Fabulously Feminist Search Engine
Custom Search
Saturday, January 24, 2009
From our Friends at Socialist Worker
Nothing to Apologize For
Michele Bollinger takes up the debate about what kind of politics will strengthen the movement for abortion rights in her review of the new book Abortion & Life.
January 23, 2009
THERE IS a great deal to be hopeful about as the 36th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion passed this week.
Finally, George W. Bush is out of office. Alaska Gov. and former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin remains a punch line (at least for now). In the 2008 elections, anti-choice ballot measures were voted down in highly conservative places such as South Dakota. Barack Obama is expected to sign an executive order to reverse the global "gag rule" that bars international family planning groups funded by the U.S. from providing information about abortion.
But questions about the direction of the abortion rights movement are as pressing as ever. The Washington Post reported that 16,000 anti-abortion protesters were in Washington, D.C., for their annual anti-abortion march on January 22. This is smaller than recent years, but stands in stark contrast to the lack of mobilization by pro-choice forces. And while Obama has said he would sign the Freedom of Choice Act if it were passed by Congress, there is no indication that he will advocate for the legislation.
This is a time for the pro-choice movement, like many other struggles, to revisit central questions about how we should organize. And on first glance, Jennifer Baumgarder's Abortion & Life is a welcome addition to the discussion.
The book by the "third wave" feminist and pro-choice activist features at its center the "I Had An Abortion" theme around which Baumgarder, along with journalist and documentarian Gillian Aldrich, crafted their 2005 documentary of the same name.
One of the reasons Baumgardner and Aldrich created the film was to build on the conversation sparked by the overwhelming response to her "I Had An Abortion" T-shirts--Baumgarder herself marched wearing one at the April 2004 March for Women's Lives in Washington, D.C.
For scores of women, this slogan--along with Web sites like I'mnotsorry.net--was an unapologetic, visual affirmation of abortion, and represented a rejection of the silence, stigma and unwarranted shame surrounding abortion in our society.
Abortion & Life replicates the film in its honest and open chronicling of individual women's experiences of abortion. As in the film, 15 women of different ages, races and class backgrounds--including noted feminist Gloria Steinem, reproductive health activist Loretta Ross, writer Barbara Ehrenreich and musician Ani DiFranco--are photographed wearing the shirts as they tell their "abortion stories."
In doing so, the book does its part to break the subject of abortion out of the shame and disparagement that has increasingly surrounded it since the decline of the women's movements of the 1960s and 1970s.
"Abortion without apology" was the clarion call of that time. Today, major pro-choice advocates and Democratic Party politicians alike--from Hillary Clinton to former NARAL head Kate Michelman--regularly maintain that abortion is a "tragedy" or a "sad" choice that we need "fewer" women to be making.
As the ideological discussion about abortion has shifted to the right over the past 30 years, many women internalized this shift, even as some utilized their right to abortion and most remained in favor of abortion rights.
While wearing an "I Had An Abortion" T-shirt isn't something everyone can--or wants--to do, the personal stories of women who sought abortions in our society expose the basic, fundamental reasons why women and only women must have the right to control their own bodies. The real experiences of women contradict the wide variety of myths about abortion perpetuated by the right.
Some stories featured in Abortion & Life confirm the fact that women have always needed and sought abortions, whether it is legal or not:
-- Florence Rice, born 1919: "I went to work in a laundry. My salary was $12.41 a week--it was the 1930s. I worked and I took care of her [Ms. Rice's first child.] Later on, I sort of went with someone else, and found myself pregnant again--but I knew I wasn't going to have any more babies. I was not going to be like my mother. It was just as simple as that."
-- Marion Banzhaf, born 1953: "Kevin wanted to get married, but I wasn't really in love with him. His view was that we would drop out of school, and we would go live with his parents, and he would work at the Owens Corning glass factory, where his father worked. And I would stay home with his mother and take care of the baby. This was his plan, and it sends shudders up my spine still to think of it. So I was getting more and more desperate. I thought about killing myself father than live with Kevin's plan."
-- Jenny Egan, born 1980: "I'm one of five children in a Mormon family. My father is a Marine, Republican, Mormon lawyer. I was raised in a church where abortion was a horror and something that was not acceptable...I was sixteen when I got pregnant. It was with my boyfriend. The first time we had sex, it wasn't completely consensual. He would sort of accuse me of being a lesbian and--though it turned out he was onto something--in my high school world at the time, it was easier to have sex I didn't want than to be called a lesbian...God, the panic of picturing my life!"
