![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
featherofeeling also links us to NYTimes coverage of same.lord_whimsy informs us of the return of the monocle.Dec. 14th, 2009
featherofeeling also links us to NYTimes coverage of same.lord_whimsy informs us of the return of the monocle.
charity list: your input needed
Dec. 14th, 2009 12:45 pmIt's the holiday season and in the US, approaching the end of the year deadline for charitable donations to put on the tax returns we have to file in April.
This is where I ask you all to link us to the non-profit organizations you support. Poverty relief, arts, scholarship, whatever. Next week (Monday or Tuesday, I'll let you know), I'll put up a big list with everything sorted into categories.
Comments are screened.
A few guidelines:
- This isn't where we post LJ'ers who need help. Many people aren't comfortable giving that way, and I try only to post links to people I know personally or people I know personally can vouch for or for whom I have other reasons to know are absolutely telling the truth. If you know of a case like that and want me to boost the signal, just let me know with a PM or something, and I'll do what I can.
- I will allow links activist organizations I agree with in their own category. Which means Lambda Legal gets a link and National Organization for Marriage doesn't. This sort of stuff is AT MY DISCRETION. But feel free to suggest it, but know it might not get linked.
- I will allow links to religious charities helping the needy (or restoring a historical building or whatever) as long as they don't refuse to help the needy on the basis of religion, LGBTQ-status, immigration status or actively divert funds to anti-choice, anti-gay or other discriminatory causes. (Which means I will not link to the Salvation Army, but probably have no problems with your church's local soup kitchen).
- Non-US causes/organizations very, very welcome.
- Micro-finance organizations where loans repaid are not tax-deductible under US law are welcome.
- Charity funds set up to honor specific individuals (deceased or not, fictional or not) welcome.
- Harm-reduction causes (i.e., needle exchanges) welcome.
- Animal-welfare orgs totally okay.
- Organizations needing non-cash donations (airline mileage, clothes, canned goods, etc.) or volunteers welcome.
- I can't research everything. My list may be imperfect. You are responsible for researching the charities you donate to.
- This is your opportunity to boost the signal for local or small organizations we might otherwise have not have heard of.
This is where I ask you all to link us to the non-profit organizations you support. Poverty relief, arts, scholarship, whatever. Next week (Monday or Tuesday, I'll let you know), I'll put up a big list with everything sorted into categories.
Comments are screened.
A few guidelines:
- This isn't where we post LJ'ers who need help. Many people aren't comfortable giving that way, and I try only to post links to people I know personally or people I know personally can vouch for or for whom I have other reasons to know are absolutely telling the truth. If you know of a case like that and want me to boost the signal, just let me know with a PM or something, and I'll do what I can.
- I will allow links activist organizations I agree with in their own category. Which means Lambda Legal gets a link and National Organization for Marriage doesn't. This sort of stuff is AT MY DISCRETION. But feel free to suggest it, but know it might not get linked.
- I will allow links to religious charities helping the needy (or restoring a historical building or whatever) as long as they don't refuse to help the needy on the basis of religion, LGBTQ-status, immigration status or actively divert funds to anti-choice, anti-gay or other discriminatory causes. (Which means I will not link to the Salvation Army, but probably have no problems with your church's local soup kitchen).
- Non-US causes/organizations very, very welcome.
- Micro-finance organizations where loans repaid are not tax-deductible under US law are welcome.
- Charity funds set up to honor specific individuals (deceased or not, fictional or not) welcome.
- Harm-reduction causes (i.e., needle exchanges) welcome.
- Animal-welfare orgs totally okay.
- Organizations needing non-cash donations (airline mileage, clothes, canned goods, etc.) or volunteers welcome.
- I can't research everything. My list may be imperfect. You are responsible for researching the charities you donate to.
- This is your opportunity to boost the signal for local or small organizations we might otherwise have not have heard of.
r's and m's
Dec. 14th, 2009 09:28 pmIn the last year, I've noticed a peculiar trend in my writing that goes back decades. I have an awful lot of protagonists named Martin, and I think I know why.
You see, if my name weren't Racheline, I'm pretty sure it would be Martin. This is not what my parents would have named me had I come out with different bits (what they would have named me had I "been a boy" in the traditional sense of things is completely unknown to me and I think I'd be off-put, quite frankly, by the process of asking and answering). It's also far from my favorite male name. But it's the one people tell me over and over I should use: as a pen name, or a drag name, or, you know, just if I decide I want a male name. Or something.
And it feels okay on me. Pretty solid really. Like a secret I don't know how to tell you. I think I'm awfully comfy in those m's and r's. And plus, I know the long list of names I can't have: Most men aren't cool enough to be named Jack, and you really have to like dogs to have that name; I don't like dog. To be frank, they make me a bit nervous. Meanwhile Richard shortens to Dick, and that's always unfortunate when you keep yours in your dresser. Nicholas, well that feels too delicate even for me.
So Martin. Sure. Why not? Martin.
But I can't be Martin. Because I keep writing about men named Martin. Over and over and over again. And that's the thing, you can't name yourself after your own characters. Not at all. Not ever. Nope. And if I can't be Martin, then I don't have to make the choice described in Why James Chartrand Wears Women's Underpants, which for me wouldn't even feel all that much like a deception, just maybe a lot of work on the days when I do feel like wearing a dress (that's the annoying thing about me, I wear the dressy clothes assigned to either gender really fucking well, and anything I do well I tend to like).
So this is what I mean when I say as part of my very long explanation of my gender identity that for political reasons I will always, on some level, be female.
Read the link. This shit sucks. It sucks for women. And it sucks for everyone who ever has to walk through the middle of this gender thing.
