Mississippi still racist. In Other News? Water is still wet.

The fine folks of Mississippi's Republican Party, when polled (N=440) about politics and social issues expressed that 46% of them would prefer interracial marriage be illegal. Not shocking, but the implications are telling all the same...


http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_MS_0407915.pdf

Q14 Do you think interracial marriage should be
legal or illegal?
Legal
40%
...............................................................
46%
Illegal ..............................................................
Not sure 14%

Well, it just confirms the idea that unsurprisingly entire pockets of the deep south have through sheer force of will have managed to avoid reality and modernity. It further underscores a much more important idea: that left to popular vote, the ability or right for interracial couples to marry whom the see fit would- if 46% of the sample had its way, be illegal. The collective rights of the American people should never be left up to the musings of a popular vote, as the old biases tend to be pervasive regardless of whether or not we naively expect others to do the "right thing". The "Will of the People"(tm) is not always right or fair. It was, after all, only 1967 when Loving v. the Supreme Court of Virginia decided that Interracial marriage ought to be decriminalized. There are more than one types of American culture, some of which exist in the present, some of which pine for the days past. These sort of intra-generational divides I have a feeling will grow more pronounced as the Baby Boom generation advances. Gay marriage, interracial marriage, the sudden and xenophobic fear of all things sharia...all growing pains social conservatives can't bring themselves get out of the past long enough to see clearly... and seem desperate to counteract at the cost of the liberties of others.

(And the always great Arcade Fire, for your reading and listening pleasure. )

(Not a) SuperJihad.

Another great post from ComicsAlliance underscoring the appauling trend of indignation about the inherent dangers of reading about the muslim faith (or characters who are possibly muslim or from middle eastern countries in this case)--->children converting to Islam----> America under sharia law!!! The terror! The panic! The McCarthy era scare tactic!

Its not the best leap of logic in the universe to object to the use of characters from a geographic region of the world loosely associated with a religion that is not uniformly associated with deplorable acts of terrorism (extremism occurs in any religion and culture). Its an even bigger facepalm when reactionary right wing media pundits are doing so BEFORE knowing anything about the actual stories, characters or plot of said story.

From what I can tell, the 99 is a comic story about a group of super heroes that come from the Islamic cultures and vary broadly (as a lot of world cultures are influenced by Islam in some way) that intends to add nuance to a largely hegemonic comic book genre. Interchangeably bland silver age characters your thing? Stick with with the great American boyscout-Superman (though his is the ultimate immigration story, with the boy from another world being adopted and acculturated to "Truth, Justice and the American way"). The mere fact that stories about characters who are Muslim are accessible does not mean that anyone is forcing a particular culture on anyone. Should someone read it, and by proxy glean some residual understanding of cultures outside your own (arguably), all the better, but is a safe bet that learning about something or someone different from their own culture in a comic book or cartoon is not going to automatically make your children run off to join the Taliban. Is it troubling to anyone else that certain segments of society are treating information, awareness and diversity as though its some sort of contagious disease? The fearmongering and kneejerk angry mobbing this perhaps skewed idea of Islam is even more problematic when we stop to think that there are large numbers of Muslim Americans in this country who a.) do not practice Sharia Law and have no desire to and b.) moved to or live in the US of A for a REASON, and despite having a faith that differs in some ways from Christianity, are just as thankful for the freedoms bestowed on the American citizenry as any flag waving conservative. Its more likely that governments that enforce and codify sharia law are problematic, not the entirety of Islam itself. Any suggestion otherwise seems tone deaf and blithely oblivious to the world around us comics like this are attempting to diversify. Its entirely possible this is going to be a shoddy comic (as I'm not sure about the art or script so far) but its heart is 100% in the right place. While people from the Midwest travel to Manhattan to protest against "them terrorists" and "protect" a city they feel are decadent, sinful and elitist any other time, I think more knowledge and awareness is just what we need. And fast.

In other news: Wednesday =New Comic Book Day! Marvel Solicits for January 2011 are out. Some story lines like "the Age of X" are in the works that at the moment look pretty vague. Oliver Coipel is mentioned, so vague, but damn pretty. What's looking sweet?

UNCANNY X-MEN #532
Written by MATT FRACTION & KIERON GILLEN
Pencils & Cover by GREG LAND
“QUARANTINE”
When your very body is betraying you, and you see life leaking out of your friends drop by drop, what would you give up for the cure? Cyclops discovers what the Sublime Corporation wants. Can he afford to pay it? Meanwhile, Emma Frost and Sebastian Shaw reminisce over old times VIA THE STRONG LANGUAGE OF PUGILISM. Part 3 (of 5)
32 PGS./Rated T+ …$3.99



Emma. Sodding. Frost. and hell, any comic solicit that uses the word "pugilism" gets some love from me.

Neither Fair Nor Balanced.

Its interesting that the Washington Post is willing to provide the "balanced" viewpoint of the esteemed Tony Perkins (head of the dubiously named Family "Research" Council) in the wake of the epidemic of gay suicides. Sure, yes, further indotrinate the idea that gay people are degenerates and see how much that helps. Something I think its interesting about how gay issues are handeld in the media is that when a gay rights issue comes up, there's point and counterpoint; most of the time provided of someone from Perkins' rolodex. The last word is given to that of the "family value" set, and the news organization calls it a day. Its troubling though how so few dialouges about anti-semitism or racism are presented with counterpoint from Matt Hale from the Church of the Creator... is it ethical or even logical to provide platforms for gay issues to institutions that will adhere to their blind, dehumanizing biases regardless of the reprocussions?

The impressivley documented blog Good As You does an amazing job debunking Perkins editorial barbs:

So yea, in short: FRC's body of work is made up of some enormously jaw-dropping
charges, the likes of which unabashedly dehumanize LGBT people and their allies.
Charges that have all gone down under Tony's watch/embrace. Yet despite the
record, Tony is constantly afforded the opportunity to throw on a suit, fire up
the talking point machine, and take to one of our nation's esteemed mainstream
media outlets, identified as little more than a "from the right" voice of
political dissent. On "Face The Nation." On CNN. And now in The Washington
Post's "On Faith" column, where Tony has been granted a forum to peddle his
views about homosexuality itself being the reason why so many gay kids suffer,
and that "change" through Jesus is the best remedy for bullying/suicide/crimes
of bias.

My only pressing question would be what would compell the Post to publish a tirade from Perkins and not one from David Duke (as their biases against particular groups have both made their careers)? What do you make of this, friends and neighbors(s)?