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ABORTION & Life also includes Baumgardner's analysis of major issues surrounding the pro-choice movement today, including counter-arguments to challenge the right-wing bigotry and moments of irreverence that are in keeping with a more uncompromising view of abortion rights.
But much of that gets lost in the overriding argument of her analysis, which, in keeping with much of "third wave" feminism, casts aside the political militancy of the 1960s generation of feminism, while trying to maintain a glossy, liberal critique of anti-abortion forces--in other words, treading a middle ground that takes us nowhere. This makes for a very disappointing book.
Baumgardner's role, in her words, has "moved from winning support for pro-choice legislation to examining how this generation's experience of abortion is shifting." This includes pushing aside a political orientation on winning back the ground taken by the right, and replacing it with a "pro-voice" orientation.
By "pro-voice," Baumgardner joins in what has been a right-wing critique of the mainstream pro-choice movement for "neglecting" the emotional experiences some women have after an abortion--feelings of sadness or depression, for example. She holds up the work of nonprofit organizations and counseling groups that have helped what Baumgardner deems to be a rightful "shift in the national conversation from 'keep your laws off my body' to 'let's talk about feelings and whether fetal life has value.'"
While the growth of organizations that promote counseling, and reproductive and mental health resources for women is arguably needed, Baumgardner wrongly conflates this work with a political strategy that can lead the way forward for the women's rights movement as a whole.
To Baumgardner, being "pro-voice" also means accepting language that the pro-choice movement used to reject wholesale--including the term "pro-life" (which Baumgardner herself uses throughout the book), "baby" (as opposed to "fetus' or "zygote"), "killing" and so on--for fear of alienating the scores of women who use these terms.
But in making this argument, Baumgardner confuses what may be sound advice for counselors running a clinic with what is necessary for a growing pro-choice movement. And she does so by taking pot shots at activists who try to fight for choice on a strong, politically confident basis:
Emily Barcklow...had an abortion when she was 19 and attending Evergreen State College. "It was not an easy decision," she recalls. "I struggled with feelings of deviance, selfishness and loss afterwards." Four years, lots of counseling and an "amazing ritual process" helped her feel resolved.
But at a NARAL event on the University of Washington campus in 2001, Barcklow spent hours preparing a presentation about her experience and closure ritual: "I arrived at the speak-out and was disappointed with the lack of depth in the other presentations--all recycled coat hangers, and we'll never go back signs. I would cite this experience as my first real disconnect from the mainstream abortion rights movement."
It's not much of a surprise, then, that in her chapter on "Can you be a feminist and pro-life?" Baumgarder answers, "The answer is a resounding yes"--while pointing out some apparently redeeming qualities in groups like Democrats for Life and Feminists for Life.
While it might seem as though she has gone off the deep end, Baumgardner is simply trying to reconcile a contradiction that just can't be reconciled--you cannot "value women" and at the same time deny women the fundamental right to control what happens to their own bodies.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
IT IS true that because of years of attacks on the right to choose, some women identify themselves as being "personally opposed" to abortion, but "politically pro-choice"--and vice versa.
But instead of fighting to remain relentless on questions of principle--such as why a fetus isn't a baby, and how it came to be incorrectly referred to as such--Baumgardner maintains that we need to move past the "pro-choice/pro-life dichotomy." This is a mistake that is grounded in a perception that people's views are static and unchanging.
The fact is that people find a clear, confident and unapologetic case for abortion rights to be politically compelling. At its core, our society remains pro-choice and supportive of Roe v. Wade because women need to have control over when and under what circumstances they have children.
Every year, about half of the pregnancies in the U.S. are unplanned, and half of those are terminated--about 1.3 million a year; over one-third of women have an abortion by age 45. According to the Guttmacher Institute, 75 percent of women say they cannot afford to have a child, and that having a child would interfere with work, school or the ability to care for dependents; 50 percent say they don't want to be a single parent or are having problems with their partner.
For these reasons, there are activists in our communities and on campuses who want to organize to fight for access to abortion, emergency contraception and so on. This is the basis on which a new movement can be built. It is possible to push back against the attacks by the right and gain ground in terms of reproductive freedom in the coming era.
The stories told in Abortion & Life illustrate how imperative it is that we fight for these rights. But the politics articulated by Baumgardner amount to a political concession to the right, put forth by a central figure of the younger generation of feminists who is supposed to be leading the pro-choice movement forward.
We will need to do much better if we are to take advantage of the possibilities in the future.
Michele Bollinger takes up the debate about what kind of politics will strengthen the movement for abortion rights in her review of the new book Abortion & Life.
