The hopeless romantic inside me has been screaming to get out for years. Since I told my friend Mary that I was thoroughly smitten with her, she's let me let him out by writing her love poems and saying really sweet things, especially when I'm high. Just the sweet things, I mean. I haven't yet attempted to write a poem while I'm high because that takes more effort than I usually feel like making. Mary is emotionally unavailable for various reasons that may or may not ever change, but at least she lets me express myself. I don't care if you think that's pathetic. I think it's sweet.

So this year, I asked if I could send her flowers for Valentine's Day. I would have done it without asking except that I had to get her address. She said she loved flowers, briefly exposing the sensitive soul beneath her tough exterior. Then I procrastinated because the trauma from years of poverty makes spending large amounts of money feels like cutting my fingers off. Then, two days before Valentine's Day, the store I'd picked to order from was too busy to take any more orders for Valentine's Day. I was horrified... until I remembered that her birthday was two weeks later. I asked if she would be crushed if the flowers were a few days late and apologized for letting her down. She said I hadn't let her down because I didn't owe her anything. Then I hoped she would forget about the whole thing and be surprised on her birthday, which was my brilliant plan all along.

I see the florist picked yellow because I selected "Friend" on the order form. There wasn't a "Friend who is vocally in love but respects boundaries" option. I knew that yellow was the apology color, and I used yellow flowers for that purpose once many years ago. I found out that it was also the color of friendship when a friend sent me a yellow heart emoji, which didn't make me think of friendship so much as cholesterol poisoning. My friendly little note was something like, "Happy birthday, Mary! You are a star shining in the darkness, and I am so blessed to have your light in my life." I gravitated toward that metaphor and once wrote an entire poem stretching it to the limit because she's one of the bright spots that makes living through these godawful times worth it. Not the only one, of course. I haven't made her solely responsible for my happiness because that would be unfair to her and unhealthy for me. See, I'm mature and stuff.

I felt like it was my birthday too, though, when Iran's "Supreme Leader" and several other vermin were removed from the planet. Now look, I hate the U.S. government. I hate the Israeli government. I don't think Trump should be allowed to unilaterally order strikes and bombings whenever he wants. I don't want another twenty-year war in the Middle East. Nonetheless, what's happened has happened, and the deaths of these dictators, torturers, and murderers are very good things, and certain leftists who can't see that really need to get their heads out of their asses. The Ayatollah was evil. The Islamic Republic is evil. Whoever needs to hear this, please stop saying stupid shit like "Iran has a right to defend itself" as if its brutal theocracy, which very recently murdered thousands of protesters, represents the people who are currently cheering, dancing in the streets, setting off fireworks, and writing "Rest in piss" on Reddit every time another member of it is reported dead. (Seriously, they love that phrase.) This. Is. What. Iranians. Wanted.

And again, I'm not unaware of the political problems with the circumstances under which it happened, the unacceptable collateral damage to civilians, or the risks for the future, but not wanting wars is not, in itself, a sufficient reason not to kill dictators. "No wars" is an ideal to strive for. It's not an absolute value like "No child porn." Given the choice between having a war and leaving generations of people to live in hell, I know what I find morally preferable. Oh, and in this instance, there's the little detail that the US is responsible for the current dictatorship in Iran because the CIA overthrew its democratic government in 1953 and installed a monarchy, which the Islamists overthrew in 1979. The US owes Iran. This is a form of restitution, though it won't do any good to the millions who have already lived out their lives under this regime. Oh, and this regime also supplies weapons to Russia, which just entered the fifth year of its three-day military operation against Ukraine. So that not happening anymore is another potential benefit.

I guess this regime also supports Palestine against Israel, which may be the sole reason why certain leftists are pretending it deserves to exist. Oh well. Evil people have their moments, as evidenced by Trump and Netanyahu having one this weekend, but that's still not a good enough reason for Khamenei and his cronies to stay alive and continue spreading misery and death. Byeatollah!*

*A leftist acquaintance on Facebook flipped me off for posting that. I told him (in Spanish, because he spoke Spanish), "If you like a murdering dictator, you can burn in hell with him." I know insulting people doesn't often change their minds, but he needed one hell of a reality check. And he said, "The same for pedophilic and genocidal idolaters." And I said, "Of course, Trump and Netanyahu are also pieces of shit. I'm just happy that they did a good thing." He didn't respond, perchance because his brain had exploded.

