If ONLY somebody had fucked warned us!

I have the flu, so I'm on my frickin' phone, feverish, getting a headache from trying to focus my eyes, so don't expect italics or any fancy shit right now. Also, I fuvking HATE being sick. I have a new caulk gun. I know there's a few peoople who could use a rectal caulking but leave that to SNL, I guess.

So, fuck your protest vote. I don't care if you're a woman.

When a SCOTUS seat and peoples' basic humanity is at stake, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A PROTEST VOTE.

And now LOOK AT US.

You happy now? Got enough attention?

There was never any Uranium One. The emails were bullshit, as was whining over the war vote, because Bernie voted for a LOT of war-related stuff. Oh, but he didn't vote THAT ONE TIME FOR THAT ONE THING and when she says she regrets it it's because she's lying? Do you realize how Trumpian that is?

The sexism on the Left is worse than the sexism on the right because at least they're honest. The left is not. 2016: "Oh, I'd totally vote for Warren if I could!" 2019: "I just don't like her, she's not....likeable." While she has that vagina, you mean. While she's of an age where she doesn't fit in with any of those acceptible roles you have for women: young hotties you should feel guilty about,
potential dates, hot professors, maybe that divorced neighbor, that coworker you might fuck if you're given a chance....but any woman older than THAT? Older than you? Ew, disgusting, that's my mom's age, get it away!

And as for the lefty women who joined in that dogpile? You can throw as many other women under the bus you want, but you're still going to wind up there yourself. There's a lot of guys who tell themselves that they're not driving the bus, so they're not at fault for all those women, but they change the oil, fill the gas tank, rotate the tires, and pay the driver's salary.

And they hint that if "you're one of the guys" you might get to climb on and have a seat, instead of chasing after. Yeah, that's a lie, but it's better than dealing with the truth, which is that more men hate women than not, and on the left, the hatred is hidden by denial and cries of "reverse sexism". Lefty men have learned that they need Reichwing men because that way they can keep the bar low. Instead of treating women fairly, you get, "Well, I'm better than Trump, aren't I?" ------and then he goes off on a spittle-flecked rant about Hillary Clinton is evil, somehow, in a way he can't put his finger on. But he resents you asking, because you're supposed to take his word for it.

Ever notice how a guy can have one bad experience with a women and it's totally okay for him to hate all women? If a woman has a bad experience with a man, it's her fault. SHE did something wrong. He's taken out of the equation, kind of like how NOBODY is suggesting in any of these anti-abortion states that maybe men should be punished, too. Men who refuse tou use birth control or sabotage it. Men who *pretend* to use birth control, but discard it. Men who rape. Men who tell themselves it's not rape because "she didn't say no." Men who have one political party when it comes to women: keep power. That's all. Keep power.

And now they've done it. See, the thing those nice lefty boys don't want you to know it, even if they engage in big‐S sexism like the Reich, they still benefit mightily from ut. There's no refuge for women where they don't have to fight every bloody day. Sexism that keeps the standards for men low means women have nowhere to go, can't ask for better, can't trust men. If men REALLY gave a shit about women, it would be WOMEN who mattered to them, not their hurt feelings. "You were mean to me, feminazis, so I'm going to vote for Trump!" is not something an actually ally would say. This was a guy who got caught loading up his plate at Craft Services and got angry when asked to show his swipe card.

And now? Look around. How many dead women are walking around now, not knowing that they are the next Savita Hallapanovar or Gerri Santoro or Becky Bell or Rosie Jiminez.

When Becky Bell dued, anti choicers attacked her and her parents, trying to deny an illegal abortion killed her. Now they just don't care. They dismiss facts as "fake news", led by that dictator cock holster they call President.

The Trumpies like hurting people. They like that aspect of abortion. Stop trying to educate them. They know all this stuff, they just reject it because facts are a barrier to them, not a stepping stool.

The fake lefty "allies" try to co-opt it, make it a cause they can wave around, even though they had the chance to end it three years ago and refused. It just didn't matter enough.

So now the fight begins. What are you going to do?

Every now and then it's plain as day, when people don't try and conceal it. It's pretty much the whole GOP party platform, where like a lot of scumbags, they think that they have plausible deniability unless the Party Chairmen declares "The War on Women begins here!"

To what am I referring?

A "gentle" loner who occasionally unleashed violence against women.

Yeah, about that.....

Funny thing is, you don't get freebies when you attack actual human beings. This is how you identify actual allies: they don't make excuses for the guys who have just one or two attempted murders, or----like some ex hippies I know---they don't whine that the poor dear was drug-addled and really, he's a nice guy most of the time. You commit one rape, you're a rapist. You commit one murder, you're a murderer. Unless your victim is a woman.

