View from the Loft

"Pro-lifers" show once again their compassion and reverence for life

This is the story of a man who chose to confront the "pro-lifers" who yelled at him and his wife, "You're killing your unborn baby!"

 

He and his wife had received devastating news: the fetus his wife carried had a rare congential deformity that meant it had no chance of survival. No bladder, no kidneys. There was really no choice but to terminate the pregnancy. This is the nightmare every pregnant woman and those who love her fear.

Yet these self-righteous women, with no knowledge whatever of the personal circumstances of this couple, chose to be judge and jury and felt they had the right to shout accusations.

Here's George Carlin on the topic of abortion. Enjoy.

 

 

So true.

"The Last Abortion Doctor"

This is from August 5, but it really is a must-read.

Shame on the people who led to Dr. Tiller's murder. What will happen when Dr. Hern is gone?

A spirited rejoinder to ageism and "looksism"

Let this be a lesson: you just can't judge a person's talent, knowledge, character, or any number of other attributes by a glance at her/his appearance. As the self-impressed, smug, and cynical judges of Britain's Got Talent discovered when this "cheeky," middle-aged, far from fashionable woman opened her mouth to sing--and stunned the audience and judges alike.

Can't embed this, but please, please check it out--you won't be sorry.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lp0IWv8QZY

If abortion were illegal, what should the punishment be for women who have abortions?

The answer of most anti-choicers is "Duh ... never thought about it ..."

Check it out. Apparently, actual women who actually have abortions don't even enter into these people's thoughts, reasoning, or arguments. They're simply nonexistent in all the romanticizing about the innocent "pre-born" being sadistically killed.

Hillary

I'm going to say it up front: I am not a Hillary Clinton supporter. I don't like where she comes from: the 90s, NAFTA, the triangulation.

But I am sick to death of the sexist attacks against her. I am sick of the articles about women who detest her, usually for no reason that makes any sense to me, or of reports of how men hate her (see Chris Matthews). I hate it when women comment about her femininity, or lack thereof, or how they can't see her being maternal, or whatever.

What bullshit.

This is a brilliant woman, a BRILLIANT woman, smarter than her husband (who was a Rhodes scholar at that, but I'd still say Hillary is smarter), a woman who mothered a child and who has served her country formally as First Lady and as Senator. A woman who has accomplished two things that too many people view as incompatible if not downright mutually exclusionary: being a mother, and being a public figure/civil servant. Or some other  roles as well: being a First Lady, and being a very accomplished lawyer and aspirant to public service roles in her own right. Being the wife of a powerful man, and having ambitions to power of her own. It's high time we got past the idea that women "shouldn't" have such aspirations. They should, and they do, and Hillary is for goddess's sake more qualified than any of the GOP candidates in terms of presidential material.

So many of the gripes agains Hillary are completely rooted in sexism. We hear about her ambition: well, who the hell EVER ran for office who didn't have ambition? Or a healthy ego? I can't stand it. I'm going mad here, and I'm not even a Hillary supporter. Limbaugh and his ilk are particularly disgusting, but I see and hear it from all quarters.

I'll tell you right now, if Hillary wins the nomination, I'm undecided as to what I'll do: sit out the election, or vote for her. But it's not because of all the sexist reasons out there. I like her chutzpah, and I like her competence, experience, and and confidence. I just don't like her policies, but I'm not that sold on Obama's, either, nor do I see that much difference between the two. I don't like her stand on the Iraq War--I would say that's the biggest obstacle for me. But damn it, she is an extremely competent candidate, and I can't say I'd object to seeing a woman elected president in my lifetime.

I really just can't stand all the misogyny coming out of the woodwork with her candidacy. It really speaks ill of the body politic, the media, and American generally. Shame.

What price beauty?

Now that I'm ancient, I don't wear much makeup, and thank goodness. It seems that some types of makeup are, indeed, hazardous to your health:

More than half of 33 brand-name lipsticks tested (61 percent) contained detectable levels of lead, with levels ranging from 0.03 to 0.65 parts per million (ppm). None of these lipsticks listed lead as an ingredient.

