Ladies! Do you still need feminism?

Some mornings it’s just not worth gnawing your way out of the restraints, is it? I mean, with shit like this popping up in my Facebook feed, it’s enough to put me permanently OFF my feed:

mra-bs-meme.jpg

Congratulations, ladies! Your fight’s over! You won! You don’t live in Saudi Arabia! (Sorry, Saudi ladies, you’re screwed. The dude who wrote this drivel isn’t about to lift a finger to help you.)

Of course, this meme is bullshit because we still DO need feminism. Because in NO country in this world is it entirely possible for women to do the following:

Fully and freely decide when, if and how we will bear children. Men, particularly lawmakers, are still interfering with our right to reproductive self-determination. They are restricting our access to good health care, especially abortion (but not limited to that, by any means). Worse, a “Quiverfull” mentality is taking over in North America, and women are being denied the right to use birth control…because “God says so”, apparently. “Freedom of religion” is becoming a Damoclean sword held over our reproductive organs.

Walk down the street unharassed, every day, no matter what we’re wearing. Even women who are fully covered, in burqas, face harassment. And they face it from the same “enlightened” white men who wrote the above drivel. In fact, those men are the ones most likely to try to strip away these women’s efforts at privacy. As for women who don’t cover up…well, they get treated like they asked for harassment. Nobody asks for that; we just get it every day, for nothing…because we are women and girls.

Grow up and attend school unmolested. Same deal as above, but with an added dollop of interfering with our educations and stunting our career prospects from an extremely early age.

Work at any job we like, with equal rights, equal respect, and equal pay. Women are still getting harassed out of male-dominated fields. And underpaid, too. What a pity we can’t grow penises on command to prevent that!

Work at any job we like, without being sexually harassed on the job. Yes, even here in Canada, this shit STILL happens, and I can’t believe we still have to protest it. Jian Ghomeshi is hardly an exception. He’s the boss from hell that many women in many different fields have had, still have, and probably always will…until someone decides to do something about it.

Be in a relationship without violence. And by violence, I mean the kind inflicted by males upon females. The kind that enforces male supremacy and patriarchy.

Be free from sexual abuse at home. Girl children are more likely to be sexually abused growing up. And not by some stranger in the bushes, either. The culprit is typically a male relative, and he typically gets away with it, because women and girls are still being regarded as property, and his to do with as he will.

Go on dates without having to fear that our dates will sexually assault us. When we have to watch our drinks (or stir them with a finger to see if our nail polish changes color), that’s a sign of severe inequality right there. When’s the last time you heard of a woman drugging a man that way, in order to have her way with him? Not often? Not ever? Funny, because that happens to us all the time. College women even have to avoid frat parties, because this is likely to happen to them there.

Be able to report a physical or sexual assault or an incident of harassment without getting blamed for it. It’s always “what were you doing, what were you drinking, what were you wearing?” Such questions put the onus on the victim and let the perpetrator off the hook.

Be able to report a physical or sexual assault or an incident of harassment and be immediately, completely taken seriously. And believed. And not taken further advantage of it by leering sexist pigs who think we’re “fair game” because we’ve already been through it.

Be able to report a physical or sexual assault or in incident of harassment…and actually see justice done. Because even if we report, are not blamed, are taken seriously and believed, the conviction rate for such crimes is shockingly low. Like, lower single digits low. This is inexcusable and happens with no other type of crime.

Enjoy representation in democratic government that is equal to our percentage of the population. We are 51% of humanity everywhere, but we do not have 51% of the seats in government. Not even in Iceland and Sweden is this the case, and they’re way ahead of everyone when it comes to gender equality!

Yeah, I’m sure we don’t need feminism anymore. Especially since we no longer have to deal with attitudes like this:

mra-bs-meme-2.jpg

I mean, I thought this question was settled with a resounding YES here in Canada, way back in 1929. Before that, mirabile dictu, we were still not persons here, at least in the eyes of the law.

But apparently, some guys somewhere are STILL asking this inane question, even now, when it should be obvious that if women were not human, men wouldn’t be able to interbreed with them. If the answer to the question were No, then we wouldn’t be producing children; we’d be producing mules. If we were producing anything at all, that is.

As for the rest of that meme, it’s just as bad and worse. It is designed to minimize the many and crucial roles women have played throughout the history of civilization. We have always worked outside the home, often much harder than any man. We have produced important things on our own, without the help of any man. Skyscrapers and satellites? Well, gee, maybe women WOULD have produced those, too, if they hadn’t been harassed and hounded out of traditionally male careers like science and architecture! Why are male achievements privileged so much above those of women…especially things women have been doing since humanity stopped living in trees and grunting? If women aren’t human, then neither are men…and the dude who horked up this hairball clearly hasn’t evolved beyond the australopithecine stage.

