7 questions to consider before changing the WWU mascot

People don't like change. Even if it is positive (getting married, moving to a new state for your dream job, and so on), you have to trust that the benefits will outweigh the costs of making the change.

While I was in DC for the  2015 International Drug Policy Reform Conference, I found a Western Front article that talked about changing the Western Washington University mascot. According to a communications professor and some student leaders, there are certain problematic features of Victor E. Viking:

1) Hyper-masculine

2) Not representative of students of color

3) Problematic racial character

"Don't get rid of me, mothafucka"

WWU President Bruce Shepard lays out his opinion (and call for discussion) about this matter on his blog. I agree with him on several points. I am also of the opinion that while we may not change it (at least for a while), that it warrants discussion, like many other topics.

1) Do students actually want this change?

Personally, I feel that most people don't want a mascot change because of...change. This is not to dismiss the validity of these sentiments, but being resistant to change is not a reason to completely block off a dialogue. Of what I've seen on Facebook and Yik Yak, an attachment to being a Viking is what most students cite as a reason to not change the mascot. If the majority of students want to keep the Viking mascot, then why force a change? It may be a different story if the school had the name of a Native American group without their permission.

2) Is there an urgent need to change it?

Last time I checked, vikings don't exist anymore and Norwegians don't have a claim on their historic predecessor. If this had been a debate raging for years, I may be more inclined to say that we should look into a change. However, this is not the case. Is this controversy the beginning of a multiple-year debate? Maybe, but we can't be so sure. Time will tell.

3) Will the school spend over $100,000 for a new mascot logo design as they did with the Western logo?

Like it? You better - it cost over $100,000

4) Are our efforts better placed somewhere else?

Western would have to spend money to come up with logos for a new mascot. That would also mean departments, sports teams, etc. would have to use up resources to accommodate the new mascot. (Anyone want these old Viking sweatshirts?) I have seen many people on Yik Yak say that the school could accomplish more useful things by allocating resources to other projects that actually make a difference, and, frankly, I agree.

5) Are there any other drawbacks to changing the mascot?

Would certain alumni stop donating to the school? Are more people going to hate the new mascot than the current viking? I'm not sure if any of these fears are legitimate, or if I could come up with any, but people who want to help shape the decision in any way should become aware of any potential drawbacks.

6) Could the mascot be slightly modified?

While the role of a woman in viking culture is disputed and not necessarily what we would hope for, the school could consider making multiple versions of the mascot, including women. (Those horned helmets weren't real, so why can't we have an evil-looking female viking?) If the mascot being "hyper-masculine" is a concern that resonates with a number of students, make it look more like Sokka.

7) How do we decide on whether or not to change the mascot?

Why is it that a mascot change gets its own poll while every other issue and concern of the students has to go through the AS Elections? Are polls reserved for very serious issues? Does the AS know that they will not get a response representative of the student body? (Hasn't stopped them before.) Most importantly, is a poll the best way to gather data to make the decision on whether or not to keep the mascot? (And who actually makes that decision?) At least in the AS Elections, students can pretend that their vote actually matters. My thoughts on this are that if the discussion of whether or not the viking is a worthy mascot continuously comes up throughout the years, it deserves the same treatment as the Greek system on campus. For those who don't know, Western does not have any fraternities or sororities, but every certain number of years, students get to vote on whether or not they feel that it's addition needs to happen. Needless to say, the students overwhelmingly feel there is no need for a Greek system. I, like Bruce Shepard, feel like it would have been a good idea to introduce a referendum for the Elections in the past to see how students would respond.

Whether your reading responses to the mascot controversy via Yik Yak or through other bloggers, at least consider the viewpoints of the other side. I don't think a mascot change is necessary, but I'm open to listening to those who feel like it's not representative of the school. As for if a mascot change is made, I think it'd be cool if Western got suggestions from the Lummi or another Native American tribe about potential mascots. It may not be representative of most students at Western, but it's a great tribute to the region.

Happy Columbus Day!

Now for a fun, historical poem...

In fourteen hundred ninety-two,
Columbus helped to spread disease and flu.

It was through sailing that he
Wished to reach the East Indies.

Instead of reaching his original destination,
He stumbled upon many a-new nation.

Despite the natives having established lives,
Columbus and his men enslaved them and gave them hives.

They did not find the route to Asian spice,
But they visited the Americas more than twice.

Through human slaughter and colonization,
Europeans furthermore extended their occupation.

Christopher Columbus was a dick,
But he has gone down in history as a heroic pick.

If you dare disagree
With Christopher Columbus' legacy,
His ghost will haunt and kill you,
Just like the hundreds of souls before you.

Whether or not I choose to wear shirts that "show off my boobs", I attract boys

A couple months ago in a Facebook discussion group, I came across someone who reposted this "Ten Things I Want to Tell Teenage Girls" to see what people thought about it. Right from Thing #1, I cringed. While it did contain some good advice, I mostly cringed throughout. The others who commented with their critiques did a pretty good job at voicing my own thoughts. While nobody had covered it quite to my liking, I just never responded, in part that my response would be too long, causing my patience to wear thin. Secondly, at the time, I didn't think I could quite articulate how I felt, especially with the first item.

"If you choose to wear shirts that show off you boobs, you will attract boys. To be more specific, you will attract the kinds of boys that like to look down girls' shirts. If you want to date a guy who likes to look at other girls' boobs and chase skirts, then great job; keep it up. If you don't want to date a guy who ogles at the breasts of other women, then maybe you should stop offering your own breasts up for the ogling. All attention is not equal. You think you want attention, but you don't. You want respect. All attention is not equal."

My feelings about it have been boiling up inside me ever since, and in the past few days, it's gotten worse. Now, I have no choice but to finally release the monster that has been tearing away at my insides ever since I first read this.