And it sucks for someone with a name like mine -- that's fantastic as a brand, but is weird and unwieldy as an actual thing for actual people to call me and makes people angry, like it's more than someone with a cunt deserves.
You see, if my name weren't Racheline, I'm pretty sure it would be Martin. This is not what my parents would have named me had I come out with different bits (what they would have named me had I "been a boy" in the traditional sense of things is completely unknown to me and I think I'd be off-put, quite frankly, by the process of asking and answering). It's also far from my favorite male name. But it's the one people tell me over and over I should use: as a pen name, or a drag name, or, you know, just if I decide I want a male name. Or something.
And it feels okay on me. Pretty solid really. Like a secret I don't know how to tell you. I think I'm awfully comfy in those m's and r's. And plus, I know the long list of names I can't have: Most men aren't cool enough to be named Jack, and you really have to like dogs to have that name; I don't like dog. To be frank, they make me a bit nervous. Meanwhile Richard shortens to Dick, and that's always unfortunate when you keep yours in your dresser. Nicholas, well that feels too delicate even for me.
So Martin. Sure. Why not? Martin.
But I can't be Martin. Because I keep writing about men named Martin. Over and over and over again. And that's the thing, you can't name yourself after your own characters. Not at all. Not ever. Nope. And if I can't be Martin, then I don't have to make the choice described in Why James Chartrand Wears Women's Underpants, which for me wouldn't even feel all that much like a deception, just maybe a lot of work on the days when I do feel like wearing a dress (that's the annoying thing about me, I wear the dressy clothes assigned to either gender really fucking well, and anything I do well I tend to like).
So this is what I mean when I say as part of my very long explanation of my gender identity that for political reasons I will always, on some level, be female.
Read the link. This shit sucks. It sucks for women. And it sucks for everyone who ever has to walk through the middle of this gender thing.
And it sucks for someone with a name like mine -- that's fantastic as a brand, but is weird and unwieldy as an actual thing for actual people to call me and makes people angry, like it's more than someone with a cunt deserves.
LJ is about to require that all users specify whether they are male or female. This will apply both to new account creation and existing accounts. The current "unspecified" option will be removed.
Requiring people to specify their gender is surely just an attempt to acquire demographic data either for ad sales or an attempt to sell LJ once again. However, this is probably a bad strategy -- leave the "unspecified" option and only 1% or 2% of your userbase will choose it. Tell us you're taking it away, and watch 20% of us choose it.
Why does this matter? Really?
Well, it says people like me don't exist (although I just discovered I didn't have unspecified selected until like ten minutes ago, so I fail there, just in terms of full disclosure and all that). It tells people that they know less about their gender than a company. And that the needs of advertising are more important than who they really are. It implies that people have a right to know what's in your pants (whether you're male, female or somewhere else on a spectrum) regardless of whether they'll ever meet you.
But particularly, it's unwelcoming to many LGBTQIA people, and LJ already has a history of being, at best, clumsy towards this community (a community of which I identify with more letters than not).
Additionally, it may be (working on links) once the code push goes through, after you choose your gender when creating an account, you can't change it later (can anyone confirm that gender is to be removed from the editable profile fields? commenters are discussing, may just be rumour, leaving in here for now). That's a lovely bit of bullshit there for people who transition to deal with; I wonder what "proof" LJ will require to change it -- if they'll change it.
And what happens to people who are basically forced to lie because of only two options? Lying on account creation is a TOS'able offense. Do you really think anyone should have to ask if their man or woman enough to be on LJ? Isn't this ludicrous? And offensive? And sort of a disaster?
Practically, this is one of those things that probably has no relevance for most of you. But for some of us it's a tiny little splinter that yet somehow manages to hobble. And for some of us, it's just simply everything.
So many of us learn to construct and define our gender on LJ. It's pretty tacky when they effectively ask us to lie about ourselves and claim it never happened.
Details and what you can do here: http://synecdochic.dreamwidth.org/366609.html
Requiring people to specify their gender is surely just an attempt to acquire demographic data either for ad sales or an attempt to sell LJ once again. However, this is probably a bad strategy -- leave the "unspecified" option and only 1% or 2% of your userbase will choose it. Tell us you're taking it away, and watch 20% of us choose it.
Why does this matter? Really?
Well, it says people like me don't exist (although I just discovered I didn't have unspecified selected until like ten minutes ago, so I fail there, just in terms of full disclosure and all that). It tells people that they know less about their gender than a company. And that the needs of advertising are more important than who they really are. It implies that people have a right to know what's in your pants (whether you're male, female or somewhere else on a spectrum) regardless of whether they'll ever meet you.
But particularly, it's unwelcoming to many LGBTQIA people, and LJ already has a history of being, at best, clumsy towards this community (a community of which I identify with more letters than not).
Additionally, it may be (working on links) once the code push goes through, after you choose your gender when creating an account, you can't change it later (can anyone confirm that gender is to be removed from the editable profile fields? commenters are discussing, may just be rumour, leaving in here for now). That's a lovely bit of bullshit there for people who transition to deal with; I wonder what "proof" LJ will require to change it -- if they'll change it.
And what happens to people who are basically forced to lie because of only two options? Lying on account creation is a TOS'able offense. Do you really think anyone should have to ask if their man or woman enough to be on LJ? Isn't this ludicrous? And offensive? And sort of a disaster?
Practically, this is one of those things that probably has no relevance for most of you. But for some of us it's a tiny little splinter that yet somehow manages to hobble. And for some of us, it's just simply everything.
So many of us learn to construct and define our gender on LJ. It's pretty tacky when they effectively ask us to lie about ourselves and claim it never happened.
Details and what you can do here: http://synecdochic.dreamwidth.org/366609.html