Reformation Bait

Catholicism just keeps getting weirder (well, not special underwear weird, but close). It seems that the Pope has revived that old medieval curio, Madonna the Papal Indulgence. If the term sounds vaguely familiar and slightly sketchy, you might be remembering your Lutheranism. Apparently, opposition to the sale of Papal Indulgences was one of the sticking points for Martin Louis the King Jr. Martin Luther in that whole Reformation thing. Well, now indulgences are back--and just as powerful as ever!

According to this article in the Times, the Catholic Church has quietly begun to offer indulgences to its congregation. Essentially, an indulgence offers a reduction of punishment in Purgatory. As the Times notes:

According to church teaching, even after sinners are absolved in the confessional and say their Our Fathers or Hail Marys as penance, they still face punishment after death, in Purgatory, before they can enter heaven. In exchange for certain prayers, devotions or pilgrimages in special years, a Catholic can receive an indulgence, which reduces or erases that punishment instantly, with no formal ceremony or sacrament.

There are partial indulgences, which reduce purgatorial time by a certain number of days or years, and plenary indulgences, which eliminate all of it, until another sin is committed. You can get one for yourself, or for someone who is dead. You cannot buy one — the church outlawed the sale of indulgences in 1567 — but charitable contributions, combined with other acts, can help you earn one. There is a limit of one plenary indulgence per sinner per day.

It has no currency in the bad place.

Before we talk more about the theology here, I have to think about that last sentence. What an amazingly cryptic statement! I can't believe the Times editors let that line stay in the final copy. What could it mean? Is "the bad place" hell? (And lest you think that the sentence is merely the topic sentence of a longer, more explanatory paragraph, allow me to assure you that the final sentence stands alone in the article as its own complete paragraph. How odd!)

So let's get the theology straight here: even if you confess a sin and are absolved, you will still be punished for that sin in Purgatory. Unless you manage to gain a plenary indulgence, which buys you out of that purgatory time. And the person who decides if you get to skip purgatory is some creepy geriatric like Pope Cowboy XVI here? Hmmm. Who comes up with this stuff?

Not to mention that there appears to be fine print:

• offer only good until next sin.
  
• limit one coupon per customer per day.
  

And people wonder why Fosco is an atheist. Does any of this actually sound like the will of a supernatural being? Or does it sound more like the cheap thrills of an authoritarian bureaucratic apparatus?

Fosco Reads What Your Nieces Are Reading

Succumbing to the pestering of several people in his life, Fosco finally read YA lit juggernaut Twilight this week. In case you've been living in Wasilla, Alaska for the past year, Twilight was a genuine pop culture phenomenon in 2008--and not just for teens and tweens. Apparently, there is a large group of Americans who want(ed) to date a vampire in high school. Or, as frequent Fosco Lives! commenter The BeeMistress put it: "everyone needs a boyfriend that sparkles." True enough: Fosco regularly sprinkles Oz with glitter while he sleeps.

So what can Fosco say about Twilight? Well, the short answer is that it's not as bad as he thought it would be (although it's not "good" by any means). It's even appealing enough for Fosco to read the next book in the series (he'll keep you updated with that project). And there are some interesting innovations that Mormon authoress Stephenie Meyer makes in the standard vampire lore, like the aforementioned sparkliness of vampires (but only in direct sunlight).

And yet, at the same time, most of the book is a big ol' mess--from the standpoints of originality, consistency, narrative, and politics. Here are some of Fosco's observations:

• The story is about a high school girl who falls in love with a vampire who resists his natural urges to feed on humans. Yet, they can never consummate their love physically. In the end, he takes her to prom. You know, I actually liked that story quite a bit when I heard it the first time--when it was called "Buffy the Vampire Slayer."
  
• This is less a fantasy novel than a romance novel. If you're looking for Harry Potter or The Golden Compass, you'll be disappointed. There is the skeleton of an adventure story in the book, but it is downplayed (even at its climax) by the romance. One might suggest that the "suspenseful" preface is misleading, as it suggests a much more eventful novel. I think Meyer was pretty careless there.
  
• Speaking of careless: on page 97, our heroine Bella gets nauseous and almost faints at the sight of blood. Forty pages earlier, in the emergency room, she watches as classmate Tyler is treated for cuts:
  

  I recognized Tyler Crowley from my Government class beneath the bloodstained bandages wrapped tightly around his head.
  [...]
  As we spoke, nurses began unwinding his soiled bandages, exposing a myriad of shallow slices all over his forehead and left cheek.

  Hmmm. It makes you wonder if anyone edited this book at all.
  
• Why does Bella, who is apparently a good student, have to hate math? Could we maybe someday find a girl in fiction who likes math? Or who doesn't really care either way? Some parts of this novel read like they were written by Larry Summers.
  
• Maybe I will sound like a teen boy here, but shouldn't there be some fighting in a novel about vampires? And if you are going to describe the one very specific way that vampires can be killed, shouldn't that actually happen somewhere in the novel? It's not that I need violence; it's just that there was an implicit promise of maybe just a little...
  