There are many problems I find with what the author, Kate Connor, says. One of these problems is that, frankly, I find this insulting towards men. Will men ogle at women's body parts, especially during puberty? Very likely. It doesn't mean that they're damned to based on their age or gender. What  if a boy decides to date a girl who does show her cleavage? Does that mean that is the reason for why they're together? I'm listening... (Also, assuming they're not being creepy about it and not doing it obviously so in public, is appreciating others' bodies such a bad thing?)

What if a woman wants to show off her body? I do it sometimes. I think most women do it more than they think. Did you ever opt for a smaller sweater when shopping because the one you originally tried on was a a little loose around your body? Well, there you go. When I notice that women devote lots of time showing their bodies (endless selfies on Facebook, for example), I'm more worried that she may be relying on what others think of her physical appearance to make up for a lack of self-esteem. Even then, I may be assuming too much. Overall, it's her choice. Maybe the point of this first item was to remind teenage girls that physical appearance isn't everything, but she could have worded it way better, and left a bunch of stuff out.

Guess what? Currently, I'm a 34 DD. My size has been like that for years. The size of my breasts is something that I have had to learn to live with. In eighth grade, I thought I was big for being a 34 C, and was really set on getting a breast reduction when I got older. No matter where I go, no matter who I am with, no matter how I am feeling, no matter what I am wearing, people notice my breasts. It's embarrassingly awkward to be where I thought was a more professional setting and wearing a dress that shows no cleavage, then have an older man remark on the size of my breasts. Even if I wear a top that goes up to my collarbone, if I bend over, it is more than likely that some cleavage will show. If I try to wear a baggy shirt, my breasts are still noticeable...and people may snub me for not looking refined or professional enough or whatever.

Look, cleavage! Boobs. Boobs. Boobs.

The point is that I never asked for my breasts to be this size. I never agreed to have breasts. They were just something I had to deal with - an inevitable in my life. When they first started growing, I was filled with wonder, but that wonder quickly grew into irritation. No matter what I do with them, people are going to notice. If I get a breast reduction, people are going to ask why and tell me that I should have been grateful to have some of that size. I am fine with them now, and have no (noticeable) back pain from them, so I have no plans to alter them. My experiences with my breasts, good and bad, have helped shape who I am. They are my breasts, so it is my right to do what the hell I want with them.

Aside from breasts, there are a lot of other body parts and qualities men enjoy about women. If men aren't vocal about their opinions about my breasts, they talk about my hair, ass, face, eyes, lips, etc. So should I, in the spirit of Kurt Vonnegut, place ugly masks wherever I am considered physically attractive? Then of course are my other qualities. People have called me smart, funny, and nice. (Sounds very exciting.) Right now, I have a shaved head and have been walking around campus with no makeup and in what I can only describe as unfashionable, frumpy clothing. Yet, men still manage to croon about my "beauty" and my "unforgettable air of confidence". It seems that no matter what I do, quite a few men still manage to find me attractive. And don't think that finding me confident means that he wants pursue something serious - at least from the hints I've gotten, they must think I'm quite astonishing in bed.

My advice to teenage girls: Wearing shirts that show off your boobs may attract boys, but so will just being a girl in general, even if you try to hide your boobs.

Yes, my boobs are quite the hot topic on my blog.

Follow me on Patreon!

2015 Young Americans for Liberty National Convention - too triggered by feminism

Friday, July 31st, 2015 marked the first ever day I attended a Young Americans for Liberty National Convention. Despite travel plans that delayed me by a couple of days and had me stranded in New York City for an entire night, I was able to make it to YALcon for the last two days. The year before, many of my Students For Liberty Campus Coordinator friends stayed in DC after the Campus Coordinator Retreat in order to attend the 2014 YALcon. I was excited to attend this year's to find out what all the fuss was about.

At the 2015 International Students For Liberty Conference, after months of courtship with YAL (I think calling it that is pretty fitting), one of my friends started up the Western Washington University YAL chapter. The club became officially recognized by the school during spring quarter, with me as the treasurer. During spring break (before we became recognized), I attended the YAL Utah State Convention in...Utah. More specifically, Salt Lake City. I had a good time, despite the Leadership Institute having a strong presence there - it being no secret that I have a huge grudge against them.

Despite the more conservative bent of YAL compared to organizations like SFL (which describes itself as being big-tent), I considered rising up the ranks in YAL in order to become a State Chair. I spend a lot of, if not too much, time on libertarianism and my political activism, and of what I have done, I have never actually been paid for my work...reimbursements and the meager ad revenue don't count. I would have liked to see some of my work compensated. However, despite my beliefs that libertarians should work within conservative groups (as well as with liberals and other libertarians), YAL lent itself to conservatives a little too much for my liking. There is also the misunderstanding from the public that libertarianism and conservatism are the same, which may also explain my contempt for fusionist organizations. (I found this neato article that explains a little bit how libertarianism and conservatism differ, from a conservative's perspective.) After attending the 2015 YALcon, I knew I would have to even further my limit my interactions with the organization.

It was my first morning at YALcon and by the time we had reached the second speaker, I seriously asked myself, "What have I gotten myself into?" This man was introduced by a YAL State Chair and Leadership Institute Regional Field Coordinator who said something along the lines of, "If he doesn't offend you, then he didn't do his job." During his first few minutes of speaking, he resorted to ageism, sexism, and other tenants of bigotry to attempt to make coherent points. Supposedly, according to himself and the introducer, listening to him provides valuable insights about life that you will never learn anywhere else. He provided a story about last year when a "young slim, blonde thing" got offended at something he said, and that it doesn't matter because she wasn't worth anything and had no importance.

I knew I had to get out of there. Being in the first row and center and within shot of the camera filming it, I wondered how to go about it. Finally, as if not giving a shit anymore, I gathered the things I would need and left. When I was walking out, I heard him say something about "offended twenty-somethings." Once I got out of the room, I realized I had forgotten my room key. I had planned to go to my room and charge my phone, which was dying, and I was delighting in using my phone because of how offended he gets when people are on their phones while he is speaking. I decided to try to see if my dorm room happened to be open by any chance. By some fluke, it was, so I charged my phone and did something a hundred more times more productive than being in his presence - I took a nap.

