Monthly Archives: March 2012

I have acquired babies! Oh, and CATURDAY

So I’m at Hobby Lobby looking for glittery pink yarn so that I can crochet a uterus and send it to a male representative, right?

Right.

And what do I find as I wander aimlessly through the aisles?

BABIES.

Little plastic babies.

The most important ingredient to my abortion cake, which I’d been putting off making because babies are so hard to find!

But now I’ve found them, while looking for the stuff to crochet a uterus with. If fate/gods/etc. were actual things, this would totally be proof that they love both irony and abortions.

Anyways I forgot to take a picture of the packaging, which is a shame, because the brand seemed to be “Bag of Chips”, and that’s a pretty wonderful thing to see on a bag of babies.

But in lieu of that, here’s a picture of my cat covered in little babies:

This is why you should always spay and neuter your pets.

Illustrating my belief that unwanted babies are essentially just glorified parasites.

Judging by her expression, she agrees!

Fetuses are probably pretty high in protein!

She also seems to think that babies make for good eatings.

She’d make a good Atheist, if that was even a thing that cats could be. Pretty sure there’s no point behind having cat Atheists when you don’t cat Theists.

Though there are catlicks, so maybe…?

Anyways, I’ll get a post up on how to make abortion cakes soon! Probably tomorrow. It’ll be delicious.

Advertisements

Clothes Hangers!

I have been thinking lately, and I have decided something.

Clothes hangers are not actually that funny!

At all.

For a long time I’ve used joking about clothes-hanger-abortions as a way to show that I supported abortion and thought that it shouldn’t be demonized or stigmatized, and as a way to try to piss off pro-lifers.

In hindsight, that makes no goddamned sense. Really.

Because clothes-hanger-abortions only exist because people are against abortion, and think it should be demonized and stigmatized.

And because those abortions tend to result in the deaths of women, which is honestly something that I’d assume most pro-lifers are totally on board with, considering how much they hate women.

So clothes hangers honestly would make much more sense as a symbol for pro-lifers.

Not to mention that it probably makes it harder to convince pro-lifers that abortion isn’t actually that dangerous when the picture you paint of it involves shoving rusty wire up your snatch. Let’s be honest, we all know that those guys are shitty at fact checking, they’re not going to make the distinction between a joke and the details of the actual procedure.

All of that said, I need to find a new thing to symbolize abortion that isn’t so inherently terrible. I still want to be able to make cheap abortion jokes, like in this post, which is now rendered not-that-great!

Isn’t it sexism for women to have things just for them!?

Short answer: No.

Long answer: Okay, it’s a bit trickier than that.

In an ideal world, there wouldn’t be anything ‘for men’ or ‘for women’, because ideally there would be perfect equity and it wouldn’t be possible to decide if something was ‘for men’ or ‘for women’.

Anyways, that doesn’t exist. As a result, there is indeed an awful lot of ‘this is for men’ and ‘this is for women’ going on.

For the record, at the moment I’m mainly thinking about television.

Also for the record, the majority of television is aimed towards men and written by men. If you doubt that, count up all of the shows you know of that have predominately male main characters, or in which the female main characters exist only as sexist caricatures of women that, as far as I can tell, only really appeal to the kind of guys that watch it for ‘evidence’ that women are frivolous and manipulative, and maybe some deliriously stupid women, and compare them to the shows in which female characters actually have major roles and characterization that equals their male counterparts, that don’t exist as the aforementioned stereotypical caricatures or eye candy.

If the second category outweighs the first… seriously, what channel are you watching? Because I’d love to see it.

More often than not though, the first category will be the larger one by a mile. This can get kind of annoying when you’re actually female, so it’s rather nice when there are shows made just for women and girls. Excluding when these shows are made by men and end up being condescending representations of what women should like and therefore complete shit, of course.

Now, is that sexist?

Well of course it’s sexist that women are so poorly represented in media that they have to have shows made just for them to ever see a decent portrayal of women. That should be obviously wrong, because the majority of television should be equally gender balanced.