There's this attitude that guys deserve a freebie or two if the victims are women, because bitches lie, right? It's that hysteria thing; you can't trust 'em. They exaggerate. They want attention. They're hypochondriacs. They're emotional. They're hormonal. They lie. Isn't it funny how when women and minorities want attention they use the most negative stereotypical behavior you can imagine, instead of excelling at something? Oh, wait, that's because they can't excel at anything. Women and minorities aren't good at anything the way men are, of course, because men work hard and....Yeah, sorry, this is why you should never go to Reddit, home of pedophilia apologia par excellence, and justifications for why white guys are the best of everything evar, and deserve all the cookies.

But anyway, there's this thing you stumble over when you study what men do to women. With other groups of oppressed people, slurs and insults are so recognized as hate speech these days that bigots resort to dogwhistles (when they're not whining about "political correctness", that is). Of course, with the GOP candidates these days, the dogwhistles are getting very very loud and actually frightening the dogs.

But with women, when you criticize the use of sexist slurs, the reaction is usually a shrug and, "But she IS a bitch." There's pushback when other victims are blamed....but when women are blamed, often times men who have themselves been victimized join in in blaming women for asking for it. The use of hate speech is so recognized these days that the bigots have to resort to dogwhistles these days, though with the Republican Party's candidates, the dogwhistles have gotten so loud that the the dogs are actually cowering in their houses. In fact, to improve deniability, racist hate speech is often visual----like when white-run TV networks use mugshots of black men to hint that they asked for it. (Mugshots are taken at arrest, not at conviction, and somehow they reflect on the subject and not on the potentially-racist white cops who dream up arrests for black guys.)

The view that women are just as likely to be victimizer as victim---in fact, more victimizer, period-----is unique in its acceptance across all groups. Even other groups of oppressed people view women within their group---or in other groups---this way. The myth that women lie more than they tell the truth works for anybody who wants to oppress women---and this can include other oppressed people. Oppressing women is useful. Not just that, it gives everybody a villain around which everyone can unite. Somewhere back in pre-history, the first guy who got pissed off at some pre-historic woman refusing to do what she was told must have bragged far and wide to other guys about this nifty way he'd discovered he could shut the bitch up. "Woman," Freud said, "What does she want?" The idea, of course, was that all women were mysterious and manipulative so what point was there in asking them?

The stereotype that women scheme and lie in the background crosses all cultural lines. It cuts women off at the knees before they can make any headway, makes them villains in a way that denies them their humanity---and makes them separate from the human race in a way that men just don't experience. Mens' rights, you see, are always taken as human rights by other groups of men. Mens' rights----human rights---are carved in stone. Womens' rights are seen as shifty, suspicious things that seize rights that should belong to men, if you're not some kind of commie pinko Marxist fascist liberal. (Yes, I have had some asshole call me the latter three, all at once---and that was within the past few days.) We still write womens' rights down on paper, then hold a lit match to it when those rights get too inconvenient.

Deny women equal rights, but people always demand more responsibility for wrongs from them, too. Look at these Taliban-like dress codes in schools across the country, part "boys will be boys" and part "teen girls are sluts like Lolita." Ten bucks says the boys being protected from spaghetti strap camisoles are the same ones screaming on reddit about "hugboxes" when they're the ones demanding that women cover themselves up so their little brains won't be distracted. That's wanting the whole world to be a hugbox. It's like Jews demanding that everyone else stop eating bacon because they can't. Notice how Jewish people never actually do this, by the way, though a few arch-conservative extremely Orthodox sects demand that women be removed from everywhere so the men aren't.....tempted. Congratulations, American schools and boys, you are acting just like somebody with Sixth Century ideas about women.

You know they're full of shit when they don't come up with a simple solution: goggles. Blinders. Wear a fucking scarf, assholes. Not my problem.

So here's a guy who was violent but the New York Times still calls him gentle....though they've erased that part of the article now. People still remarked on the phrase, which is a hopeful sign, but the editors at the Times felt a man who was violent toward women could nontheless be described as gentle. It's kind of like how it only matters the way dudes treat men, whereas no one cares the way they treat women. No Human Involved is what some cops say. When it's women, the phrase and the concept is far more universal. You see it mentioned in justice: "But he has a bright future ahead of him!" Said about one rapist who wanted to become....a police officer. Try and unpack all that. What's one little rape compared to all the good this guy might do for actual human beings? Besides, the bitch probably asked for it.