• Here's a weird little sentence:
  

  I concentrated on the news, watching out for stories about Florida, or about [baseball] spring training--strikes or hurricanes or terrorist attacks--anything that might send them home early. (421)

  Why would anyone think to include "terrorist attacks" on a list of things that might cancel baseball spring training? It just seems like a ludicrous thought. If I'd been editing this novel (and somebody should have been), I would have crossed that out immediately.
  
• Is it possible that the whole novel is just religious propaganda for sexual abstinence?
  
• And speaking of propaganda, can you imagine a Creationist vampire? Vampire Edward:
  

  "Or, if you don't believe that all this world could have just happened on its own, which is hard for me to accept myself, is it so hard to believe that the same force that created the delicate angelfish with the shark, the baby seal and the killer whale, could create both our kinds together?" (308)

  I'm not sure what Edward has been doing with his time since he became a vampire in 1918, but apparently college hasn't been part of it.
  
• You know what this book is? It's tween girl p*rn. I use the word p*rn here in the sense of material that is designed to evoke comforting yet unrealistic fantasies on the part of specific consumers. (And I don't use the actual word here because I don't really fancy either Google or the FBI coming across a phrase like "tween girl p*rn" on this website.) And what tween girl fantasy is in play here? Think about this:
  

  While he walked me to English, when he met me after Spanish, all through the lunch hour, he questioned me relentlessly about every insignificant detail of my existence. Movies I'd liked and hated, the few places I'd been and the many places I wanted to go, and books--endlessly books.
  I couldn't remember the last time I'd talked so much. More often than not, I felt self-conscious, certain I must be boring him. But the absolute absorption of his face, and his never-ending stream of questions, compelled me to continue. (229)

  (I'll note here in passing that, despite their shared interest in "books--endlessly books," never do we see Edward reading one and we certainly never see him and Bella discussing one. Books just aren't sexy enough to make it into this narrative.) So what tween girl fantasy is being served here? Clearly, it's the fantasy of a (gorgeous) boy who wants to know everything about them--and who finds it all totally fascinating. Our culture has spent the better part of the last few decades convincing our children that each and every one of them is a precious unique snowflake; naturally, the next logical step is for these snowflake children to want to talk (endlessly) about what makes them so precious and unique.
  
  Now I'm not saying that each child isn't genetically unique and morally precious; however, I am saying that there is no tween girl (or boy) in this country that has anything interesting to say about their interests, their thoughts, or their lives. They all like the Jonas Brothers, they all wish their parents would treat them more like adults, and they all want to go to the beach for summer vacation. More or less. But before you think I'm being unfair to tweens, let me note that there are very few adults who are more interesting. Most of us like Coldplay, wish we didn't have to work, and want a new flat-screen television (I know I do). My point here is that "every insignificant detail of [our] existence" is just not interesting. Ever. And you just aren't going to find someone (especially someone as gorgeous as Edward) who is actually that interested in it. Either that person is faking or brain-damaged.
  
  But wait, you say, what's wrong with reading a book that plays to this fantasy? Isn't YA lit all about fantasy? I guess. There is certainly something to be said for escapism. But isn't YA lit also about finding ways to negotiate the adult world? And in the same way that gay porn is a pretty bad guide to the real world of sex (the pizza delivery boy is never hot in real life and, even if he were, he would never join Fosco and Oz for a threesome), books like Twilight are not going to be very helpful when it comes to crafting a meaningful romantic relationship.
  

As you probably know from reading this blog, Fosco is not above trashy books (does Gossip Girl ring a bell?). And so, even with all these flaws, Fosco isn't going to advocate burning Twilight in a giant Sarah Palin-inspired bonfire. However, he can still wish it were a better, less silly book. And he can also wish for a more thoughtful, more intelligent heir to the Harry Potter "tweentertainment" throne.

True Love Doesn't Wait (Duh!)

What everyone except your idiot pastor already knew:

Think back to your teen years... raise your hand if you've had sex with someone who wanted to stay a virgin until marriage (N.B., there is no such thing as an "anal sex loophole"). Yes, I thought so.

Of course, this would just be good for another belly laugh at the expense of misguided and pointless campaigns like True Love Waits (which is a stupid idea but a great Radiohead song); that is, if it didn't appear that these ineffective virginity pledges are actually associated with decreased use of sexual protection and birth control. As the article notes:

Teenagers who pledge to remain virgins until marriage are just as likely to have premarital sex as those who do not promise abstinence and are significantly less likely to use condoms and other forms of birth control when they do, according to a study released today.

For those of you who need me to spell it out, this means increased risk of sexually transmitted disease as well as teen pregnancy (both things that we probably would like to avoid on a societal level).

So by all means, America: keep up this whole virginity-pledge thing in lieu of real, effective sex education. Heck, it worked out well for Bristol Palin--her pregnancy has allowed her to lock down high-school dropout and sex on skates, Levi Johnston. She's one lucky woman.

Buy Rand-McNally Stock

Reasonable people can argue about the outcome of our current financial crisis: either things will eventually return to normal or never be the same again. But thank goodness there are also unreasonable people who can provide us with much-needed entertainment during this crisis. And so we have Russian political science professor Igor Panarin, who is predicting that the US will break apart in a giant civil war in the year 2010. You can read the WSJ article here.

