?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
22 August 2010 @ 11:57 pm
I Simply Do Not Understand  

I do not understand the appeal of Angie Harmon whatsoever.

Many lesbians seem to flock to her despite her socially conservative politics, the fact that she apparently voted in favor of Prop 8 (I tried to find voter lists corroborating that claim, but could not find them), and her admiration and love for Sarah Palin. 

No, seriously.  She admires and supports Sarah Palin, including the woman's bid for presidency in 2012.  And apparently the admiration is mutual. 

Check out the links below:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/01/angie-harmon-republicans_n_181781.html
http://www.thesarahpalinblog.com/2009/04/support-angie-harmon.html
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/05/16/actress-angie-harmons-favorite-website-newsbusters
http://www.conservatives4palin.com/2009/03/angie-harmon-not-afraid-to-call-out.html
http://usconservatives.about.com/od/hollywoodconservatives/p/AngieHarmonBIO.htm

Consider this quote:

While defending former VP nom Sarah Palin's daughter, Bristol Palin, and her controversial pregnancy (unwed teenaged mother), Harmon stated that "one of the greatest things about the Republican Party is the understanding, we don't point fingers and we have class."

Um, really?  You (Repubs) don't point fingers?  Do the words "Ground Zero Mosque" mean anything to you?  Because Republicans sure do seem to be pointing fingers there, some of them--including your precious Sarah Palin--equating the entire Muslim religion with terrorism.

Note to Angie:  This is not classy.  Trust me.  Neither is claiming that if you stay in LA, your three daughters will be strippers with "full sleeves" by age 8.

(The full quote from the above is: "I think that if you have boys, it is a different thing. Boys are tougher, stronger, you know. If I don't get my girls out of LA, by the time they are like 8, they are gonna be strippers, have full sleeves....")

"We just had another baby and I've got three little girls now," said Angie Harmon. "So my husband and I were going to move out of Los Angeles and go somewhere in the South, where I can raise some strong Southern women with morals, ethics and values."

Yes, because the South is so much better for children.  It has the highest rates of high school drop outs, the highest rates of obesity, and the highest rates of teenage pregnancy, combined with the lowest national educational prowess.  Yeah, the South is better, Angie.  If you want your girls to be fat, uneducated, pregnant teens.  But classy ones who won't point fingers, we're sure.

I'm not trying to say here that the South is a bad place to raise children, by the way.  I live in NC.  My niece and nephews are being raised here.  My point is that it is difficult to raise children ANYWHERE.  Every city/region/state is going to have its challenges.  The onus for raising one's children with the morals and standards one deems most important lies with the PARENTS, not the location in which they are raised. 

And speaking of Prop 8, Angie said this in defense of Carrie Prejean, the beauty queen who spoke against same-sex marriage in her interview question and lost her crown: "I just don't understand how we've gotten to a place in America where, if someone doesn't agree with everyone, then they are punished for it."

Does that include gays who support same-sex marriage and fight for those rights, Angie?  Because I personally think there's a big difference between a beauty queen losing her crown and the violence and hatred that continues to haunt the LGBT community following the Prop 8 legislation and subsequent appeals. 

Aren't there better women for us to idolize? Ones who don't thumb their noses at our fight for equal representation under the law? Ones who don't pledge their support to a vitriolic, hateful, crooked, undereducated, wolf-shooting ex-beauty queen with delusions of grandeur?

If we're willing to boycott corporations such as Target, Walmart, Exxon, and Cracker Barrel for their support of anti-gay initiatives, why are we not boycotting Angie Harmon?  Instead, many of us are supporting her financially by watching her shows and writing fanfic which will possibly increase her shows' popularity amongst lesbian viewers.

Can someone explain this to me?  

And the response "She's hot; get over it." is not acceptable.  There are PLENTY of hot women on TV and in movies who support our community and do not pander to Republican politicians and their ridiculous rhetoric.

Write fanfic for them.  Watch their shows and movies.  

We deserve better fictional representation than Angie Harmon's characters.

And before anyone starts whining to me about Angie Harmon's or Sarah Palin's First Amendment rights, the First Amendment says this, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." 

That means they have the right to say what they want on any topic (within the limitations of state and local law) and I have the right to respond according to my conscience and my morals (within the limitations of state and local law).  The government cannot stop either of us from speaking our mind.