Except… that’s not what these people are complaining about. They’re complaining that after having everything made for them, they have to deal with one thing that isn’t made for them. At this point, fuck no it isn’t sexist on the show’s part. It’s sexist on your part. You already have a ton of shows to choose from where everything can be about your demographic, you don’t need to demand that shows geared towards women gear themselves towards men instead, like certain My Little Pony fans have been doing.

That isn’t how fixing sexism works. You don’t ask the underprivileged group to give up what they have before you give up your own. If you don’t want there to be shows aimed at genders specifically, that’s fine and noble. But at the very least you should oppose shows ‘for men’ and ‘for women’ equally- don’t just declare that the ‘for women’ shows become for men.

To clarify: We all know segregation was wrong, right? Right. Having, say, water fountains ‘for whites’ and fountains ‘for blacks’ was clearly wrong. If you were to ask me if it was racist for there to be fountains for black people, then I’d clearly say yes.

Thing is though, I’d also say it was racist for there to be fountains for white people. I’d say that there needs to be just one water fountain for everyone.

Whereas the people who complain about women having shows for themselves would probably be thinking more like this:

“Gee, it sure is racist that black people have their own drinking fountains!”

“It sure is.”

“White people should be able to drink from them too!”

“…and black people could use the white fountains, right?”

‘What? No! Dammit, these uppity womenblacks are trying to take everything from us!”

“…”

Hopefully nobody misses the irony in that.

Hopefully.

Time to Stop Ignoring Birth Control!

For the past few weeks I’ve been cutting down on reading blogs and paying any sort of attention to news,  because all of the rage-worthy material coming from politics and media seemed to have exploded and I couldn’t quite handle the cavalcade of stupid.

One of the biggest things causing me to avoid any media besides that containing colorful ponies was Rush Limbaugh’s recent inability to understand anything at all about birth control, health care, and basic human sympathy. As soon as I heard the gist of what happened, I pretty much decided that that was enough politics for now and cut myself off. Because of that, I never heard the exact details of the situation.

Until now! Luckily they were surrounding by commentary by Stephen Colbert or my brain would have exploded.

Of course Jon Stewart turned out to have a considerably better video, so I’ll be linking him instead.

I’m convinced he has therapeutic qualities. Not that Colbert doesn’t, he’s just not quite as wonderful. I’m still going to make a point to take my birth control with some Americone Dream someday though.

Anyways, there’s unfortunately more to Rush Limbaugh’s failing-to-act-like-a-human-being than which comedy news show host handled it better. That being, Rush Limbaugh’s failing-to-act-like-a-human-being.

As I mentioned before, I never quite got the entire picture of what exactly he did before now. There were details I missed. Namely, that he thinks that women receiving insured birth control need to post sex tapes on the internet. Of course there’s a lot more wrong with all of the awful things he said besides that, but the misunderstandings on how birth control and private insurance works along with how terrible a human being he is have been covered extensively already. This in particular actually wins the award for “Most Revolting Thing Said in 2012 So far” in my book. It’s a special kind of creepy to me.

Now of course any person with any human decency will probably be disturbed by this. Women, moreso. Women on birth control, even more than that!

But there’s a little nuance that I picked up on that I haven’t seen anyone mention yet, that makes it that much more cringe-worthy.

Does Rush realize that there are women under 18 taking birth control? I started on it when I was about, say, 13. Granted it was medical, but Rush doesn’t make that distinction, so  there’s not much a point of me making it either. Not to mention that where I needed ( and still need) it to make periods livable, there are girls who do take contraception for contraceptive purposes who are that age, and younger.

Does Rush realize that in feeling he has a right to watch every woman on insured contraception have sex, he included a good handful of preteens in there? Young teenagers? People under 18 in general?