Now while Fosco doesn't need to be convinced that secession by several Southern states (goodbye Texas!) would indeed be a desirable thing, Professor Panarin's predictions are much nuttier. Here's a good one:

California will form the nucleus of what he calls "The Californian Republic," and will be part of China or under Chinese influence.

That would certainly make it easier for Fosco to get a hold of his favorite Chinese melamine chews. But really--China? China is going to assume control of the Western US? Has this guy ever been to California? Based on recent voting trends, it seems more likely to Fosco that "The Californian Republic" would fall under Mormon control--especially as Utah is predicted to be part of the same "Californian Republic."

How silly! You know, the only thing that seems more far-fetched than a China-controlled California would be...

Canada will grab a group of Northern states Prof. Panarin calls "The Central North American Republic."

Fear the rise of Imperial Canada! Fear it! They are coming for our Great Lakes! Although, come to think of it, most Midwesterners might not mind doing business in a stable and valuable currency.

Need more laughs? Here's the full map:

Actually, maybe the best part is the return of Alaska to Russia. Luckily, Alaska has someone someone who knows a lot about Russia.

So what does this mean? Well, Fosco is going to celebrate July 4th like a mofo this year, because apparently it will be the last one.

Censorship at BY"U"

[Thanks to a tip from Mere.]

You may remember Fosco's feelings about Mormon higher education. Well, here's another troubling story.

J. Michael Wiltbank, a student at BY"U", submitted a final project for an art class that contained photographs of gay BY"U" students and their supportive friends. As Wiltbank explained the project:

I am not telling the viewer who identifies themselves as homosexual, because I hope the viewer will realize that placing a label with the portrait only creates divisions in our society and furthers stereotypes. It is my hope this body of work can be a vehicle for tolerance, support, love and change.

You can find some photographs from this project here.

According to his blog, BY"U" decided to take down his contribution to the show:

Apparently the topic of homosexuality is a bit much for the BYU audience and my part of our Fine Art Classes show was taken down today. It seems that censorship is favored over support and love. This really saddens me.

Luckily, after Wiltbank blogged about the censorship, BY"U" allowed his photos to be displayed, blaming their original removal on a "miscommunication" (HA!). Wiltbank (who strikes me as a genuinely generous person) is encouraged by this:

I think the administration's action has been a good example of that increased understanding.

Like I said, Wiltbank seems generous.

From where Fosco is sitting (some 800 miles away and 50-60 years in the future), the whole thing still seems somewhat sad. Think about it: all Wiltbank wanted to display were photographs of young Mormon men, some of whom self-identify as gay. The photos are not naked, sexually explicit, anti-religious, or provocative in any way--except, of course, that they show nice, normal-looking Mormon kids who just happen to be almost as sinful as murderers. (And we all know that there is nothing more "normal-looking" than a Mormon.)

This isn't about BY"U" condoning/condemning gay sex or gay marriage or gay parenthood (or any of those other activities that drive the LDS crazy and make them want to ship tons of money out of state); rather, what BY"U" tried to do here, even for a little while, was to efface the existence of Gay Mormons altogether. And that makes Fosco angry.

Joke of the Day

Q: What is the difference between the Mormon Council of the Twelve Apostles and the Legion of Doom?

A: One is a secretive group of diabolically evil freaks of nature dedicated to the destruction of civil society. The other is a group of villains who battle the Super Friends.

Rimshot!

Pop Music: The Littlest Mormon and more.

So Fosco is doing this pop music thing this week (with only mild complaints from his commenters). It just so happens that the last two or three weeks have been a period of much pop music consumption for Fosco--one of those semi-annual periods where he decides to get back in touch with his inner brainwashed-music-consumer.

And what better way to get reacquainted with pop music than the American Idol double whammy? That's CDs by AI winner David Cook and runner-up David Archuleta, released within a week of each other in mid-November.

Now, Fosco has never watched much AI (that's really more the department of his boyfriend Oz). However, these two guys are pretty blockbuster and it would be silly not to give them a listen.

Let's start with David Cook. For those of you who never watched AI, he's the "rocker." You can tell because he has facial hair. His eponymous debut CD has lots of rockin' guitars and some pretty rockin' song titles (like "Bar-ba-sol"--that's rockin'). As music goes, it's pretty inoffensive. Actually, it's all strangely familiar, as every one of the songs mimics a previously released song by another band. When Fosco played his favorite track ("I Did It for You") for Oz, Oz noted that he liked the song better when it was called "Stop and Stare" and it was performed by One Republic. That pretty much illustrates the problem with David Cook. He's a copy--a pretty decent copy, but still a copy. He sings like he's auditioning to lead a Nickelback cover band and he looks like a pre-highlights Dominic Monaghan.

Fosco is much more interested in David Archuleta, the Littlest Mormon. Seriously, that boy is like 4'5". And he's just so darling. Like a little (gay, yet repressed) elf.