January 23, 2009
THERE IS a great deal to be hopeful about as the 36th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion passed this week.
Finally, George W. Bush is out of office. Alaska Gov. and former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin remains a punch line (at least for now). In the 2008 elections, anti-choice ballot measures were voted down in highly conservative places such as South Dakota. Barack Obama is expected to sign an executive order to reverse the global "gag rule" that bars international family planning groups funded by the U.S. from providing information about abortion.
But questions about the direction of the abortion rights movement are as pressing as ever. The Washington Post reported that 16,000 anti-abortion protesters were in Washington, D.C., for their annual anti-abortion march on January 22. This is smaller than recent years, but stands in stark contrast to the lack of mobilization by pro-choice forces. And while Obama has said he would sign the Freedom of Choice Act if it were passed by Congress, there is no indication that he will advocate for the legislation.
This is a time for the pro-choice movement, like many other struggles, to revisit central questions about how we should organize. And on first glance, Jennifer Baumgarder's Abortion & Life is a welcome addition to the discussion.
The book by the "third wave" feminist and pro-choice activist features at its center the "I Had An Abortion" theme around which Baumgarder, along with journalist and documentarian Gillian Aldrich, crafted their 2005 documentary of the same name.
One of the reasons Baumgardner and Aldrich created the film was to build on the conversation sparked by the overwhelming response to her "I Had An Abortion" T-shirts--Baumgarder herself marched wearing one at the April 2004 March for Women's Lives in Washington, D.C.
For scores of women, this slogan--along with Web sites like I'mnotsorry.net--was an unapologetic, visual affirmation of abortion, and represented a rejection of the silence, stigma and unwarranted shame surrounding abortion in our society.
Abortion & Life replicates the film in its honest and open chronicling of individual women's experiences of abortion. As in the film, 15 women of different ages, races and class backgrounds--including noted feminist Gloria Steinem, reproductive health activist Loretta Ross, writer Barbara Ehrenreich and musician Ani DiFranco--are photographed wearing the shirts as they tell their "abortion stories."
In doing so, the book does its part to break the subject of abortion out of the shame and disparagement that has increasingly surrounded it since the decline of the women's movements of the 1960s and 1970s.
"Abortion without apology" was the clarion call of that time. Today, major pro-choice advocates and Democratic Party politicians alike--from Hillary Clinton to former NARAL head Kate Michelman--regularly maintain that abortion is a "tragedy" or a "sad" choice that we need "fewer" women to be making.
As the ideological discussion about abortion has shifted to the right over the past 30 years, many women internalized this shift, even as some utilized their right to abortion and most remained in favor of abortion rights.
While wearing an "I Had An Abortion" T-shirt isn't something everyone can--or wants--to do, the personal stories of women who sought abortions in our society expose the basic, fundamental reasons why women and only women must have the right to control their own bodies. The real experiences of women contradict the wide variety of myths about abortion perpetuated by the right.
Some stories featured in Abortion & Life confirm the fact that women have always needed and sought abortions, whether it is legal or not:
-- Florence Rice, born 1919: "I went to work in a laundry. My salary was $12.41 a week--it was the 1930s. I worked and I took care of her [Ms. Rice's first child.] Later on, I sort of went with someone else, and found myself pregnant again--but I knew I wasn't going to have any more babies. I was not going to be like my mother. It was just as simple as that."
-- Marion Banzhaf, born 1953: "Kevin wanted to get married, but I wasn't really in love with him. His view was that we would drop out of school, and we would go live with his parents, and he would work at the Owens Corning glass factory, where his father worked. And I would stay home with his mother and take care of the baby. This was his plan, and it sends shudders up my spine still to think of it. So I was getting more and more desperate. I thought about killing myself father than live with Kevin's plan."
-- Jenny Egan, born 1980: "I'm one of five children in a Mormon family. My father is a Marine, Republican, Mormon lawyer. I was raised in a church where abortion was a horror and something that was not acceptable...I was sixteen when I got pregnant. It was with my boyfriend. The first time we had sex, it wasn't completely consensual. He would sort of accuse me of being a lesbian and--though it turned out he was onto something--in my high school world at the time, it was easier to have sex I didn't want than to be called a lesbian...God, the panic of picturing my life!"
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ABORTION & Life also includes Baumgardner's analysis of major issues surrounding the pro-choice movement today, including counter-arguments to challenge the right-wing bigotry and moments of irreverence that are in keeping with a more uncompromising view of abortion rights.