When Strauss and Gelles were planning the first large interviews of domestic violence victims decades ago, they decided to erase all mention of sexual assaults in their tally of violence in the home. You know why? Because it was so universally men-vs.women that it "skewed" the results. They had already made up their minds that violence would be equal. If you want to count violent acts, you're going to have to come to the conclusion that men are far more violent to women than vice versa, a fact that makes Cool Girls and MRAs very uncomfortable. If you have a theory that matters more to you than the truth, you somehow conflate stabbing with a knife with self defense with a pillow, which is exactly what they did. Because women are evil and they must be equally evil to men, that's why.

No Human Involved. Robert Dear attacked women and womens' rights to the point of killing, but that doesn't make him a terrorist. Like so many anti-choice men, he was a failure at pretty much everything except dominating women and having an affect on them, so he decided to act on GOP lies about 'baby parts" and strike a blow to show he really was the hero in real life that men are raised to think they are, even if it's all in their heads. Guys expect to be the protagonist in life, as if it's all a big movie. Refusing to carry an unwanted pregnancy is rejecting a guy's non-existent right to treat women like a canvas on which to make their mark.

These guys don't give a shit about babies. It's all about not being the domineering macho men they felt was their right as men---and conservative men at that. Sexism is the last gasp for these losers: "Well, I might be a total failure in life and love and marriage and work but I can still dominate women and bend them to my will. Oh, wait...."

Dear reportedly ranted about "no more baby parts" when he was arrested. When will Republican lies catch up with Republicans instead of the rest of us?

And the next time somebody whines about this overwhelming liberal media we have, point them at this screenshot. The NY Times is supposedly the most liberal of the liberal, and nobody thought twice before describing a woman-beater as 'gentle.'

So a couple of years ago, the deep dark secret that women whisper to one another---and that the powers that be studiously ignore-----came out. Abusive men sabotage birth control to tie women to them. MRAs love to whine about hilarious spermjackings (where women perform intricate experiments that are difficult in a top-of-the-line laboratory, much less a cramped bathroom) because of course women are going to endure nine months of pregnancy and eighteen years of hard labor for......$40 a week. That won't even cover diapers. (In reality, men use birth control like they're saving it for a special occasion, so whining about spermjacking is outright lying a good part of the time.)

Well.

That's on top of the fact that as of today, in thirty one states a rapist can sue his victim for visitation and other parental rights over a child created by rape. Just because Daddy's a rapist doesn't mean he's a bad dad.

Well, now the other shoe's dropped, and here's a shocker. Lack of abortion options ties women to abusive men. If you can't abort the rapist or the batterer's baby, you're stuck with him, because you know bitches lie about rape and all that shit. Men, however, who get so much benefit of the doubt because it's taken away from women and given to them, have absolutely no reason to lie about beating or raping women in a culture set up by men for men. Where they get believed when they have every reason to lie.

Abusers know that kids tie women to them. Lord Byron, on the birth of his (legitimate) daughter to his wife, cried out, "What an implement of torture I have in you!" That could be the crest and motto for the abuser's flag. Abusive dads don't care about the kids themselves; they're just things to them, as seen when yet another father kills all his kids to get back at his wife. Funny, when men (especially white men) do anything violent (especially to women) the first cry is always, "But he's probably mentally ill!" (When women with documented histories of mental illness do something horrible, though, the first and often only thought is that she's faking. Because bitches do that.

So Republicans are engaged in a great quest to make abortion incredibly difficult to obtain. Three-day waiting periods, no exceptions for rape or incest, (and at one point they wanted to deny the label of "victim" ONLY to rape victims), intravaginal ultrasounds (who paid for those?), ridiculous regulations demanded of no other surgical procedure------these form the contents of some of the thousands of anti-abortion bills proposed by Republicans over the past several years. Numerous clinics have been shut down across the states, sometimes leaving women with just one clinic in the state, which means that a woman needing an abortion has to find transportation, then endure the three day waiting period, (where does she stay?), endure non-factual, Republican-mandated (and often written) bullshit lectures about "babies", and on top of that go through "side walk counseling" by smug little ignoranuses who think that birth control pills cause abortions and who demand that their fairy tales be given sway over other peoples' lives.

And now the Republicans have decided to go after birth control, with "conscience clauses", where some fundie deliberately trains for a job that he or she cannot or will not perform, such as handing out emergency contraception and/or birth control. In one case, an anti-choice nurse refused to dispense a coagulant commonly used in abortions because it violated her belief that she was entitled to force everyone else to live by her suspicions. In another case, a nurse argued that birth control was wrong and yanked out a patient's IUD. Another case recently featured a nurse applying for a job she couldn't perform because it dealt with abortion and birth control, suing to get said job, even though she would not perform major components of it.