I wish I could say that David A.'s CD is the next big thing, but it's not. It's better than David C.'s disc and has a few catchy songs, but that's about it. The first single is infectious (trust Fosco and his insomnia) and the video raises all kinds of interesting questions about which boy David wants to go swimming with. But even so, the song isn't the right setting for the strength of his voice.

One of the most interesting questions about this CD is how Wee David manages his sexual persona. After all, he has a legion of tween fans (called Arch Angels) who are just starting to feel tingly in certain places. And I mean look at that kid: has there ever been a pop music star who is less sexualized (including Jordy)?

It turns out that David's awkward sexuality is what makes so much of his CD fun to listen to. Consider these lyrics from the song "Touch My Hand":

Saw you from a distance
Saw you from the stage
Something about the look in your eyes
Something about your beautiful face

In a sea of people
There is only you
I never knew what the song was about
But suddenly now I do

Try to reach out to you, touch my hand
Reach out as far as you can
Only me, only you, and the band

Up until that last line, it's just a typical song about a connection between singing David and the adoring tween fan in the crowd. But then what happens? Suddenly, things get creepy. Only me, only you, and the band. Why is band involved here? Is he proposing what I think he's proposing? Or is this some kind of weird reverse plural marriage?

"Admit you're wrong. Then we can talk."

Fosco was always a little suspicious of the previous Pope's zeal for "interreligious dialogue." Not that "interreligious dialogue" is a bad thing--Fosco heartily supports it, as long as it doesn't mean Catholics and Mormons teaming up to beat down the gays. Reasonable religious dialogue might be nice, actually. Heck, it could stop some killing. It's just that Fosco never believed that any "dialogue" is possible with a religion (like Catholicism) that axiomatically believes that every other faith is incorrect.

Of course, this was the problem that puzzled all the commentators when old Pope Droopy II used to hold all those Interfaith Clambakes. After all, how can the Pope talk to non-Christians when it is the Church's infallible teaching that Jesus alone leads to salvation and that other religions are "objectively speaking [...] in a gravely deficient situation" (emphasis in original).

Can you imagine the conversation?

[CATHOLIC CHURCH]: Do you believe in Jesus?
[ISLAM]: We are actually more interested in a God we call Allah.
[CATHOLIC CHURCH]: That is gravely deficient. Would you like a cannoli?

How's that for dialogue?

Well, as Pope Buckaroo XVI (pictured above) continues his sprightly little dance on the grave of Vatican II, it seems the idea of Catholic participation in "interreligious dialogue" has finally been admitted as a sham.

According to an article in the NYTimes, the Pope has written a letter to an author of a book on Christianity's salvific uniqueness, a letter in which

the pope said the book “explained with great clarity” that “an interreligious dialogue in the strict sense of the word is not possible.” In theological terms, added the pope, “a true dialogue is not possible without putting one’s faith in parentheses.”

I'm not sure the Pope needed to resort to tricky "theological terms" such as "in parentheses" to make his point here. The ground of any "dialogue" is the essential possibility that one's position may change when one listens to what the other person has to say. If you rule out that possibility from the start, there is no dialogue (rather, it's a double monologue or something--at any rate, it sounds exactly like Fosco's conversations with his father...).

In related news, Fosco would like a cannoli.

Tax law made interesting

Ooooh, the Mormons are in trouble...

According to the SFChronicle, the State of California will be investigating the Mormon Church as to "whether [it] accurately described its role in a campaign to ban gay marriage in the state."

Hmmm... Fosco can't help but wonder if this is the first step in revoking the Mormon Church's tax exempt status. As you may (not) know, churches (and other tax-exempt organizations) are not allowed to attempt to influence legislation in a substantial way. Doing so would endanger that organization's tax-exempt status. Some thoughtful observers think the Mormons crossed the line on this one. Fosco hopes this is the case. Think about what all that delicious Mormon money could do to offset California's major budget shortfall.

We're coming for your money, Mormons!

In which Fosco defends the role of the courts in democracy...

As you've probably heard, the CA Supreme Court has agreed to hear legal challenges to the despicable Prop H8. As the SF Chronicle notes,

the justices asked for written arguments to be submitted through Jan. 21. The court could hold a hearing as early as March, and a ruling would be due 90 days later.

That means that we could have a decision by mid-June.

This is good news, of course (although, as the article notes, there is reason to fear that one of the justices that originally overturned the marriage ban may not be willing to overturn Prop H8). It's also good news in that it could allow gay couples to plan late-June weddings (although, in California, a "June wedding" is possible nine months a year).

You may have noticed the little "teapot tempest" occurring in the comments section of one of Fosco's previous posts on H8. One of Fosco's friends, The Beemaster (come to think of it, why do Fosco and his friends have aliases that sound like supervillains? Count Fosco, The Beemaster, Oz... It's like a whole Legion of Doom thing...)--but anyway, The Beemaster has questioned whether relying on the courts to overturn a ballot initiative is a subversion of democracy. I have to disagree; in fact, I think court review of these kinds of things is actually one of the best features of our system of democracy because it protects the rights of minorities from whims of majorities.

