How To...

Make an article of yours run and run without ever stopping? Take notes from el presidente of Pickled Politics, the one and only Sunny Hundal - put 'anti-Muslim' in the title, and I swear it's like a Pavlovian dog to the 'intelligentsia' that frequent the site. I use quotation marks because there are (inevitably) some nuts, and I am on it too... :-P

So yeah, for all you 'lovers, haters and anticipators' (own coinage! :-P), this is the 'How-To' post. It's not your usual 'How To,' so don't expect to see me dancing about with a monkey wrench (yes, I linked to it just in case you, like me, had utterly no idea what the hell it is. Terrifying looking thing, and to top it all off, it comes from a site called 'Manic Collector'. Brilliant). Nor will I be dancing about with any monkeys, though I may well dance at an unspecified future point of this evening.

Other things I will not be telling you how to do:
- Bake a stained-glass window biscuit (though I would LOVE to do that)
- How to fix your temperamental heating (set the neighbourhood poltergeist on it?)
- Be graceful and ladylike when farting (absolutely, scientifically bloody impossible. If you do not even let a giggle slip, you are qu. clearly an android. Pity my poor man :-P).

Now that I am done with eating my apple-that-tasted-like-mushrooms and a curiously pleasantly artificial-tasting bag of mini 'Snack-a-Jacks', I will proceed to the main 'How To' of this post.


How to... reconcile Julie Bindel and Laurie Penny?

Most of y'all (except for Rumbold) will probably be wondering 'what de haile' I am talking about (sorry, I couldn't resist... The DOs & DON'Ts crack me up).

I am referring to this:

http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2008/10/25/pantomime-dames

That's right. So important is this link that I refer to that I have actually abstained from insinuating it snugly within my text, and displayed it brazen and bold. I will understand if some of the comments bore you, but verily there are quite a few of those fascinatingly bitchy Internet-car-crash moments that make you wonder why the hell everyone is taking all dis shit so SERIUSS, man, iss juss da Internet, innit?

(Sorry, I've obviously been too long without going home / being woken up by 'rudebwoi' freshers and evidently I'm hankering. OMG, maybe I miss my brother!).

What is of interest (to me, anyway) here is how the author, the lovely Laurie, presents a distance between herself and Julie Bindel (it must be said that the version of the article posted on Laurie's own blog is much more complete and better articulates her viewpoint). Cath Elliott took her to task over her attacks on JB in the article, but as somebody who views themselves as a 'feminist', I'm going to be uber-patronising and try to join the dots between the two... hence the 'reconciliation.'

Firstly, in partially echoing CE, I would say: if you, Laurie, judge JB on comments she made over a year ago and has since apparently expressed regret for, are you not as bad as her (and her ilk), who attack transfolk because they see only biologically-determined sex and refuse the mutability of gender?

Secondly, assuming that JB should be accepting of transfolk is highly naive. Many gays and lesbians have fought to define themselves beyond the frequent and narrow societal dismissals of 'effeminate' or 'butch'. Hence the term 'queer' being 'reclaimed' from its 'hetero' context and being applied to (for just one example) 'Queer Studies', which seeks to revisit history from a LGBT perspective, providing a more nuanced view of history in the process I would say. Acceptance has much more to do with personal politics (i.e. your outlook on life, whether liberal, conservative or whatever) and security in oneself - both of which are entirely subjective. I think there may be a little 'liberal assumption' occurring on Laurie's part here. 'Gay' does not mean 'open-minded' or 'liberal', even though it often seems like it should.

JB, as a renowned militant-feminist-lesbian, has obviously defined herself (and thus carved out a career!) on very specific (some might say absolute) terms. Hence, the performative element that comes with transfolk - performance of a gender - is presumably problematic for her and her ilk. I suspect they see it as inauthenticity, as betrayal. Looking at her picture, I would point out some hypocrisy - is she, in refusing to wear obvious make-up and having short hair, not simply seeking to enact the same image rebellion? The only difference with her is that she happens to be 'shored up' by biological sex.