I inadvertently shared political misinformation in last week's post. Trump's nickname for Harris isn't "Laughing Kamala," it's "Laffin' Kamala." We know this because he spelled it out to his supporters at a rally, and they laughed and cheered him for it because they have the mental capacity of slugs. I apologize for misrepresenting the pathological liar.

Speaking of morons... oh, my God. Holy crap.

I can't even with this bullshit about the Olympics. I can't tell you how tired I am of weird right-wing maggots spreading flat-out lies about Imane Khelif long after they lost any excuse for not knowing better. I mean, on the one hand, watching conservatives who have spent the last several years being the genital police suddenly swear up and down without a trace of irony or self-awareness that a person born with a vagina is really a man is kind of funny. But then I remember that a. most of these chucklefucks are allowed to vote and b. these chucklefucks are actively making the world a living hell not just for transgender people but for any cisgender woman who might look a little masculine. So yeah, sorry not sorry, but I don't think the world would lose anything of value if they all held their breath for about ten minutes. I'll admit that's a moral failing on my part. Sue me.

Imane Khelif is not a man. She never was a man. Muslim countries like Algeria hate LGBTQ people as much as Republicans do, and the chance that one of them would put a transgender athlete on any of their sports teams is zero. Imane Khelif apparently has some biological advantages, just like all Olympic athletes have biological advantages over the average person and many of them have biological advantages over each other because news flash, life isn't fair and everyone's bodies are not the same. A boxing association that's run by Russians and not affiliated with the Olympics disqualified her partway through a match based on the unspecified results of some sketchy secret test, conveniently allowing the Russian athlete to win. Many lying right-wing bigots (sorry for the redundancy) claim that the IBA statement says she's a man. It doesn't. It says she was "found to have competitive advantages over OTHER FEMALE COMPETITORS." (Emphasis added for the mentally challenged.) Regardless, the constant bitching about "uNfAiR aDvAnTaGe" from people who have never cared about women's boxing, never complained about any other athlete's advantages, and never heard of the IBA until this week is the reason I have no faith in humanity. And isn't it funny, by which I mean disgusting, how conservatives suddenly care about unfair advantages after all the time they've spent denying or justifying the unfair advantages that people have in society because of their race, their sex, and/or their parents' wealth? Where's their outrage over asshole billionaires like Elon Musk doing whatever the hell they want? Imane Khelif has also lost more matches against other women than she's won, including in the last Olympics four years ago when none of these crayon-eating arse ends knew she existed, so you know, fuck off already.

What we're seeing here is conservatives' brains breaking in real time as they're forced to stop pretending that intersex people don't exist. There's actually no proof that Imane Khelif is intersex, and for her sake I hate that the internet has exploded into a debate over what she has in her cells and between her legs, but someone at some point said that she has XY chromosomes and that became an accepted fact. So suddenly genitals don't matter and chromosomes are the sole determining factor of biological sex. There has to be a sole determining factor because bigots are incapable of nuance or science. Their worldview has no room for the complexity of sex and gender that exists in the real world. Intersex people have been known to exist for thousands of years longer than Christians have existed, but they're still scary and dangerous to the conservative ones. And now they've forced themselves into a position where people with vaginas should use men's bathrooms if they have XY chromosomes. Good Lord. Too bad chromosomes are harder for bigots to police. It's a statistical certainty that a non-zero number of women who insist that Imane Khelif is a man have XY chromosomes themselves and don't know it.

Anyway, this whole controversy erupted because Imane Khelif's opponent, who appears to have the same body type as her, had a public meltdown about getting punched too hard in a sport that consists entirely of people punching each other. It wasn't her first public meltdown either. And she also happens to be a police officer, so she probably just wasn't used to attacking a brown person who was allowed to fight back. She has since said, "I want to apologize to her and everyone else. I was angry because my Olympics had gone up in smoke. I don't have anything against Khelif. If I were to meet her again, I would embrace her." This would be a good signal for the troglodytes spreading lies and hate on her behalf to shut the fuck up, but of course instead they said she had nothing to apologize for and doubled down on spreading lies and hate. And that's a perfect illustration of why Donald Trump became president of the United States and why he has a non-zero chance of becoming president of the United States again. God, it makes me ill. Speaking of rapists, a child rapist named Steven van de Velde who only served one year in prison also competed in the Olympics, but conservatives sure were quiet about that. I wonder why.