Think about it. The state of Utah is 62% Mormon. That pretty much means that, if Utah allows its state constitution to be revised by a pure majority vote (like CA), the Mormons could decide to do anything they wanted to the non-Mormons. They could revoke suffrage, legalize discrimination, even require non-Mormons to wear special underwear (how ridiculous!). (Disclaimer: I don't know if the Utah constitution can be altered by a majority vote; but that doesn't change our thought experiment).

But, you say, that would never happen because the courts would prevent it (based on either the US or State constitution). Exactly.

Actually, we could even consider this in a CA context. Prop H8 passed with about 5 million votes (approx. 1/7 of the population of CA). Now there are lots of things I bet I could get 5 million Californians to vote for (especially if I had millions of dollars in Mormo cash to help me run a misleading ad campaign). Remember how they had those troubles linked to Black muslims in Oakland (at Your Black Muslim Bakery--no, that's your Black Muslim Bakery, not mine)? I bet I could get 5 million Californians to require Black muslims across the state to register with their local police departments.

Or what about Scientologists? Heck, I bet if I had enough money (enough to outspend the Cruises), I could even get 5 million CA voters to force Scientologists to get freaky facial tattoos!

My point should be ridiculously clear by now: a democracy doesn't work unless there are courts to protect minorities from impositions by the majority. Now, we can argue all day about how the CA Constitution (or the US Constitution) should be interpreted when it comes to marriage equality. Or, to put it a different way, we can argue all day about whether marriage equality is a basic civil right. But I don't think it's worth arguing that this is a question for the courts--this is exactly a question for the courts.

Excuse me while I stumble off of my soapbox to make a gin & tonic.

Monday Procrastination Tools

As if reading Fosco Lives! isn't procrastination in itself, Fosco has found several other things you could read today to avoid doing any work:

• From the Anchorage Daily News, read that Alaska's dropout rate is double the national average. Wow. Sarah Palin has done some great work.
  
• Does your sense of California superiority need a little deflating? From the HuffPo: "Can We Stop Pretending California is Green?"
  
• From Andrew Sullivan, read about The Mormon War on Gay People.
  
• From SFGate read a fascinating history by Oz's US Representative Jackie Speier about her ordeal at Jonestown. It turns out to be a really remarkable story.

Now go do some work. Or something.

We're here, we're queer, and we want a wedding!

By now, you know that the gays (Fosco included) are pretty angry about the whole Prop H8 thing... So there was a major protest march down Market St. in San Francisco last Friday night. Fosco and his boyfriend Oz were there. This is the story.

First, it is important to know that Fosco spent several hours (and used art supplies!) to make posters. Here is his favorite:


You can tell that the above photo is a Fosco photo because it is so blurry. Luckily, Oz was in charge of the camera during the march itself. Here are some of his excellent pictures of signs:



Hey, you know what? Queer sex is awesome!

Yes, that is a guy dressed as a nun...




Here's a good picture to remind us all what this is about:


Fosco's favorite part was marching through The Castro. Here we are marching past the eponymous theater:


Here is the guy with a bullhorn who kept chanting: "I'm gonna get maaaaaaaa-rried. Somebody wants to maaaaaaaaaa-rry me." At first it was annoying. Then it was funny. Then it was something in between. (Psst: check out the lesbian hair in the foreground!)


Here is my favorite sign of the night:


And here is a picture of Fosco and Oz. Yes, that is Fosco's unruly mustache peeking over the top of the sign. (No, it is not a centipede.)


If you are one of those who prefer live-action, check out our short video:

If you watch this video, you will see the frequent amused reactions to Fosco's "Utah" sign (at this point in the march, Fosco and Oz were standing on the sidelines). The best part is the guy in the motorized wheelchair who shows up at the end of the vid and can be heard saying "Let me tell you about Utah." Oz turned off the video at this point (which was only the polite thing to do), but I wish we had caught the guy's story on tape. He said that years ago (in the 70s I think he said), he lived in Salt Lake City and there used to be a number of gay bathhouses. He said that lots of married Mormon men would go to the baths for man sex and that they would walk around the baths in their special underwear (instead of nude or with a towel, as is the custom). He said that a lot of the guys were really good at gay sex. He was definitely nostalgic for it. What fun!


There is another rally in SF this weekend and Fosco hopes to see you there.

Your Prop 8 Omnibus

So there is this thing called Prop H8 that takes away marriage rights from CA gays (like, for example, Fosco). While the Obamagasm (which, btw, Fosco is not complaining about) has mostly kept Prop 8 out of the coverage of the MSM (although, see the eloquent Keith Olbermann plea), the internets are buzzing. So how can you make sense of it all? Who is there to read and distill all the Prop 8 coverage for you? That's where Fosco comes in.

1. First things first. Fosco needs to apologize for an earlier post in which laid partial blame on black voters for the passage of Prop 8. While there were indeed exit polls that suggested black voters supported Prop 8 at , there is good reason to be suspicious of these numbers. And, even if these numbers are correct, a thoughtful analysis reveals that the black support would still have been too small to pass the measure by itself. You can read these analyses here. Fosco plans to amend his earlier post accordingly and apologizes for jumping on this bandwagon.
   
