Signal boosting for alumiere:

or, i am not a fucking addict

earlier today, in response to an ongoing conversation about the new cdc guidelines on opiates (see here: https://storify.com/AnaMardoll/chronic-pain-disability-and-opioid-access) i wrote this series of tweets:

dear obama administration/fda/cdc - your new rules on opiates hurt chronic pain patients to the point that many of us will die b/c of it.

it was already ridiculously hard to get the medication that keeps me from spending days on the bathroom floor puking b/c of pain

now, i'm out of [med x], can't get new doctors to fill them, can't afford out of pocket visit to old doctor to fill them, so...

i'm losing 2-3 days a week to pain and vomiting. also dropped too much weight since i can't hold down food. 5'7 and 91lbs

is not okay, even for super thin me. please consider the people who need opiates to live & change your rules before we start dying

and then i read http://theferrett.livejournal.com/2050453.html which got a lot of things right, but also failed for me by calling a chronic pain patient who needed opiates an addict. this was my response:

"not bad overall. but... i don't think your uncle was an addict. if he needed the meds to function, if he wasn't getting high but getting relief then he's not an addict.

this may sound harsh, but are you an addict because you need your meds? what about the diabetic on insulin? so from my pov, calling tommy an addict is calling me and every other person with an incurable pain condition an addict. it is wrong, and part of why these bullshit guidelines are now in place - because we're seen as not fully human due to our conditions.

i wrote about how hard it is before these new guidelines earlier today here. https://storify.com/alumiere/the-policy-on-opiates-in-the-usa-is-hurting-people

people are going to be harmed and die because rather than prevention & treatment we prohibit and shame. and if something doesn't change for me soon, i'm likely to be among them. because without opiates i can't hold onto enough food and it's terrifying to watch your body waste away because the cdc thinks chronic pain patients don't deserve treatments that work."

p.s. if you're able to help/share i'd appreciate it; a fundraiser to help pay for my medication and get me through some tough times (i'm offering perks too) https://www.youcaring.com/alumiereandpris

Mainly in case ford_prefect42 doesn't come back to my previous post.

"I kinda figure that everyone has an inborn compulsion to reproduce. It's kinda evolutionary."

It's an interesting theory and I'd like to pick it apart.

If you could define "an inborn compulsion to reproduce" as "a curiosity as to what their offspring would look/be like," then yeah, I do think that everyone has probably pondered on this at some point in their lives.

The fact is that I am an exception. I have no compulsion to reproduce; never have. Only a few moments in my life has a viable argument in favour of breeding entered my head:
- Once, in my late 30s, when it occurred to me that having children is the only means of preserving any bit of one's youth and vitality.
- Once when I felt a tinge of regret that my musical talent wouldn't be passed on to any future generations.

But those arguments were quickly overruled by logic: In the first case, I reasoned that this was as may be, but still didn't make all the downsides worthwhile; in the second case, I realised that there was no guarantee any child of mine would be musically talented, and in the split second thereafter I realised that this is where so many parents go wrong -- having expectations for kids that aren't even born yet, and who inevitably disappoint them by not exhibiting the combination of inherited traits the parents desired.

What Bill's question prompted me to ask myself was: If I were male, would his theory apply to me? In other words, do I actually possess an "inborn compulsion to reproduce" which has been decisively overruled by my stronger desire to not go through pregnancy and childbirth?

In my two previous long-term relationships, my male partners have expressed the desire to have kids. Easy for them to say, was my reaction. But I loved my grown-up partner enough that I actually considered whether there were any conditions under which I'd be willing to become a parent, for their sake. The absolute conditions on this would have been: I don't have to give birth (so adoption); we could skip the earliest, neediest years, before the kid could communicate verbally and use the toilet on its own (so adopting an older child); and they, not me, would be the primary caregiver. In other words, I could never be a mum, but perhaps I could be a dad. In the end the deciding factor was that even if all of my conditions for parenthood were met, if anything happened to my (actual or hypothetical) partner, I'd end up being a single parent to a child I never actually wanted. And no child deserves that. So thus ended the thought exercise.

A hypothetical "inborn compulsion to reproduce" could be overruled by other factors besides not wanting to endure pregnancy and childbirth. For instance, there's the cynic's argument of not wanting to bring a child into a world which is facing imminent ecological and economic devastation. There's also the survivor-of-abuse argument; some people's parents were so horrible as to put them off even the idea of ever being a parent themselves. These motivations are not gender-specific. I've known people in both categories, and am firmly in the first camp myself. Are these motivators sufficient to override the "inborn compulsion", or are they evidence that this "inborn compulsion" is in no way universal?

Because it's really hard to overrule actual inborn compulsions. Look at people who are gay and try to suppress it, for instance. If people were actively suppressing a compulsion to breed, rather than just not having one in the first place, then pretty much everyone would at some point change their mind about having kids, or regret missing their chance. And not everyone does. So no, I think the existence of people who are truly happily child-free into old age disproves the theory.

Counter arguments?

Tonight I lived a Rocky Horror fan's dream come true.