The good news is that calling these brainless fascist pricks "weird" has turned out to be a surprisingly effective and brilliant strategy. In four minutes, this video explains why.

Saturday was one year since the Islamic Republic murdered Mahsa Amini for not wearing a hijab, sparking protests throughout Iran. After a few months, the Western media largely ignored these protests or straight-up lied that they were basically over, but the truth is that they aren't going to stop until the Islamic Republic is dead. The Islamic Republic has passed the point of no return. It's lost its legitimacy, it's become desperate, and its collapse is a matter of when, not if. The sooner the better, of course. The US and the EU need to hasten that day by growing some spines and treating it like the global pariah that it deserves to be. Down with all dictatorships, down with all theocracies, down with all religious extremism, and down with all misogyny and other forms of bigotry, no matter how much they wrap themselves up in the supposed respectability of faith.

Today I went for a hike in Tony's Grove with members of the local Unitarian Universalist congregation and three dogs. I was the youngest human there by a wide margin. The next youngest human was a mother of adults and teenagers, and everyone else had white hair, or in one case would have had white hair if she hadn't dyed it purplish red. I didn't remember where Tony's Grove was and I didn't realize the drive and the hike combined would total four and a half hours, but I'm not mad. Just tired. The temperature was perfect and the views were gorgeous. Susanne Janecke, a geologist from USU, told us about the caves and the rocks. Supposedly some of the latter were shaped by the ocean before life existed on land. I'll take her word for it. I felt, as I often do these days, insignificant against the scope of this planet's history, and since we'd just had a presentation on climate change by USU hydrologist Patrick Belmont earlier that day, I thought about the possibility that my entire species might not be here much longer, and I wondered why we evolved to be so stupid and whether there's any real purpose to the suffering we've inflicted on ourselves and our home. But mostly I just appreciated the views.

If God is all good and all loving, it must be pure constant agony for him to restrain himself from snapping his fingers and erasing men like Vladimir Putin and Ali Khamenei from the face of the Earth. I'm neither all good nor all loving but I wouldn't be able to restrain myself for a millisecond if I had that kind of power. It drives me out of my fucking mind to be powerless while these demons on the other side of the world are destroying millions of lives with impunity. I don't deny, of course, that God may have perfectly valid reasons for not stopping them, like agency and whatever, but I certainly can't be expected to believe this is the same being who struck people dead for touching the Ark of the Covenant and turned them into pillars of salt for I don't even know why. I'm not ready to give up on God yet. I hope all the people who have given up their lives so other people can have basic human rights someday have gone home to him, and I hope he's treating them really well to compensate for having been oppressed, tortured, raped, beaten into comas, etc. I hope they didn't just cease to exist when they were murdered by Russian soldiers or Islamic terrorists.

Reminder that by installing the Snowflake browser extension, you can help Iranian revolutionaries and other oppressed people circumvent government censorship.

Here are some pictures I found on r/NewIran that I think are superior to whatever impotent words I might otherwise churn out. I like this one because it works on multiple levels. I hope the artist doesn't get murdered.

These girls' regime-sucking parents made them do this PR stunt that very few people in the world are stupid enough to buy...

First I think this one is beautiful, and then I think I must be really sick for thinking that. It's not beautiful that these women had their eyes shot out by Islamic terrorists for demanding basic human rights to which they are entitled by birth, but their indomitable spirits really show in this picture. And those indomitable spirits are why the Islamic Republic is boned. I just wish I could be a part of that, damn it.

Then I saw this last night. I don't know much about Iranian politics except that the Islamic Republic is a blister on Satan's testicles, but Reza Pahlavi is the Crown Prince who would be in charge right now if the Islamic Republic hadn't come to power, and he's emerging as a de facto figurehead for the current revolution. Of course not all Iranian revolutionaries like or support him but the general consensus is that they should send Khamenei back to hell now and worry about their differences later. Anyway, I don't know if any rallies or marches will happen in Logan, Utah, which has few Iranian expatriates, but I will certainly participate if I become aware of any. I considered stepping way out of my comfort zone and trying to start some but I don't think that's my place and I don't think it would be any more successful than my previous attempts to make a difference in the world.