   The question of how this black scapegoating came about is an interesting one. There has been much hand-wringing in the gay community about racism recently. This piece from Pam's House Blend is particularly thoughtful.
   But I do want to think that there are less-racist reasons why this story became a story. Because Fosco is a "literature-type," he would like suggest that the outrage over (possible) black support for Prop 8 is about the seductions of narrative. Here are two (related) explanations.
   
   Think about the surprise and anger that gay people and their allies felt on Wednesday morning when they discovered that California is so astonishingly retrograde. At that point, there was one set of exit polls available, those from CNN. The CNN exit polls were not particularly nuanced at this point, breaking down the results by five sets of demographics: age, religion, previous voting behavior (first-timers vs. regular voters), educational background, and race. All of the demographics except race followed Fosco expectations: old people are more homophobic, college graduates are more tolerant, etc. For Fosco (and, I suspect, for many people), only the last category provided any new information: the suggestion that black voters were more socially conservative than he expected (of course, as Fosco noted above, there are reasons to doubt the methodology of these exit polls and consequently their findings). But anyway, on last Wednesday morning, the exit polls seemed to offer one piece of new and interesting information (black support for the measure) that could then be subsumed into a narrative about the surprise passage of Prop 8.
   
   But, once this narrative (that black people "caused" the passage of Prop 8) became established, there was another reason why it became almost irresistible: its tragic irony. There is something in us (particularly in well-educated types) that loves a good irony and this narrative had it. The irony: the same social group (black people) that turned out in record numbers to help elect Barack Obama (a man that most gays ardently desired as president) also doomed gay marriage in California. In other words, one of Fosco's most wished-for outcomes (an Obama presidency) was fundamentally tied to Fosco's loss of civil rights. What high tragedy! No wonder this narrative was easy to embrace.
   
   Which is not to say that racism isn't implicit in these narratives (because it is, I think). My exercise here is not to excuse myself and the gay community from blaming black people for the passage of Prop 8; rather, it is to look for the ways that racism worked alongside/within other structures of meaning-production (such as narrative desire) to produce negative outcomes. Remember: complexity is a good thing.
   
   
2. So who is to blame for Prop 8? Well, as the always brilliant number-crunchers at fivethirtyeight.com note, a primary culprit is the elderly. According to Nate Silver:
   

   The good news for supporters of marriage equity is that -- and there's no polite way to put this -- the older voters aren't going to be around for all that much longer, and they'll gradually be cycled out and replaced by younger voters who grew up in a more tolerant era.

   Are we sure that we want to expand Medicare?
   
   
3. Of course, no round of blaming would be complete without Fosco's new favorite nemeses: Mormons and Catholics.
   
   Recently, Fosco focused his anger on those pesky Mormons. However, it turns out that the Catholics are a problem as well. For one thing, the involvement of the Mormons in this fight seems to have been orchestrated by the Catholic Archbishop of San Francisco George Niederauer (no, not that George Niederauer). According to an article in the SF Chronicle:
   

   The June letter from Niederauer drew in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and proved to be a critical move in building a multi-religious coalition - the backbone of the fundraising, organizing and voting support for the successful ballot measure. By bringing together Mormons and Catholics, Niederauer would align the two most powerful religious institutions in the Prop. 8 battle.

   That bastard! I just don't understand why any self-respecting Catholic would get into bed with the Mormons... Don't they know about the naked touching?
   
   As the article goes on to note, it is Catholics who responded to pulpit-pressure at the last minute who passed the measure:
   

   The last Field Poll, conducted a week before the election, showed that weekly churchgoers increased their support in the final week from 72 percent to 84 percent. Catholic support increased from 44 percent to 64 percent - a jump that accounted for 6 percent of the total California electorate.

   More proof that the Catholic Church is now waging an organized war against the individual consciences of its members (psst: Vatican II is dead).
   
   
4. And what about those Mormons? Well, they're still evil, of course (and not just because they are busily posthumously baptizing as Mormons Jews who died in the Holocaust).
   
   What were the Mormons saying at their anti-gay rallies? Here is a priceless paragraph from an article in that charmingly British "newspaper" The Economist:
   

   Mr Perkins [a Mormon] informed the crowd that gay marriage and tolerant school lessons are little more than “a recruiting process for homosexual behaviour”. Anybody who doubted the connection should take a look at Europe, where homosexuality is apparently rampant.

   That "apparently rampant" line is so deliciously dry. Nice work, Economist. (But, is Mr Perkins right?)
   
   But not all Mormons are evil. There are some who stick to their progressive beliefs, like the Feminist Mormon Housewives (kudos to you, ladies!). And such dissent is not easy, as noted by a comment to Andrew Sullivan's blog. According to the commenter:
   

   Those who openly speak disagreement with the church's orthodoxy are routinely excommunicated (you can easily Google public examples, most are secret). There are reports on public websites that Mormon Bishops even questioned individual’s actions supporting Prop 8 in “Temple Interviews,” a form of confessional where members validate that they are living up to the highest church standards.

   All of which makes the intolerance of the Catholic Church look like french kissing.
   
