How to use this Page

A few weeks ago a I posted my digital sketch of this little slush monster asking for all your votes and support. And everyone came through! Thanks so much to those of you who voted for me! My slush monster did collect the most votes and I finished the drawing of him for the blog is is now the mascot of.

Thanks everyone!

Hand guard (Tsuba) depicting a dragon clutching a sacred pearl from a Japanese sword. The original 18th century sword hand guard that I used for reference is in the collection of The Walters Art Museum. I started this earlier in the week, then things heated up and got busy. This evening, even though it's a bit late, I just couldn't resist finishing it up and posting it.

www.peggyfussell.com
www.peggyfussell.wordpress.com

oooops

An unhappy dragon with a winecork stuck up his nose, and to short hands

Went to go see Julie Taymor's new(ish) opera, Grendel, and started drawing based on the dragon in the production. It's all scribbly and I don't really know where I was going with this, but I haven't contributed in a while. Gotta start somewheres... Maybe I'll get more on the ball next week.

Here's my entry into the dragon world. I guess a Chinese dragon would eat Chinese Takeout.

Notable federal district decision from a week or so ago concerning a student/parent objection to a book that had homoesexual [well, same-sex couple] characters. The court upheld a lower court dismissal of a lawsuit by a family climaing their religious rights were being violated when kids read books involving “positive portrayals of families headed by same-sex parents and same-sex marriage, including the frequently challenged children’s book, King and King.” The court stated that reading the books is not the same as being “indoctrinated” into affirming the choices the book’s characters make, or are evidencing. It’s an interesting challenge and an interesting, and to my mind positive, response with the upshot being “you do not have the right to not be offended”.

The First Circuit rejected the parents’ indoctrination claims. It held that there is no First Amendment free exercise right to be free from any reference in public elementary schools to the existence of families in which the parents are of different gender combinations. It also held that public schools are not obliged to shield individual students from ideas which potentially are religiously offensive, especially when the school does not require that the student agree with or affirm those ideas, or even participate in discussions about them.

You can read the full opinion here and some backstory on the controversy that sparked these claims here and here. Keep in mind that this book challenge happened in Massachusetts, a state where same sex marriages are legal and where a “1993 state law directed school systems to teach about different kinds of families and the harm of prejudice.”

This is a photo my sister took of the calendar in the room where I was hanging out with Dalhousie library/info science students at a brown bag lunch. Please note OMG line. Delightful. I had a really good time talking to students and answering question about topics ranging from porn to the USA PATRIOT Act. Thanks to everyone for coming out and saying hello!