But much of that gets lost in the overriding argument of her analysis, which, in keeping with much of "third wave" feminism, casts aside the political militancy of the 1960s generation of feminism, while trying to maintain a glossy, liberal critique of anti-abortion forces--in other words, treading a middle ground that takes us nowhere. This makes for a very disappointing book.
Baumgardner's role, in her words, has "moved from winning support for pro-choice legislation to examining how this generation's experience of abortion is shifting." This includes pushing aside a political orientation on winning back the ground taken by the right, and replacing it with a "pro-voice" orientation.
By "pro-voice," Baumgardner joins in what has been a right-wing critique of the mainstream pro-choice movement for "neglecting" the emotional experiences some women have after an abortion--feelings of sadness or depression, for example. She holds up the work of nonprofit organizations and counseling groups that have helped what Baumgardner deems to be a rightful "shift in the national conversation from 'keep your laws off my body' to 'let's talk about feelings and whether fetal life has value.'"
While the growth of organizations that promote counseling, and reproductive and mental health resources for women is arguably needed, Baumgardner wrongly conflates this work with a political strategy that can lead the way forward for the women's rights movement as a whole.
To Baumgardner, being "pro-voice" also means accepting language that the pro-choice movement used to reject wholesale--including the term "pro-life" (which Baumgardner herself uses throughout the book), "baby" (as opposed to "fetus' or "zygote"), "killing" and so on--for fear of alienating the scores of women who use these terms.
But in making this argument, Baumgardner confuses what may be sound advice for counselors running a clinic with what is necessary for a growing pro-choice movement. And she does so by taking pot shots at activists who try to fight for choice on a strong, politically confident basis:
Emily Barcklow...had an abortion when she was 19 and attending Evergreen State College. "It was not an easy decision," she recalls. "I struggled with feelings of deviance, selfishness and loss afterwards." Four years, lots of counseling and an "amazing ritual process" helped her feel resolved.
But at a NARAL event on the University of Washington campus in 2001, Barcklow spent hours preparing a presentation about her experience and closure ritual: "I arrived at the speak-out and was disappointed with the lack of depth in the other presentations--all recycled coat hangers, and we'll never go back signs. I would cite this experience as my first real disconnect from the mainstream abortion rights movement."
It's not much of a surprise, then, that in her chapter on "Can you be a feminist and pro-life?" Baumgarder answers, "The answer is a resounding yes"--while pointing out some apparently redeeming qualities in groups like Democrats for Life and Feminists for Life.
While it might seem as though she has gone off the deep end, Baumgardner is simply trying to reconcile a contradiction that just can't be reconciled--you cannot "value women" and at the same time deny women the fundamental right to control what happens to their own bodies.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
IT IS true that because of years of attacks on the right to choose, some women identify themselves as being "personally opposed" to abortion, but "politically pro-choice"--and vice versa.
But instead of fighting to remain relentless on questions of principle--such as why a fetus isn't a baby, and how it came to be incorrectly referred to as such--Baumgardner maintains that we need to move past the "pro-choice/pro-life dichotomy." This is a mistake that is grounded in a perception that people's views are static and unchanging.
The fact is that people find a clear, confident and unapologetic case for abortion rights to be politically compelling. At its core, our society remains pro-choice and supportive of Roe v. Wade because women need to have control over when and under what circumstances they have children.
Every year, about half of the pregnancies in the U.S. are unplanned, and half of those are terminated--about 1.3 million a year; over one-third of women have an abortion by age 45. According to the Guttmacher Institute, 75 percent of women say they cannot afford to have a child, and that having a child would interfere with work, school or the ability to care for dependents; 50 percent say they don't want to be a single parent or are having problems with their partner.
For these reasons, there are activists in our communities and on campuses who want to organize to fight for access to abortion, emergency contraception and so on. This is the basis on which a new movement can be built. It is possible to push back against the attacks by the right and gain ground in terms of reproductive freedom in the coming era.
The stories told in Abortion & Life illustrate how imperative it is that we fight for these rights. But the politics articulated by Baumgardner amount to a political concession to the right, put forth by a central figure of the younger generation of feminists who is supposed to be leading the pro-choice movement forward.
We will need to do much better if we are to take advantage of the possibilities in the future.
Fabulously Feminist News
Victory for Women! Global Gag Rule Repealed
The Feminist Majority applauds President Barack Obama for issuing an executive order today that repeals the Global Gag Rule. President Obama's expeditious action on behalf of women worldwide will save the lives, health, and suffering of literally millions of women worldwide yearly.
"Barack Obama, with the stroke of a pen, is now saving the lives and health of countless women and girls around the world. President Obama is keeping his pledge to women and I believe this is only the beginning," said Feminist Majority President Eleanor Smeal.
