Tag Archives: fighting the power


turnedoff finale2

Screen-Free Week is about whether you’re able to go for a full week without using any electronic devices that have screens. This year, it’s being held from may 2nd to 8th. Basically, we’re talking about anything from smartphones, tablets, televisions, consoles, to computers and laptops. The numeral display on your microwave gets a pass.

I’ve participated twice in the exercise so far:



And I have to say I have mixed feelings about it. Sure, media addiction is a real problem. People spend a ridiculous amount of time every day being absolutely fixated to flickering screens, so much so that they don’t notice the real world happening live, right in front of them. So it makes sense to have a media awareness campaign  that dares to ask people to look at whether or not their media consumption is balanced or not.

On the flip side though, as someone who’s participated in the challenge twice, I have to say that going a whole week without any means of contacting people digitally can be  little harsh. If you happen to be isolated and you don’t have many, or any,  people in your life that you can spend time with in person. Because, let’s say you came out to your friends and family and ended up alone. Then Screen-Free Week can be a bit of a tall order. In reality, it’s like asking someone to go without any human contact for a week. For outcast queer people like me, sometimes communicating digitally is the only type of socializing that we have access to.

It seems to me that the same people who preach  about returning to more down-to-earth traditional values, and cutting off contact with technology, are the same people who exclude people who don’t fit the mold, from their communities. So you can’t really blame us if we become addicted to our electronic devices afterwards. Your communities are barred to us.













DD in action color9



[ 4 PANELS ]

The need for a Queer Salute


So, it looks like we won’t be boycotting the upcoming 2014 Sochi Olympics. Bummer. But, why would we? With all that gender-segregated, celebration of the  different aspects of the human body, the Olympics are already very, very, gay.

So I’ve been thinking, we need to come up with a universally recognized gesture that symbolizes support for LGBT people, in Russia, and around the world. Something that athletes can do at the games if they want to show support for us in a non-verbal way. A “Queer Salute” if you will. Something  we can also use once the games are over too.

So, I`m holding a poll on the subject.  And, in no particular order, here are some potential choices:


model AA new spin on established queer body language. That bent wrist says: “I’m Queer and I’m proud”, the left hand on your chest says that you’re saying it from the heart.


model BModern, and self-explanatory. A little less outlandish, but also more likely to appeal to our straight allies.

OPTION-C  Sign Language for the “G”

sign language G

A write-in suggestions with a certain flair.

OPTION-D   The Japanese gesture

Another stylish write-in option.

OPTION-E  The Write-in. You send your sketch or pic, with the title of your pose to: queersalute@gmail.com


So yeah, here’s the poll: ^_^


AH! So the option for the “I heart pink triangle” won the vote, and it’s now the official T4D queer salute for the Sochi Olympics! Which is very cool!  A lot people suggested doing it with a downward pointing triangle instead, so here is the final updated version of “I heart PINK TRIANGLE”:

I heart PINK TRIANGLE updated


NATNOTE: The models were rendered as art-store mannequins in a vague effort to keep it gender-neutral.    :)


What we can learn from the Suffragettes

When I set out to write this article, just for argument’s sake, I tried to remember what the reason against giving women the vote was. And for the life of me I couldn’t remember what those patriarchal dinosaurs were putting forth to justify their position.

Was it because they felt men needed to dominate in the political arena to compensate for their genetic inferiority? ( Men are vulnerable to a lot of extra diseases because they’re missing an extra leg on their “Y” chromosome that would normally carry the extra data required to prevent those said diseases. ) Was it that they felt jealous of women because they get stronger orgasms? ( Women have an average of 12-15 muscle contractions during an orgasm, as opposed to 9-10 for Men. ) Were they depressed because statistically women get to live longer then men, and felt they needed to compensate?

No, after looking into it, I found out that the people who were against giving women the right to vote, were mostly doing it because they were defending what they saw as “still-valid” traditions. And any movement promoting the modernization of our political system will probably encounter similar opposition. They’ll be told that our current political systems are “still-valid”, even though most of the time they were conceived in a technological era that predates the telegraph.

I think there are similarities between the fight for women to have the right to vote, and the fight for the modern electorate to be able to have a say in what they’re paying for.

I was reading about the Canadian Suffragette movement, and what they did which was pretty clever, which is that they decided to hold  “mock-parliament” sessions. They would re-enact parliamentarian procedures, but this time with women in charge. They had various parties debating whether simple creatures like men, should be allowed the responsibility  of being able to vote. Basically using humor to get their point across. I’m a big fan of that.

I’m also a big fan of their “mock-parliament” idea. Doing a modern-day, online “mock-parliament” could also be a lot of fun. It could be an easy way to illustrate how a digital democracy might work. All we really need is to purchase a web-domain name, run a forum/online chat type of operating platform, you then you just add a logo. As far as the technical aspects of setting up something like that I’m sure it wouldn’t be too much of a challenge.What would get harder though, would be to get a bunch of collaborators to agree on what the structure should be for the next-gen of gov systems. Should it be structured like an online forum with the head-of-state replaced by the equivalent of a forum moderator? Or perhaps tweaking the current system, with voters being able to vote on all government law projects and programs? Or, how about we turn it around, make it that only the electorate can propose law projects, and it’s the politicians who have to decide if it goes thru or not?

Which would be the best structure?

It’s hard to say.Obviously there’s a lot of potential avenues which could serve as an appropriate soil to erect a digital democracy, the question is, which one better suited for that type of project? I don’t have the answer yet, but I think that sometimes it’s a good idea to look at the past for inspiration…