...because it's impossible to hide the truth.

When I saw these tweets on r/NewIran, no joke, my first thought was astonishment at how much Iran's theocratic dictator sounds like an LDS prophet. I didn't bother to mention it because most Iranians have never heard of the LDS Church and I see no reason to change that, but some of these statements could have come almost verbatim from a conference talk or Ensign article not very long ago. 

Of course, I don't mean to insinuate for a moment that LDS prophets are exactly the same as this man or that they should also be publicly executed. Much of my astonishment over the similarity stems from the fact that this man is talking about mothers and housewives to sidestep the more pertinent subject of him having women imprisoned and abused for refusing to cover their hair. But other than that weird bit of misdirection, the tactic of defending oppressive gender roles by praising women, even by claiming they're superior to men, is identical to what the LDS Church has done countless times. And while we're on the subject, the LDS preoccupation with "modesty" stems from exactly the same place as the Muslim hijab requirement - namely, the toxic doctrine that women have a moral obligation to protect men from sexual temptations. One can easily imagine Ali Khamenei, or whoever writes his tweets, telling women without hijabs, as Dallin Oaks told women who don't follow the LDS dress code, that they are "becoming pornography to some of the men who see you." But as the Islamic Republic soon will be, the LDS Church has been forced to back down on this issue a lot.

You know who isn't backing down? Missouri Republicans, who recently voted to require female lawmakers to keep their arms covered. (Insert obvious joke about the right to bare arms here.) No, I can't believe this is real life either. The Republican Party is a cancer.

I recently read Wife no.19, or the story of a life in bondage. Being a complete exposé of Mormonism, and revealing the sorrows, sacrifices and sufferings of women in polygamy by Brigham Young's ex-wife Ann Eliza Webb Young. While I was reading it I met up with an old friend and she asked what I've been reading lately and I didn't mention this book because I assumed she was still a member of the church, but it turns out she's an atheist going through the motions for her parents' sake, so that was kind of funny and reinforced yet again how screwed the church is. Anyway, I had been aware of this book's existence for quite some time but somehow not curious enough to read it. I had an institute teacher who mentioned Ann Eliza Young in his church history course. Mind you, this teacher was/is in most respects a really great and thoughtful and compassionate and funny guy, so I regret that this one anecdote gives a negative impression, but he just dismissed her as a gold digger and portrayed it as funny that she lost her alimony lawsuit because Brigham successfully argued that she had never been his wife because polygamy was illegal. And for some reason that was good enough for me. But I recently was reminded of her book's existence and realized that now I had no reason not to read it.

It's no secret that my feelings toward the LDS Church at this time are primarily negative, but this book's portayal of it is so overwhelmingly negative that I couldn't help being skeptical. Surely Brigham Young wasn't that evil. Surely Mormon vigilantes didn't murder that many people. Surely Utah wasn't hell on Earth for all women. Granted, this wasn't the first time I'd heard claims of Brigham swindling people in business or missionaries lying to European converts about polygamy. After reading it, I went to see what FAIR had to say about it, curious whether LDS apologists could legitimately call Ann Eliza Webb Young's credibility into question or disprove any of her claims about historical events. FAIR has no article about the book and only so much as mentions it a few times, usually to cite it as evidence that even "a later wife of Brigham Young's who divorced him, published an anti-Mormon book, and spent much of her time giving anti-Mormon, anti-polygamy lectures" believed that Joseph Smith took Fanny Alger as a plural wife before Emma caught them having sex in a barn. So I guess I'm free to assume the accuracy of everything she wrote.

I just want to share a couple of quotes that hit my heart especially hard. Page 395: "When flippant newspaper correspondents, after a visit to the valley of the Saints, go away and write in terms of ridicule of the Mormon women, calling them fearfully ugly in looks, they little know what bitter, hard, cruel experiences have carved the deep lines round the eyes and mouths, and made the faces grow repulsive and grim, and taken from them all the softness, and tenderness, and grace which glorify a happy woman's face, even if she be ever so plain of feature. If these men, who write so carelessly, could only see the interior of the lives that they are touching with such a rough, rude hand, they might be, perhaps, a little more sympathetic in tone. It is no wonder that the women of Utah are not beautiful; there is nothing in all their lives to glorify or beautify their faces, to add at all to their mental or physical charm or grace. They are pretty enough as children; as young girls they can compare favorably with any girls I have seen in the East; but just so soon as they reach womanhood the curse of polygamy is forced upon them, and from that moment their lives are changed, and they grow hard or die - one of the two - in their struggles to become inured to this unnatural life. This system either kills its victims outright, or crushes out every bit of hope and ambition from them, leaving them aimless and apathetic, dragging out existence without the least ray of present happiness or future anticipation to lighten it."