Erin Hoagland
(aka DiNovia)

Tags:
 
 
My State of Mind: irateirate
 
 
 
Amy: Nyet.aguafiestas on August 23rd, 2010 06:40 am (UTC)
I have to say, I had no idea Angie Harmon had a following among lesbians. I mean, she's hot, but I've always known about her conservative politics. And now that I know she's so staunchly anti-feminist, I'm even more turned off. :O
seftiri: ::facepalm::seftiri on August 23rd, 2010 01:43 pm (UTC)
The amount of fanfic being written for her new show, Rizzoli & Isles, is what prompted this rant. It's a deluge. And people still write fanfic for Women's Murder Club and for her character in L&O. It boggles my mind.

runetraverse: Reverierunetraverse on August 23rd, 2010 10:35 pm (UTC)
Saw this last night, but my brain was too fuzzy to make a decent commentary . . . I have to say, I was a little surprised to find out just how anti-LGB Ms. Harmon seems to be, since I only caught wind of it recently. (someone commented on her support of Palin in one of Fembuck's fics, much to several peoples' surprise.) Then again, I've never understood any prejudice against gay / lesbian couples to start with, so I guess being in the dark there is nothing new. xD Normally I'd say that she's keeping her personal and professional lives separate, but with a role like Rizzoli (the "subtext" in that show is almost mind-numbingly blatant) I just don't know. Maybe a "look, I might not approve, but I'm not hateful" move?

When it comes to the fanfic, I think, it's a little less "oooo hot lady" and more the portrayal of the character herself that inspires the fic, at least in my case. Haven't written any Rizzoli/Isles or Lindsey/Cindy, but to me, it would be the character's personality, attitude and interactions with others that drew me to pen the story; the fact that she's played by Angie Harmon wouldn't necessarily factor in beyond describing her physically. To be honest, I can think of several actresses I find more attractive. So I guess it would be less promoting Angie Harmon, and more promoting the characters as the writers' created them?

That said, yes, it bugs me that someone who disapproves something so intensely seems to be enjoying a huge bit of popularity with the same group. Personally, give me someone like Crystal Chappell or Christina Cox, or even Lucy Lawless or Liz Vassey.
seftiri: Blackberryseftiri on August 24th, 2010 02:58 am (UTC)
While I appreciate your point of view, I must argue that any promotion of Angie Harmon's characters results in financial and personal gain for Angie Harmon. I'm not sure the LGBT community would want to be responsible for increasing the popularity of a woman whose personal politics are so anti-gay, no matter how compelling her characters may be.

runetraverse: Reverierunetraverse on August 24th, 2010 03:27 am (UTC)
*nod* Point taken. On the other hand, having a show as obviously subtexty as Rizzoli and Isles would seem like a good thing to me. So I guess the question would be do we want to deny popularity to something "pro-gay" because it associates with someone whose personal politics are apparently anti-gay?

(Is it stupid that I'm seriously enjoying having an intelligent conversation about this? ^^')
seftiri: Cat Cora Whiteseftiri on August 24th, 2010 03:50 am (UTC)
But a "pro-gay" television show does little to advance LGBT legal equality other than through increased visibility. Since the show doesn't claim the characters are gay and all supposition is purely subtext, no net gain comes to our cause.

On the other hand, any financial gain and personal popularity Angie Harmon reaps from the popularity of her show can be funneled into the political campaigns of her favorite politicians, who are John McCain and Sarah Palin. Both are notoriously anti-gay, anti-woman, and anti-reality (arguably). Angie has already proven that she and her husband will give speeches and financially support Republican candidates (they both made speeches at the RNC in support of W during the 2004 election and presumably made large donations as well). By increasing her or her show's popularity, we risk a huge net loss for our cause.

To me, no character--no matter how well-written or how potentially gay-positive--is worth assisting Sarah Palin becoming president in 2012.

And no, it isn't stupid to enjoy a civil and intelligent discussion. :)
runetraverse: River Signalrunetraverse on August 24th, 2010 04:11 am (UTC)
Hmmmm, I honestly hadn't thought of her donations in that light. And you have a point about the subtext versus 'confirmed gay' characters. (and the anti-reality, but that's a personal thought. xD) So what would you propose for those of us who'd like to support a character / writer / train of thought / what have you WITHOUT publicising the anti-gay? IS there a way to do that?

*amused* I'm honestly in the mood to write her a letter and ask her thoughts on the matter, just because talking about it's made me curious.
seftiri: Fried Green Tomatoesseftiri on August 24th, 2010 04:22 am (UTC)
So what would you propose for those of us who'd like to support a character / writer / train of thought / what have you WITHOUT publicising the anti-gay? IS there a way to do that?