The Global Gag Rule prohibited family planning programs in other nations that receive US aid from using non-US monies for abortion counseling, advocacy, and referrals. The rule was instituted by President Reagan in 1984, was repealed by President Clinton, and was reinstituted by President George W. Bush.
The Global Gag Rule inhibited women worldwide from access to gynecological exams, AIDS prevention and treatment, and contraceptive options. It also halted shipment of condoms and contraceptives to more than 20 countries. In part because of restricted access to reproductive health services, more than 70,000 women annually die from unsafe abortions worldwide.
The Feminist Majority, founded in 1987, works for women's equality and to enhance feminist participation in public policy nationwide and worldwide.
Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act Passed Senate, Returns to House
The Senate passed by a strong majority the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 (S. 181) last night after defeating a series of Republican hostile amendments. The Senate floor debate for the Act was led by Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Dean of the women Senators, for Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chair Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) after Majority Leader Senator Reid (D-NV) navigated the bill to the floor.
"President Obama and the Democratic Congress are keeping their pledge to women and all workers to reverse the Supreme Court decision that gutted the right of employees to fight wage discrimination," said Eleanor Smeal, President of the Feminist Majority. "We're on a roll to rebuilding women’s rights and civil rights taken away during the Bush era."
The Senate Act, which has already passed the House in a version coupled with the Paycheck Fairness Act, will go back to the House as a single bill. The House is expected to pass the Senate bill on Tuesday. President Obama is expected to sign it into law shortly thereafter. In almost straight party line votes the Senate kept the pledge of President Obama to sign the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act almost immediately after being sworn in.
Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson's killer amendment was defeated 55-40 in a nearly straight party vote with Democrats voting against it – only Republican Olympia (ME) voted with Democrats. Several other debilitating Republican amendments also went down to defeat.
The Ledbetter Act corrects the Roberts Supreme Court decision that gutted the ability of women workers to sue for wage discrimination. The Act passed helps not only women, but all workers who are victims of wage discrimination on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, national origin, age, or disability.
The Feminist Majority applauds President Barack Obama for issuing an executive order today that repeals the Global Gag Rule. President Obama's expeditious action on behalf of women worldwide will save the lives, health, and suffering of literally millions of women worldwide yearly.
"Barack Obama, with the stroke of a pen, is now saving the lives and health of countless women and girls around the world. President Obama is keeping his pledge to women and I believe this is only the beginning," said Feminist Majority President Eleanor Smeal.
The Global Gag Rule prohibited family planning programs in other nations that receive US aid from using non-US monies for abortion counseling, advocacy, and referrals. The rule was instituted by President Reagan in 1984, was repealed by President Clinton, and was reinstituted by President George W. Bush.
The Global Gag Rule inhibited women worldwide from access to gynecological exams, AIDS prevention and treatment, and contraceptive options. It also halted shipment of condoms and contraceptives to more than 20 countries. In part because of restricted access to reproductive health services, more than 70,000 women annually die from unsafe abortions worldwide.
The Feminist Majority, founded in 1987, works for women's equality and to enhance feminist participation in public policy nationwide and worldwide.
Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act Passed Senate, Returns to House
The Senate passed by a strong majority the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 (S. 181) last night after defeating a series of Republican hostile amendments. The Senate floor debate for the Act was led by Senator Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Dean of the women Senators, for Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee Chair Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) after Majority Leader Senator Reid (D-NV) navigated the bill to the floor.
"President Obama and the Democratic Congress are keeping their pledge to women and all workers to reverse the Supreme Court decision that gutted the right of employees to fight wage discrimination," said Eleanor Smeal, President of the Feminist Majority. "We're on a roll to rebuilding women’s rights and civil rights taken away during the Bush era."
The Senate Act, which has already passed the House in a version coupled with the Paycheck Fairness Act, will go back to the House as a single bill. The House is expected to pass the Senate bill on Tuesday. President Obama is expected to sign it into law shortly thereafter. In almost straight party line votes the Senate kept the pledge of President Obama to sign the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act almost immediately after being sworn in.
Republican Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson's killer amendment was defeated 55-40 in a nearly straight party vote with Democrats voting against it – only Republican Olympia (ME) voted with Democrats. Several other debilitating Republican amendments also went down to defeat.
