I didn’t win.

That is all.

I was just making a general observation, meaning only to point out how often folks assert this or that being “important” or “necessary” or “worthwhile” or “essential” (well, you get my drift…) as if the adjective rests on its own all self-evident-like, always and for everyone.

Wildly off-topic example: “It’s essential to bail out the auto industry” leaving totally aside “essential to whom“?

That’s all I meant.

Ron, I would certainly never dare chasten any man whose musical repertoire includes a reggae version of the Immigrant Song. You don’t frink around with people like that.

Maybe there is a deeper philosophical discussion to be had on the nature of ‘award’ in respect to values, but probably not here and now.

Kinsella got new marching orders from Ignatieff.
Liberals are told to abandon “the Bully” epithet when referring to PM Stephen Harper.
This is major shift in Liberal policy.

Ignatieff’s message to Liberal followers; no more girly stuff, stop whining, grow some balls, get testosterone pumping and take in on a chest like a real man.

All feminists started to panic as this kind of behaviour is what they detest the most in Conservative ranks.

Lesbians at HoC were first to suggest that all feminists in House of Commons pack their bags and move over to NDP camp.

Jack Layton got so excited at this prospect that he is considering sex change surgery. Now, he is in a process of discussing this new idea with his wife Olivia.
He wants to continue their marriage and enter Guinness Book of World Records as first lesbian couple in National Parliament.

I am not making it up, just read Kinsella’s Blog

http://warrenkinsella.com/

Quote:
BULLY FOR YOU

——————————————————————————–

Saturday, December 20, 2008, 05:13 PM
Is the Conservative leader a bully?

He certainly gets called one often enough, but not ever by me. Two reasons.

One, in politics at least, calling one’s opponent a “bully” implicitly suggests he or she has bested you. That you are indeed weak, and that you want the rules of the game rewritten. In politics, it sounds sucky.

Besides, you need only take a gander at the titles of a couple of the books I’ve cobbled together – ‘Kicking Ass,’ ‘The War Room’ – to know that I don’t think anything is wrong with being tough with a political equal during an election campaign. (Playing partisan games during a massive economic crisis, meanwhile, isn’t bullying. It’s stupid and self-defeating and bad for the country.)

Two, I don’t think Stephen Harper, the man, is a bully. I’ve personally experienced the man’s willingness to reach across the aisle – with me, an opponent who had been very critical of him and his party, and for years, too. …..

Is it possible to talk intelligently about values at all without the *valuer* being taken into necessary account?

Anyway
“Maybe the Best Feminist Blog should be changed to Best Women’s Issues Blog or something similar. ”
As mattt doesn’t incorrectly point out (amazing), that has been suggested before, and won’t work if the idea is to honour the best blog devoted to “feminism” because it does permit anti-feminists to participate. It’s also why some decided to label NBCD and I of being afraid of the word feminism (I’m not, and proudly call myself a feminist) and started the “f-word awards”.

That’s why it’s difficult to solve this problem. I want to run an inclusive blog awards so that all Canadians feel they can fairly participate, but some want to run simply for political reasons, and some to only offend another group of bloggers they don’t like (politically or otherwise).

Mattt is right (again, wow!) that bloggers who don’t want to be labeled Best Feminist Blog, should not be eligible. To fix that we’ll have to double check with all nominated bloggers that they want the title. Any volunteers to work on that next year? Keep in mind there are deadlines to this work, it’s unpaid, and if you don’t get it done, then you leave your team mates in a bind where they have to go ahead with the blogs suggested or delay things. We delayed the feminist category with some success by doing so, and didn’t in the Sci-Tech and got chewed out over that problem there. Bottom line, is if there are open nominations, then we need a BIG team of fair judges to work on all new rules created for next year.

I think the CBA guys tried, they really did, but there’s no template for this category so they’ve had to improvise a lot. It shouldn’t be necessary — you’re progressive or you’re not, you’re conservative or you’re not, you’re a feminist or you’re not, etc., it should be that easy. It’s too bad that for *whatever* reason this category sends righties into such paroxysms of outrage that they feel driven to try and screw it up.

But they’ll do the same thing next year, guaranteed.

Oh well. On a positive note, NBCDipper told me that the Womens Studies person apologized for giving me the boot. Ha!

This is a situation where the commitment of feminist bloggers could and should be recognized…We have some superb ones…The awards were not only disrespectful to JJ, but all feminist bloggers and indeed all feminists…

I was not nominated and that’s OK…but I could sure tell you that Choice for Childcare does not belong there…and some of these women make consistent and admirable contributions…and the awards should at least attempt to honour that.

So, take issue with my rhetoric or what have you…

But, I think that those who run things should be held to a higher standard.

I mean really…some of these women spill blood, sweat and tears into their blogs and their commitment to feminism and it sickens me that so little effort was taken to find a suitable external judge.

(heading quietly off into a corner where I’ll say no more)