Not in this case. Angie Harmon is too well-known for her social conservatism and her support of Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin is too officious in her support of Angie Harmon.

If we in the LGBT community agree that Sarah Palin as president in 2012 could actually be why the Mayan calendar is supposed to end that year, why would we risk helping her campaign in any way? At some point, a line must be drawn. Is it more important to write fanfic starring two attractive subtexty women for (little) personal gratification or is it more important to frustrate Sarah Palin's bid for world domination in whatever way we can?

;)

If you do write Angie a letter asking for her opinion on the matter, please publish the response. I think it would be eye-opening. And probably very (unintentionally) entertaining.
runetraverse: Otalia OTPrunetraverse on August 24th, 2010 04:42 am (UTC)
Oh, I'd definitely publish it if I got a response. Though on the whole, I'd probably have a massive problem making the letter sound intelligent without being snarky - I wasn't kidding when I said I don't understand gay/lesbian prejudice, those people might as well be from mars for all the sense they make to me. The sad part is, I have a sneaking suspicion the more I think about it that the producers know exactly how to convince LGBT-ers to flock to a show; they (and Ms. Harmon) are simply taking advantage of an "accept the crumbs" mentality. Which would truly, truly suck.

Slightly OT, but Sarah Palin / Mayan calendar snark ftw! I actually choked on soda laughing. xD Gonna have to use that one somewhere again.
(Deleted comment)
seftiri: Billie Smilesseftiri on August 24th, 2010 09:48 pm (UTC)
Thanks for the support. :) I've only ever seen AH in L&O as I stopped following her once her socially conservative viewpoints became clear. I thought Abbie Carmichael was a smartly-written, powerful character and I liked her. But I cannot support an actress who clearly supports politics and politicians that do not support me or my interests.

Just a thing I have. ;)
scribesquill: Diane Nealscribesquill on August 24th, 2010 03:12 pm (UTC)
I understand and see your point. However, I'm of the opinion that to like an artist for their craft in spite of their politics is fine. To put it more bluntly: I don't watch Angie Harmon because I agree with her politics. By the same token, I don't really watch Mel Gibson's movies because of his values/politics, or listen to the Dixie Chicks because of theirs.
I believe that celebrities are in a unique position to piss a lot of people off when they say or do anything at all, simply because they are so public. They may or may not choose to use that platform to proclaim their beliefs. If it turns you off, that's fine. If it doesn't, that's fine too.
I dunno. I guess I'm just not political enough to really care much. Unless it becomes something that changes my view so completely of the person that I can't get over it, or their politics begin to leak into what they do. I'm not going to see an anti-semetic movie simply because Mel Gibson is in it, for example. I mean, I'm not going to donate to a charity/campaign just because a celebrity does it, and I'm not going to avoid their show/movie because of what their interests are.
seftiri: DN Starpowerseftiri on August 24th, 2010 09:55 pm (UTC)
I see your point, as well. It's just not mine. I do listen to the Dixie Chicks more because of their politics/values than because I like country music (which I don't) and I do not support Mel Gibson films and haven't since he came out as anti-gay and anti-Jew (of which I am both). I support Angelina Jolie both because I find her beautiful and because I agree with her political and personal values. I find her politics and her values to be more compelling than her beauty, actually.

Since AH supports Sarah Palin (who is very anti-gay) and since AH has been known to speak at Republican campaign functions and to donate to Republican campaigns, I don't see the need to fund her via my patronage.

Whoever wants to watch AH is free to do so. I just hope it's with what we in the medical research field call informed consent. If you know all this about AH and still opt to support her, great! That's totally your right. I just couldn't let my continued state of confusion go without expressing my thoughts on the matter.
Read The Subtextreadthesubtext on August 24th, 2010 08:26 pm (UTC)
We deserve better fictional representation than Angie Harmon's characters.

And therein lies the conundrum, because Angie's characters embody everything I could want in a strong female lead. I'm not going to lie - I do find her attractive on a purely primal level, but that doesn't motivate my enjoyment of her work, it merely enhances it. For me, the appeal lies in her characters' devil-may-care attitude, their swagger, their gun-toting kick-assery coupled with their aching vulnerability, their anger management issues, their inherent butchness, not to mention Angie's impeccable comic timing, her endlessly entertaining facial expressions and her aptitude for eyesexing her female co-stars to within an inch of the bedroom. If she carries on in the same vein, I could make one hell of a compelling case for Jane Rizzoli becoming just as much of a gay icon as Xena. No, seriously.