As for giving birth being our main contribution to society: Well, so what? It was the only one explicitly and consistently ALLOWED us. Where did you come from, O dude who made this — fully formed from the head of Zeus? Nope. You came out of a woman’s belly after up to nine months’ gestation, probably by way of her nasty-wasty cootie-ridden vagina. Same as every other sooooper-fucking-genius male. Half your DNA comes from your mother. So does the X chromosome in every one of your cells. Even though you hate and despise her, hold her in utter contempt, and are keen to minimize the role she and every other woman plays in your life, the fact is, you can’t live without her. And this is how you repay her? You fucking parasite. You should be bowing down in gratitude that she didn’t abort you. Or leave you to die of exposure on a hillside.

And if we are so “pampered and privileged”, why are we deemed “near-worthless” and fit only to be denied all our inalienable human rights? Does this asswipe seriously believe that women are better off in chains, and that humanity would be better off that way too? Because the picture, which was blacked out by the anti-MRA Facebook group that posted this, showed the women naked and in chains. Hell, even in Saudi Arabia, women are treated better than that!

It’s very telling, isn’t it, that some men can only assert their “rights”…by denying us all of ours. And this in the supposedly “free” countries where we allegedly have so many…and yet, not nearly enough. Because no one — NO ONE — is suggesting that men be treated the way we have been for centuries, much less stripped of all THEIR rights.

Yes, we still need feminism. And as long as memes like these exist, along with the assholes who made them, we will continue to need it badly.

Bad news for ammosexuals

Music, Maestro Cummings:

Ah, that was lovely. And now, the news.

First, the sublime: It looks as though John “Mary Rosh” Lott has been definitively debunked, by real scientists not in the pocket of the gunmakers’ lobby. Instead of “More Guns, Less Crime”, it’s “More Guns, More Crime”:

Across the basic seven Index I crime categories, the strongest evidence of a statistically significant effect would be for aggravated assault, with 11 of 28 estimates suggesting that RTC laws increase this crime at the .10 confidence level. An omitted variable bias test on our preferred Table 8a results suggests that our estimated 8 percent increase in aggravated assaults from RTC laws may understate the true harmful impact of RTC laws on aggravated assault, which may explain why this finding is only significant at the .10 level in many of our models. Our analysis of the year-by-year impact of RTC laws also suggests that RTC laws increase aggravated assaults. Our analysis of admittedly imperfect gun aggravated assaults provides suggestive evidence that RTC laws may be associated with large increases in this crime, perhaps increasing such gun assaults by almost 33 percent.

In addition to aggravated assault, the most plausible state models conducted over the entire 1979-2010 period provide evidence that RTC laws increase rape and robbery (but usually only at the .10 level). In contrast, for the period from 1999-2010 (which seeks to remove the confounding influence of the crack cocaine epidemic), the preferred state model (for those who accept the Wolfers proposition that one should not control for state trends) yields statistically significant evidence for only one crime – suggesting that RTC laws increase the rate of murder at the .05 significance level. It will be worth exploring whether other methodological approaches and/or additional years of data will confirm the results of this panel-data analysis and clarify some of the highly sensitive results and anomalies (such as the occasional estimates that RTC laws lead to higher rates of property crime) that have plagued this inquiry for over a decade.

“RTC” = “right to carry”.

Higher rates of robbery, rape, aggravated assault AND murder (not to mention accidental gunshot wounds and deaths) go hand in hand with “right to carry” laws. Who’d of thunk? Guess that puts paid to the whole “if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will carry guns” canard of the NRA & Co. Seems that the more legal guns are, the greater the number of outlaws who find themselves free to carry the same. And consquently, the more powerless the cops will be against them, unless they happen to be better armed. What a coincidence, right at a time when even small-town police forces are starting to look more and more like miniature armies, while weapons manufacturers all rub their hands and yell “Ka-CHING!!!”

And now, the ridiculous. Since carrying a gun creates an automatically greater risk that you will wind up on the outlaw side of things, it’s getting harder to tell the cops from the robbers. Particularly in Ferguson, Missouri, where racism is uniting bigoted ammosexual cops with bigoted civilian ammosexuals like never before:

Some suburban St. Louis gun dealers have been doing brisk business, particularly among first-time buyers, as fearful residents await a grand jury’s decision on whether to indict the police officer who fatally shot Michael Brown.