The Ledbetter Act corrects the Roberts Supreme Court decision that gutted the ability of women workers to sue for wage discrimination. The Act passed helps not only women, but all workers who are victims of wage discrimination on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, national origin, age, or disability.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
From our Friends at Slept On
Proposition 1984by Susie Day
[SATIRE]
Look at your paycheck. Did your company take out again for Iraqi quagmire-maintenance? Now, look around. Is the crime rate going up in your neighborhood? Do you suspect your nifty new iPhone is tracking your every move? Are you worried that the economic meltdown will leave you homeless, starving, and naked in the streets? Perhaps you are already homeless, starving, and naked in the streets with your new iPhone?
Would you agree there is a Problem?
You know what the Problem is, don't you? Heterosexuals. I have evidence.
Everywhere you go – there they are. Walking. Talking. Eating. Buying things. Going to the "Men" or the "Ladies" room.
Not that there's anything wrong with that sort of thing. We all have our repulsive little quirks, I suppose. Some of my best friends are straight: "heavy in the loafer"; "friends of Britney," if you will. We admire these people for their sports stadiums; their automated tollbooths; that slaphappy sit-com humor that has allowed Heterosexuals to survive centuries of hardship. But there are limits.
Marriage, for instance. Show me where in the Bible it says that two people of opposing genders, by becoming legally wed, should be able to get Social Security, Food Stamps, and Income Tax benefits.
Shocking? Yes! SIMPLY BY GETTING MARRIED, Heterosexuals derive some 1,400 entitlements – approximately 1,000 federal and 400 state – FEW OF WHICH CAN BE OBTAINED OUTSIDE THE BONDS OF LEGAL MATRIMONEY! Imagine Heterosexuals being allowed to visit spouses in hospitals; claiming joint privileges to adopt and raise children; gaining immigrant residency status; obtaining bereavement or sick leave. Disgusting!
AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE IN THE MESS WE'RE IN TODAY! These "special rights" invoked by connubially-wedded Heterosexuals have upset the natural order of things. They are against God's Plan for Us. Hark: you can almost hear God retching.
I admit they had me fooled for a while. At first, Heterosexuals appeared to be just another harmless identity group. They stayed in their place. We tolerated them. Heck, weren't we all "just people"?
Then I got up the nerve to enroll in the School of American Ballet. My application was turned down: they wanted someone whose posture was a little "straighter." The economy started to tank and several of my friends were "laid" off their jobs. A nuclear family moved into our neighborhood – and rents skyrocketed.
So I began to look around. I realized that what I had been watching was part of a carefully orchestrated plan. "They teach god-knows-what filth in our schools," I thought, "inherit each other's estates, get conjugal visits in prison – and there's nothing we can do about it."
Or was there? I got some facts. Did you know that:
* Heterosexuals comprise at least 90% of the population?
* That this "population" is teeming with huge numbers of muggers, pickpockets, corporate polluters, slumlords, child pornographers, and fascist dictators?
* It therefore follows that at least 90% of all muggers, pickpockets, corporate polluters, slumlords, child pornographers, and fascist dictators are … HETEROSEXUALS!!!
WHY ARE THESE DEVIANTS ALLOWED TO MARRY EACH OTHER? DON'T THEY HAVE ENOUGH RIGHTS?
I have begun an anthropomorphic study of Heterosexuals. Oh, they start off innocently enough. As babies, Heterosexuals are often quite cute. Many of them, however, cry all night and drool a lot – the first signs that something is not right.
As Heterosexuals grow older, they watch TV for hours – depraved programs such as "Family Guy" or "MASH" reruns, designed to implant the psychosexual desire ONLY for others of the "opposite" sex. Then they go outdoors to engage in shame-based playtime activities such as "house" or "doctor." Soon, all they can think of is buying nudity-promoting hygiene products and getting a place of their own, so they can procure other Heterosexuals with whom to enjoy frequent and legal erotic relations. Thus are they indoctrinated into HETEROSEXUALITY'S MATRIMONIAL DOMINATION OF THE ENTIRE GLOBE!!!
Accident? No! Through patient research, I have uncovered a vast, international conspiracy of Militant Heterosexuals who seek total worldwide supremacy over Planet Earth! Their behavior is being constantly monitored by their Militant Heterosexual president, Big Breeder. "BIG BREEDER IS WATCHING" is one of the mottos of the Breederhood. Others include: (1) Freedom is Marriage; (2) War Is Cute When It's Between the Sexes; and (3) Ignorance Of And Alienation From My Wondrously Protean, Polymorphous Libido Is A Small Price To Pay For World Domination.
Ignoring the problem won't make it go away. So get righteous: Go up to each and every Heterosexual you see on the street. Ask them to think about the chaos in the Middle East and the economic meltdown; about domestic surveillance and starving in the streets. Tell them
THEY have caused these problems.