If you've been steadfastly boycotting her work (not to say I don't understand the reasons why), then you're never going to fathom Angie's appeal, but I can honestly say I've never clicked with/related to a character as much as I do Jane Rizzoli (or Lindsay Boxer, for that matter), and judging from the explosion in the femslash fandom, a lot of other lesbians feel the same way.

Even the most politically aware of us can get sucked in against our better judgment (Dorothy Snarker & Sarah Warn, for example, love the show), and it's not like I'm an undereducated, easily pleased squeer who's all too willing to feast on scraps and overlook the bigger picture. I have every respect for a woman who sticks to her principles and I can understand your bewilderment over "Angie mania" as an objective bystander, but I genuinely believe if you were to check out the Rizzoli and Isles episode 'Money For Nothing' - and hey, you could always download it; that way you'd be robbing Angie of her hard-earned cash instead of lining her back pocket - you would have to be superhuman not to feel your resolve slipping away.

In a world where we're often denied any positive representation, any form of validation, this amazing connection between two women whose chemistry is off-the-scale feels like (hell, I'm going to say it) a dream come true. So if I had to choose between cringing my way through another painfully mediocre lesbian film or pledging my allegiance to a show that - at least right now - is giving me everything I could wish for and more on the femslash front, then I would pick R&I any day. And I'm ecstatic that others seem to be enjoying it as much as I am. If you saw the way Jane and Maura look at each other, then perhaps you'd understand :P

TBC...
Read The Subtextreadthesubtext on August 24th, 2010 08:26 pm (UTC)
That being said, I'm not disputing the fact that Angie comes across as a vapid bimbo in 99.9% of her interviews (the Jekyll and Hyde analogy comes to mind), although I think her problem stems from being hopelessly inarticulate more than anything. Maybe she's simply saying she doesn't want her daughters to end up like Lindsay Lohan or Paris Hilton, or defending everyone's right to free speech, but she admittedly goes about it in entirely the wrong way... which is why I generally try to avoid her chat show appearances like the plague. Still, for me, that doesn't negate the fact that she is - genuinely - a very talented and charismatic actress who brings me untold amounts of viewing pleasure and, call me a traitor to the ranks, but if that means selling a little piece of my liberal soul, then so be it. I'm in the Rizzoli and Isles fandom because of the characters and their amazing relationship, not because I hero-worship the "celebrities" who portray them.

Also, I never really understood the logic behind judging someone/boycotting their work on the basis that they may - possibly - be judging us, because isn't that essentially engaging in the behaviour we're supposed to be condemning? Am I supposed to studiously avoid religious people on the basis that the Church has historically oppressed homosexuals? You can't be all for free speech until someone says something you don't want to hear, and I actually like the fact that Angie is willing to stand up and take the flack (and there has been a hell of a lot of it) for what she believes in, even if her views are diametrically opposed to my own. People are making a lot of inferences and assumptions about her based on a couple of sensationalist quotes that may have been taken completely out of context - because, let's face it, it wouldn't be the first time that's happened.

Yes, she's been quite vocal about the fact that she supports the Republican party, but did Grace Hanadarko - proud supporter of the death penalty, die-hard believer in rough justice and taking the law into her own hands, advocate of a person's right to bear arms, someone who had a lot of respect for "our boys in Iraq," and someone who was was unquestionably an ignorant red neck at times - make you seethe in the same way? You can't define someone by a stereotype, and Angie has been involved in two of the most positive gay-themed episodes I've seen - 'To Drag and To Hold' and 'I Kissed A Girl' respectively. It didn't look like she was trying not to puke in the process, either... in fact, she looked pretty damn content lying in bed with her female co-star discussing the merits of lesbianism.

Whatever comes out of her mouth, the fact remains that Angie's characters are - at least 80% of the time - a glowing beacon for the feminist movement. If you won't take me at my word, then you're welcome to see for yourself. Call me delusional, but I just can't believe that she's anti-gay when she is so adept at dyking it up. She actually seems to go out of her way to gratify the lesbian audience... almost, dare I say it, as if she's doing it on purpose. This isn't the first time she's roused the masses; she's something of a serial offender in that respect.