Metro Shooting Supplies, in an area near the city’s main airport, reports selling two to three times more weapons than usual in recent weeks — an average of 30 to 50 guns each day — while the jury prepares to conclude its three-month review of the case that sparked looting and weeks of sometimes-violent protests in August.

“We’re selling everything that’s not nailed down,” owner Steven King said. “Police aren’t going to be able to protect every single individual. If you don’t prepare yourself and get ready for the worst, you have no one to blame but yourself.”

[…]

Protest leaders say they are preparing for non-violent demonstrations after the grand jury’s decision is announced, but they also acknowledge the risk of more unrest if the panel decides not to issue criminal charges against Darren Wilson, the white officer who shot Brown, who was black and unarmed.

No word on what color most of the gun buyers are, but you can pretty much guess. It’s the same color as most of the NRA’s membership. And all of the KKK’s. Ammosexuality is, when all’s said, a white man’s disease.

Is this Canada’s first anti-Muslim law?

polygamy.jpg

If I didn’t know better, I’d say it sounded like the Harper Government™ is on some kind of a feminist roll. Yesterday, Bill C-36, which bans the buying of sexual services, passed the Senate. And today, there’s this:

Citizenship and Immigration Minister Chris Alexander introduced legislation Wednesday afternoon to ban people in polygamous and early and forced marriages from immigrating to Canada.

Alexander said the practices, including female genital mutilation and honour-based violence, are “incompatible with Canadian values.”

Alexander and Minister of Labour and Minister Responsible for the Status of Women Dr. Kellie Leitch announced the federal government bill at a news conference Wednesday morning at Rexdale Women’s Centre.

[…]

The 2013 Throne Speech promised action to stop early and forced marriages, polygamy, female genital mutilation and so-called honour-based killings.

All are issues of concern to the Harper government in light of the multiple murders in 2009 of female members of Montreal’s Shafia family, Alexander said. An Afghan-Canadian man, his second wife and their son, were convicted of first-degree murder in the deaths of his three teenaged daughters and his first wife — killed because he felt the girls’ dating and dress brought dishonour to his family.

No word in there as to whether they plan on stopping the US-based cult of fundie-Mormon polygamists who’ve taken up residence in BC, and barring any members of that sect from crisscrossing our border. Those most certainly qualify as immigrants, and practitioners of early and forced polygamous marriages, if not genital mutilation. I have a sneaking suspicion that our gummint simply doesn’t want to know that they exist, and focus instead on all those sinister-looking (to them, anyway) brown and black people from overseas.

I did say “if I didn’t know better”, eh? This is what “knowing better” entails:

Knowing that there’s something deeply, grossly wrong about singling out members of one particular religion for specific anti-immigrant sanctions. As it is, our immigration system has already become dangerously restrictive, and is shutting refugees out. And yes, that adversely affects those who are refugees from institutional sexism in their countries of origin: refugees facing genital mutilation, forced and early marriages, and polygamy!

Knowing that “honor killing” is not a Muslim thing, it’s a cross-cultural thing. Only, when non-Muslims (usually white, Christian Canadians) do it, it’s simply classified as plain old homicide, or even “domestic violence”. Our statistics are rife with husbands killing estranged wives, men killing mistresses who no longer want to be “kept”, and jilted boyfriends stalking and murdering their ex-girlfriends, but none dare call THAT “honor crime”, even when it is easily classifiable as an affront to some man’s pride. Talk about a whitewash!

Knowing that polygamy is by no means limited to Muslims, either.

Knowing that everything Those People have done, “our” people have also done, one way or another, at one time in history or another. Remember medieval tortures and witch persecutions? They involved all kinds of persecutions of outcast women. White Christian people did those things. And they did them relatively recently right here in the Americas, too.

But-but-but, we say, we’re past barbarism nowadays. And just look how bold and saintly we are, trying to yoink Those People out of the Dark Ages as well! Yeah, let’s just forget that while Christian Europe was in its Dark Ages, burning “witches” and cats over the plague (and thus, unintentionally, making matters worse by eliminating trained herbalists and rat-killers), the Muslim world was making great advances in the enlightened arts of science, medicine and mathematics, to say nothing of arts and culture. No, Those People need our rescuing, and they need it NOW!

Never mind, either, that the overwhelming majority of Muslims are not polygamous, and that the Koran is very specific about the circumstances under which such marriages can occur. If a man is capable of treating them all equally, he may have up to (but no more than) four wives. If not, he must content himself with just one. Most can’t afford more than one. Most also can’t divide their time, affection and worldly goods between more than one. The vast majority of Muslims are thus de facto monogamists. And, adding that to the fact that most have already voluntarily adapted to the secular laws of the lands where they find themselves, it means that most Canadian Muslims…are also de facto monogamists! Exactly how many people are we talking about “protecting” by forcing them to stay out of our country, anyway? And why aren’t we taking in Muslimas who are trying to escape polygamy, if we’re so concerned about this “barbaric practice”?