Now, I am not usually one who goes about trying to cause drama, creating gossip, and pitting people/organizations against each other (that's actually The Libertarian Republic's job), but sometimes I become so infuriated with an organization's dealings that I feel obligated to inform the public. I was at least glad that I wasn't the only attendee who was dismayed at YAL's decision to have him as a speaker, as I saw some social media outrage and noticed quite some more people than usual using his time to look at sponsoring organizations' tables, mingle, etc. If libertarians are wondering why it is difficult to appeal to more diverse demographics, this is it: by having bigoted conservative speakers appeal to fellow bigots and dismiss people's concerns under the guise that being offended is beneficial to furthering a cause, it undermines people's experiences and ensures that a movement will only eventually run out of steam. Get with the times, YAL - conservatism is dying out, thanks in part to its desperate tactics. I don't have any problems with conservatives in themselves as I was raised a conservative girl myself, but having to rely on shock factor and manipulation to try to capture the public's attention is pathetic at best. If this was the only incident to have happened with 2015 YALcon, I wouldn't have written about it. By venting about my frustrations, I got a heads-up from a couple of reliable sources concerning a juicy tidbit...

While Reason tabled there, they were also supposed to have a panel. It was approved, but a week before YALcon, it became unapproved. Why would that happen? It turns out the subject matter was too triggering for the organization. What was so risky a topic that YAL had to censor it? Feminism.

YAL be all like...

This was the description for the panel:

Libertarian Feminism in 2015: Carrying on the individualist feminist tradition

Join us for a discussion of libertarian feminism in the 21st century. We'll touch on the individualist feminist tradition and then explore issues of particular importance to libertarian feminists today; how libertarian feminism differs from modern, progressive feminism; and what the philosophy has to offer the larger libertarian movement.

According to YAL, they deemed this to be too "divisive" and controversial. They offered the panel the timeslot again only if they altered the description and event so that the word "feminism" was avoided, but Reason turned down that feeble attempt at compromise. If I was Reason, I would have said "sure" but then F-bombed the panel to create bad relations with YAL - it's not like YAL's professionalism created any stronger bonds.

If a feminist panel was too controversial for the convention, YAL could have provided trigger warnings in the program or had a safe space when attendees became too offended. Instead, they decided that ridding their convention of such a panel would best protect the "liberal campus survivors" from further trauma.

Before you can say, "But feminism and libertarianism don't go together," do some reading:

1972 Libertarian Party Vice Presidential candidate and the Association of Libertarian Feminists founder Tonie Nathan was the first woman in the US to receive an electoral vote.

America's First Feminist Was a Radical Libertarian

What Does Libertarian Feminism Look Like?

Anyways, it doesn't matter if you don't believe the two go together or you don't identify as a feminist (you don't have to!), the fact that YAL couldn't even bear to have a libertarian feminist panel, claiming that it would be too divisive while having (at least) one atrocious conservative speaker is not only hypocritical, but espouses the mindset that certain educational information is harmful and needs to be erased.

At this point, the national organization seems to be of little difference from the oft-confused conservative, "illegal immigrant catching" Young Americans for Freedom. There's only a tad more cherry-picked political correctness differentiating YAL from YAF. Now we know what the "con" in YALcon stands for.

Gossip doesn't write itself.

 

Become a Patron!  

How Capital City Pride discriminated against Libertarians

Generally, I am not a fan of hyperbole, especially when used as a clickbait title to an online article. Even more-so when conservative media utilizes it to build a logically unsound argument about how liberals are destroying America. While I am skeptical of most media organizations, I tend to be even more skeptical about the stories the conservative media shares. From my observations (and own experience), the conservatives realize that they are losing ground with the US population, having to resort to covering deeply exaggerated stories or what should be a mundane topic meant to send their audience into an emotional downward spiral, hence creating loyal followers.

          

In the past few days, I noticed that my friend, James Holcomb, was upset about an incident that happened during the 25^th Annual Capital City Pride in Olympia, Washington. The first post I saw from him was a photo of a sign saying, “BANNED FROM PRIDE FOR BEING A GAY LIBERTARIAN.” 

“Thank you to all the supporters who stopped to talk to me on the street after getting banned from going into pride. Capital City Pride willing violated our booth contract because some individuals not associated with us decided to open carry (which is legal). We were discriminated against because we support the 2^nd amendment and it was assumed by the event coordinators that we were together with the open carry folks, which is not true. So now the LPWA and myself personally are banned from pride “for life”. Liberty requires tolerance.

After being unable to get any of the local media to cover his experiences at Pride, TheBlaze interviewed him. If an online magazine says “liberal” in a way that is meant to be derogatory, I do my best to avoid them. Many times has The Blaze said “liberal” in a derogatory manner. Hence, I do my best to avoid them. That doesn’t mean I completely shut them out, as there are a few articles here and there that legitimately catch my interest. Despite my general distaste for TheBlaze, the coverage of James’ Capital City Pride experience is well illustrated.

As detailed on TheBlaze and by talking with James, we know that the Libertarian Party of Washington State booked and paid for a table weeks before Capital City Pride. Despite wanting to have a speaker, they were not given permission. The LPWA has been able to table at Pride for four years in a row, with no issues. James asked the chairwoman, Anna Schlecht, if members could open carry because there had been a problem at Seattle Pride – not with the LPWA, but with a demo regarding a person named Sparkles. (Interestingly enough, there is no problem with open carry at Whatcom County Pride.) He wanted to be able to tell the rule to the volunteers, just in case – “knowing the nature of libertarians.” Upon asking, James and the LPWA were asked to never return.

Neither James nor the LPWA were involved with the open carry protestors. James stood at a corner alone for five hours, protesting with his sign by himself. He attracted attention – he was called “racist” several times, but he also had productive conversations with some strangers. According to him, some who were against the open carry group came to tell him off as well, but once they heard his story, felt bad for him.