At the end of the day, I love the characters Angie plays and I relish every second of the way she portrays them, and what she does on her own time - at least in my view - is her business. She'd have to be incredibly sheltered and naive not to realise how much her roles appeal to the femslash community, though, and I find it hard to believe that even Angie is too dense to realise that staring at her co-star's cleavage for five seconds flat is not the most hetero-normative of behaviour *shrug*

Still, who knows? Maybe she's a shrewd, manipulative bitch who is taunting us mercilessly so we can unwittingly further her evil agenda, but hey... I'm not gonna look a gift horse in the mouth. And this show really is a gift to the gay community.
seftiri: O_oseftiri on August 25th, 2010 03:01 am (UTC)
Wow. Okay. Wasn't expecting a dissertation, but I can roll with the punches.

I watched AH on L&O and I enjoyed Abbie Carmichael as a character quite a bit. However, finding out that AH is a self-proclaimed social conservative (and social conservatism embodies a host of political views that I find problematic--not just ones revolving around LGBT issues) was enough to make me rethink supporting her endeavors. Luckily, she didn't do much worth mentioning for a while and it wasn't an issue.

I was never a fan of the WMC books so I didn't bother watching the show. It's during the run of WMC that I first began to learn of AH's political activities, but it is only recently that I discovered her outright support of (via public speeches at campaign events and interviews) politicians I loathe--specifically George W. Bush and Sarah Palin.

Because her personal money goes to these candidates, my support will not go to her--not even in downloading form.

Do I find AH physically attractive? Sure. I'm human. She's not the most beautiful woman I've ever seen, but I'd look twice if I didn't know her and she walked down the street.

Do I find at least one of her characters compelling? Yes. I liked Abbie Carmichael. I thought she was out-spoken, didn't take crap, and could go toe-to-toe with Jack routinely, with good result.

Do I care about her personal opinions/values/political leanings? Yes, especially since she is so vocal in the political arena and lends her name, face, time, support, and money to candidates I cannot ever dream of supporting. If she had personal opinions/values/political leanings in opposition to mine but wasn't particularly politically active--say she voted her conscience and checked the box on her tax return to donate a dollar to her political party, then I would have little problem with her. I might choose to watch a show of hers if I found it particularly compelling. I might even follow that show routinely.

But AH is actively political and supports politicians who are actively in opposition to a number of my political leanings. Sarah Palin is one of the most reprehensibly vile and manipulative politicians the US has ever produced, much to this country's embarrassment. SP is actively anti-gay, anti-Islam, anti-environment, etc., etc. She is also woefully uneducated, power-hungry, and down right ridiculous most of the time. Her recent rhetoric about the "Ground Zero Mosque" alone should have her burying her head in moose-poop in shame, but does it? No! She's using fear and hatred to manipulate political campaigns in her party's favor and she does it unapologetically.

When Mel Gibson, brought up by another commenter, showed his stripes years ago as an anti-gay idiot, I stopped watching his work. When he more recently began showing his anti-semitic leanings, I counted my boycott of his work as well-earned. I am both gay and Jewish.

I support the Dixie Chicks even though I don't like country music because I like their politics. I think Angelina Jolie is physically beautiful, but I think her UNICEF ambassadorship, her philosophy of charitable giving, and her support of same-sex marriage make her truly amazing. I support her.

To me, the political is personal and I am free to support or to withhold support from whomever I choose based on whatever political criteria I deem important to my life.

Now, to address some of your other points.

Grace Hanadarko was a fictional character and did not financially or otherwise influence political candidates in opposition to my values. Was she a stereotype? I don't personally think so. Did I agree with everything she did/thought? No. But again, she was FICTIONAL. Holly Hunter's political leanings, on the other hand, are within the same range as mine. I have no trouble supporting her work.

TBC
seftiri: O_oseftiri on August 25th, 2010 03:02 am (UTC)
The Church is an institution and I am actively opposed to a number of its political activities, its institutionalized pedophilia, and its innate misogyny. I do not judge individuals based solely on their affiliation with the Church. AH, on the other hand, is an individual. Her affiliation with the Republican Party is not my primary issue with her. She is free to support whoever she wants to with her free time and her hard-earned money. I simply will not assist her in doing so. That is my right.

You can't be all for free speech until someone says something you don't want to hear, and I actually like the fact that Angie is willing to stand up and take the flack (and there has been a hell of a lot of it) for what she believes in, even if her views are diametrically opposed to my own.

