Monthly Archives: June 2009

Thursday Short Poem: Winter’s “Sestina”

Posted on by

After a week like this, we need, I think, a slightly more light-hearted Thursday Short Poem. Jonah Winter offers us just the thing.

Sestina: Bob

According to her housemate, she is out with Bob
tonight, and when she’s out with Bob
you never know when she’ll get in. Bob
is an English professor. Bob
used to be in a motorcycle gang, or something, or maybe Bob
rides a motorcycle now. How radical of you, Bob—

I wish I could ride a motorcycle, Bob,
and also talk about Chaucer intelligently. Bob
is very tall, bearded, reserved. I saw Bob
at a poetry reading last week—he had such a Bob-
like poise—so quintessentially Bob!
The leather jacket, the granny glasses, the beard—Bob!

and you were with my ex-girlfriend, Bob!
And you’re a professor, and I’m nobody, Bob,
nobody, just a flower-deliverer, Bob,
and a skinny one at that, Bob—
and you are a large person, and I am small, Bob,
and I hate my legs, Bob,

but why am I talking to you as if you were here, Bob?
I’ll try to be more objective. Bob
is probably a nice guy. Or that’s what one hears. Bob
is not, however, the most passionate person named Bob
you’ll ever meet. Quiet, polite, succinct, Bob
opens doors for people, is reticent in grocery stores. Bob

does not talk about himself excessively to girlfriends. Bob
does not have a drinking problem. Bob
does not worry about his body, even though he’s a little heavy.
Bob
has never been in therapy. Bob,
also, though, does not have tenure—ha ha ha—and Bob
cannot cook as well as I can. Bob

never even heard of paella, and if he had, Bob
would not have changed his facial expression at all. Bob
is just so boring, and what I can’t understand, Bob—
yes I’m talking to you again, is why you, Bob,
could be more desirable than me. Granted, Bob,
you’re more stable, you’re older, more mature maybe but Bob . . .

(Months later, on the Bob-front: My former girlfriend finally
married Bob.
Of Bob, she says, “No one has taken me higher or lower than
Bob.”
Me? On a dark and stormy sea of Bob-thoughts, desperately,
I bob.)

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged

Ed Feser on George Tiller: more from my delightful, but utterly appalling colleague

Posted on by

Pasadena City College’s social sciences division has two blogging professors: I’m one, and my father’s former student, philosopher Ed Feser, is the other. Ed and I like each other a great deal, and each refers to his counterpart as “a delightful person with appalling views.” We share a department, a common commitment to the college, and a common faith in Christ. And we both do love to scribble!

Ed is particularly appalling here, where his post on George Tiller (written from Ed’s very conservative perspective) is diametrically opposed to my own. (I compare George Tiller to Dietrich Bonhoeffer; Ed compares the assassinated physician to Jeffrey Dahmer.)

Warning: Ed’s post may be triggering — or simply infuriating — for some. But he’s got tenure, as do I, and he can handle a bit of heat for his views if you want to see if you can get through his moderation queue. Part of being in an academic department, after all, is finding a way to be personally amiable and ideologically combative. And sending readers his way is surely within the bounds.

By the way, Ed’s book, The Last Superstition: A Refutation of the New Atheism has been well-received on the right, and is now winning widespread plaudits from those who find its reactionary views to be congenial. It’s certainly spirited and enjoyable to read, albeit jaw-droppingly wrong. And I’m not even an atheist.

A long post about dating, rejection, affirming and redirecting

Posted on by

The comment thread below this post from last Thursday is still active, and has taken a number of twists and turns. There’s been much discussion of the “seduction community”, lookism, privilege, and the difficulty in finding people to date. It’s been remarkably civil to boot. I think I’m gonna give out the “best comment thread of the year” award in December, and so far, this looks like the winner.