One-third of the tested lipsticks exceeded the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s 0.1 ppm limit for lead in candy – a standard established to protect children from directly ingesting lead. Lipstick products, like candy, are directly ingested into the body. Nevertheless, the FDA has not set a limit for lead in lipstick, which fits with the disturbing absence of FDA regulatory oversight and enforcement capacity for the $50 billion personal care products industry.

Well, heck: surely it's worth a little lead to have voluptuous lips, right?

Sigh.

Twisty takes on the patriarchy: laundry tags

You just have to read this by Twisty over at I Blame the Patriarchy. If you've ever felt oppressed by those instructions on the tags of your clothing, you'll feel the thrill of validation, the joy of being understood, the triumph over one of life's little but omnipresent boot-on-the-neck experiences.

"MACHINE WASH WARM, INSIDE OUT, WITH LIKE COLORS. USE MEDIUM IRON.” “HAND WASH COLD FAN WITH GOOSE QUILLS ON VERANDA TO DRY.” “DRY CLEAN ONLY USING THAT REALLY EXPENSIVE ENVIRONMENTALLY FRIENDLY CLEANERS.”

The impossibility of fulfilling these divers and nonsensical laundry requirements is symbolic of the insane futility of housework in general. What the heck does “like colors” even mean? Hue? Saturation? Who, except a goth kid, has load-quantities of clothes of “like” colors? And what high moral purpose is served by turning a thing inside-out? It merely adds an extra inside-out-turning step now and and another right-side-out step when it emerges from “tumble-dry-medium.”

Indeed.

Read the whole thing.

So much for abstinence-only

Even true believers in abstinence-only education sometimes have to face the facts: when 65 out of 490 female students get pregnant in one year, you gotta know that abstinence-only just isn't working. So, in Canton, Ohio, Timken High School is modifying and expanding its sex ed program to teach safe, responsible sex along with abstinence after 13% of the female student population became pregnant. (And kudos to them for doing it.)

Over and over I've seen studies showing that abstinence-only does not work: see here, here, here, and here, for starters.

Since it doesn't work, isn't it better to teach kids about safe sex--how to have sex without contracting STDs or HIV? As it is, kids are having oral sex without even thinking of it as sex, and they're doing so without using condoms, with a corresponding rise in cases of chlamydia, for example. Herpes, HIV, gonorrhea, hepatitis, and syphilis can also be transmitted orally. Isn't it wrong not to teach kids who are going to go ahead and have sex anyway how to protect themselves? Do we really want our kids contracting and spreading STDs?

There's nothing wrong with presenting abstinence as one option, even emphasizing that it's a choice that should be honored. But by the same token, the sexually active should not be stigmatized. Instead, they should be given the information they need to take care of themselves.Emotional and relational issues surrounding sex do need to be addressed, but that can't be done when the message is Don't Do It At All. I'm not sure how those issues can best be addressed, especially if parent-child relationships aren't good, but I do know that we can at least protect kids from physical risk.

New CODE PINK actions

Noting that most Americans and Iraqis would like to see a timetable for withdrawal of American troops from Iraq and that Iraq's Vice President asked Bush for a withdrawal timeline during the President's flash visit to Baghdad, CODE PINK has put a couple of actions in motion.

(1) First, they ask that voters of conscience sign the Voters Pledge:

I will not vote for or support any candidate for Congress or President who does not make a speedy end to the war in Iraq, and preventing any future war of aggression, a public position in his or her campaign.

Their hope is to get million of signatures and influence the 2006 and 2008 elections. It is indeed high time for Dems like Hillary Clinton to get the message that withdrawal is the only option left. We are not at war: we are implementing an occupation. As occupiers, we can withdraw or we can annex the land we occupy; the latter is hardly a serious option.

(2) Their second action is a time-honored one rooted in the tactics of non-violent resistance: the hunger strike. They will be launching a fast in Washington, D.C. on July 4. Called Troops Home Fast, this is an open-ended fast for which CODE PINK asks a show of support by persons willing to fast for at least a day.

Long-term hunger strikers will include Cindy Sheehan, Dick Gregory, Medea Benjamin, and Daniel Ellsberg. There's a long, long list of well-known names who will fast shorter-term.

Actions you can undertake in solidarity with Troops Home Fast are suggested here. You can also sign up to commit to at least a one-day fast here.

Please support CODE PINK in whatever way you can. They are people of conscience who refuse to give up the struggle to end the occupation of Iraq.