Um, yes, I can. AH has the right to speak her mind on whatever topic she wishes. However, so do I. And if I want to say that I disagree 100% with whatever she has to say, that is protective of her rights as well as mine. She is free to vote for, donate to, or stump for whatever political party/ideal/concept she wishes. I am definitely not saying she cannot. I am saying that as a result of her choices, I am choosing not to support her activities. Which--guess what--is MY right. I am also exercising my right of free speech to educate others on her political activities and to pose the questions that I did. Free speech has consequences. Free speech has responsibilities. Free speech goes BOTH ways.

I am not making inferences about AH based on sensationalist quotes. I cited my examples and quoted AH's OWN words in nearly every citation.

As for R&I, I thank you for the invitation to watch it. I will respectfully decline. The subtext may indeed be TVs "gift" to the gay community, the chemistry may be wonderful between Jane and Maura, the writing may include lesbian characters from time to time. Wonderful. We--as a community--have seen all of that before. We will see it again, no doubt, because ridiculously enough, network television is still too mind-numbingly coward-like to portray an actual lesbian couple in a normal, committed relationship for a long-term period of time. (I.e. Where one of them doesn't die, go crazy, commit a crime, return to men, or get inexplicably pregnant.)

I decline your invitation not because of the "table scraps" mentality and network TV's subsequent offerings, but because I choose not to support AH. Period.
tulliolus: feettulliolus on August 26th, 2010 10:12 pm (UTC)
Hi! Good to see you back in this metaphorical space!

Herewith, some links to things this post and comment thread reminded me of:

Eric Flint - Prime Palaver #8
"We'll always have that bit where the giant whelk eats her rapist" - an irreverently-titled post by a blogger who is good with irreverent titles.

Please don't confuse my citation of these posts with endorsement of the opinions they express. As a matter of fact, I'm not sure what my opinion is. On the one hand, AH doesn't do that much for me, so I guess I don't understand her appeal either. On the other, I'm so eclectic in my political opinions that I'm used to having to hold my nose when I find out what almost anybody I like believes.
seftiri: DN Joyseftiri on August 27th, 2010 01:11 am (UTC)
Hey you! Nice to hear from you, too! How's your beloved?

I understand the part about having eclectic opinions (mine are musical rather than political, but a similar issue). It's just that I really, really, REALLY do not want Sarah Palin anywhere NEAR the Oval Office. I have plans. They include living in this country for another 3 years at a minimum, longer if I can manage it. SP becoming president would SEVERELY hamper those plans. And AH's tacit support of SP and her name recognition makes it impossible for me to support her. Amongst other reasons.

How goes school?
tulliolus: liontulliolus on August 27th, 2010 01:43 am (UTC)
Caitlin is happy, warm (both emotionally and physically) and thanks you for enquiring. We celebrated our fifth anniversary just last month.

I really, really, REALLY do not want Sarah Palin anywhere NEAR the Oval Office.

I feel the same way (though probably a bit less vehemently). Unfortunately, I also feel the same way about more or less everybody who's likely to be running in the next Presidential election... Oh well, I won't be eligible to vote in it anyway.

I have plans. They include living in this country for another 3 years at a minimum, longer if I can manage it.

I can think of two ways of parsing that: you're considering emigrating, or you're terminally ill. Please tell me you're considering emigrating...

How goes school?

Well, I finished the Masters program (with distinction, he added immodestly), and I've just finished the first year of studying for my doctorate. I hope to be giving my first presentation at a conference in America either in October or January, and in any case I'm presenting a poster at a conference in Belfast in December. It's full steam ahead, really.
seftiri: Rose Tyler Cheekyseftiri on August 27th, 2010 02:20 pm (UTC)
I can think of two ways of parsing that: you're considering emigrating, or you're terminally ill. Please tell me you're considering emigrating...

I would be forced to emigrate if SP became president is the point I was trying to make. My plan is to enter grad school next year, though, so an SP presidency would severely impact my master's degree schedule. I am not terminally ill. Well, beyond the fact that we are all dying to a certain degree every day, anyway. ;)

I'm glad Caitlin is well and that you've celebrated five years together! Wonderful! Please give her my best.

Where in America is this wonderful conference at which you will be presenting?

Congratulations on completing the master's with distinction! Quite an achievement!
tulliolus: flatirontulliolus on August 27th, 2010 08:17 pm (UTC)
Ah, yes. Life is a sexually transmitted, terminal condition, it's true ;)

So long as one or both of them accepts my abstract (touch wood), my American debut will either be made at the North East Linguistic Society meeting in Philadelphia, or the Linguistic Society of America meeting in Pittsburgh.