Then get them to give you their paychecks.
****************************
Susie Day is a SleptOn columnist and political satirist based in New York.
SleptOn Mag is an independent socio-political online journal established to promote awareness, facilitate discussion, debate and organization by providing hard hitting, thought provoking and engaging news analysis and potent commentary on politics, entertainment and culture.
SletpOn Mag is a web based magazine for and representative of a broad cross-section of the politically adept interested in an alternative source of information which is often overlooked, marginalized or excluded from the narrow focus of the dominant corporate controlled "mainstream" media, sanitized and scripted political debate and commercialized entertainment industry outlets.
SleptOn Mag will seek to harness the energy and passion of the astute observer in the struggle for peace, justice, equality and solidarity while providing uncompromised commentary, analysis and entertainment that take on the current issues in a dynamic, compelling and critical way.
Join us and let's deliver a wake up call to the world, together. No Justice ... No Sleep!!!
Fabulously Feminist Poetry
the man--by fabulously feminist
cool
crazy
cat
mojo in constant flow
across from me he sits
legs crossed
swanking sock showin'
foot-a-flappin'
orphan orange sweater
clings to his lanky
catholic school by frame
as he speaks
the archaic beat
of human existence thus far
pulses through his boy
as his words pulse
through his hands
amid turbulence
of cigarette smoke
mingling with the steam
of double mochas
he searches my face
with italian eyes
blistering my inhibitions
with our gaze locked tightly
as I wish our bodies could be
his approving smile
elevates my spirit
to the deity proportions of a
crazy
cool
cat
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Urgent Action call from Amnesty International
Fear of torture or other ill-treatment--MEXICO 1) Máximo Mojica Delgado (m)
2) María de los Ángeles Hernández Flores (f), his wife
3) Santiago Nazario Lezma (m)
2) María de los Ángeles Hernández Flores (f), his wife
3) Santiago Nazario Lezma (m)
The three people named above, who live in Teloloapan municipality, Guerrerostate, have been arbitrarily arrested and are believed to have been beaten in custody. They are being held incommunicado and are at risk of further torture or other ill-treatment.
According to María de los Ángeles Hernández, on 27 November an unmarked car with three armed men stopped the car in which she was traveling with her husband, Máximo Mojica, and their two children. The men forced Máximo Mojica out of the vehicle and took him away, but did not identify themselves aspolice officers or show an arrest warrant. On 29 November, María de los Ángeles Hernández, received a phone call from her husband telling her he had been kidnapped and that she needed to pay a ransom of 50,000 pesos (US$2500). Later on the same day, neighbors reported that María de los Ángeles Hernández, her nephew (who was later released but is now hiding for his safety) and another man who was visitingthe family's house, Santiago Nazario Lezma, had also been taken away from her home by a number of armed men in uniforms. The armed men had arrived in seven unmarked vans without license plates. It is believed the men whodetained Máximo Mojica, María de los Ángeles Hernández and Santiago Nazario Lezma were all officers of the State Judicial Police (Policía Investigadora Ministerial).
The whereabouts of the three were unknown until they were finally traced on 3 December to the office of the State Attorney General’s Office in the city of Acapulco, Guerrero state. They were visited on the same day by staff of Guerrero State Human Rights Commission (Comisión de Defensa de los Derechos Humanos de Guerrero). The Commission reported that Máximo Mojica, María de los Ángeles Hernández and Santiago Nazario Lezma had visible bruises all over their bodies and had not had access to a lawyer of their choice. The three have not been permitted to see lawyers or relatives since this visit, and could be tortured or ill-treated while they are held incommunicado. It is not known if they have received any medical treatment. The three have still not been officially charged.
On 29 December, the home of Máximo Mojica’s brother, Pastor Mojica was also searched by armed men while hewas out and has been occupied by these men since. Pastor Mojica and his family are currently in hiding.
According to a local human rights organization, Máximo Mojica and his brother Pastor Mojica are members of a grassroots political organization “Tierra y Libertad” that works on housing rights issues. Máximo Mojica, Pastor Mojica and María de los Ángeles Hernández are all members of a teacher’s union that has been organizing demonstrations over the past few months. The family has also stated that four months ago armed men visited Máximo Mojica’s home and accused him of hiding members of an illegal armed group.
Please Help.....to find out how click HERE
Day Without a Gay
"The worldwide media attention surrounding our massive grassweb efforts for gay rights has been tremendous. Join the Impact was a HUGE success and will continue to thrive because of our efforts.We've reacted to anti-gay ballot initiatives in California, Arizona Florida, and Arkansas with anger, with resolve, and with courage.
