Who Cares If He Called Him Legless? In Britain 'legless' Means Drunk!!

Once again, in my opinion, the world is replaying that old favorite Much Ado About Nothing. What is the big deal? Anyone who knows who John Cleese is also knows that what the Monty Python crew finds funny is a far cry from what mainstream America laughs at! And after all the complaining about his comment, we find out that all he said was that Pistorius was drunk!! Good for him if he came up with a two-pronged slam on Pistorius! LOL Since when does anyone have a problem with a comedian 'dissing' someone? No one said a word when every comdian in the world made jokes about O.J,; No one had a problem when it was Tony Blake. Let me guess; Is it the fact that his legs have been amputated that make Oscar Pistorius such a special case, that makes him untouchable when it comes to legless jokes? If so, isn't that doing the one thing that most people with disabilities don't want,  singling them out for special treatment?  If that man is strong enough to accomplish all that he has in life, he's damn sure strong enough to withstand the tweets of comedians. 

Monty Python’s John Cleese angers Twitter with inappropriate Pistorius comment

• CELEBRITY
• FEBRUARY 17, 2013
• BY: CARLA IVES
• Subscribe

John Cleese got his Twitter followers in a snit over a seemingly tasteless tweet regarding Oscar Pistorius

Credits: 

Mark Metcalfe/Getty Images

According to the Huffington Post on Feb. 16, actor/comedian John Cleese, star of TV, films and a Monty Python alumnus really aggravated fans and non-fans alike with a seemingly tasteless tweet about the Oscar Pistorius murder case. Those who remember Monty Python’s Flying Circus know that their specialty was totally tasteless humor.

When the news broke that Oscar Pistoriuswas being charged with the murder of his girlfriend, Reeva Steenkamp, Cleese tweeted:

“Oscar’s defence will be that he was absolutely legless at the time.” (Defence is the proper British spelling of defense.)

That tweet garnered almost 2,500 re-tweets and 585 favorites in a very short time, not all of them complimentary.

@LevParikian: “John Cleese broke a twitter silence to make a Pistorius joke. My 11-year-old self, the one who fell in love with Fawlty Towers, is crying.”

@rayascott: “Again, comedians on Twitter: so NOT funny.”

John Cleese followed up with, “Sorry if the last tweet was a bit naughty.”

Was Cleese just following in Monty Python’s footsteps or was it a misunderstanding due to English versus American speech patterns? An update to the story informs readers that the phrase “absolutely legless” is a British expression meaning “drunk.”

In Honor of Deoni Jones D.C. Council Introduces Bill

D.C. Council introduces bill to allow transgender residents to obtain new birth certificates

Posted by John Riley | February 19, 2013 3:18 PM | Permalink 
Retrieved from MetroWeekly thru LGBTinDC 2/21/13

D.C. lawmakers are rallying around a bill introduced Tuesday that would amend the Vital Records Act of 1981 to allow transgender individuals born in the District more easily obtain new birth certificates reflecting correct gender and, in some cases, new name.
The bill, co-introduced by Councilmembers David Catania (I-At Large), David Grosso (I-At Large), Muriel Bowser (D-Ward 4), Kenyan McDuffie (D-Ward 5), Mary Cheh (D-Ward 3), Tommy Wells (D-Ward 6), Jack Evans (D-Ward 2) and Jim Graham (D-Ward 1), and co-sponsored by the remaining members of the D.C. Council, has been named the "JaParker Deoni Jones Birth Certificate Equality Amendment Act of 2013," in honor of the transgender woman who died last year after being stabbed in the face while waiting at a Northeast bus stop.
According to Andy Bowen, social policy organizer for the DC Trans Coalition (DCTC), the bill is a technical modernization of D.C.’s laws to enable individuals who transition genders to have their sex and name, if applicable, recorded on their birth certificates. That change will make it easier for individuals who need to use their birth certificate as proof of identification for common activities ranging from finding employment to obtaining a new driver’s license to applying for a passport.
The first major element of the proposed bill requires that a new birth certificate reflecting a person’s expressed gender be issued upon receipt of a written and signed request from the individual born in the District (or the applicant's parent, guardian or legal representative in the case of a minor) and a signed statement from a licensed health care provider who has treated or evaluated the person applying for a new certificate, which attests that the applicant has received treatment for a gender transition. That new certificate will be substituted for the original birth certificate, with the original being sealed and made available only upon the request of the individual to whom it pertains or by court order.
Such procedures bring the District in line with policies currently used by the State Department regarding gender reassignment, Bowen said.
The second major element of the bill exempts individuals transitioning from having to fulfill publication requirements that once required those in the process of transitioning gender to publish their names in a newspaper for three consecutive weeks.
"The bill lowers the risk of outing, and thus, discrimination, allowing trans people in D.C. to live freer and safer lives," Bowen told Metro Weekly in an interview Tuesday.
The bill has not yet been scheduled for a hearing, but is slated for a hearing before two committees – the Committee on Health, chaired by Councilmember Yvette Alexander (D-Ward 7), and the Committee on the Judiciary and Public Safety, chaired by Wells – before it receives a vote from the full D.C. Council.
Bowen told Metro Weekly that the bill will likely receive a hearing in front of the Committee on Health sometime in April, but there has been no word on when it will be taken up by the Judiciary Committee.

