Pitchfork Staff: “The Story of Feminist Punk in 33 Songs From Patti Smith to Bikini Kill, the songs that have crushed stereotypes and steered progress

Excerpt – “BUSH TETRAS ~ ‘Too Many Creeps’ Gestated in dark clubs and cramped DIY spaces, New York’s no wave movement wasn’t just an oddball response to the macho energy of the previous decade’s punk scene. It marked a palpable shift in rock circles in the city and beyond, and became a hotbed for the musical expression of feminist ideals. Sonic Youth and Lydia Lunch are frequently credited with pushing its postmodernism into the spotlight, but due is also owed to Bush Tetras, the freak-funk outfit formed by guitarist Pat Place (a founding member of the no wave icons the Contortions).

Bush Tetras occupied an uneasy new space, balancing spry bass and guitar with singer Cynthia Sley’s deadpan, frequently political mantras. Their biggest hit, “Too Many Creeps,” was a funky rebuttal to street harassment. “I just don’t wanna go out in the streets no more,” Sley insisted airily, “because these people give me the creeps.” Her lyrics laid bare a sense of exhaustion all too familiar to most women—who hasn’t been the target of a wolf whistle or undressing glance? Coupled with the dancey arrangement, Sley’s monotonous tone signaled that within the Tetras’ newly staked safe space, misogyny wasn’t a threat: it was just a boring, predictable damper on the party. Like the rest of their peers, this band was over it.” –Zoe Camp

The Mysteries of Pitching, and All That ‘Stuff’ ~ The New York Times, Oct. 3, 2015 by John Branch

“Baseball considers itself the most thoughtful of games, a pastime more than a sport, written about with reverence and lyricism, in which pitching is considered more art than athleticism. Yet the primary term used to explain the art of pitching, which often determines who wins and who loses, is an inelegant word of ill-defined mush.

Stuff…”

SCOTUSblog Recommended Citation: Lyle Denniston, Court reopens race and death penalty issues, SCOTUSblog (Jun. 6, 2016, 1:41 PM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/06/court-reopens-race-and-death-penalty-issues/

In another Texas capital punishment case, the Court agreed to try again to sort out when an individual is too disabled intellectually to be sentenced to death. The Justices chose not to consider a second issue raised in that case: the constitutionality of prolonged stays on death row, especially on the theory that this treatment causes severe psychological harm. A month ago, over Justice Stephen G. Breyer’s dissent, the Court refused to hear that question in a California case. It appears that there are not four votes (the minimum number required) to grant review of that particular issue.

In the newly granted case of Buck v. Stephens, the Court gave itself the option of weighing a death sentence that may have been influenced by a racist comment by an expert who had been called to the witness stand by a defense lawyer, not by prosecutors. The expert had made similar comments in several other Texas cases, and the state had taken action to remedy those, but did not do so in the case of Duane Edward Buck of Houston.

Buck’s new appeal focused on the same legal complaint that a divided Court refused to consider five years ago: that his defense lawyer failed in his constitutional duty by calling to the stand a psychologist, who told the jury that Buck would be likely to be dangerous in the future, if not put to death, because of his race; Buck is black. The question of future dangerousness was a central issue for Texas juries in deciding for or against a death sentence.

The witness, Dr. Walter Quijano, had been summoned by Buck’s trial lawyer to testify on the dangerousness issue. He said flatly that his studies had shown that black people and males were more likely to be a danger to the public. Under questioning by Buck’s lawyer, he reviewed the findings of his report.

Buck was sentenced to death for murdering his girlfriend in front of her children, along with the murder of a man. Both crimes occurred in 1995. When Buck took an appeal to the Supreme Court in 2011, five Justices commented negatively about the witness’s comment, but three of those five said the blame lay with Buck’s lawyer for calling that witness and eliciting that testimony. Two Justices would have granted review at that time.

As Buck’s case returned to the Court this Term, it focused on whether the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit had raised too high a barrier before Buck could raise anew the question about Dr. Quijano’s testimony. Buck’s current lawyers have been attempting to reopen his case to raise the same racial discrimination issue. That essentially procedural question may be at the center of the Court’s coming review, but the underlying race bias claim remains in the case.

Lyle Denniston, Opinion analysis: Telltale files on race-based jury selection, SCOTUSblog (May. 23, 2016, 2:22 PM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/05/opinion-analysis-telltale-files-on-race-based-jury-selection/

Opinion analysis: Telltale files on race-based jury selection
Analysis

“The Supreme Court made a new effort on Monday to restrict prosecutors’ power to strike black jurors in a racially sensitive case, but the result was so tightly focused on what happened at just one trial that it was doubtful that the new ruling would do much to end the practice. What made the difference this time, it appeared, was defense lawyers’ discovery of telltale files obtained from prosecutors years after the trial was over…

The decision in Foster v. Chatman dealt with the trial practice of “peremptory strikes” of members of a jury pool — that is, striking a pool member without giving a reason to do so. Until the 1986 ruling in Batson v. Kentucky, the use of such strikes could not be challenged…”

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 158 other followers