Laurie expresses near-identical sentiments to these with more eloquence towards the end of her own blog post (as I mentioned earlier). JB and co. need to remember that transfolk 'challenge' not just their own gender identity but that of heterosexuals too. I will refer here to Isis, the ANTM hopeful. Note the snarky comment about 'packing (Hint, Hint)a few more goods than the rest of this season’s competitors' and that too from a site that I initially thought was less bitchy than most!

Why this continual reduction of transfolk to an object of amusement or ridicule? Given what I learned in QS last year (:-D), it is because they are easier to handle that way. You can brush 'em off without thinking about it. Yet even within the most blatantly satirical depictions of femininity or masculinity by drag queens and kings, is a questioning of our gender norms. That's the point of all satire, after all, isn't it? If you react badly to it, then you're missing the point. You're stuck on the corner of the bigger picture.

Referring to what drag kings and queens do as 'satire,' by the way, is not meant to be in the least detrimental. Rather, I think, unwittingly or not, there's something ingenious about the whole thing. In a world which often feels like it's getting blacker-and-whiter by the day, transfolk and their reality are a much-needed burst of grey. I personally see them as mirrors - mirrors of the fact that life is not fixed and stable as we would like it to be, but fluid and perpetually in flux. Sex and gender are a part of life and are thus equally subject to change. 'Is nothing sacred any more?' Don't think so, and why should it bloody well be, anyway? :-D Surely that is a message that would unite Laurie and Julie!

The real Q here is: on what grounds did Stonewall choose Bindel for their Journalist of The Year award? And how was she selected? Perhaps there was a shortage of sufficiently trans-friendly journalists? I'd say that rather than attacking the nominee, it might be more fruitful to turn our attention upon those who nominated her...?


(Seriously) Recommended Reading:

http://www.thefword.org.uk/features/2008/10/incitement_to_r
http://www.thefword.org.uk/reviews/2008/09/uglies
http://www.thefword.org.uk/reviews/2008/09/the_perfect_vag

(Warning: the last one is really rather graphic).


This week, yours truly has been listening to Helicopter Girl - How To Steal The World (but only tracks 1-4 and 10!), Alphabeat - Boyfriend (oh, the cringeworthy joy of simultaneously: oddly Christmas-bell infectious music matched with utterly teenage self-indulgent lyrics, and Swedes with perfect diction innocently singing lyrics such as 'Oh yeah, we run away from private eyes / To privacy' (I think you meant 'prying eyes,' love?) and Santogold. Her whole album is good, but the pulsating religiosity of Anne has had me absolutely bewitched. There appears to be a tension between the lyrics ('My name is Anne, I got a plan / I may lack virtue / But I'm penitent' and the chorus 'J,j,jesus Pieces / Rescue me / The more I try / The more it gets too complicated') and the oddness of the backing music.

I really recommend watching the Alphabeat video (because it's really cool - it features the notion of the illustrator as God! C'mon, that's always fun!) and I recommend Anne because I'm so fucking in love with it. However, read the lyrics first! Along with Unstoppable, it's become my 'coping anthem' of late. Oooh, just realised that the HG album title also contains a 'How To' - IT'S FATE! *runs screaming and glassy-eyed into the woods*

Cheers, thanks and goodnight :-D.


A little 'hidden' How -To for anyone who is even remotely culinarily-inclined (own coinage again! o_^b ). It is both easy and fun, since I am not the most patient, even though I love food :

Catalan Bread

Bread (crusty is better, but you can use regular bog-standard white or wholemeal as long as you toast it crisp first)
A ripe tomato, halved (just-ripe isn't as good, though it does work)
A clove of garlic, cut in half
Some olive oil


Take one of your half-cloves of garlic and rub the exposed end thoroughly over the bread (it should end up smelling of garlic and may look a bit shiny in the light).

Take half your tomato and rub its innards all over your bread.

Drizzle over olive oil, and if you are anything like me, spread it with a knife to ensure even coverage (perfectionist freak!)

Enjoy.


In Barcelona, this is the standard preparation for sandwiches - you do this and then put whatever else, probably because Barça is the Catalan heartland of Spain. Fancy that!