So you're going into grad school yourself, then? In which field?
telepresencetelepresence on August 29th, 2010 11:31 pm (UTC)
Setting aside Angie Harmon for a moment, I really hope you can stop stressing about Sarah Palin becoming President. It's not going to happen, not in a million years. Will she be an annoying figure on the political landscape, going around giving interviews and making speeches? Sure. But she's never going to be running the country. I realize you don't know me from Adam, but I'm sort of a politics junkie and her numbers outside of conservatives are horrible. Her numbers with women are soft. Her numbers with moderates and minorities are abysmal. It's not going to happen. Seriously.
seftiri: Carrot Rootseftiri on August 30th, 2010 02:00 am (UTC)
Thanks for the pep talk! I appreciate the reality check and I do realize that she has a long row to hoe to get into office. I am concerned that the moderates in the Republican party seem to be a disappearing breed, though. Who, in your opinion, bears watching for the choice of candidate for the Repubs in '12? Is there someone scarier than Palin with more credibility/numbers that I should know about?

Lishesquelishesque on August 29th, 2010 02:16 pm (UTC)
Very well written. I too cannot separate the political from the personal. Haven't really seen the draw of Rizzoli and Isles, and not all that interested to find out anymore.
seftiri: Cat Cora Chopsticksseftiri on August 30th, 2010 02:08 am (UTC)
Thanks! And yeah, can't watch it myself, even though I support Sasha Alexander.
DJ Shivadjshiva on September 20th, 2010 07:38 am (UTC)
Hm.  I have had to sit and think about how to respond to this.  Still not sure I have an answer.

On the one hand, I am one of those people who tends to shy away from supporting people whose politics I know to be odious.  That said, I am supporting any number of people every day whose politics are odious.  More on that later.

I have quite a few really good friends who voted for George W. Bush, and at least one friend who has flat out told me "My faith teaches me that homosexuality is wrong.  But if anyone tried to bash you I would beat their face in."  The place where religion and politics and reality meet is messy.  I know really lovely people who say and do and believe some really fucking stupid shit, and yet I still care about them.  I don't know if that even comes close to making a point, but it's just my visceral response here, I'll admit.  

I think AH's politics suck.  I also tend to think she's...well...not much of an intellectual, to put it nicely.   She supports Sarah Palin, a vapid power monger who, much like most "conservative" women, says one thing publicly about women's roles but does completely the opposite.  And yet here she is, playing a woman who (this is STATED canon, btw) is unmarried by choice, because she doesn't want someone to make her choose between them and a career.  A woman whose friendship with another woman seems to be the most important thing to her besides her job and her family.  And a woman whose actions play as nothing if not butch as all hell, considering the last few episodes.  

How frustrating, to feel as if one has to choose between supporting/rejecting AH, or supporting/rejecting a role that portrays a strong woman making some fairly un-traditional life choices.  

And so here I am.  Admittedly viewing the show via...ahem...less than legal means...and shipping the hell out of the two main characters, because they make it SOOOO easy.  And part of me finds something incredibly delicious and subversive in femslashing a character played by a Republican...I won’t lie.  

And the whole time I know the reality of what the success of the show means, in the terms that you have outlined.  That AH gets paid, dumping more money into Repub coffers, and potentially pushing policies that screw us all sideways.  All true.  But for the sake of argument, let me also point out that R&I’s network, TNT, is owned by Ted Turner, who gives generously to NARAL and Planned Parenthood (both of whom I support), as well as to environmental organizations like Greenpeace and to Democratic candidates.  Ole Ted’s got a few more pennies to weigh against Angie’s, in the long run.

And you know I totally support your right to call bullshit on AH’s political shenanigans, and I join you loudly proclaiming them as well.  But I feel like I am giving less to AH than I am to BP, because I own a car (albeit, one sitting in my parking lot broken at the moment).  I give more to Big Coal when I pay my electric bill, and if I buy new shoes (doesn’t matter what brand), I am inevitably giving money to some asshole company that pays pennies a day to impoverished female sweatshop workers somewhere too warm and too far away.  

Hell, L&O: SVU is on NBC, which is owned by GE, which I would argue has done way more damage to this planet and to politics than AH and Palin combined could even THINK of doing.  Ask me about GE’s weapons programs and their connection to the Reagan administration sometime.  We can’t turn around in any direction without banging our shins on something really horrible that we are financing every day.  