NOW, it's time to show America and the world how we love. Gay people and our allies are compassionate, sensitive, caring, mobilized, and programmed for success. A day without gays would be tragic because it would be a day without love.
On December 10, 2008 the gay community will take a historic stance against hatred by donating love to a variety of different causes.
On December 10, you are encouraged not to call in sick to work. You are encouraged to call in "gay"--and donate your time to service!
December 10, 2008 is International Human Rights Day. CLICK HERE to join us, and search or add to the list of human rights organizations that need our help RIGHT NOW. "
From Day Without A Gay homepage.
Fabulously Feminist News
Ugandan Legislator Urges Legalization of Abortion
Rebecca Kadaga, the Deputy Speaker of the Ugandan Parliament, has recently called for the legalization of abortion in Uganda. Kadaga believes that it is possible to legalize abortion in Uganda in line with the Maputo Protocol, an agreement led by the African Union that includes provisions on women's rights.
In relation to abortion, the Maputo Protocol states: "State parties shall take all appropriate measures to protect the reproductive rights of women by authorizing medical abortion in cases of sexual assault, rape, incest and where the continued pregnancy endangers the mental and physical health of the mother or the life of the mother or fetus," according to The New Vision. Uganda has not ratified the agreement, but local women's rights activists are pushing for ratification.
According to The New Vision, Kagada has reportedly said "the civil society went to the Church and mobilized religious leaders to support the cause of abortion. So it is possible, I do not want us to close the door."
*************************
Mary Jo Kilroy Wins Close Ohio House Race
Mary Jo Kilroy won a tight race for Ohio's 15th congressional district by a 2,311 vote margin and officially declared victory last night. Kilroy faced Ohio state Senator Steve Stivers, a Republican, in her second bid for a House seat. Provisional ballots put Kilroy over the top against Stivers, who was leading by 594 votes before provisional ballots were counted, according to the Washington Post. In 2006, Kilroy lost her race by only 1,062 votes against Republican incumbent, Deborah Pryce.
Kilroy was widely supported by a number of feminist groups in her current campaign and had been endorsed by the Feminist Majority PAC, National Organization for Women PAC, Emily's List, National Women's Political Caucus, Women's Action for New Directors PAC, and NARAL. Kilroy is a strong proponent of women's rights issues, including full funding of reproductive services by health insurance programs, expansion of healthcare access, and stricter enforcement of civil rights laws. She opposes the global gag rule and legislation that dismantles Roe v. Wade.
Kilroy told the Columbus Dispatch that "it's always a given that you're most vulnerable in your first re-election. I will be the first Democrat to hold the title of representative of Ohio's 15th in 40 years. I intend to keep that honor and distinction through hard work, through honorable service to the people of this district."
*************************
Kansas State Supreme Court Opinion Issued Friday in Relation to Ongoing Tiller Case
The Kansas State Supreme Court issued a ruling Friday in a lawsuit related to former Attorney General Phill Kline's conduct in an ongoing case with Dr. George Tiller, an abortion provider who is one of the few late-term abortion providers in the US that serves women with troubled pregnancies and complicated health problems. The lawsuit sought to have Kline, who originally launched an investigation into Tiller’s practice in 2006, relinquish all medical records and be held in contempt of court. Though the ruling called Kline's conduct inexcusable, the only sanction against him is that he must deliver "a full and complete and understandable set of any and all materials gathered or generated by Kline and/or his subordinates in their abortion-related investigation and/or prosecution" to the Attorney General's office.
Current Kansas Attorney General Steve Six has criticized the investigation of Tiller by Kline, but has said the charges against Tiller should stand, according to the Associated Press. Tiller's attorney's filed a motion in September asking the court to either suppress evidence or dismiss the charges against Tiller because of alleged "outrageous" misconduct of the preliminary investigation into Tiller's practice by Kline and Eric Rucker, a state attorney.
Friday's opinion heavily criticized Kline's conduct: "Kline exhibits little, if any, respect for the authority of this court or for his responsibility to it and to the rule of law it husbands. His attitude and behavior are inexcusable, particularly for someone who purports to be a professional prosecutor. It is plain that he is interested in the pursuit of justice only as he chooses to define it."
Planned Parenthood of Kansas President Peter Brownlie told the Capital-Journal that "the court confirms what Planned Parenthood has said all along: Phill Kline is a zealot pursuing a lawless prosecution and misusing the people’s trust to advance a radical anti-choice political agenda."
Brought to ya'all by:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