Would he care if he realized that? Not entirely sure. Actually, I completely doubt it. He’d probably care less about the fact that he gave off the impression that he’d be up for child porn than he would about the idea that women under 18 actually use birth control. In fact, I can kind of hear his little tirade now. Something about feminazis and liberal agendas and… probably the gay agenda, and sexualizing children before he wanted to sexualize them. I also have a feeling he wouldn’t hesitate to call an eleven-year-old a slut. Hell, he’d probably jump at the chance. Prostitute, too.

Finally, on top of all of the different terrible things about Rush Limbaugh, there’s one thing that makes him that much more disgusting to me. That being that my dad actually listens to his talk show.

Limbaugh is frightening enough from a distance. Having someone who lives in the same house as you who follows his nonsense is a whole new level of disturbing and incredibly creepy, especially considering the subjects of this recent issue. Granted he’s claimed that he doesn’t necessarily agree with what Rush says, he just enjoys listening to him. But, you know, being able to listen to Rush without going into a rage, much less enjoying the experience, might as well be the Terrible and Frightening Person litmus test.

Why can’t we send all of the GOP to Siberia?

I chose a bad time

In follow up of my last post, the reason I hadn’t posted in so long was a mix of busyness, and the need to stop reading the news/blogs/everything politics related for a while because it had all gotten too infuriating lately, and I needed to spend 24/7 on My Little Pony imageboards for a while.

 

Clearly, I chose a bad time to start reading blogs again.

I Never Want to Have an Abortion

Ever. Unless the world changes drastically.

I’m not pro-lifeanti-choice. I’m not the kind of person who ever wants to be a mother, nor the kind to become attached to a fetus. Statements about when fetuses grow fingernails and such don’t phase me. I don’t think it’s murder, or even any meaningful kind of killing, to have an abortion. I don’t have any problems with the process of abortion.

Yet I never want to have one. I don’t just mean that in the sense that I never want to get pregnant unexpectedly, which I think can be said of anyone unless they’re really keen on surprises. I mean it in the sense that if I did become pregnant, I would freak the hell out. I really, really want to say that were I to decide to have an abortion, the only thought involved in such a decision would be “What, I’m pregnant? Time to play Angry Landlord with an Eviction Notice with my uterus!”

But I don’t think it could ever be that easy, solely because of the climate that surrounds abortion.

If I had an abortion, I’d first have to find a doctor who would support me through it. I’d have to find a clinic for it.

I’d have to wade through a sea of angry anti-choicers, made only more angry by the fact that I’d probably be aborting a totally healthy non-rape baby.

And then, I’d have to go through this, a description of a sonogram. To be honest, I don’t think it would make me feel bad. What it would do is make me incredibly fucking angry.

Angry for all of the women who had to go through that who would be affected by it, like the one in that article. The ones who did find out that their child would have a horrible deformity, a child they had wanted. The ones who had been raped, who would have it described to them the exact consequences of that. The ones who maybe didn’t have either of that, but still aren’t as cool with the idea of abortion itself.

Why do anti-choicers have to go around pulling this kind of shit? Do they hear about people like me who are completely convinced they could have an abortion and feel nothing, and take it as a challenge? Do they really think it’s noble to force a woman who is already losing a child she wanted to know exactly what she’s losing, and then to blatantly lie to them? To force doctors, who have taken an oath to do the best they can for their patients, to do the exact opposite?

This is why I would never want to have an abortion. These people have made it their duty to make every abortion as tearful and horrible as it can possibly be. Abortion shouldn’t necessarily be a sad thing. The only time it should ever be is in the example linked, and only because the woman lost a child she had wanted. But there’s no reason for such awful negative stigma. When rape victims have abortions, it should be empowering. It should be their grand ‘Fuck You’ to their rapists, their way to say that they are ultimately the ones in control of their bodies. For people who need abortions because their birth control failed, or even those who never had any birth control at all for whatever reason, it should be a symbol of how far medicine and womens’ reproductive rights have come.

But instead it’s a procedure that women must undergo tearfully and reluctantly at any costs, and sometimes, only if they’ve been deemed worthy of it by people that hate them.