One comment jumped out at me, from “Eurosabra”, who wrote yesterday about the difficulty of meeting women:

…by the 50th sidewalk café, you’re feeling pretty tired and put-upon and wondering when you’re going to be seeing some of the mythical “female sexual agency” directed at you. So it’s a cart-horse problem, compounded by the fact that (at least in college) everyone is always constantly meeting people, it’s just that some people get…no results. And straight women’s means of showing interest are so indirect, because of that whole slut-shaming thing….

it really makes me feel like I have to put myself out there and hope, hope to be chosen, while initiating everything.

I’ve spent my share of time being quite tough on young men like Eurosabra, but having read enough of his comments, it’s clear that he’s not coming so much from a place of male entitlement as from a place of genuine hurt and disillusionment. And that hurt and disillusionment, that sense that meeting potential dates requires constant receptiveness to rejection, is widely felt among many men I know. Some lose all claim on sympathy with misogynistic tirades rooted in a sense of frustrated privilege. But others don’t claim that women are obligated to be attracted to them. They don’t secretly believe that they are God’s gifts to women. They’d just like to meet women with whom they could perhaps have a relationship, and the system for meeting potential dates seems so opaque, so difficult to understand, so set up to guarantee disappointment after disappointment after disappointment. No wonder some of these men retreat into pornography addiction, or turn to the slick purveyors of seduction techniques. No wonder that others just, well, get very sad and a bit cynical. Continue reading →

More on the martyrdom of Dr. Tiller, and repudiating violence in the animal rights movement

Posted on by

I’m still very distressed this Monday morning about the George Tiller murder; the raw emotions that undergirded my post last night are still with me. I’m heartened, as I peruse the blogosphere this morning, to see so many rousing calls to action. I’m moved by the willingness of so many to donate afresh to various organizations that facilitate choice for women. Christians remark often that “the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church”. And Dr. Tiller’s blood will plant many good seeds; just counting those whom I know personally, I’m aware of over $10,000 pledged to pro-choice organizations in the past 24 hours in the name of this man, our martyr.

My own commitment to the pro-choice position has been renewed in recent years, and was galvanized by the experience of witnessing my wife’s pregnancy and the birth of our daughter. (More on my journey from pro-choice to pro-life and back to pro-choice here.) The murder of Dr. Tiller has made me even more resolute in my commitment, as a Christian and as a feminist, to supporting women’s right to abortion. And let me make this clear: had I the skills to do as Dr. Tiller did in his life, I would. As I wrote yesterday, I am Dr. Tiller. If you would curse his name and pray for his end, then do the same for me. I assure you that my dollars and prayers and efforts will go to raise up others to take his place, so that the blood of this martyr will be a great seed for justice. For my conservative friends, please understand that this may seem sufficiently appalling as to serve as an abrogation of our relationship. But in the face of this monstrousness (and the less monstrous, but just as dedicated efforts on the part of others to deny women sovereignty over their flesh) I’m putting my proverbial cards on the table. I am Dr. Tiller. If you hated him, hate me.

Let me note, too, that I have been thinking about my own rhetoric on animal rights. I have made it very clear that, as a vegan who believes that rights are grounded as much in sentience as in humanity, I’m opposed to factory farming and scientific experimentation using animals. But I want to reiterate again my absolute rejection of any use of violence against persons in order to liberate animals. I want to defund animal research. I belong to organizations that work to defund animal research. But I repudiate anyone within the vegan or AR movements who advocates violence. The man who shot Dr. Tiller was nurtured by the language of some in the pro-life movement, a language which demonizes those on the other side and creates a culture in which such murders are seen as justified. Though it is worth noting that the Animal Liberation Front or its affiliates have never been responsible for the death of a factory farmer or medical researcher, let me say again — again, again — the final victory will be won by acts of nonviolent civil disobedience and by concentrated political action.

Those of us who believe passionately in making illegal what is yet legal (as the anti-abortion movement does, and as we in the animal rights community do) must be even more explicit about rejecting language that condones violence as a means to achieving the ends we long for. And we must do more than reject the language of violence; we must repudiate those in our movements who are willing to countenance bloodshed. Then and only then can we make a claim to legitimacy and understanding. I haven’t been clear enough on this issue in the past. I am now.