There was a showing of RHPS at the Underworld in Camden to mark the movie's 40th anniversary. Patricia Quinn was introducing it. The venue manager got the idea of having a backing band... Dave Winkler (hughe's brother, and lead guitarist/singer for the excellent Bordello Rose) rings me on Wednesday and asks me if I'd like to play "Science Fiction/Double Feature" with him. I picked my jaw up off the floor and said yes. Had three days to learn the stage version in several different keys, depending on where Ms Quinn's voice was. monted was invited to play bass too, so it was a sort-of Memepunks endeavour.

The song isn't complicated, and I've met Patricia Quinn before, but I swear as we were soundchecking and she came into the venue and walked onto the stage, I forgot every chord. Fortunately I recovered -- we played (bass, piano, acoustic guitar) and sang backing vocals on the main song and the reprise at the end of the film. Patricia loved it. It was a shame myriadofsins couldn't be there! Ed then lost his virginity from the vantage point of the stage, and I lost my voice due to shouting lines over an underlying cold. It was worth it though. We got pictures and there is video to come!

I swear, I could never have imagined, during the years I spent going to RHPS at the Rialto in Raleigh every Friday night and performing in the cast, that one day I'd be on stage in a club in London playing piano for Patricia Quinn. Life is insane.

( Photos in case they are too large )

The Memepunks are playing a gig on Wednesday 22 April at The Garage (The Garage!!), opening for Abney Park and Cauda Pavonis (who have replaced the Cesarians on the bill). We'll be on early, I'll try to start as late as possible to give people enough time to get there from work, but the latest we'll start will have to be 7:45pm.

We have tickets available for £12.50 instead of the advance price of £15, see one of us in person or send a PayPal for £13.10 to tickets@memepunks.co.uk.

Actually here is a Buy It Now button:

And the flyer:

I have just purchased a new painting!

It's a sister piece to this one which I bought from the artist in 2012. Yay new art :)

So apparently my return to Facebook under the name Psyche WAS the result of intercession by Lil Miss Hot Mess.
Try this method and see if it works for you.

On Saturday night the Memepunks marked the third anniversary of our first ever gig in a pub with another gig in a pub.

This time we were supported by Bordello Rose, Dave Winkler's band, every member of which is both multi-talented and dead sexy. We'll be saying we knew them when.

Things got off to a late start due to a football match delaying load-in and the Memepunks overloading the sound desk by being the first band ever to use every one of their channels. They had to disconnect the DJ equipment so we could play! Bordello Rose started a bit late, and also overran; thankfully the venue manager was happy enough with our turnout (and the bar take) that they let us carry on after 11pm so we could finish our set. Despite every member of the band being either injured, ill or lacking sleep, the gig went well and the venue were very pleased with us. The soundman even texted his wife during the set to say she should come down because we were great! d_floorlandmine played some great mash-ups, and I sadly missed bootpunk playing Killing Joke's "Pssyche" in my honour as I was madly setting up. Thanks to aliasrob for the video and myriadofsins and monted for the party.

The Memepunks 3rd anniversary gig at The Gunners, Finsbury Park, 6 December 2014

Magic Safety Roll
Kiss Up (feat. Sean Purdy, guitar)
When You’re Evil
Creep Or Without You
The Final Tango
Heaven On A Prayer (feat. Tasha Scott, vocals)
Beat Roxanne (feat. Sean Purdy, guitar)
Fly Girl From Ipanema
All Star Breakfast
Sympathy For The Transvestite

Encores:
She’ll Shag Me In London
Journey Into Darkness (feat. Dave Winkler, guitar)

I have been reading "Self-Made Man", by Norah Vincent, an account written by a woman who disguised herself as a man and put herself into various situations to learn how society treats men differently from women. In most of the situations, Norah, as "Ned", gets to know various people -- mainly men -- and then selectively reveals her true identity to get a sense of how people's reactions to her change when they see her as a woman instead of a man.

There are some insights. Generally, I was disappointed by the book's viewing gender as a strict binary; but then again, that was the point of the book -- to identify differences between the way men and women are treated, not to identify similarities.

In the chapter on dating, "Ned" goes on dates with straight women he's met mostly on the Internet. In a few cases, "Ned" gets on well with the women, and feels compelled to reveal that she is a woman (and a lesbian). Her first question to these women is whether they may be lesbians. Hello, bi erasure. Pro tip: asking a woman who has spent her life exclusively dating men whether she is a lesbian is probably not going to get you the answer you want. Asking her whether she is potentially bisexual, well, those odds are much better.

But I've now put the book down and am considering burning it. Why? She refers to "Teena Brandon, the woman who disguised herself as a man..." WHAT!?!? My jaw literally dropped aghast at such blatant transphobia. Norah Vincent, author, is a lesbian who disguised herself as a man. Brandon Teena was a trans man.
I refuse to read another word written by someone so ignorant.

I've just created a Google+ community for people banned from Facebook, and (hopefully) people still on Facebook, to find each other / discuss strategies around the "real names" issue / hopefully keep us ex-Facebookers informed of any developments which we're no longer able to access.

https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/103143483314387812335

Spread the word and join!