   So how does one deal with the Mormons? What if we actually took them at their word re: their support for other gay civil rights (just not marriage)? Well, someone has had that brilliant idea! Utah is about to become a lot more progressive...
   
   
5. And then there are just the garden-variety religious nutballs. Like the execrable flat-earther and View cohost Sherri Shepherd. This Defamer headline says it all,
   

   Sherri Shepherd Vows to Defend Biblical Definition of Marriage That She Cannot Remember,

   but you should still watch the insanity here.
   
   
6. Did you know that you can see who donated money to either side in the Prop 8 struggle? The searchable database is here.
   
   Note, this database apparently only includes donations greater than $100 (as the donations of Fosco and his friends do not appear). So don't assume that absence from the database means no donation was made.
   
   
7. Finally, what are we supposed to do about Prop H8 until it is overturned? Here are some good ideas:
   
   • refuse to pay CA taxes (caution: may only work for celebrities!)
     
   • protest, protest, protest (especially at Mormon "churches")
     
   • boycott Utah (Fosco's been onboard with this one for years)
     
   • boycott people who supported Prop 8 (See, this already worked! And worked again!)
     
   • did I mention protest?

Don't Fuck with the Gays, California.

A majority of those voting on Tuesday (still only 15% of CA's total population, as I noted earlier) approved the vile Prop H8.

It's time to show California that the gays are not going to take this. It's time for a new Stonewall. So let the chaos begin.

Last night, there were protests in West Hollywood (with seven arrests!)

This afternoon, gay marriage supporters targeted the Mormon Temple in Westwood (a particularly appropriate target, I might add). One good sign from the protest: "YOU HAVE TWO WIVES I WANT ONE HUSBAND."

Rumor has it that there will be a major protest in SF tomorrow (although not specifically targeting the Mormons), which means that Fosco needs a sign! But what should it say?

Possible Signs for Fosco to Carry to Protest Prop H8

• Muck Formons.
  
• Your Daughter Is Too Ugly to Marry a Princess.
  
• At Least Our Bridemaids Wear Tasteful Dresses.
  
• Taking Away My Marriage Won't Make Yours Any Less Unfulfilling.
  
• Which of Your Rights Should We Take Away?
  
• Scared of Gays? Don't Piss Them Off.
  
• Your Pastor Is A Liar.
  

Hmmm. I'm not sure any of these works. Any suggestions, commenters?

Burn It Down

The Mormon Temple in Westwood, site of major protests today against Mormon involvement in the passage of Prop H8.

Watch out, California--here come the gays!

Things You Should Know

Here's one of those "miscellaneous" posts, in which Fosco points you toward interesting titbits of information from the last few days.

• The recipient of the world's first face transplant is somewhat ambivalent about the whole thing. Although, she is French--and, as far as I'm concerned, the French invented ambivalence.
  
  What happened to her original face? Her dog ate it. I'd just like to point out that a pug would never do that.
  
  
• Remember how fiction totally sucks unless it's actually based on real events? Well, luckily for Willem Dafoe Daniel Defoe fans, Robinson Crusoe's island has been discovered! Begin the countdown until it becomes a theme park... now!
  
  
• Do you and your wives have trouble deciding who to vote for? Well, you're in luck, you crazy Fundamentalist Mormon. Because now there is a voter's guide for you and all of your nubile teenage daughters/brides (Note: nubile teenage daughters/brides may not vote until they are 18). The article does not say who the polygamists support for president, but (and I'm just thinking out loud here) John McCain seems to have had a couple of wives...

N.B., for the next two (nail-biting) days, Fosco has embedded the widget from the brilliant poll-crunchers at fivethirtyeight.com (see the embed at top left). Fosco cannot recommend this site highly enough, especially if you (like Fosco) are

1. obsessed with Tuesday's election
   
2. "in the tank" for Obama (and might I suggest that this phrase is one of the most annoying of the whole election season?)
   
3. secretly into statistics

Enjoy!

Mormon Education Is A FRAUD.

That's right, Fosco used the F-word. And he's going to use it again:

FRAUD.

As in, "Mormon Education is a FRAUD."

Oh, and by "Mormon Education," he means Mormo State University (aka, BYU).

You may remember the nifty little calendar called "Mormons Exposed," featuring some shirtless Mormon missionary beefcake. The calendar really wasn't to Fosco's taste, but as Fosco had a college roommate with a raging hard-on for Mormons, Fosco was pleased that such a calendar exists. Not so the Mormon Church, who promptly excommunicated the calendar maker, Chad Hardy.

But now (and here's where we get to the FRAUD part), it turns out that BYU has revoked Hardy's academic degree. According to the report,

A Sept. 30 letter from Norman B. Finlinson, the school's executive director of student academic and advisement services, said a nonacademic hold was placed on Hardy's record after the church-owned university learned of the excommunication.

"If in the future you are reinstated as a member of the church in good standing, you are invited to contact my office regarding your possible eligibility for the awarding of a degree," Finlinson wrote.

