertising revenue played a part in this panicked mass deletion. The sponsored communities did offend me, largely because of the use of unlabeled employee journals to run the communities and even to post in them. That didn't outweigh the value of the links and ties I have to people here.

This does. A group of fanatics have, in the name of fighting horrific abuses, pressured Six Apart into a panicked deletion of hundreds of journals, and the company is refusing to review these deletions. They've come down on the side of silencing and on the side of fear. I don't want to be part of a community in which people are afraid to cover certain themes in fiction or to talk about certain ideas or to list certain interests.

If LJ gives in to this group, what happens when other groups come after GLBTQ communities? Or BDSM communities? Polyamory? How about people advocating the legalization of drugs?

So here's my decision: not only will I be posting smut tomorrow (be gentle: it's not what I usually write), but that's the only content that I will post here unless and until LJ reverses its paranoiac deletions. I'm going to set up a journal on my own server, and I'll give you the address once I do. Remember, LJ is nothing without its content providers: that is to say, it is nothing without us.

So long, and thanks for all the fish.

. . . and I come back to find that Livejournal has deleted numerous journals, including a large number of fanfic and RPG journals, caving in to a bunch of Dominionists calling themselves "Warriors for Innocence" and jumping up and down screaming pedophile. On their website, they're now claiming that it's not their fault that the journals that have been deleted included communities for survivors and one for the discussion of Lolita. This is kind of funny given that, earlier, they were taking credit for getting "over 500 sites" deleted. Letters sent by LJ abuse clearly suggest that someone reported the journals involved directly. What's more the "warriors" specifically mentioned certain interests as being offensive, even though, as we all know, listing something as an interest doesn't mean you support it per se. (You can find more information here.)

If you read the letter these "warriors" sent to LJ/Six Apart, you can see that they were threatening advertising revenues. Remember when some of us were upset about ads coming to LJ? Things like this are another reason for that.

These "warriors" aren't really protecting anyone, of course. They're using claims of protection to censor, and the message is clear: don't talk about sex, or you might be deleted. Don't talk about rape, even if you're a survivor, or you might be deleted. We cannot allow these people to create a climate of fear. So I propose a small protest. This Friday, make an entry about something that these people would like to see censored. If you write fanfiction, post explicit fanfiction. If you're a survivor, and you are willing, write about what you survived, because no matter what these people claim, one of the results of their actions has been the silencing of people who are already too often silenced. If you know someone who was deleted, post some of their content. If all else fails, post passages from Lolita. Listen, we are the content providers here. We are the ones who bring people to Livejournal. If they delete us all, they lose. So let's stand in solidarity. And if waiting until Friday gives you enough time to backup your journal, then consider adding some of the taboo interests to your list. I plan to add "rape", because that is something I have survived and so, of course, a theme I explore in my poetry, for instance.

My freshmen have pleasantly surprised me once again. Today, one group presented a lesson based around the theme of love. They performed two skits, one of which was about two women-- students-- who fall in love. Afterwards, they asked the rest of the class what they thought about homosexuality. I was a little worried that I'd have to intervene, because even though I knew that acceptance of homosexuality has been increasing in China, I'd heard that that was mostly true in large cities. (Zhengzhou is a large city-- just not by Chinese standards-- and a fair number of my students are farmers' children.) But the overwhelming majority of the students answered along the lines of "love is love". A few people did mention personal discomfort with it-- but most of these also noted that they didn't think it should be forbidden. What really impressed me about the group giving the lesson, however, is that they challenged students who mentioned being uncomfortable by asking questions such as, "What would you do if your best friend said she were gay?" (I'd modeled and complimented the use of such techniques in earlier lessons).

During the feedback session at the end of the lesson, students complimented the group for bringing up something they didn't usually think about and for helping them to expand their worldview.

I really love it when I don't have to say anything beyond correcting a few minor mechanical mistakes (or, I should say, pointing out the mistakes so that the students can correct them for themselves).

Of course, I managed to break the next class's brains by explaining what a wake is-- or maybe it was just the heat getting to them.

For the past few days, the temperatures here have been getting up over a hundred degrees Fahrenheit. While it is at least a dry heat, it's not exactly my kind of weather. It does, however, seem to be the kind of weather for the mosquitoes and large moths that fly around here. The cicadas, too, have started singing. And I've also seen a few of these little guys running around (I know I should have added something to the picture for size comparison, but he wouldn't hold still):

I know that a lot of people who identify as liberal or progressive get very upset when someone who supports a third party says that there isn't much of a difference between Democrats and Republicans. I just hope that those of you who feel this way feel equally outraged at the Democrats who have said this.

You see, Al Gore said it when he gave his concession speech in December 2000. You don't talk about healing and unity when an election has just been stolen if you think it actually matters who won. John Kerry said it when he didn't pursue the 2004 election's irregularities. The majority of Democrats in congress said it in voting in favor of the Patriot Act, to authorize the Iraq war, and to fund that war again and again. Barack Obama said it back in April when he gave credence to pro-war propaganda by stating that Congress would pass a funding bill without timelines, because no one "wants to play chicken with our troops". Sure, he eventually voted against the bill, and given that the vast majority of the US is now opposed to the war, that's a politically smart move. But don't you think that statements like his contributed to the atmosphere that caused the latest funding bill to pass?

This afternoon, I finally got into the post office to send off a few submissions. All week, the line was literally out the door. You see, the seniors graduated on Friday (over a month before the term ends for everyone else), and there just isn't space on the trains or buses for them to bring everything home with them. While I was filling out various forms, a truck pulled up to load their packages. A few of these were boxes or suitcases, but most were thick plastic bags. Up until the truck showed up, the pile of these packages literally extended from floor to ceiling, and an auxiliary pile outside had spread out beyond the pavilion set up to cover it.

I'm also happy to report that I must be making some progress in Chinese (even though it often doesn't feel that way) as there were no "Huh?" moments during today's transaction.

What's the thing with feathers that perches in your soul?

Today featured another lesson planned by students. This group had selected Mother's Day as their theme and presented a series of three scenes. In the first, a boy told his mother that he had decided to join the army. In the second, he died in a battle. In the third, the mother searched among the returning soldiers for her child, only to be informed of his death. Afterwards, they explained that they had read that the origin of Mother's Day was as a way to commemorate the mothers who had lost their sons to war.

When I came home this evening, I read that Congressional Democrats have decided to put forth a bill that continues funding for the war without even a timeline to end it. I'm not surprised, really, and there's still (a slim) hope that an effective letter-writing and phone-call campaign from outraged citizens could convince enough of them to vote against it. What really angers me, however, are the claims that taking a stand for a little bit of time (which is to say putting on a show) is something to be proud of. Somehow, I really don't think that matters to people who died today in Iraq. And then there's the nonsense about setting the stage for future confrontations. On second thought, that's true. They've set the stage for more confrontations that run exactly like this one: a lot of noise and a lot of antiwar window-dressing with the final result being business as usual. Killing as usual.

It seems that a bunch of eighteen-year olds understand the consequences of war better than many of the people elected to represent the American people.