I spent my New Year's Eve Contra dancing in Sacramento. At some point, I realized that I was being followed/stalked by a woman. She first stood near me, and talked into space at no one in particular, I suppose hoping that I would listen and comment. Since I didn't hear what she was saying, I paid no heed. Some time later, I got cornered near the snacks, coincidentally by the stack of progressive newspapers. She made sure to shout this time, though no more in my direction than before. I ignored her a couple of times, and started looking at the headlines of the newspapers. She shouted something about gun control. I finally realized she was trying to talk to me. See, I had suspected as much before, but I'm not used to people talking to me. Once she had my attention, she announced her status as a conservative lesbian. I thought it was rather oxymoronic. When I said as much, she said "What, have you been going to college? Who tells you this stuff?" Hmmm... Prop 8, anyone? It's not news that conservatism and homosexuality do not go hand in hand these days (or ever have). I asked her if she ever wanted equal civil rights to heterosexuals. The conversation went nowhere. Never mind that she's been following me (a guy) around looking for a dance. I dismissed her as confused, and went on my merry way, talking to other people so that she'd leave me alone. She never got her dance.
Now that I'm home, I decided to search up this funny sounding term, "conservative lesbianism." There are at least a few things out there, but recent headlines are intermingled with stuff at least as far back as 2001. Mostly it's the idea that these lesbians adhere to conservatism in the true sense - minimal government, and certainly minimal government interference in personal life. Since when, though, has the conservative element in this country actually adhered to those ideals? Certainly not recently. Why on earth would any lesbian or gay person currently identify with a party that is actively working to deny them civil rights, and whose religious core condemns them as hell-bound? What's more important to you - your guns, or your dignity?
These people must wake up and get their priorities straight. The Republican party has no respect for them, and the Republicans have clearly shown no intention of minimizing government's monitoring and control of people's decisions. Until there is true conservatism in government, without the interference of religion and corporate greed, any conservative gay person would do well to lose that identity and focus on preserving their rights as equals.
Digital picture frames are neat little gizmos - especially for showing pics to my parents, who are rarely, if ever, inclined to poke around flickr (or anything much beyond their email). I have had various setups for a while using an old laptop. At first, I used Windows, because the wifi drivers for Linux were either missing for my card, or inadequate (non-functional, or locked up computer frequently). I have finally gotten a card that agrees with Linux (the Intel 2200BG MiniPCI), and the computer is now up and running with Xubuntu. Many options are out there for picking particular sets, or photos by interestingness, but I wanted simply a way to download my whole photostream and allow a screensaver to meander the collection. Not all of my photos are interesting, but they have other personal value of interest to parents.
The synopsis of what I do:
- Use flickrfs to mount my photos on the drive
- rsync to copy photos from flickrfs to local drive
- cron to run photo update scripts nightly
To do this yourself,
- Get flickrfs - on Ubuntu/Xubuntu 8.04 and 8.10, this can be accomplished with
apt-get install flickrfs (sudo as necessary)
- Make 2 folders - one to mount flickrfs to, and another to store your pictures locally. Make sure you have write access to both of them (obviously)
- Mount the flickrfs filesystem to the folder you created for it. This is as simple as the command
flickrfs /PATH/TO/YOUR/DESIRED/MOUNTPOINT
After running that command, a web browser will open for you to authorize flickrfs to access your account. Eventually, the command line window will spit out something about updating your sets, and tell you when it's done.
- You should now have 2 folders in your flickrfs mount point - sets and meta
- If you have the 2 folders, create a folder named "stream" in the flickrfs mountpoint. If you don't have the 2 folders and you create the stream directory, fuse will complain about a non-empty directory. The flickrfs mount point must be empty until it (flickrfs) puts stuff there.
- Wait 5-10 minutes for flickrfs to populate the stream folder
- rsync to copy files from the flickrfs/stream/ folder to your local pictures folder.
If anyone finds it useful, here's the script that I have cron run to update my local Pictures directory with the contents of my photostream. There's also a bit in there to clean up empty files. rsync seems to be not quite perfect with flickrfs, and I accumulated a few empty jpg's that confused the screensaver.
flickr-update
I display the pictures using GLslideshow, which is standard with xscreensaver. I replaced gnome-screensaver with xscreensaver, as configuration of xscreensaver is easier. To ensure that xscreensaver is always reading a fresh set of photos, I kill it and restart it nightly (cron is really useful!). I did have to tell XFCE to start xscreensaver at startup - it isn't a completely automatic drop-in replacement for gnome-screensaver. To point xscreensaver at your local pictures directory, check the advanced tab in the upper right, and change the folder where it looks for pictures.
Side note: The Perl installation for Ubuntu 8.10 has a bug with xscreensaver. It dumps yellow text onscreen, something about a constant being changed. I fixed this by adding a debian sid repository to my third party software, and using the Perl version from there, since it's more up to date. It fixed the yellow text problem for me. The older this post gets, the less likely this will be an issue for you - I imagine the Ubuntu people will update this soon.
If you haven't already seen this, you really should watch it. It's a 1985 documentary on Harvey Milk, the subject of the recent Sean Penn movie.
http://www.hulu.com/watch/49577/the-times-of-harvey-milk
It's worth watching because Harvey Milk exemplified the kind of person that we desperately need - right now and always. He was gentle and compassionate, yet fiery and determined in his push for human rights. I have been forced throughout my life to learn about Christianity at various religious schools and from growing up Catholic. This man, more than anyone in the political history of the United States that I know of, truly exemplifies what it means to be a Christian politician (even though he was Jewish): accepting of others, peaceful, selfless, and relentless in his pursuit of human equality. I only mention Christianity because of the current political skew in that direction. It is irrelevant in understanding Milk's life, but does provide a widely acknowledged standard of excellence, a standard through which Milk can be evaluated to be a truly praiseworthy man.
The Sean Penn movie is also worth watching, but this documentary is better, in my opinion. It covers the events after the assassination in much greater detail. If you do go to see the Sean Penn movie, please avoid Cinemark theaters, as the owner of that chain donated the maximum personal contribution to the Yes on Prop 8 campaign, and should not be profiting from the memory of such a great leader of the gay community.