It's not about "babies." It never has been. It's about trying to wrench women back to the good old days when men were men and they knew they could fuck unruly women into constant pregnancies that would keep them too exhausted to develop ambitions.

And Republicans want to bring this back. That idiotic Hobby Lobby SCOTUS ruling was proof.

As if to prove that America contains nothing but religious hypocrites, by the way, the NFL just whipped out its tin ear yet again when it sought disciplinary action against a Muslim player who basically did a Tebow after he scored a whatever-it-is-you-do-in football. No double standard here.

Meanwhile, I'm sure it's just a coincidence that a study has now proven that women are tied to abusers by children. Well, it's only a secret if you never listen to women. But to the rest of us? Yeah, women listen to other women (for the most part.) We know.

Think of that the next time you hear some Repub go on and on about the sanctity of the family and all that crap.

Absolutely nothing, that's what. So why do we apologize for them?

"Oh, I'm happily married but...."

"I take birth control for medicinal reasons......"

"I'd never have an abortion myself....."

Slut is a throwback to the idea that a woman is nothing but her vagina, and her value decreases with the amount of sex she gives away free. If you buy into that shit, you're endorsing various primitive and arch fundamentalist religions all over the Globe, that view loss of virginity before marriage to be a sin, and sometimes a crime worthy of death.

Abstinence only classes teach that condoms don't work, that you get used up the more sex you have----but only for girls!----and that boys will be boys. And, asshole, if you try that thing where you claim that slut applies to men, you're too stupid to live.

A slut is a woman who has sex freely and flouts the conventions. A slut is a woman that married women blame for breaking up their marriage, like she wasn't married to the guy, not the other woman. I always think about this when I encounter women who are constantly taking time off from work to do this or that for their kids, too. Where's the hubbie? Why isn't he doing it? Why am I a party to their marriage?

Slut is a really bewildering term that has essentially no value as a descriptor. Does she bounce checks? Kick puppies? Set fires? Listen to Rush Limbaugh? Some women may sleep around as a sign of low self esteem or just because they want no strings sex, but for eons, the threat of pregnancy out of wedlike or a time when the father couldn't be her spouse kept women cautious. Of course, only in very rare circumstances were men punished when they sought sex from women who had a lot to lose, if not everything. Sex was seen as the act of dirtying up a woman, unless she was your wife, in which case the sex was boring.

The label of slut leaves a woman defending herself against a charge that can be devastating. The only other option seems like it's to protest the exact opposite but this only plays into the notion that women have two speeds: slut or virgin. It's a mistake to use this framework, obviously. Say you're a slut. Embrace the label. Don't talk about numbers, talk about 'what the fuck is wrong with you, jerkwad?"

The same thing goes for the other two. Say it: "I use birth control because I don't want to have unplanned pregnancies." Of course some people think you shouldn't fuck unless you want babies, and you shouldn't fuck outside of marriage. You can see how closely these go hand in hand for some people. Rush Limbaugh would make a great stoning committee member for punishing alleged adulterous women. Even though he didn't finish college, he's still got numerous material advantages over your basic Afghani tribesman, who suffers from a lack of education, nutrition, information, and often times, hope. That means there's no excuse for anybody to buy into this shit.

Last but not least is the dreaded, "Well," pause, I'd never have an abortion myself but that's okay for other people." This is endorsing the idea that abortion is bad. It's not. It saves lives, keeps families planned, and gives women freedom from the burden of constant pregnancies. There's nothing wrong about it all. I don't think it should be safe, legal, and rare. I think it should be safe, legal in every way that women need and want, and as often as necessary, for whoever wants it. Some people should not have kids. The notion that women are naturally mothers is bullshit, forced on women by patriarchs who found a way to make women feel both incredibly guilty and insecure. I'm not even going to pander to morons by saying---as I had to to the yuppie moms at Feministe----that critiques of social views of motherhood have nothing to do with mothers themselves. I sense that some of the moms there are 'you homewrecker!' type in a lot of situations, if you know what I mean. Why? Beats me. Maybe---like the moms who used to have to take lots of time off for their kids while their hubby didn't do squat----they're afraid of arguing with the hubs. Maybe it's easier arguing with other women----and if they invoke motherhood the right way, they can make childfree people look bad. Nobody goes around telling guys they need to have kids or they won't be real men.

There's a lot of other things that the fundies think is shameful, but these people think sex itself is shameful. If they had their way, people would be celibate entirely before marriage, fuck only to have kids during marriage, then abstain once reproduction was no longer possible. And women would have as many babies as they could, at least until it killed them----and if they were good white Xtian women. (Do I need to put a sarcasm tag here? If so, this might not be the blog for you.)