Never mind, also, that the Shafia case was in fact egregious from the viewpoint even of Muslim polygamy, since the patriarch of that family made a grotesque point of NOT treating his two wives equally. He maltreated the first, who was infertile, and favored the second, who was younger, and who gave him all his seven children — three of whom he killed. He could have divorced his first wife, freeing her to pursue a better marriage with someone else, but he did not; instead, he kept her on as an unpaid domestic. There is no “honor” in that, and Muslim Canadians themselves have said as much.

And never mind, above all, that female genital mutilation isn’t a Muslim thing, but a tribal thing, and mainly African. Which means that non-Muslim Africans also sometimes do it. Never mind, either, that white men sometimes also mutilate the genitals of women whom they perceive as having pissed on their masculine “honor”. No, let’s just fixate on the Muslims and accuse them, and only them, of barbarism!

No, there is nothing feminist about this latest Harpocratic legal project. It doesn’t even pass the most basic of sniff tests. Unfortunately, that probably won’t stop it from passing the House of Commons…and the Senate. And it probably won’t make it unpopular with the gullible morons who voted for those goons, either.

Canada’s real terrorism problem

cold-lake-mosque.jpg

This mosque in Cold Lake, Alberta, was spray-painted by xenophobic vandals. The town is home to an airbase from which CF-18 jet fighters recently departed en route to the war zone of Iraq. The people of Cold Lake have since banded together to clean up the graffiti while the police search for the perpetrators.

Oh, Canada. What’s happening to you?

You used to be such a nice place. Liberal. Socialist, even. And it worked out great for you while it lasted.

You used to be such a livable, lovable place. The country to the immediate south of us may have billed itself the Land of Opportunity, but when it came to real opportunities, we had them beat. Our social safety net ensured that no one got left too far behind by the ups and downs of the mixed economy.

Everyone who came here used to feel so welcome. We got immigrants from all over the world, and they helped make this the most diverse country on the planet. And the most multicultural. And the place where the most disparate people had a chance to coexist peacefully. From Vietnam War draft dodgers to Iraq War refugees, we’ve been enriched by the presence of people who were outcasts in their own lands. And the religious and ethnic clashes of the old country were left far behind, much to the relief and joy of all. Here, it didn’t matter who you were, what you were or where you came from; you were accepted. You were always at home.

And now I feel like a stranger in my own land, even though I was born here.

We seem to have caught terrorism-itis from south of the border. Everyone’s so paranoid now. Instead of waiting to learn what’s going on, we start jumping to false conclusions. The embarrassing truth leaks out too late every time.

Like this week. These past few days saw us “attacked” by two “terrorists” who, it turns out, were something else altogether. One was a paranoid schizophrenic; the other, a drug addict. But since both were Muslims, and chose to attack and kill soldiers of the Canadian army, with a confused mess of ISIL propaganda and madness roaring through their heads, they just automatically got labelled as terrorists. As if they had flown fully loaded passenger jets into the Peace Tower and the banking district of downtown Toronto on a suicide mission co-ordinated from a cave somewhere near the Pak-Afghan border.

The truth is stranger, and sadder, and nowhere near as dramatic as that.

In fact, the “terrorists” were not foreigners, as was initially reported/speculated. They were both native-born French-Canadians. And they both had mental problems that could easily have been treated. This tragedy was totally avoidable, and neither a war nor even changes to our nation’s security systems was necessary to avert it.

Don’t believe me? Let’s look at who these guys were, and how they acted.

Martin Couture-Rouleau was a convert to Islam; he converted only last year. He was not an immigrant. He was not even remotely an Arab, or Muslim by birth. His religious conversion appears to have arisen out of a growing heap of personal problems. Apparently he made enough radical-sounding noises that the RCMP was investigating him, and his passport was revoked, preventing him from travelling to Turkey (and presumably, from there, to Syria to join ISIL forces). He was alienated from his family, and everyone who knew him was bewildered by the recent changes to his personality. He was divorced, and his ex-wife was apparently frightened enough of him to seek sole custody of their child. It was not Islam that had made him that way, though; it was his own schizophrenia. His “radicalization” was concurrent with the worsening of his illness. And his own imam struggled in vain to dissuade him from supporting ISIL or taking up battle — or terrorism — on their behalf.