In a bit of a tangent, I am bothered by how very few other people seem to be irked by the bi-shaming experienced by the member of the open carry group. Bi/pansexuals have enough to deal with, excluding the harassment from fellow queers and “allies.”

During James’ experience and since then, my Facebook newsfeed has been filled with anger towards what happened with him and the LPWA, as well as dismay of how the people at Pride are not tolerant of the 2^nd Amendment and open carry, and why they should be. I believe that that is a completely different story. Personally, I have no problem with people (responsibly) open carrying, but I can understand how an event organizer may be uncomfortable with allowing that when attendees may become irritated or feel unsafe. Let’s face it – those kinds of crowds are mostly liberals and leftists, who believe in no or limited firearm freedom. A lot of libertarians probably agree with the protestors from the open carry group (but hopefully not their tactics and rowdiness), but I am clarifying now that this is not what I am writing about. And again, the LPWA and open carry group are unaffiliated.

No one should be able to argue that Capital City Pride had the right to not allow open carriers at their event. As a private institution, it was within their rights to turn away open carriers. You can argue if it was the right thing to do, followed by many-a-debate about whether or not the 2^nd Amendment is obsolete. Even if there was not a mix-up between the LPWA and open carry organization, could Pride not allow an organization with certain views to table? Certainly. However, if this particular view was not in display (whether through pamphlets and other educational materials or by someone open carrying) and has no bigoted background, one should question the motivation of enforcing such rules.

When I asked James why he worded the sign the way he did, he responded with, “I’m not the right kind of gay.” The gay who is pro-open carry. The gay who is Libertarian.

The fact that the LPWA was even allowed to table at Capital City Pride shows for a fact that Pride did not openly discriminate towards Libertarians. James is not entirely sure if they would have been allowed to table if the mix-up had not happened. According to him, Schechter does not like the LPWA and would not allow them to have a speaker at the event (this was weeks before the open carry fiasco). In other words, they were keen on finding an excuse to give the LPWA the boot. It still comes to question why the LPWA was allowed to table in the first place if they perceived that they are hated so much. (Revenue?) Not every aspect of this story will ever truly be clear to us.

Capital City Pride discriminated against open carriers, which means they discriminated against Libertarians. They discriminated against conservatives. They discriminated against any other group that believes in open carry. But how is discriminating against a conservative open carry advocate different from a Libertarian open carry advocate? Historically, the Libertarian Party was the first major party to announce support for gay marriage, and include it in their platform. John Hospers, who was the first presidential candidate for the Libertarian party (1972), was the first openly gay man to run for president. (He and the vice-presidential candidate, Tonie Nathan, received an electoral vote, making Nathan the first female candidate in United States history to receive one.) Pride made the choice to do away with an ally that has been supporting gay marriage for longer than the two major political parties, as well as the gay man who is a member of the Libertarian Party, who believes in 2^nd Amendment rights. They kicked out an organization that is on their side and paid money weeks beforehand for their table because of their unwillingness to have open carriers at the event, ignoring the fact that they had probably made a mix-up with the LPWA and open carry group. The event organizers, whether you agree with their decisions or not, handled the dismissal immaturely and unprofessionally. If they realized a mix-up had been made, they were probably too hateful, stubborn, or feeble-minded to make amends.

Capital City Pride discriminated against Libertarians in a way that other private entities discriminate subtly (and sometimes under-the-law). If a business does not want to hire an older person, they will look for someone “not planning to retire.” And so on. James and the LPWA were not the “right kind of gay” – the kind that shares the same views on a variety of issues – and done away with. It is something libertarians, especially progressive libertarians, have to regularly deal with.

Whether or not you agree with the wording of James’ sign and that Capital City Pride discriminated against Libertarians, you have to admit that seeing his sign was quite the conversation starter…and that the event organizers for Capital City Pride are major assholes.

Adsense's hypocrisy and puritanical shaming

On April 15th, 2015, I went onto my email to find that I received an email from Adsense saying that I violated their terms of agreement by posting a nude photo on my Blogger site (in reference to "My naked picture - six months later"), which utilized their service. A few weeks prior, Antiwar.com had a problem with Adsense when they refused to take down an article which contained graphic images that were against Adsense's policies, causing them to have to find new ways of obtaining revenue. This post is not about companies' rights to dictate how people use their services. As private entities, they do have the rights to determine those things. However, it does not mean they don't have a moral obligation to make sure their rules are fair and consistent. That is what this particular post is about.

When I thought about posting my first nude photo on here, I was mainly worried about Blogger, since this is where La Commedia Politica is hosted. I also was concerned for Facebook, since I wanted to post the photo there as well with the link to my article (and if the preview showed the picture). Even though I view my photos as being artistic, I feared that Blogger would view them as pornographic, which would make me have to make my blog 18+. This hasn't happened...as of yet. I had heard that with Facebook, it allowed artistic nudity, and according to their Community Standards, they allow "photographs of paintings, sculptures, and other art that depicts nude figures." They also say they will remove photographs "focusing in on the fully exposed buttocks." Whatever that means. No zooming in? I don't think I had ever given Adsense much thought, if any at all concerning whether or not my images violated their terms of service.

When I received the warning from Adsense, I decided to check out their standards, to see what kind of nudity they allowed (because surely they allowed artistic nudity...right?). One of the links they recommended to me was an article called "Policy Tips - Keeping the network family-safe." The first things that stands out to me from this article is this sentence: "Because the label "family-safe" is a general term that differs among all countries and cultures, we often receive questions asking for clarification on what we consider adult content." Ya know, it's really great that they recognize and acknowledge this. Nevertheless, they completely throw the understanding behind that statement out of the window when they say in the last paragraph that, "When in doubt about whether an image or text might be construed as adult content, our rule of thumb is this: if you wouldn't want a child to see the content or if you would be embarrassed to view the page in front of colleagues, then it's probably not family-safe and you shouldn't place Adsense code on it." In other words, if you don't think a close-minded,  prudish American wuss can handle it, don't use Adsense.