[Photo: Councilmember David Catania, photographed by Todd Franson/Metro Weekly]

Suing Here, Suing There, Suing Everywhere; and For What?

    It was my intention to write today about this litigious society we live in, and about all the frivolous cases we've heard of over the years. Then while reading news headlines I ran across this story about angry people and racism, and decided to use it instead. This is, to me, just another example of how ridiculous our society has gotten about the whole 'racism' thing. Now I'm not saying that there isn't any such thing. There is, and in some places a lot of it. This story is more about how just how far people have taken "playing the race card".

Sports Illustrated Called Racist For Using 'Exotic' People In Swimsuit Issue

The newest edition of Sports Illustrated's Swimsuit Issue is getting a lot of buzz for the wrong reasons this week, with critics charging that the global pictorials are racist and reinforce bad stereotypes.

This year the heralded swimsuit issue decided on a seven continents theme, with its bikini-clad models posing in countries around the world. The problem for some, however, is who the models were posed with.

Instead of sticking to exotic backdrops, some of the models are featured standing next to people allegedly representing the various countries--an editorial decision that makes the "native people" tantamount to exotic props.

Jezebel's Dodai Stewart takes specific offense to two pictures, one from China, and another from Namibia.

In a shot taken in a picture taken on a river in Guilin, Guangxi, model Anne V., who is white and blonde, sits on a raft piloted by an elderly Chinese man:

This photo cements stereotypes, perpetuates an imbalance in the power dynamic, is reminiscent of centuries of colonialism (and indentured servitude) and serves as a good example of both creating a centrality of whiteness and using "exotic" people as fashion props.

Besides which, the picture represents a specific decision to portray China as "non-Western" and "backward." As Shanghaiist notes, in Sports Illustrated's view "China is poverty and 'ethnic' clothing, not the world's second largest economy where the majority of people live in cities rather than the countryside."

The second controversial shot, featuring Emily DiDonato in an African desert, also include a tribal-looking, half-naked man carrying a spear:

These shots tap into the West's past obsession/fetishization with so-called savages, jungle comics and the like. Again: In a visit to seven continents, this image is what Sports Illustrated is using to represent the continent of Africa.

David Leonard, Ph.D., Associate Professor in the Department of Critical Culture, Gender, and Race Studies at Washington State University, told Yahoo! Shine he understands why some might find the pictures offensive.

"These photos depict people of color as exotic backdrops," Leonard said. "Beyond functioning as props, as scenery to authenticate their third world adventures, people of color are imagined as servants, as the loyal helpers, as existing for white western pleasure, amusement, and enjoyment."

In contrast, cover model Kate Upton, photographed in Antarctica, has penguins in her background.

Shooting fashion spreads in exotic locales has caused controversy in the past, of course -- remember when J. Crew raised eyebrows with a Bali shoot featuring local kids? Magazines have also found themselves in hot water over exoticizing cultures for the sake of a fashion shoot. Vogue Italia took a serious misstep in 2011 when they decided to call hoop earrings "Slave Earrings" on their website.

Meanwhile, some people have argued the whole Sports Illustrated debacle has been blown out of proportion. Unsurprisingly, a story on Fox Nation titled "Liberals Call SI Swimsuit Issue Racist" was filled with comments in support of the magazine.

Do you find any of the photos offensive?

Why Are Gays Wasting Their Time This Way?

