because googling “roe v wade anniversary 2010″, “pro choice” and even “pro roe v wade” will get you nothing but “March for Life” sites and pro-life articles, i have decided to post a few links to some good articles here.
Sarah Palin is a notorious one of the pro-lifers who have co-opted feminist ideas and twisted them around to support the pro-life argument. this is infuriating because it’s not only intellectually dishonest, but it hurts women. before i fly off the handle and go on an epic rant, i’ll just give you the link to an article that picks Palin’s argument apart.
pushing back against abstinence-only education–the Pro-Choice Public Education Project. PEP does a great job not only of educating young women about their sexual health and reproductive options (rights!), but also addresses the racial and socioeconomic aspects of the fight that are absolutely inextricable from the debate.
here’s some FACTUAL information on abortion from Princeton Pro-Choice Vox–they also have a great page on contraceptive information.
and, of course, Planned Parenthood! (FYI, a google bomb is in order, because in teh Googul, this link doesn’t turn up until page FOUR!)
and for all the Christians out there–you CAN be pro-choice! it DOES fit with your theology! i totally mean it!
if only all abortions could be this easy! and the women who got them were more concerned about Oasis getting their fan letter!
here’s a somewhat less Roe-related post, but it has to do with giving birth and choosing it. so i’ll include it.
and be on the lookout for pro-life sites and orgs masquerading as pro-choice. if they were so confident in their morals and their argument, why would they have to be so coercive! and furthermore, from what i remember from my Catholic education, to “God” all sins are equal, none is worse than another, so isn’t bearing false witness the same as an abortion? just sayin’.
i am a peruser of blogs and a lot of time i read the comments on posts that i find interesting to see what other people’s takes on the issue are. (i’m speaking mostly of jezebel because most other blogs are frequented by morons who comment out of their asses. with horrible spelling, and not just to beat the filters.) but just now i read jezebel’s post on ellen degeneres and portia de rossi who were on oprah to talk about their marriage, and i came across this comment, which i found remarkable for a couple reasons: a) because it is so long, and b) because it is so well thought-out (although at times not so perfectly worded.) regardless, i thought that it was worth putting here, if only for myself, but also because it’s such a funny/poignant counterpoint to -Z-’s moron fifth-grade teacher’s blathering about feminism and gender roles.
jezebel always has an insightful analysis of the new Mad Men episodes the day after they air. obviously, they pay special attention to the portrayal of the women in the show, the situations they’re in, what their options are, how they react and what they were or might have been thinking. i always like reading those after seeing the episode.
this past episode was quite good.
the one question that i remember having after watching it was the scene at the end, when Roger confronts Don after seeing him in an awkward moment with Jane. Roger says that it’s dangerous to act too happy, saying that when one does it, it essentially makes him a target. Don says that Roger isn’t actually happy, he’s just pretending to be (or something to that effect.) shortly thereafter, Don walks by Roger and Jane slowly swaying on the dance floor after almost all the guests have left. Don walks past them and finds Betty out on the lawn and starts slowly swaying with her. i’m still trying to figure out whether that means that Don is also just pretending to be happy (more probable) or if both men are as happy as they can be, considering the time and their options.
anyhow, if you like Mad Men as much as i do, you’ll wanna keep up with these.
(here’s the previous one, it’s about the same episode as the first one.)
yeah, “Dmitri,” she didn’t call you because of some massive natural disaster/an emotionally taxing family tragedy/she’s psychologically unstable. THAT must be the reason this woman didn’t call a catch like you back for some sweet bedroom action. you’re clearly a flawless specimen of a man and the incarnate ideal of what every woman is looking for in a one-night stand. [/sarcasm]
dude, don’t take it so personally. and why do you insist that you play the victim? that’s what those True Forced Loneliness guys are all about, and we all know where that gets us. moron.
So, I checked out What Would Tyler Durden Do this morning and stumbled across this post about some random interview Kendra Wilkinson gave (she is some Playboy chick that was on a reality show about Playboy chicks). Anyway, that it was about her is not the point.
The question of how long one should wait to have sex with someone was asked of her and her response was (after the jump!):