Seriously, what you "wouldn't want a child to see" or "be embarrassed to view in front of colleagues" not only differs from country to country, but is such a white, middle-class way of trying to make a point. For all we know, someone from the  Drug Enforcement Administration may be viewing Adsense-embedded sites at work.

Not to mention, they should be awarded at least 300 douchebag points for not allowing sexual health or medical advice.  

I say that in both of my naked picture posts that people do not have my consent to use these pictures against me in a negative fashion. I don't know if I can really blame Adsense for trying to remain consistent with what they allowed to be posted. So I'm not so much pissed off at the enforcement as I am with the rules they came up with in the first place. Of what I can see, they make no mention of art in any form, unless you count pornography. Of course, this all begs the question: Why does nudity have to be artistic or medical for it to be acceptable?

Overall, I can understand why Adsense would want to cater to the needs of the advertisers. Personally, if I was an advertiser, I probably wouldn't care where my ad was placed (unless the money went towards an atrocious person/company/cause) because if people choose to associate my ad with an image of a battle wound on a site that is totally unrelated and therefore don't want to buy my product, I sure don't want those dumb fucks to be supporting my brand. I just wished Google was less lenient with what they allow advertisers to do...

To be honest, I have been very uncomfortable with Adsense on my blog. I only added it because, "Oh hey - money" (and not even that much for as long as I had it) and the convenience since, "Oh hey - I want to make some money." I would have felt more comfortable if they allowed me to choose which kinds of ads I wanted. Instead they were all like, "Ah, she's half-Filipino, so let's give the men on her blog the opportunity to date *coughexploitcough* Asian and Filipino women!"

"Katrina must have many men after her, so let's further objectify Filipino women!"

"Katrina's an attractive Asian women, so surely she wouldn't mind this."

I wasn't able to screenshot these ads (because I hadn't seen them after this incident), but Google seemed to think that because I am open in talking about sex, that I approve of people cheating on their romantic partner. So yeah, I had ads on my blog that told my audience (usually focused towards the men) to have extramarital affairs.

It would make sense for me to wrap this all up in a conclusion. However, I think you all can decide for yourselves about what injustices have been done here. There is no real end to this story until Google and other online conglomerates can pull their shit together.

UPDATE: I am now using Infolinks for ad revenue. While I am not a fan of the default format (I want to see if I can change it to something more formal), it is making me more than I make with Adsense.

What it's like to be a Campus Coordinator, and why you should be one too

During the fall of 2011, I started attending Western Washington University in Bellingham, Washington and became a member of the Western Libertarians. When the president graduated winter quarter of 2012, I stepped up to that position, and have been in place ever since. In the spring of 2013, I was elected to become the chapter president of WWU Students for Sensible Drug Policy. With those two groups, and then some, under my belt, I had to learn how to facilitate events and meetings, bring in prospects through tabling, and acquire general knowledge about certain topics in a short period of time (eh, college), amongst other things. When the Campus Coordinator position was brought to my attention, I didn't care to become involved.

With a lot of campus activism experience, I didn't think that becoming a Campus Coordinator would be highly beneficial for me. However, I decided to apply and commit to doing my best in the program, feeling that it would still be fun and beneficial in at least a few ways. While doing online training, a lot of material concerning activism was stuff I had come to learn from leading several groups. There were a few tips that I knew would be of use to me. Instead of reading up on all of this in a span of less than one week, I had to learn from months or even years of on-the-field experience. Looking at this information, I wished that someone had been there to guide me when I was learning the ropes.

Not only are Campus Coordinators taught how to be effective liberty advocates at their schools, but we learned about the history and certain tenants of libertarianism. As a student of anthropology and theater, I do not have much time to learning about different political ideologies and philosophies, but Students For Liberty is able to collect the most relevant pieces and help us expand our beliefs from there.

A big difference between being a leader for liberty on WWU's campus and being a Campus Coordinator is that I had to apply my experience on my own campus to others. No longer was I posting flyers at my school, but at others too. My work previously revolved around keeping my groups afloat, but now it's become part of a bigger cause.

Another huge aspect of becoming a Campus Coordinator is getting involved at the conferences. Conferences are a big part of Students For Liberty, and are probably the most rewarding part of being a part of the SFamiLy. Getting to know fellow CCs and SFL staff members increases the number of people you can meet at different events. Networking is a worthwhile means of finding people who may be able to help you find a job or cooperate to hold an event. I have attended both the Northwest Regional Conference and International Students For Liberty Conference as a normal libertarian student, then as a Campus Coordinator. While all of these experiences have become some of the best of my twenty-three-year-old life, I felt that being a CC definitely made the events so much richer. It's pretty worthwhile to have SFL pay for your travel and board for these conferences (as long as you're doing the required amount of work). Paying less out-of-pocket definitely makes such events even more fun.

What's another perk of becoming a Campus Coordinator? All. Of. The. Free Things. Students For Liberty has a lot of resources, including physical ones, such as books. As a CC, you can order quite a lot, which you then give out when tabling, etc. Not only do you get these things from SFL, but they will tell you about what resources other organizations are offering. Not only that, you will probably be emailed by more organizations who will want to send you more things. As a result, your bedroom, closet, and living room is swimming in hundreds of copies of libertarian literature.

Being showered in these gifts has me all like:




Maybe except for the part of being a manipulative con artist.

Even as a campus activist with about three years of experience, one thing that pulls at the back of my mind is finding capable leaders for my clubs. Despite the never-ending search for people to replace me and my fellow officers, not many are willing to step up to such demanding positions. With Students For Liberty, I have more confidence in finding these leaders because I now have access to the resources that can help me with this endeavor. Concerning the Campus Coordinator Program, it effectively trains a number of student libertarian activists each year, and I know it's more efficient than what any one individual can accomplish without the help from others.