While gays certainly have a right to protest in any way they see fit, personally, (as a lesbian) I feel that there are more productive protests they could be conducting.  At the end of the day what have they accomplished? Nothing. No one is thinking about what they're hoping for, all they're thinking about is the stupidity of anyone who goes down to apply for something that they know they're not going to get. ( Not saying that they were stupid, saying that is what the anti-gay marriage folks are probably thinking, IMO.) If it was legal but the city wasn't giving them out, that would be a good reason to hold that type of rally. If the city was giving them out but one person inside wouldn't, that would be a good reason. To me (again as a mature, all the way OUT lesbian) this was a complete waste of energy and effort that could have gone into something more productive. Strictly my opinion of course, live from Bikini Bottom; your mileage may vary.

GAY RIGHTS RALLY Same-Sex Couples Try To Apply For Marriage Licenses; Opponents Also Turn Out For Rally

Huntington , Cabell County , West Virginia 

Reported by:  Darrah Wilcox
Videographer: Kenney Barnette
Web Producer: Jeff Morris                                                    Video From West Virginia's Eyewitness News
Also Contributing: Dave Benton
Reported: Feb. 14, 2013 12:50 PM EST
Updated: Feb. 14, 2013 10:00 PM EST

About a dozen same-sex couples walked into the Cabell County Clerk's Office to try to apply for marriage licenses Thursday morning during a rally by a group of gay rights activists and supporters. 

Justin Murdock helped organize the event. "You know a man and a woman can meet out here on the sidewalk and go in and get a license, but my partner and I who have been together for over two years now, we're in a committed. We have a home together. We're a part of this community, a part of our church. We still can't get a license." 

He and his partner went into the Cabell County courthouse Thursday to apply for a marriage license. 
"We know we're going to get turned down, but we don't think that's right. 

He's not alone. Several other same sex couples applied for a license this Valentine's Day. 

Jessica Crum also went with her partner. She said, ""We're American citizens, we're patriots, and at the end of the day we deserve equal rights." 

Many friends turned out to support them. Raine Klover is straight and married, but helped organized the equality rally. Klover said, "I believe that equality is universal. That everyone deserves the right to be married, to love the person that they love, and to have the rights and privileges that marriage confers. " 

While there were some counter-protesters, the group decided collectively to ignore them. 

Murdock said, "We're here with a message about love and equality. From our standpoint there here with a negative of hate and inequality. 

Although gay marriage is not recognized in the state of West Virginia, couples wanted the act of applying for licenses to represent their hope for a change in that law. 

Murdock said even though they were denied a license, he felt the message was successful, and they're not ready to give up. "We'll keep applying until we can get one." 

The group of gay rights activists and supporters held the same event last year on Valentine's Day and this year the demonstration has grown.

Don't Step On a Crack! Or You Might End Up Like This!

    On January 29th, 2013 I was leaving home to go to work, and BLAM! I trip over a crack in the sidewalk and go crashing face down, elbow down, knee down, ankle down...

 

 Here it is, February 17th, and I have been to the emergency room and two doctors, have an appointment to see an orthopedic surgeon, haven't been to work, and spend most of
my time in bed. My knee was swollen till it looked like a bullseye (left) and I couldn't get a shoe on my foot. I had stitches in my eyebrow and a black eye, and the doctor was worried that I'd broken my cheekbone. (I hadn't.) Now my kneecap is pointing off to the left instead of straight ahead, and I walk like Quasimodo trying to pull the bell cord. 


    And that's just one of the many great things that have happened to me! The week before the accident I'd unexpectedly had to leave a place that I loved working in. (Can't say the job was perfect, but it was okay.) I say unexpectedly because even though someone working a contract can be let go at any time, I was never given any reason to suppose that I would be leaving before the contract ended, at least not without some advance notice. Guess how much notice I got? TWO WEEKS! Like that's really time to go out and find another job, especially in our economy!!! And the explanation? "The client says you're not a good fit." WTF??? What does that mean????

    They say there's always a silver lining, so I've spent a lot of my time here in bed talking to my cat and looking for it...I really can't see it, but I did realize that I wasn't really "kicked to the curb"; at least the kick wasn't as hard as I first thought. The company that I actually work for has bent over backwards to work with me so that I had some income (before I fell) and more importantly, so I can keep my medical benefits. I wouldn't have been able to go to the doctor at all if not for them, so I am seriously grateful about that. (Think I should send a thank you note to the program manager? Maybe one of those edible fruit baskets, she looks like she'd enjoy that...)

    So, I'm back in the job hunting rat race. Filling out and sending in the applications, tailoring my resumes, choosing should I send a cover letter or not.... If anyone knows of an opening for a badly limping grandmother with years of clerical experience including 5 in the federal government as an Administrative Assistant, puh-leeeze let me know!!! 

I'm still here.... Live From Bikini Bottom!