So I'm a slut. You know what? That word doesn't have any power over me. "You're a slut, ginmar."

"Yeah, and?" or

"Your point?"

These sexist words are held in reserve to use on women, and in some cases they have real power over women, or their reputation. Whenever possible, though, embrace them. Pulls the rug right out from under the asshole. Well, hell, they whipped out their secret weapon and the bitch effortlessly deflected it! Now what?

"You're a bitch."

"Aw, that's one of the nicest things anybody's ever said about me."

"Yeah...and?"

"Thank you!"

"Er.....so? You're an asshole. I wouldn't have to be a bitch if you weren't such a dickdropping."

"OMG, you're a baby killer."

"You betcha. In fact, I'm not even pregnant, but I'm going to have an abortion just to fuck with you."

"Tastes like chicken! Yummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!"

Anti-choice assholes---yeah, 'pro-life' my ass----often whip out all three of these thins at women seeking abortion. This is because sex is only to have a baby, and here's this woman who's obviously fucked somebody, getting rid of it. That everyone should live by their standards is a foregone conclusion with these people; they feel they are the best people in the world, the most moral, the most upright, the most beloved by God, and probably they also think that it's not arrogance, but an accurate opinion of themselves. They think they're going to be raptured. They think they're going to ascend bodily into heaven. Converting or controlling other people gets them God brownie points. Alleviating peoples' suffering? Oh, no, they need to suffer to learn a valuable lesson. Really, it's very altruistic of the Xtians. Other peoples' suffering put those folks on the road to a torture-induced conversion, which gets you the toaster in the 'compete for cash and prizes" form of Xtianity.

Strangely, their victims are unappreciative. This is one of the dark strands in the fundie hatred against health care. People just aren't suffering enough. If the Xtians didn't get out of suffering themselves, then they're determined that nobody else should have it better. Compassion is for.....actually, Jesus was pretty fond of it. But let's just ignore all that inconvenient stuff.

Suffering of women can have a particularly satisfying bite, because they're having sex that the fundies didn't get to have, and besides, if they offer her any help at all----even though they have no intention of actually following through-----they're so much better than they actually could be. So they're only as good as they have to be. Otherwise, they're always looking for wiggle room.

Fight back. Knock the legs out from under them. Make them prove why it's bad----when it's not. What is bad is claiming to be virtuous and Xtian while being a sadistic, duplicitous prude.

Go forth and let me go lie in bed and whine because the whole throwing up thing is back, close on the heels of speculation about Rush Limbaugh's sex life. Sandra Fluke didn't make me throw up.

Here at RedState, we too have drawn a line. We will not endorse any candidate who will not reject the judicial usurpation of Roe v. Wade and affirm that the unborn are no less entitled to a right to live simply because of their size or their physical location. Those who wish to write on the front page of RedState must make the same pledge. The reason for this is simple: once before, our nation was forced to repudiate the Supreme Court with mass bloodshed. We remain steadfast in our belief that this will not be necessary again, but only if those committed to justice do not waiver or compromise, and send a clear and unmistakable signal to their elected officials of what must be necessary to earn our support.</i>

We don't think we'll have to have another Civil War, bitches, but that's only if you bitches give it up.

Also...."Physical location"? Where else would the fetus be? THE FUCKING MALL, PERHAPS?

Yeah, both parties are just as bad.

All right, this is getting too heated and I don't wnat to leave it unattended. Everybody take a deep breath and step back. I'm freezing it till people cool off.

The house next door is being renovated and I noticed contractors in my yard. Specifically, parked in my yard. I went out to check it out and found they were using my hose as a rope---after using my outside tap for their various needs. "We knocked," said the leader. "Nobody answered."

Which knocked me back on my heels. Nobody was there, nobody answered, so....that means, yahoo, partay!? What the hell would these guys do if the door was unlocked? And I know the answer. I got it from a guy named chuckles48, who explained why it was okay to take my personal information and give it to people who've subsequently harassed and threatened me. "You didn't protect it," he said. The conservative mindset in a nutshell. I especially love the idea that one---I suspect for chuckie it's women, or women-like creatures like gays and Dems----cannot ever withdraw consent. I also like the fact that because somebody else asked him to do this, that makes him somehow blameless. Finally, he's a firm believer in the 'both sides' fallacy, where you take evil people and compare them to non-evil people who are usually devoted to fighting them. "You can't tell the difference between identity and an opinion," he sneered, because I guess if you believed the things he does, you'd pretty much have to comfort yourself that it's just a difference of opinion, too. The issue comes down to consent. I withdrew mine a lot time ago. To this guy and that guy, it doesn't matter. If they had it once, sucks to be you because they have no morals, no qualms, and the only thing that matters to them is winning and taking and getting.