If you are going to be a libertarian college student next year and want to join me in Denver this summer (or go to the other CC Retreats in DC or Texas), consider becoming a Campus Coordinator as well. It can be hard work, but you get out as much as you put into it. One of my goals for this year was to expand SFL's reach on the West Coast. It was a little overwhelming to be the only CC in the state of Washington, but I know that I am just one step in achieving the overarching goal of the organization, and if I (and others) can get more Washingtonians to apply, I can really see us persevering within the next year. You can email me at khaffner@studentsforliberty.org if you have any questions. I look forward to seeing the who makes the CC class of 2015-2016, and I hope that you will be joining us, or will recommend this to someone you know.

Apply before this Friday, May 1st!

Feeling too small to have an impact - qualms as a student drug policy activist

Around noon today, I decided to end the campaigns of two initiatives that a couple of us, on behalf of WWU Students for Sensible Drug Policy, were working on to get onto the AS Elections ballot this year. The first one was for the Associated Students to urge the AS Board of Directors to incorporate policies into their legislative agendas that support the federal legalization of cannabis - both marijuana and industrial hemp.

The other initiative was to get the AS to push Residence Life to implement a Good Samaritan Policy within the halls, and have ResLife work with University Police to produce a compact substance policy guide for the entire campus.

Because the AS Elections Code hadn't been published in time for when the language of any initiatives had to be turned in to the AS Board of Directors, I had to go to a board meeting to request an extension for the deadline, which was granted. However, in order to have an initiative even be considered for the ballot, it has to be passed by the AS Board of Directors. The next board meeting, I gave information about both initiatives for the board members to consider. The next board meeting, a couple of others from the campaigns told the board members any more information that was needed (since I was in Salt Lake City at that time), and the board determined that the initiatives would be allowed on the ballot. All of that happened in the span of three weeks - one board meeting per week. The next step was to collect the AS Elections information packets and petitions for each respective initiative. At Western Washington University, each initiative petition needs to have at least 696 valid signatures in order to get onto the ballot. That is, 5% of the vote.

Two years ago, I ran for Vice President for Student Life, and last year, I ran for Vice President for Activities and sponsored the opposition campaign for the referendum that asked if students wanted to make the school a smoke-free campus. (I lost both races, and the majority of those who voted did so in favor of making a smoke-free campus, but it was close, so the school decided to compromise instead.) As a candidate, you have to collect only 150 signatures. Both years, I was able to pretty easily get all of the signatures I needed. (It was a hassle, but doable.) I thought that with a couple of other people helping me and a longer timeline, that we would be able to collect all of them. Nevertheless, because of the delay in getting the initiatives approved and the occurrence of spring break, we didn't get the initiative packets until a week ago, which meant that we were supposed to collect all of those signatures within one week. (So much for the longer timeline.)

Keep in mind that the three or four of us working on the campaigns have busy lives of our own - classes, work, etc. Probably the biggest hurdle though was that we weren't allowed to utilize any physical campaigning materials. Physical campaigning isn't allowed for any candidate or initiative campaign until a certain date. In order to to find people to sign the petitions, you...find people. What I usually did for my personal campaigns was go to Academic West, Miller Hall, and the Viking Union to find people sitting and eating, studying, or conversing, and give a short speech, answer any questions they had, and gave them the petitions to sign if they so chose to. Because initiatives require so many more signatures, I quickly learned that my default method would not give us enough signatures in time. I emailed a couple of school clubs and professors to see if they would allow me to talk to their members/students. But again with our schedules, we didn't have time to go to many classes or clubs.

On Thursday, I started to feel hopeless. I noticed that I was incredibly sluggish, and whichever organ in my lower abdomen that aches and makes my body tremble was doing just that (I think it means I need more sleep), so instead of dedicating more time to collecting signatures, I went home to eat and take a much needed nap. At the SSDP meeting later that day (and right after my nap), we expressed our concerns, but I still made the push to try to get all of the signatures we needed by the deadline. Before and after the meeting, I did not physically feel well. My chest was hurting and I couldn't comfortably walk at the brisk pace I normally do. I had no idea if the chest pain was due to my asthma, stress, or both.

During my weekend trip to Seattle to put up flyers on campuses for Students For Liberty (join the Campus Coordinator Program), spend Easter with my older sister (which I wasn't expecting to do), and other shenanigans (use your imagination *wink*), I thought hard about how to go about collecting the rest of the signatures needed for the initiative petitions...or if it was even worth doing it anymore. Talking to the other campaign members on Thursday, it was very clear that we were all both physically and emotionally exhausted from work and classes, and to have to collect nearly 700 signatures on top of that was not comforting. I have had a few people tell me that I have this "flame" within in me that never dies out and keeps me going. This flame told me on Thursday that we still might have what it takes to get all of the signatures. While I do believe in hard work and looking on the bright side, I see myself as a realistic optimist. My optimism is grounded in reality, or so I like to think. 

This morning, I realized how unsuccessful this whole thing had been, and any attempts this late in the game to collect the rest of the signatures would be fruitless. By this point, my stress levels were astronomical. The desperation and helplessness I felt was terrible. If any of you have had depression or depressive symptoms, you are probably familiar with that feeling of not even wanting to try, and even if you do, it would't even help. It was similar to that.

If you can't tell, these initiatives are important to me. I try to do everything in my power to ensure that marijuana, both medical and recreational, and industrial hemp will become legalized on the state and federal levels in the United States. With the substance policy initiative, I can't help but be haunted by the thought of how many students on campus get in trouble within the next school year because of unclear substance policies, or even worse, getting into trouble for calling for help. Or having an unnecessary death because people were too afraid to call for help. The cannabis legalization initiative is one we have been trying to get onto the AS Elections ballot for three years now. The first year, the sponsor was working on it all by himself. Last year, we had a delay in the approval of the initiative. I thought the third year, for sure, had to be our lucky year.