And none of this is to say that we SHOULDN’T try to avoid giving our support to assholes.  Not by a long shot.  But it is to say that it is impossible to completely avoid it, and so I guess we end up making choices based on our perception of the degree of odiousness, and our understanding of the complexities of politics and politicking.  

I am totally not writing this to “win” an argument, or even to start one.  You know I love you dearly, and respect you probably more than you know.  I just had some thoughts on the matter, and even though I despise AH’s politics as much as you do, sometimes things are not as simple as we want them to be.  
seftiri: Currant Eventsseftiri on September 20th, 2010 01:13 pm (UTC)
I respect your opinions on this matter, as well, and I realize that less than a week after I wrote this, AH guested on Chelsea Lately with what seemed like a one-lined agenda consisting of the words "I like gays!"

For me, that's not enough. As I explained, I find her to be an attractive woman and I have liked at least one character that she has played. I agree with your tactful suggestion that she isn't the sharpest fondue fork in the chocolate. Again, for me, that's not enough of an excuse for her statements or her politics.

It is pretty simple for me to reject supporting AH even though you are absolutely correct that everything I consume and every place I consume it from can probably be linked to odious politics or policies somewhere down the line. I try to make good choices about my consumables based on what I know, meaning that I don't buy my gas from Exxon or BP or Shell anymore, I don't patronize WalMart, Cracker Barrel, or even Target at the moment. I support Pauley Perrette (sp) and Cote de Pablo and write fanfic about their characters together because PP is an adamant and vocal supporter for marriage equality and because I love their characters.

I know that my choices have flaws and imperfections. My position on AH may be one of those. But my conscience does not allow me to support her on the basis of my objections to her statements and her support of Sarah Palin, a woman I consider to be one of the most divisive, hate-mongering, and imbecilic representatives of any political party in any country anywhere.

And that AH's support apparently consists of the fact that she likes Palin's ability to stand up for what she believes in and nothing else, is--to me--a weak argument. One that could be made for anyone, anywhere--including Fred Phelps and Terry Jones. It is admirable to stand up for one's beliefs, to be sure. But that's not enough in this day and age. It's not enough to stand up for any ol' belief. The content of our beliefs has to matter, too. We can't just get kudos for the philosophical equivalent of standing on a street corner in rush hour traffic, shouting the end of the world is nigh.

That one person with a public stage, no matter how seemingly insignificant, would support a politician with the most ridiculously moronic content to her beliefs, is an abdication of that first person's responsibility as a thinking, voting member of this society. Does she have the right to do it? Absolutely. Do I have to like it? I do not.

Now, do take these thoughts of my own with a grain of salt. I am still in the hospital, still sleep-deprived, just found out that I have to have an EKG because my heart is starting to act weird, I miss the woman I love with a fervor that fills every cell of my body, and I am watching The West Wing on television from my hospital bed. Any one or a combination of these things could be exerting influence. ;)

Thank you for your reasoned opinions and for sharing them here. I also respect you, probably more than you know, and I love you dearly, too.

I hope you are well!

Edited at 2010-09-20 01:48 pm (UTC)
DJ Shivadjshiva on September 20th, 2010 03:36 pm (UTC)
For what it's worth, I am smitten with Sasha Alexander, who was spotted at a Lambda Legal Fundraiser this week.

And AH's "I love the gays!" appearance on Chelsea Handler was SOOOO wackalicious. Talk about a blatant PR bit. But I do believe that she is one of those that disconnects their personal feelings about their gay friends/relatives from their political actions that affect them. There have actually been a couple stories about this phenomenon as related to anti-gay candidates with gay relatives (like this new Lil' Palin, Christine O' Donnell).

Not only that, but if you actually have to keep defending yourself publicly because people think the political party you belong to is a racist, homophobic piece of shit, at the very least mayhaps you should spend more time talking about how you can IMPROVE and change your party, instead of just defending yourself. Because that says 2 things: 1) your party is fucked up, and 2) you're not smart enough to address the real issue, which is that your party is fucked up. And mean.

Anyhow, you know I totally love you for standing up on this one, regardless of my own mixed bag of emotions. And as much as I can only dream about how awesome your fic would be if you wrote Rizzles fic...I will look forward to the conclusion of Hide Beside Me (ahem...*glares pointedly*).

But before that, I really just want you to get better, dammit. It is required that you come hang with Team Midwestish and bring that awesome snarky girlfriend of yours at some point in the near future. ;) So, yes...get better. And in the process, if you happen to meet a hot lesbian doc who likes butch girls, please do send her my contact info. ;)

<3