I am not…a member of the Family ‘Felidae’ January 26, 2009

I am not a cat. When I have an argument or physical altercation with another woman, it is not a catfight. It is not sexy or funny any more than it would be if two men were fighting, or a man and a woman. If I say angry words to another woman, it is not an occasion to say “meow” or to hiss. Maureen Dowd, irksome though she may be, is not “much better at meowing at her own side”, nor does she have “cat-wit”. If a woman or girl of any age is being petty or mean-spirited, she is not being “catty”. If I get a new boyfriend or lover (or get him to make a commitment), I am not “sinking my claws into him”, nor am I entrapping him as one would do prey.

Feminism is an uphill battle January 25, 2009

[Trigger warning]

I should know, by now, not to browse Urban Dictionary. It’s like reading YouTube comments or farting around the Focus On The Family website – just plain masochistic (though the latter can be hilarious!). Alas, though – I wanted to see what the currently-accepted definition of “mustache ride” was (note: it was exactly as I suspected) and happened to glance over to the sidebar:

So I also clicked on "mustache party". You would too.

“Pro-Life” Myth No. 3.5: Pro-Choicers hate babies, so they should…have more of them?

This thought occurred to me during the writing of my last post in this series, about the “pro-life” myth that people who are in favor of reproductive choice hate babies. As I (hopefully) demonstrated in that post, a lot of the the time, someone’s reason for getting an abortion is the exact opposite: they care a great deal about children, both preexisting and potential, so having an abortion when unable to care for (another) one is an expression of that respect and love. I stand by those statements, but wonder: why is it that that argument gets under people’s skin so easily?

“Pro-Life” Myth No. 3: Pro-choicers hate babies!

This is a persistent one. Besides being chanted by every Planned Parenthood protester with a fetus picture, it got a lot of mileage during the latest presidential campaign. Basically, at a campaign event in March of last year, Obama said the following scandalous statement:

“I’ve got two daughters — 9 years old and 6 years old. I’m going to teach them first of all about values and morals, but if they make a mistake, I don’t want them punished with a baby.”

I dislike his equating “values and morals” with abstinence and lack thereof with sex, but I do like that he’s encouraging contraceptive use (this speech was not actually about abortion at all). He also recognizes, as most reasonable people do, that being pregnant when one does not wish to be is distinctly unpleasant, and when this unpleasantness is the result of sex, a pregnancy (particularly a pregnancy that one is unable to get rid of) can reasonably be called “a punishment” for said sex.

Well. I’m sure you can guess how that radical sentiment worked out.

Na na na na, na na na na, hey hey hey… January 24, 2009

Curse my lack of faith! The Global Gag Rule, officially known as the Mexico City Policy?

Buh-bye now.

To celebrate, please enjoy the following clip of the late and irrepressible George Carlin, on abortion rights:

Obamadinistration, Day 3 January 23, 2009

Feministe has a good post up listing some of Obama’s executive orders since he’s started working. He clearly came out of the gate running; one of the most interesting is that he has frozen all pending policies and legislation passed by the Bush Administration, subject to review. Among the affected policies? Our old favorite, the HHS “conscience clause” rule! According to California NOW,

While the regulatory process had been completed and the final regulations reported in the Federal Registry, HHS had not yet developed guidelines for implementation. [A contact at HHS confirms] the Department believes the regs. fall under President Obama’s executive order “freezing all last minute Bush administration regulations for review prior to final implementation”.

Woohoo! In other reproductive health news, yesterday was the 36th anniversary of Roe v. Wade.

“Pro-Life” Myth No. 2: “Choice” is a dirty word January 18, 2009

Are you outraged? Are you inflamed with the fires of righteous anger? Are you duly vexed?

What do you mean, you’re not?

No, I’m not talking about the inauguration or either of the pastors speaking at it (the gay one or the one that hates gays – hi, Rick!). I’m talking about the doughnuts. The abortion doughnuts. The deep-fried wonders that are, even as we speak, terminating the pregnancies of any and all pregnant women they see with their glazed little eyes, and the organization that is enabling them to do so – Krispy Kreme [shudder]. Makes me sick (So much more than that Campbell’s Soup ad did a couple of weeks ago).

You don’t believe me? Hear it from my Supreme Overlord, Judie Brown:

Washington, DC (15 January 2009) – The following is a statement from American Life League president, Judie Brown. “The next time you stare down a conveyor belt of slow-moving, hot, sugary glazed donuts at your local Krispy Kreme you just might be supporting President-elect Barack Obama’s radical support for abortion on demand – including his sweeping promise to sign the Freedom of Choice Act as soon as he steps in the Oval Office, Jan. 20.

So, there you go. And if you still don’t believe me – read it for yourself.

Grin January 12, 2009

Why am I giddy right now? It’s probably because of one of my Firefox add-ons: in particular, the President Bush Countdown 1.1.2. As you can see in my previous post that used a screenshot of my browser, the P.B. 1.1.2. resides in the bottom left corner of my browser. I added it a year or two ago, so when I started it the number was in the 5 or 600’s; over time, the number has steadily decreased (as would be expected), and a couple days ago:

Deep in the bowels of The Radical Notion

Can we get a close-up on that, please?

“Pro-Life” Myth No. 1: You can just give it up for adoption! Problem solved! January 8, 2009

Time for a series on wingnut myths about reproductive rights! Yay!

Every time someone says, “Oh, I don’t think you should be allowed to have an abortion. But just give it up for adoption! It’s just as good for you, and better for your baby!”, I want to punch a hole in the wall. Part of it is the blithe nature in which it’s said, exacerbating the flagrant disregard of what the mother might think is best for her or her baby; part of it is the moralistic, holier-than-thou tone – ironic, in my opinion, because said tone is coming from someone who has made it their business to guilt/force women into bearing unwanted children, and still manages to feel proud and self-satisfied.

My quarrel is not with adoption, per se. My quarrel is with these “pro-lifers” (you know what? I can’t handle putting parentheses around the term each time I use it, and don’t want to get into what the best alternate term would be, so just assume the quotes are there from here on out) who frantically trot out ADOPTION as the best (and only moral) choice for pregnant women who aren’t ready to have a child. Adoption can be a wonderful thing for everyone involved, but to assert that it’s the best choice in all cases, or for all people, is a dramatic misrepresentation of the facts, and insulting to women who choose to have an abortion rather than give their babies up.

Attention: Blogroll Updated January 7, 2009

I have just updated the blogroll at the ride sight side of the page – not only did I add lots of links to blogs that I’ve discovered since originally creating the list, but I reshuffled some of the preexisting links. Originally, one of the caategories was “Feminism” and another was “Miscellaneous Awesomeness”; thus, lots of blogs on other aspects of working for social equality/resisting discrimination for example, on LGBT rights or anti-racism) didn’t really fit in. I had just put them in “M.A.” but it seemed inappropriate and a tad disrespectful to put such illustrious and respected (with good reason) blogs such as Racialicious and Pam’s House Blend in the same category as, say, Cake Wrecks (which is equally wonderful, but in a different way). So now the former category is “Feminism/Social Justice”, which is more inclusive and more accurately reflects my personal reading habits, which focus on feminism but touch a lot on other aspects of anti-bigotry (if not intersecting with them directly). So…yay for linkage!