As an aside, I know people who are friends either with this online asshole, or people like him, and their response is----always, after I get pissed off at something the asshole has done---that they don't want to get in the middle, that you're both my friends,. Which in turn reminds me so much of waht people say when they talk about bullying years later. The bullying gets ignored, but once the victim turns around and fights back, that gets noticed. Rules get remembered. Judgment gets passed. But not with the original act. There's always a middle, despite the fact that one person made the first move, and if the victim reacts they get told, "Well, why don't you finish it? Saying they started it is so juvenile!" Why? Why is a victim not entitled to a response, to fight back? "Oh, you just won't give up!" It's bullying, all right. I wonder how many people who pull this crap were bullied themselves. What it amounts to is coming down on one side---usually the wrong one---and then putting pressure on the person who was attacked to shut up and make it all go away. Stop and think. How many of these "I don't want to be in the middle/both sides are just as bad!" people do you know? Take a good look, because if you ever need them, they're going to side with the person who did the wrong thing.

Amanda Marcotte once wrote that people side with abusers because they're charming, charismatic, or other things. This is true. Bullies are charming---you would be too, if you knew that people would always take your side. You'd be confident, charming, even witty----because people like power, and often all it takes to have power is to be a jerk off. People also don't want to think unpleasant thinkie thoughts about their friends so they tend to ditch the person that makes them have those thoughts, and it's not the jerk. By the same token, the pressure put on victims to 'give it up' 'get over it' and all the rest is amazing. "Just let it go!" goes the whine. Because it's our buddy Joe and we don't want to look too close at him. Victim blaming is taken one step further: the victim is the bad guy for not letting it go. And you can guess which gender the bad guy usually is.

The bullies are never remorseful, or if by some chance they do face some pressure, chances are they get away with a shitty "I'm sorry you're such a weakling asshole who can't appreciate my genius" type apology. "I'm sorry you feel that way," is the classic, and again, people who ought to know better jump on the victim for not letting it go.

Something else about apologies, too: they don't let the offender off the hook. "I'm sorry," isn't enough if real harm has been done and the victim is the judge of what harm has been done. Not the offender. Not the so-called 'mutual' friends. Not the people who whip out the hoary old false equivalency. The victim and the victim alone. If there's real harm done, the offender's an asshole for not taking steps to make it right. And of course it seldom if ever gets that far.

There is usually absolutely no middle in these type of disputes. What usually happens is that somebody's an asshole, the victim responds, asshole gets pissed, victim gete pissed---and victim gets pissed on. Self defense is not a crime----well, unless you belong to certain classes and genders, it's not. Recast an argument between two men and see how that changes things. When it's two women, it's a cat fight: petty, spiteful, bitchy, probably hormonal, unimportant. When it's a man versus a woman, the man benefits from the cultural conditioning----beaten into us since birth---that men are logical, thoughtful, Right, and honest while women are hysterical, emotional, prone to lying. And as time goes by and a case of self defense becomes "why won't that bitch let it go?!" that bitch may very well wonder what the fuck is going on. Women and other people are not entitled to defend themselves, even against another woman, because this culture has such a fear and contempt for losers. If you're not the one doing the attacking, then you're the loser and people will back away for fear of the cooties. This, by the way, explains so much about conservatives like Chuckles above, who like to act as if their biaes don't affect real people, and aren't based on absolute contempt for anybody who's not a rich white conservative God-fearin' dude. Don't be fooled by piercings and tattoos. There's a recent move afoot in conservative churches, for example like San Fran's Mars Hill, to recast cosmetic unconventionality as moral innovation, when the Mars Hill male parishioners are just the same old patriarchs as before.