Michael Zehaf-Bibeau was also not an immigrant, although his father was one (from Libya), and his mother a deputy chair at the federal immigration department. At school he was simply known as Mike Bibeau, the big, gregarious good-time guy voted most likely to succeed, especially with the ladies. But drug addiction shortly after his graduation from high school put an end to all that. He was known to police, but only as a petty criminal and drug abuser. His parents are long divorced, and bewildered as to what has become of him. Like Martin Couture-Rouleau, he was alienated from his family; his mother said she hadn’t seen him in five years. In that time, he had fled to BC, looking in vain to escape his addiction (which had shifted from marijuana and PCP usage to crack cocaine). He tried everything from religion to prison to cure himself. He wasn’t jailed long enough to keep him away from the dealers, and the imam of the mosque where he broke in at night to sleep on the floor locked him out. His religious fervor was a direct outgrowth of his efforts to replace one drug with another. At the time of his final desperate acts, he was homeless and so isolated from humanity that even at the Ottawa homeless shelter where he’d taken refuge, he was an outsider.

Neither man was connected to the other, nor to any known terrorist groups. Both were entirely isolated, and more so thanks to their respective mental conditions.

Meanwhile, our social safety net has eroded. Mental health services have faced severe cutbacks in all provinces. People who should have been hospitalized, as much for their own safety as anyone else’s, are instead left to roam the street, helpless and untreated. A few years ago, we were horrified by a beheading on a Greyhound bus; the killer, in that case, was a schizophrenic too, and should have been hospitalized. Not until he’d killed and partially eaten a complete stranger in the thick of a psychotic episode did he finally get the help he needed. If by “help” one means psychiatric incarceration, that is.

Six years after Vince Weiguang Li began his treatment, our mental health system has not improved a whit. It is still chronically starved of funding and professionals. The mental hospitals we so desperately need are still closed, with no new ones opened to replace them. The few still remaining have waiting lists a mile long. Those who can’t afford private counselling and rehab are shit out of luck.

And worse, we no longer have a federal long-gun registry. That’s right; a crime-fighting tool born out of a terrorist attack in Montréal was scrapped by the same wonderful Conservative party that’s also behind all the other rips in our social safety net! The police are thus officially hamstrung. Who knows if we’ll ever find out how Mike Bibeau, who was legally prohibited from owning firearms due to his criminal and drug record, managed to get his hands on the rifle that enabled him to kill Nathan Cirillo, who was standing guard at the federal War Memorial?

Yeah, tell me the Conservatives are not the real terrorists in all this. They’re using the hysteria surrounding these events, even now, to push their own very anti-Canadian agenda. And the sad part is, too many people are all too happy to LET them.

Of course, salient facts like that have escaped the major media, or the myriads of know-nothings who pontificate in the comments sections of their websites. Most of them seem quite convinced that if we only shut our doors tightly enough, ramped up the security high enough, and went to war in enough foreign countries to “bomb them back to the Stone Age” and “teach them a good lesson”, the “terrorist” problem would be best addressed. Never mind that neither of these guys was a foreigner, and that both in fact were born right here.

Or they’re all full of self-righteous Islamophobia, oblivious to the fact that in both cases, imams actually tried to deter these guys from taking the criminal turns they did. And oblivious, too, to the fact that Canadian Muslims are right on the same page with all the rest of us in condemning such attacks, and terrorism in general.

And above all, they’re oblivious to the role that a too-easy access to guns, and a too-hard access to mental health care, played in this whole goddamn mess. They simply cannot and will not see those connections, even though it doesn’t take a brilliant sociologist to draw them.

Oh yeah, and that’s another thing: We’re not supposed to commit sociology in times of terrorism, according to none other than Stephen Fucking Harper himself. Yes, that’s right…the tough-talking macho PM, who bravely, bravely hid in a broom closet while his underlings barricaded the door with spears made from flag poles!

But hey. At least the parliamentary Sergeant-at-Arms, Kevin Vickers, proved that his role is not merely ceremonial, even though his costume may be. Like René Jalbert many years before him, he was the one who engaged a confused, deranged gunman hellbent on wreaking terror. Unlike Jalbert, though, he couldn’t talk the shooter out of it; he ended up having to kill him. “Terrorist” crisis ended, either way.

And all this without recourse to war.

Now the PM’s security detail has modified its protocol so that they can enter the Commons chamber and protect him at all times. That’s fine; at least it doesn’t unduly curtail anyone’s civil liberties. Not so fine, however, is the legislation the government apparently passed on the same day as Martin Couture-Rouleau ran down Patrice Vincent in a fit of psychosis. We’re now facing intrusive, unconstitutional online surveillance under the pretext of “crime prevention”! Yay!