Now I recognize that this kind of thing probably happens all the time at places like Bob Jones University (aka, BJU... teehee! I think I've seen that movie) or Bethel College. But at a (supposedly) national-caliber research university that is only too pleased to brag about the religious diversity of its student body? Ridiculous! I'm not sure we should be calling BYU a university anymore. So, from now on, Fosco promises to refer to that place only as BY"U" (and yes, when he does so in conversation, he will use air quotes).

Why do Mormons want to ruin everything?

"Hey little girl...

...have you ever seen a Mormon naked? Me neither."



[Picture of Mitt Romney from the Times.]

Two Truths and Lie: Haunted by Mormons.

Remember this feature? Where I offer three titbits from the news? One of which (in some small, small way) has to do with lying? Here we go...

• Those two giants of social science research, the Associated Press and MTV, released the results of a major study today on "young people and happiness." By young people, they mean 13-24 yr olds.
  
  Here's something interesting and no entirely surprising:
  

  Young people who are non-Hispanic whites are happier than blacks and Hispanics by a wide margin: 72 percent of whites say they are happy with life in general, compared with just 56 percent of blacks and 51 percent of Hispanics.

  Well, as long as the white kids are happy...
  
  Even better news:
  

  In looking to the future, 70 percent say they want to be rich - and nearly half think it's at least somewhat likely they will be someday.

  I remember thinking that when I was a teen. I wish some cynical blogger had burst my optimism back then.
  
  Fosco finds the following result most telling:
  

  And contrary to popular views of technology as a source of stress, many young people would be more stressed out without technology, with nearly half saying they never turn off their cell phones - even when they're trying to chill out.

  As someone who almost never turns his cell phone ON, Fosco now understands why he hates young people so much.
  
  
• You may remember the horrible suicide last summer of UCSC's Chancellor Denice Denton. There were several unpleasant aspects to this story, including some possible relationship issues between Denton and her partner Gretchen Kalonji (as well as the possibility that idiot student protesters may have contributed to Denton's depression).
  
  The story got sadder this weekend, with the Kalonji is suing Denton's estate because she received nothing in the will nor from Denton's life insurance policy.
  
  Now Fosco has no idea what to make of this case. Clearly there is a cautionary lesson here: if you're in a long-term relationship, you should change your will to include your partner.
  
  But this is what is bothering Fosco:
  

  UC officials declined Friday to comment on what Denton's benefits were and how they were dispersed, but according to [a Denton family attorney], Denton didn't leave the insurance money to anyone and the policy has been split between Mabee and Denton's estranged father in accordance with UC protocol.

  Again, it is clear that Denice Denton probably should have named a beneficiary of her life insurance policy. However, why wouldn't the UC system pay that life insurance to Denton's life partner of nine years? If Denton and Kalonji were legally married (you know--that thing that straight people can do?), wouldn't Denton's life insurance money go to Kalonji without trouble?
  
  Gay people just keep getting hosed.
  
  
• The 2008 US News College Rankings are out! Princeton continues its dominance; Fosco's alma mater Harvard is still pretty good.
  
  But what of UC Santa Cruz? Apparently, UCSC is about where it usually sits (#79), but now it is TIED for #79 with... MORMONS. That's right, Bringem Young University is tied with ultraliberal UCSC.
  
  You know how Fosco feels about Mormons, so you can appreciate the irony here. I've been thinking of ways to resolve this problem: can UCSC challenge BYU to a tiebreaker?
  
  Suggested tiebreakers that UCSC would win:
  
  • bong painting contest
    
  • Diet Coke chugging
    
  • blow-job-a-thon
    
  • evolutionary biology quiz
    
  • surfing
    
  • voting for change
  
  That's my school! Go Slugs!

Fosco's New Year

Because of The Accident, Fosco's New Year's Eve plans were a bit less adventurous than usual (NSFW, but a must-see as it is very strange). Fosco's family is still in town, so he spent the evening sitting at home making fun of things with his sister, Maggie Tulliver.

What did we do?

• watched the series finale of Arrested Development. And although I hate to say it, while AD may not have the narrative drive and suspense of a drama like Veronica Mars, it is actually a better show.
  
• watched Bollywood trailers on the internet.
  
• discovered that Mormon cinema is called "Mollywood." Here's a description of one of those Mormon films: "Sons of Provo (2004). Mockumentary about an LDS boy-band named Everclean." It sounds kind of funny, but I'm sure the Mormons found some way to prevent that. Ugh, Mormons.
  
• discovered the Jollywood Moving Picture Co., which appears to be some sort of training project for teens with video cameras. Here's a sentence (from a description of one of their films) that made my sister and me laugh heartily for almost 10 minutes: " The movies [sic] style was influenced by the mockumentary "Dog Show" starring Eugene Levy." I love that sentence so much.
  
• watched the musical numbers from Moulin Rouge!.
  
• and finally, as midnight approached, we couldn't bear to count down with either Ryan Seacrest or Carson Daly (they make our eyes bleed, they do). Instead, we did the countdown en español on Univision.
  

How's that for an exciting New Year's Eve?

If you want to read about a productive/party-filled NYE, visit Ted. He spent time at some place called "The Hole," which practically makes me tingle with curiosity.