America is such a black and white country sometimes, and in disputes and how we view them you can see them. Not coincidentally, the conservative mindset exploits this to a T, with its good/bad, male/female, madonna/whore thinking. There's only winners and losers, good and evil to conservatives, and that's why they're so eager to recast all debates as 'both sides are just as bad.' Wrong. Again, there's attack and defense, and the Repubs like to cast themselves as the stern Daddy while everybody else is the air headed housewife or non-male who needs that stern male hand. Shut up, ladies, Daddy knows what's best. You don't need abortions; you need babies! If nothing else betrays the mindset, it's the twin battles of abortion and gay rights, because as much as conservatives like to talk about babies, the fact is that by siding with the fetus---not a baby---they're attacking the woman, and by casting homosexuality as icky and female they're revealing that their views of sex are essentially male/female, doer/done to; plow/soil; active/passive; faucet/recepticle and...rapist/victim. Except all victims in their universe aren't really victims, they're just losers who didn't protect themselves but oh, wait, some people don't get to protect themselves. This is why they can on the one hand condemn the rape of a Bill Napoli-approved virgin and yet wish for prison rape out the other side of their mouth. Some victims aren't really victims; in fact, they're appropriate targets, because that's their job in life. Gay men, for example, can't be real men, because a real man sticks his dick in whatever's around; the gay guy or the woman is the receptacle on the other end. It's kind of hard to act offended about most rapes when, really, when it comes down to it, sex for guys is just dick insertion, so why do women get so pissed off about it? (You can see some of this is with Ken Buck, who sneered that people should vote for him because he doesn't wear heels, and as a prosecutor dismissed a confessed rape with the comment that the victim experienced 'buyer's remorse.' Once you give consent to one guy, ladies, you stop being a valuable commodity and become just a receptacle for all. Does a receptacle have a right to choose who ejaculates into it? No, but her owner does; rape as a property crime, again, where the real victim is the male owner of the woman's hymen, vagina, what have you.)

And this brings me back to the beginning, because talking about conservative men can be a misnomer, in that so many progressive men seem to think that voting for abortion makes them feminists and nothing else need to be done. Consent is always the thing, and I did not consent to anytihng, either that the contractor or Chuckles did, and when I pointed out that my consent was the issue, but men got offended and blew up. Chuckles remains intransingent to this day; the contractor---who did actual damage to my property---told me to sue him. Apologizing, of course, is not for men such as they, especially for a fine conservative guy who thinks it's stupid to confuse 'identity with differences of opinion.' So many conservative opinions are based on the simple opinion that only straight white guys are human, and their actions very clearly bear that out. Gay people aren't human; women aren't human; fetuses are more human than the women in whose bodies they reside. For example, there's this Republican scumbag who's running in Minnesota right now. He's trying to whip up the homophobic vote by saying that gay marriage is not a right, that voting against other peoples' rights is a right that Democrats are usurping. By defining straight (white) people as the only humans, the Repubs neatly, sneakily set up the debate on their terms. Which, in the context of this debate, is another dodge that deflects attention from what's going on: rights, consent, who matters.

I'm sure somebody will try and come up with a clever hypothetical exception instead of deal with reality, but that's still another dodge. It was and is very simple. It's bullying. It's the many forcing the few out of the ring, and dismissing their consent or desires or welfare or rights. These are very simple things: watch for the very complicated contortions that people go into avoid that reality.

Video here, for an example of excising gay people from society:



Is that a difference of an opinion? Are the people who strip gays of their rights and women of their consent and the people who fight to defend and restore those things just as bad? Think about it.

Bullshit. Safe, legal and rare. How about safe, legal and without apologizing or equivocating? It's none of your damned business if a woman has an abortion, not even if she's married to you, dating you, or your daughter. Especially if she's your wife, daughter, or girlfriend. If you gave a damn about her, you'd already know her opinions about abortion and respect them. If you gave a damn about her, you wouldn't put her health and her decisions over that of your pathetic control issues a fetus, or try and browbeat her into eighteen years of labor. Oh, yeah, and cut the shit about how $200.00 a month is equal to raising a child. If you have that much difficulty in writing a check, see your doctor. Also, ask for an anatomy lesson. Men don't get to decide when or whether a woman has an abortion because it's none of their damned business. Their decision time ends when their orgasm does. It's simple biology. If you don't want your sperm inseminating some woman stick to oral or anal sex or gay sex or----here's a scary thought----be honest with the woman before you have sex with her. "Hi, my name is Larry and if you get pregnant I'm going to turn into a whiny selfish control freak who might very well change my mind about fatherhood when you're eight months pregnant, after which I'll either not pay child support at all, or put you through the ringer to get it. All $200 bucks a month of it, because I'm a whiny jizzbucket who wants to spread my manly sperm around and get a warm fuzzy because I have lots of progeny but no responsibility for any of them." Oh, yeah, and stop talking about paper abortion. I don't buy for one second that a guy who could avoid child support wouldn't lie about his intentions after the fact. It's not like one of the most common tropes in the world isn't the guy who abandons the girlfriend he got pregnant. How many of these guys refused to wear a condom? How many women didn't have the option of saying no? If men don't take, "I don't want to have a child" seriously, do you really think they're going to take, "No" as an answer? It's not like rape is practically legal in this country anyway. So, no, I don't give a shit if abortion is rare. It's none of my business. It's none of your business. Neither is my or any woman's weight, hair color, sexual orientation, and so forth. Stop being a control freak.