So, now you know. And if this is the last post you see from me, you’ll know why. I’ll have been arrested for committing the supreme terrorist act of daring to think un-conservatively and sociologically, and tying together all the things they don’t want us to understand are related. If you think Martin Couture-Rouleau and Michael Zehaf-Bibeau were crazy (and they were, alas), you ain’t seen nothin’ . My own country just totally outclassed them in the losing-one’s-shit department.

And since it’s already at war in Iraq, too, it’s also outdone them in terms of real terrorism.

Cops Behaving Badly: Back to School Bathroom Bomb Scare Edition

texas-teen-pregnancy-site.jpg

The front page of an official Texas website promoting abstinence. Think it will work?

Ugh, Texas…what the fuck is wrong with you? Whatever it is, even your police are suffering from it now:

Parents in Texas are upset after police reportedly “swarmed” a Texas high school because a girl may have had a miscarriage in one of the bathrooms.

KDFW reported that a school custodian notified the principal at Woodrow Wilson High School after finding a “possible fetus” in one of the bathroom stalls on Friday.

The principal contacted police, who “swarmed” the school, according to KTVT.

They even sent a helicopter to buzz the skies overhead. Yup, miscarrying in the school washroom is now being treated exactly like a full-fledged terrorist attack. One would think it was a bomb, not blood, in the toilets.

And oh yeah: How about a little religious slut-shaming with that, too?

Dallas Police Department’s Child Abuse Unit detectives were investigating to find out who may have abandoned the fetus. The person involved was being considered a “suspect.”

“We’re reviewing video, talking to the teachers, trying to determine if anybody has any knowledge of any student that may have had something going on in their life, and pray,” Dallas Police Major John Lawton said.

Yeah, that’s right…instead of trying to find the girl and make sure she’s all right, they’re just gonna pray. Pray for that young heathen jezebel who just couldn’t wait until she was married before getting knocked up. She’s being treated as a “suspect”, rather than a girl who may be in need of medical attention.

And the local religious slut-shaming brigade also just HAD to chime in…

Alan Elliott of Baby Moses Dallas explained to KDFW that the mother could have avoided any criminal charges if she had taken advantage of Baby Moses laws by carrying the child to term, and then dropping it off at a safe baby site like a fire station.

“And that’s a happy ending when that happens, because the baby is safe, the mother is protected from any sort of prosecution, so it’s a win-win for both of them,” Elliot noted.

However, it was not immediately clear how far along the pregnancy was, and the cause of the possible miscarriage was not known.

…even though it’s not clear that it was a deliberate abortion. What if it turns out to be an accident?

And why all this horrible talk of prosecuting what must, by now, be one terribly frightened girl?

Well, maybe because Texas is an abstinence-only state. And that’s not going so well for them:

Texas has one of the highest rates of teen pregnancy in the country. Although the teen birth rate has been declining over the past decade, the Lone Star State still has the highest rate of repeat teen births, as an estimated 22 percent of teens who give birth have already had at least one child.

In light of those statistics, how is Texas’ Department of Health hoping to help prevent future unintended pregnancies among young women? By spending $1.2 million to build an abstinence-only website that doesn’t include any mention of contraception.

Yes, I’m sure that will help a lot. In fact, I bet the girl in question was already a beneficiary of just such a paucity of information. Not to mention deathly afraid of seeking birth control, because if anyone found out, the slut-shame brigade would turn out in force and swarm her, just like those stupid cops and their helicopter. Girls who conceal pregnancies tend to be afraid of things like that. Even just telling their own mothers could be the hardest thing in the world to do — especially if Mom is another of those religious freaks who would rather pray for her daughter’s soul than take her to the doctor and make sure her body is all right.

And really — since when is it the police’s duty to play Morally Judgmental Parent?

With a “win-win” framework like that in place, more bathroom miscarriages are all but inevitable.

And now, for a Very Important Message…

…from a very self-righteously indignant dude:

Uh, dude? That’s not a fedora, that’s a trilby. Get your hats straight! And if you’re that irrationally angry about a silly little hat (which, I note, you’re not wearing very well either — either match it to your suit or GTFO), well…who are you to lecture anyone who makes fun of your “class, not swag” d-bag headgear?

(Also, stop with the frantic in-and-out zooming. You’re making me queasy. Pick a focus and stick to it. And for fuck’s sake, learn to hold your camera horizontally, so you don’t get those idiotic black bars down the side, rookie.)