Between now and next AS Elections, we will be working on trying to see what we can do with these two initiatives without going through the election process. For example, talking with ResLife and the University Police to see what they think about working together to come up with a single, compact substance policy guide. If it works, great. If not, we could use any knowledge gained from those interactions and go through the AS Elections process again. However, what's nice about having campaigns like these is that they are more likely to gain more publicity than anything else would. What else we will work on is coming up with ideas on how to work smarter, and not necessarily harder - obtaining more campaign members, reaching out to more professors, clubs, etc. I also plan to talk with the AS myself to share my concerns with their standards on how initiatives can get onto the ballot. I know some other people who have worked on initiative campaigns, and it's relatively known that the AS Elections cater more towards candidates than initiatives.

When I finally messaged the campaign members about how I felt about suspending both campaigns, I felt really empty inside. This was originally going to be a Facebook update, but I decided to put this on here because it ties into political activism. Not to mention, look at how long this post is! All of the work we put into this would come to nothing. When I ran in the AS Elections, I at least was allowed on the ballot and had a fun experience. With this, I ran myself into the ground, had to give up on an avenue to address some very important issues I care about, and don't even have an awareness campaign we could utilize (at least through the AS Elections). I wanted to cry, but I just didn't feel sad enough to actually do so. Tonight would have been one of those nights where I go to a bar to do homework and drink some beer, but I need to catch up on sleep.

It annoys me when some people don't even want to attempt _________ because they're "just one person," or "the system is too big and corrupt." I constantly put myself out there because I sincerely believe that an individual is an essential component to a group or a cause. When I went sign waving in downtown Bellingham because I was angry that nobody seemed to be paying attention what was going down with Syria because they were too distracted by Miley Cyrus, I didn't actually think I would influence individuals with actual powers on US-International relations. I did have people come up to me and ask what was going on. I made people pay attention. I don't know if I actually made a long-lasting impact on anybody, but if I can positively influence one person with my actions, I can say that what I do is worth it. With failing at getting these initiatives onto the ballot, I feel small. While I would have loved to put in more effort to gather signatures, my health and grades can handle only so much extra stress.

I don't like to fail. Because of suspending these campaigns, I feel like a disappointment to myself and others. These were supposed to be more than "feel good" campaigns. I wanted them to bring about tangible results, or at the very least, produce a snowball effect. In order to rid myself of these bad feelings, I am going to analyze on how we can still get these campaigns going (whether it be working outside of the AS Elections or in next year's), forget the disappointments, and move on. I like to learn from the past, not have it control me. It's so hard to put this past me, but I am looking at the bigger picture. A little setback will not tarnish what I ultimately believe in. This has definitely been a low point in my political activism, more specifically, my drug policy activism. I cannot help but feel that smarter and safer drug policies are not being implemented fast enough. This ordeal does not help with that. If this was a low point, I am going to eventually find another high point. Since drug policy is a topic I will probably be drawn to for the rest of my life, I will exposed to both low and high points. Let's look forward to the high.

Which class in school did you feel most impacted by?

Everyone has their own opinions on which classes are most important for children to be exposed to. There is also a debate of the classes deemed important, which one deserves more time and resources. Jokes about math in school center on how it's only relevant while you're still a student who has to study it. My personal opinion aside, it goes to show how the perceived relevance of certain subjects may not necessarily hold true for everyone.

Now I have to ask...

Which class have you taken that you feel impacted you the most?

You don't have to name just one. I have taken several in elementary, middle, and high school that have probably had a huge influence on how I am today. However, there is one that really stands out.

During sophomore year of high school, I signed up for a scientific research class where we learned how to find, read, and conduct scientific research. (Okay, I moved to Texas right after that year, so I didn't exactly get to that last part.) Just because this class had been useful for me doesn't mean that it would be so for everyone else.

As a college student, the skills I learned have proven to be very useful. I have had professors tell the entire class that a lot of students don't seem to know how to cite references, then tell me in their critiques of my papers that I do so very well. Not only have I made Google Scholar my bitch, I know if I can't find free access to certain studies, I can attempt to email the author(s) for a copy. I have been able to apply my research knowledge to my formal studies, anthropology and theater, as well as other classes I have taken in English and political science and other subjects. It's also quite useful in informal debates. As a writer it adds more legitimacy to what I have to say.

That class helped me with a paper on chewing gum

Speaking of writing (or writing about writing, HAHAHA), my seventh grade English class was amongst the most useful. Not many students liked the teacher because she could be stern and the subject was tedious at times. I liked her. I think she knew how many of my classmates felt about her and the class, and once stated, "This may be a lot to learn and may seem useless right now, but trust me, you will be thankful for this education later." Boy, was she right. I credit her for most of the grammar knowledge I have today.

During second semester of senior year of high school, I wanted to take a psychology class. However, that filled up quickly and my counselor suggested I sign up for sociology. This was actually what made me decide to go into anthropology.

Of the three classes I mentioned, only one was a required course - the other two were extracurricular. When transferring to my third and last high school, they had a hard time placing my scientific research class into any subject categories of theirs, and of course, it didn't fill in any science requirements. Luckily, they were able to credit it under an independent studies course.

Now that you know some classes that I contribute to having a positive influence on my life, tell me yours.

My naked picture - six months later

If nudity, especially that of Katrina Haffner, is something you would not wish to look at, then reading this particular post is not for you.

Today is March 8, 2015. Six months ago and six days ago, September 2, 2014, I wrote about a privacy breach that exposed nude photos and videos of female celebrities. The post contained a lot of pent-up anger I had felt every time a female celebrity had private photos exposed to the world. Most of this anger resonated within me because instead of most of the backlash being aimed at the person who released the photo(s), it was fixed on the female celebrity, making it seem like society only cared about how "stupid" the celebrity was for taking pictures of herself in the first place. Not only did I write about the absurdity of the victim blamers, I took a naked picture photo of myself.