Stop apologizing for abortion. Stop apologizing for having sex. People fuck. People fuck all the time. I'm sick of women bearing the scrutiny and the burden, which on the one hand gets romanticized and on the other gets demonized: Welfare queen, single mother, entrapping bitch, and so forth. It's funny how the same people who repeat anecdotes about evil women who entrapped their cousin's husband's doctor's veteranarian's sperm are the same people who tell women they're evil bitches when they complain about something that's a bit more than an inconvenience: injustices like rape, abuse, beatings, discrimination, and hatred get brushed aside with, "But the patriarchy hurts men, too." It doesn't hurt men as often or as hard as it hurts women. Men complain about $200 bucks a month. Women complain about injustice. Can we trade?

None of the anti-abortion groups have been honest about their desire to outlaw birth control, and none of the MRA organizations are honest enough to admit they like the idea of simultaneously forcing women to have their babies while they get to bugger off with a few whining denials. Don't talk to me about irresponsible women. Women have all the responsiblities that men don't, from housework to childcare to simply managing kids and often times, husbands who claim they're 'babysitting' their kids. If you're babysitting, you're a shitty father who thinks his and his wife's kids are solely his wife's problem but the bragging rights are his. If you're babysitting and don't do housework you're a shitty father who's giving his kids sexist ideas. Don't badmouth your wife, your girlfriend or your ex, unless we get to have her side of it, too. PAS is a bullshit excuse for women-bashing. Use it and accept the consequences: you're an asshole and you'll get treated like one. You want traditional women with traditional home, hearth and kitchen values? Traditional women are the most likely to believe in entrapping men because they believe in all that man/woman stereotype crap, but they're also obediant, submissive, and less of a challenge than a feminist, who will call yous ass on your bullshit. They also hate men like you would not believe. You're a dog to her, a meal ticket, and a man with obligations to her. She gives you sex and childcare and lip service, and you better pay up. You want it both ways, though. You want a woman who works, but gives you her paycheck and her future. In return, you give nothing. Pick women who hate men and you have it coming. You think she'll have your baby but there's no atheists in foxholes and there's very few unexpectedly pregnant women who don't even consider or have abortions. If you can't be honest with yourself, least of all the woman you're having sex with, you have no right to complain when you get a dose of your own medicine. If you want women who actually like and have hope for mens' future, try a feminist. Oh, wait.

So, no, I want abortion to be safe, legal and as frequent as women want them to be. No explanations, no equivocating. If you don't want kids, use condoms and accept that accidents happen. Male birth control useage is at 20 %. That's not womens' fault. Don't blame women for the male lack of action. If you don't want kids, get a vasectomy or shut up about women and start lobbying pharmaceutical companies for more male birth control options. Absent any practical proof that you took steps to protect yourself, you're just another MR Asshole who wants it both ways: all the power, none of the obligations.

Oh, yeah, and improbable scenarios about women entrapping you? Yeah, tell a woman that before the date and see how she reacts. Also, shut up about how women lie. If we have to accept your bullshit, you have to accept the actual truth about what we go through at the hands and dicks of unscrupulous or indifferent men. Of course, if you pick one of those starry-eyed women who think they can rescue the bad boy, she might be stupid enough to fuck you or maybe even marry you because she's got 'MRA second wife syndrome written all over her forehead. Try Ann Coulter. Of course, there are women who feel compelled to believe whatever fool thing a man says about his ex because she can compete against a woman who's no longer around to tell her side of the story. I wish I could tell such women exactly what's in store for them and Prince Charming, who'll stop picking up his socks once he has a new housekeeper/childminder devoted wife all locked up or better yet, pregnant. I hate men who badmouth women---and better yet don't get that they're doing it ---but I also hate those passive aggressive women who eagerly believe at the expense of other women in their own speshulness. Here's a clue, hon: you're just a childcare worker to him. Wise up. I don't like you and feminism doesn't mean I have to accept any backstabber just because she's got ovaries. You're not entitled to anything if you side with the men. Give it up or just you try and get along with what those men you love want you to do. I dare you.

Either way, I don't care how many women have how many abortions. Abortion issues are never about just abortion, they're about power and who gets to control women. Anti-abortion groups have not even been and are not now honest about their policies, the results, and the wide-reaching deadly effects of their actions. Women get to control abortions. Period, end of subject, end of story. Deal with it.