PS: According to David Futrelle, the above video is comedy. Could have fooled me, but oh well. I was already laughing anyway.

A Children’s Treasury of Wingnuttia

wingnut-kids-books.jpg

I don’t know what’s funnier…the fact that there’s a book for kids on the “virtues” of open carry, that it’s “frequently bought together” with other forgettable trashery like Raising Boys Feminists Will Hate, or these Amazon.com reviews for it:

open-carry-book-reviews.jpg

open-carry-book-reviews2.jpg

open-carry-book-reviews3.jpg

open-carry-book-reviews4.jpg

Yes indeed, this book is a classic in the making. I can smell it already. No, wait…that’s just burnt gunpowder and stale flop-sweat. My mistake!

The only thing that can stop a bad guy with a gun…

…is a good guy with a lasso:

In case you can’t see the video, here’s the basic gist:

According to The Atlanta Journal Constitution, deputies said that 25-year-old Celestino Moras showed up drunk at a rodeo in Bartow County on Sunday, and was asked to leave because he was not invited to the event.

The property owner told WSB-TV that Moras pulled out a pistol and opened fire, leaving three shot.

When Moras ran out of bullets, one of the rodeo cowboys reportedly lassoed him. Moras was then beaten by other guests, who tied him up until deputies arrived.

Authorities said that two people were shot in the lower body, and one person was shot in the neck. However, WSB-TV reported that “the three wounded guests suffered only minor injuries and were treated and released from local hospitals.”

A fourth person suffered cuts on the hand from a knife.

Moral of story: Never bring a gun to a knife fight at the OK Corral. Or something like that.

Yee-haw!

God hath spoken; Christians still not listening

jesus-slap-shit

Good morning! If you ever needed proof that God is NOT on the side of blind bigotry, just take a look at how close She came to wiping out one family that decided to try Her patience:

An Arizona family fed up with abortion, homosexuality, taxes and the “state-controlled church” will fly back home Sunday after being lost at sea for months.

Hannah Gastonguay told the Associated Press she and her husband “decided to take a leap of faith and see where God led us.” The family, which included two small children, abandoned the United States and set sail for the island nation of Kiribati in May. They ended up lost in the Pacific Ocean for 91 days.

During the voyage, their boat was damaged by “squall after, squall, after squall.” The damage forced them to head towards the nearer Marquesas Islands, but they made little progress.

Luckily, human mercy saved the day for these lost and benighted souls, who are gullible enough to think (with no evidence whatsoever to support it) that the US government is interfering with religion (actually, it’s quite the other way around, and has been for quite some time). If it had been up to God, they’d have been drowned in true Darwin Award style for their stupidity. As it is, the “God-hating” US government paid to get their sorry God-bothering asses back on home soil. But have they learned their lesson? Oh nooooo:

Hannah Gastonguay said the family will now “go back to Arizona” and “come up with a new plan.”

Please plan to stay put…and while you’re at it, plan to stop reproducing. Isn’t it bad enough that you nearly killed your own innocent kids for the sake of a religious delusion?

Get your own damn sandwich.

So, women now rule the world, and men are oppressed? Courtesy of a Facebook friend, here’s an extremely typical example of how guys who make those claims actually “think” (note the quotes):

antifeminist-stoopid

Y’okay. I know this isn’t really a fair fight here, seeing as I’m about to do a battle of wits with an unarmed man. But damn, he’s just begging for an ass-kicking. So I figure I might as well oblige him. Ready? Here goes…

“You’ve never been forced to die in war.”

Yeah, dude, we’ve never fought in a war, never been killed as civilians either, and certainly NEVER been raped to death. Just because women haven’t faced as much historical conscription as men (outside of Israel, maybe), doesn’t mean we didn’t get wiped out too. My mother’s baby sister was forced to die in a war when she was just 11 months old. Of course, she had to do so via malnutrition and dysentery, so there’s that.

“You are not capable of performing the same tasks men do because you lack the ambition and devotion to do a good job at anything. This is why you get paid less.”

Actually, we are more than capable, and we don’t lack “ambition and devotion”. We work twice as hard for half the pay and a quarter of the recognition. There are now more women than men graduating from college. And we don’t get there by sleeping with our profs or batting our eyes at TAs, either. The reason we STILL get paid less is because men can get away with paying us less…and they do. It’s called systemic discrimination; look it up, dude.

“Remember when you weren’t allowed to vote? It’s because you lack the enough logical reasoning skills to take difficult decisions in a sound manner.”