I was braced for what I thought was going to be a shitstorm of fury. Despite being warned from my family at a younger age about taking risque photos of myself lest they become leaked later in life, I did not elicit a reaction from them. Neither did anyone else around me say anything bad about the picture. In fact, a lot of people I know were congratulating me on my bravery and offering to buy me beers. I never did think that what I had done was brave. I still don't feel that way. While I feel more exposed, I don't equate my overcoming of that feeling with courage. With so many beer offers, I felt like all of those people could have instead pitched in to present me with my own harem.

Or bring back Marlon Brando from the dead...and have him in my harem

A couple of conversations, both in real life and online, stand out from the rest concerning my choice to post that photo on this blog. One happened while I was at a dance, and a friend came up to me to ask why I had decided to put it up, not in a demeaning way, but in a curious manner. I told him that talking about the normalization of nudity without participating in it felt hypocritical, and he was one of those people who commented on my bravery. After him, I had a few more talks similar to that one. On my Facebook about a month ago, I posted about that nude picture, and a Facebook friend commented how nobody in their right mind would do that. Then he realized that I was being serious. So while that was not a purposefully offensive thing to say, it made me contemplate the mindset of those who judge the actions of other people, especially within the realms of nudity and sexuality.

The conversation that put me on edge the most was from some guy online. He did not shame me for posting the picture, but told me how I will probably regret it later. Sure, I had a few people ask if I had really thought it through (and I was easily able to reassure them that I did), but this time, I took it personally. By saying that I didn't think it all the way through and will very likely regret it later in life, you are insulting my intelligence. Do you not think that this was something I thought very carefully about? I figured when I had made the final decision to take a naked picture of myself that if I came to regret this, then too bad. What if I learned that a potential employer saw it, and as a result, didn't hire me? Too fucking bad. All it would do is prove my point.

Maybe the actual negative responses to the photo were being said behind my back. I wouldn't be surprised. Even though I consciously try not to create any drama, people still manage to talk shit about me. Oh, humans. A few have pointed out to me that the responses may have been different if I looked different, as in if I wasn't attractive. I had definitely thought of that. If any edits to the photo were made, it was probably just cropping or some lighting adjustments - I made sure to leave it relatively untouched and natural. Because a lot of people think I'm attractive, I feared that some would think that I only put up the photo in order to get traffic. I won't lie, it's definitely cool seeing how popular that post has become, but that is not the reason why I took it.

Other than Avatar: the Last Airbender and The Legend of Korra searches, "Katrina Haffner naked" searches make up a good chunk of the keywords people use to find themselves at La Commedia Politica. Are people searching for that specific post, or are they just creeping on me? Who really knows. The weirdest search as of yet that I have seen someone use to find this blog was "Katrina Haffner full frontal" - I guess the logic here being that if I have a completely naked photo of my backside, there must be one of my front too. While I do give people permission to enjoy looking at my naked picture, some also choose to share their perverted thoughts about it with me. I don't exactly know what I want to say in regards to that.

While I am happy with the picture, and happily surprised with the positive responses to it, it never seemed like enough. When I was running the idea through my head of writing about the celebrity privacy breach, the nude photo didn't come to mind until much later into the brainstorming sessions. Once I had it in there, I couldn't get it out, but what got me was the kind of nude photo I wanted to take. At first, I was thinking of a full-on breast shot. However, that seemed too much like a "Hey guy I am hooking up with currently, these are my tits" kind of picture, and if I was going to advertise that post using the picture (because why not milk it a little?), Facebook and other sites would take it down for sure. Funny how ass and breast photos elicit different reactions. Not to mention, I wanted something more artistic, and the kind of photo you would send to your casual partner at 3 AM because you can't sleep didn't really cut it. With the sort of picture I decided to take, I wanted to emphasize the human form without necessarily sexualizing it.

Now, I am taking the steps I was too scared to take six months prior. Like the original post, this is something I have thought well through, and will be damned if I back out. The guilt of not showing any of my front side has weighed on me for months, and it's time to let it off my shoulders.

It's not the best quality photo. Cropping it and changing the lighting was the only editing work done. It took me a few days to figure out what kind of pose I wanted to do. If I had an actual photographer, it may have turned out a little bit different. I could have chosen from tens, maybe even hundreds of pictures to find the "perfect" one. However, by having my laptop set to a timer to take the photo, it took a lot of work to take even just one picture. I had to make sure the webcam was adjusted to the right height, click to take the photo, then run to the chair to do my pose. Because of all of this exhausting work, I didn't have a limitless supply of photos to choose from. This picture was one of the first ones I took. It was probably the first one that I took that was not blurry and where I was in the right pose. I had meant to close my eyes, but in the few second rush to get in the right pose, I forgot to do so. I was meaning to try out a few with my eyes closed, and others with my eyes open, but the more I took after this one, I just couldn't keep going on. I am wearing makeup, but let's be honest, I don't think my face is the main focus of the picture

What stood out to me was the movement. Probably one reason why it's not great quality. To me, it makes it seem more natural. When I first looked at it, I didn't like it. Then I studied it a bit more, and decided to keep it in case no other photo turned out well. After deciding to use the picture, I started disliking it again. It wasn't that I thought I looked unattractive, but I didn't look as attractive as I could be. The most glaringly obvious example would be the curve of my waist to my hips - it usually looks more prominent (makes up my hourglass shape), but at the angle in this photo, I think I look somewhat straight figured. I dismissed these thoughts because I think the world should know that even attractive people have insecurities about their looks, no matter how superficial.

You do have permission to look at and enjoy this photo, but you do not have my consent to use this against me in a negative fashion.

You may call me brave, but do so according to my willingness to showcase my insecurities, not because I am showing my naked body to the world. What will bring me even greater joy than complimenting by body or spirit is to join me in this endeavor to get the world to appreciate the naked human form, without having it always be about sex. Even if it is about sexual appeal, respect people's choices to show themselves off, while refraining from objectification.

Maybe next September, you all will get to see my vulva.

Follow me on Patreon!