This claim of polygamy making women ugly would easily be dismissed as her subjective opinion if not for the fact that, as she mentions, outsiders noticed and commented on it - most famously, Mark Twain in Roughing It: "With the gushing self-sufficiency of youth I was feverish to plunge in headlong and achieve a great reform [on polygamy] - until I saw the Mormon women. Then I was touched. My heart was wiser than my head. It warmed toward these poor, ungainly and pathetically 'homely' creatures, and as I turned to hide the generous moisture in my eyes, I said, 'No - the man that marries one of them has done an act of Christian charity which entitles him to the kindly applause of mankind, not their harsh censure - and the man that marries sixty of them has done a deed of open-handed generosity so sublime that the nations should stand uncovered in his presence and worship in silence.'" Not so funny anymore, is it?

After escaping from Utah, initiating divorce proceedings, and going around speaking against polygamy with the help of Gentile friends, Ann Eliza Webb Young writes on pages 589-91: "I had felt [polygamy's] misery; I had known the abject wretchedness of the condition to which it reduced women, but I did not fully realize the extent of its depravity, the depths of the woes in which it plunged women, until I saw the contrasted lives of monogamic wives.

"I had seen women neglected, or, worse than that, cruelly wronged, every attribute of womanhood outraged and insulted. I now saw other women, holding the same relation, cared for tenderly, cherished, protected, loved, and honored. I had been taught to believe that my sex was inferior to the other; that the curse pronounced upon the race in the Garden of Eden was woman's curse alone, and that it was to man she must look for salvation. No road lay open for her to the throne of grace; no gate of eternal life swinging wide to the knockings of her weary hands; no loving Father listened to the wails of sorrow and supplication wrung by a worse than death-agony from her broken heart. Heaven was inaccessible to her, except as she might win it through some man's will. [Outside of Utah] I found, to my surprise, that woman was made the companion and not the subject of man. She was the sharer alike of his joys and sorrows. Morally, she was a free agent. Her husband's God was her God as well, and she could seek Him for herself, asking no mortal intercession. Motherhood took on a new sacredness, and the fatherly care and tenderness, brooding over a family, strengthening and defending it, seemed sadly sweet to me, used as I was to see children ignored by their fathers....

"Women are the greatest sufferers. The moral natures of men must necessarily suffer also; but to them comes no such agony of soul as comes to women. Their sensibilities are blunted; their spiritual natures deadened; their animal natures quickened; they lose manliness, and descend to the level of brutes; and these dull-witted, intellectually-dwarfed moral corpses, the women are told, are their only saviours.

"What wonder that they, too, become dull and apathetic? Who wonders at the immovable mouths, expressionless eyes, and gray, hopeless faces, which tourists mark always as the characteristics of the Mormon women? What does life offer to make them otherwise than dull and hopeless? Or what even does eternity promise? A continuation merely of the sufferings which have already crushed the womanhood out of them. A cheering prospect, is it not? Yet it is what every poor Mormon woman has to look forward to. Just that, and nothing more."

Oof. Until reading this passage, I had believed that the LDS Church was progressive on women's rights in the nineteenth century and had merely gone astray by refusing to progress further with the rest of society during the twentieth century. Ann Eliza Webb Young says otherwise. This could, again, be her subjective opinion, but I have no reason to doubt it. This isn't presentism. She wrote contemporaneously. She didn't look back through decades of hindsight, with the benefit of modern assumptions about women's equality founded on multiple feminist movements, to condemn the church. She looked around at what was, for her, the here and now, and she saw that the LDS doctrine that men intercede between their wives and God, which was explicitly taught in the temple ceremonies until 2019 (and arguably remains implicit in some ways), was already sexist by the standards of 1876. That's pretty damning. Of course, if some apologetics for this doctrine are to be believed, it's really placing an extra responsibility on men because women are superior to them. Ali Khamenei, or whoever writes his tweets, would be proud.