“The enough logical reasoning skills”? What does that even mean? Dude, if you’re gonna pride yourself on your superior reasoning and logic (mad skillz!), shouldn’t you at least learn how to string together a coherent sentence? You know, so you at least LOOK like you have logic and reasoning capacity?

As for the point you’re struggling to make here, it’s also bullshit. Remember all those wars you were being forced to die in while we fragile flowers were sitting safely home, getting raped to death? Product of superior male logic and reasoning, dude. And product of oh-so-superior all-male voting and all-male candidate slates, too.

“You have never ruled the world. Because you lack the enough physical strength and intelligence to lead an army or a nation.”

Again with “the enough”. Dude, if you’re gonna claim superior intelligence — again, learn to string together a coherent sentence, or don’t try to make that argument.

Actually, don’t try to make that argument anyhow. No single individual has ever ruled the world, and none ever will (or should). But if you want rulers of armies and nations, learn to look beyond your own sex once in a while. Jeanne d’Arc organized and led an army at 17. Queen Elizabeth I ruled as an unmarried woman, never relegated to second-class status as a producer of royal heirs. She routinely boasted of her “male brain”, which kept her securely on the throne for 44 years. Queen Victoria ascended the throne of England at 18, and the British Empire grew and prospered under her reign (which she did not abandon to produce heirs and spares at a prodigious rate). Queen Elizabeth II has been on the throne for 61 years now, and may well live to top Queen Victoria’s 63. And don’t get me started on Hatshepsut, the Egyptian queen who crowned herself a pharaoh, and won the respect of her people by her successful forays in both war and peaceful trade. She wasn’t even the first female ruler of Egypt by a long shot!

I’m sorry…what was that you were saying again, dude?

“The only reason you need wimpy support groups (i.e. Feminism) is because of your primal instinct of inferiority.”

“The only reason…is because of”? Again, dude, learn to string together a sentence; that’s fucking pathetic.

BTW, there is no such thing as a “primal instinct of inferiority” peculiar to women; see above. I’m sure that any of the female rulers and leaders I’ve mentioned (who are just a handful among many) would be greatly surprised to find themselves in possession of such a thing. I know I would be!

And if feminism is just a “wimpy support group”, why are you so afraid of it? Why post these moronic, hastily typed screeds if you’re so naturally, primally, instinctually superior? Whom are you trying to convince — us, or yourself? Either way, your flop-sweat is starting to smell.

“You have never invented anything worth mentioning during the last thousands of years of recorded human history. That computer you’re using, the electricity, the house you live in, the car you drive, the job you work for, the gasoline that fuels your car, the desk, the pencil, the paper and everything you use in your everyday life was invented by men.”

O RLY? Ada Lovelace would like a word with you, dude. Without her, Charles Babbage’s “Analytical Engine” would have been no more than a quaint curiosity, with limited (or no) practical use. Female programmers also worked the first electronic computers during World War II. If you use software or algorithms of any sort, you’re using something invented by a woman.

Also, electricity wasn’t invented by men. It wasn’t invented, period. It’s a force of nature that no man can lay claim to. Although a great many men have been killed by it, some in chairs invented by other men. (Ah yes, those superior male brains. They fry so beautifully.)

I don’t know who invented houses, desks, or pencils and paper, and neither do you. But to just assume it must have been a man (because instinct, blah blah) is lazy and pathetic. If you can’t name who invented something, you don’t have the right to assume anything about the inventor’s gender.

BTW, I don’t drive a car. I ride a bike; less polluting. More often, I just walk. Are you going to tell me that men invented walking, too?

“The job you work for”? Again, pathetic sentence structure. Dude, learn English. Use that superior male head of yours for something other than a neck ornament, already.

Also, not everything we use every day was invented by men. So, you were saying…again?

“Mathematics, philosophy, science, medicine, and all of the important building blocks of modern society were created by men.”

Wrong, wrong, wrong. They were all co-created by men and women, throughout history. And the ratio of the former to the latter would have been smaller by far if systemic discrimination had not existed throughout history, and if it did not STILL exist today.

And how do I know it still exists today? Because you said this:

“You are only to provide us men with your physical beauty. Which is the only worthy talent you posses besides bearing children. If you can’t do that you’re worthless.”

Gee, dude, you sure told me. BTW, could you learn to spell possess too, while you’re busy learning English with that mighty manly head of yours?

“Now go make me a sandwich”

What — can’t you take care of that yourself? You’re superior enough to die in war for the sake of philosophy and shit. You invented electricity! I’m too pretty and inferior to do anything but look good and bear you children. You said so yourself. Make your own damn sandwiches.

And don’t forget the period at the end of the sentence, dumbfuck.