Wednesday, June 30, 2010

Major Lulz from the Sheltered - Chapter 5

I can't believe I missed Chapter 5 of Life's Choices when it went up. So today, I have the pleasure of reviewing Chapter 5 and tomorrow I will work on Chapter 6. (Previous Chapters)

When last we left our heroine, Leona, she was . . . um, pregnant. I forget. But it's hardly important, I'm sure we can figure this out.

actually, i had all this great snark written and then I got to Leona's adventures in Planned Parenthood. It's so utterly clueless and offensive, I erased the snark to concentrate on this.

Leona pushed the thought out of her mind and made her decision. She was going to the Planned Parenthood Clinic right now and get this whole thing over with. She would never have to tell her parents, and if Peter or Sarah asked her, she could just tell them that she had a miscarriage.
She grabbed her purse and dashed out to her car before she could change her mind. Why was she afraid that she would, though?
She arrived at the clinic ten minutes later and walked in.
“Can I help you?” the receptionist asked.
“I’m here for an appointment,” Leona said.
“Did you have it scheduled?” the woman asked, looking through her desk calendar.
“No,” Leona said. “I just now decided. Is it possible to done really quick?”
“Why don’t you have a seat in the lobby and I’ll see if we have a doctor free.” The woman waved to the lobby room and then disappeared through a door.
no. just no. you need an appointment to get an abortion. walk-ins are not welcome. first of all, they have to confirm that you actually are pregnant. this is so ridiculous, and it just gets worse.

Leona began to feel nervous. There were a few other girls in the lobby, but Leona suddenly felt alone and almost scared.
“This your first time?” a girl sitting near her asked.
“Yeah,” Leona mumbled.
“You seem kinda nervous,” the girl stated.
"I am,” Leona tried a wobbly grin. “A little.”
“Well, don’t be,” the girl said with a wave of her hand. “It’s nothing, really. Just try thinking of it as getting an overgrown toe nail removed. That’s pretty much what it’s like. I mean, it’s something not alive. Almost like a fungus.” The girl seemed to emphasis ‘it’ a lot.

Really? First of all, I think the "girl" means "ingrown" toenail, not "overgrown" toenail, because I remove overgrown toenails myself with nail clippers.

Secondly, this cavalier portrayal of abortion? Bullshit. Abortion is not a decision that is reached lightly. It is reached after much weighing of facts, consideration of alternatives and soul searching. It is beyond offensive to state (I was going to use "imply", but this is more than implication) that women who have abortions do so after less thought than they would expend on a new hair color or manicure.

Leona was shocked. All this time she had been calling ‘it’ a baby...but was it really just what the girl had said? Like an overgrown toe nail?
“Anyway, you’ll get used to it after a while,” the girl said.
“Get used to what?” Leona questioned, with puzzled look.
"Get used to coming here,” the girl laughed, almost freakishly. “This is my fifth time.”
"Your fifth time getting an abortion?” Leona was shocked.
“Well, yeah, what did you think I meant?” The girl laughed again.
By this time, the two other girls who were in the lobby were listening in on Leona’s and the other girls conversation. One of them piped in, “It’s my third time here, actually. And my friend here has been here once before.” She waved to the girl sitting next to her.
Leona felt herself sink deeper into her chair as her mind swirled with so many different thoughts. How could these girls talk of this procedure so lightly? Didn’t they ever think of what they were losing?

First of all, very few teenage girls get abortions anymore and very few people get multiple abortions. Planned Parenthood also offers birth control services, you see. Which you would know, Miss Raquel, if you bothered to use google instead of simply restating a prolife pamphlet.

A more realistic representation of who would be there for an abortion:

Eighteen percent of U.S. women obtaining abortions are teenagers; those aged 15-17 obtain 6% of all abortions, teens aged 18-19 obtain 11%, and teens under age 15 obtain 0.4%. Women in their twenties account for more than half of all abortions; women aged 20–24 obtain 33% of all abortions, and women aged 25-29 obtain 24%.

So, if there were 3 people besides Leona in that waiting room, it's unlikely any of them were "girls". Leona is 18 (we think), so everyone else in that room should have been 20 or older.

About 61% of abortions are obtained by women who have one or more children.

So, yes, Leona, if that waiting room were filled with the people who really do get abortions, they would know exactly what "they are losing", from personal experience, unlike you, you judgmental little twit.

Forty-two percent of women obtaining abortions have incomes below 100% of the federal poverty level ($10,830 for a single woman with no children). Twenty-seven percent of women obtaining abortions have incomes between 100-199% of the federal poverty level.*

That's why they're willing to "lose" it, Miss Raquel. These women already have at least one child and are making less than $10,830 a year. A year! That's not even poverty, that's one school lunch away from starvation. So why don't you stop writing "fictionals*" and do something to help these women if you're so concerned about the little babies?

So, even in a Planned Parenthood that does provide abortion services, of the women in the room, not all should be there for abortions (the rest would be there for yearly exams, etc.), and the one other woman there for an abortion should be in dire poverty, over 20 and have at least one child.

Fail, Miss Raquel, fail.

*She describes this dreadful little story as a "fictional". Yes, she nouned an adjective.

It's a Good Thing Buses Don't Have Desks

Or I would have headdesked myself into a coma this morning.

The bus driver and a passenger were discussing god. For a while there it was a fairly standard discussion about giving all things to God and in faith all things are possible, until the driver declared that Satan was trying to make him "mess up". How does he know this? Because of the things he has been saying to his wife lately. You just don't say things like that to someone you love. Ergo, Satan.

Here is this grown man completely denying any responsibility for words that came out of his own mouth. Even a five-year-old who's been caught lying or cursing won't try to say that somebody else said it.

Yet this is totally acceptable in some Christian circles. An excuse that a small child would reject as being too unbelievable is the height of theology for a great many people.


Tuesday, June 29, 2010

The Weirdest Thing Happened to Me Today

I walked down to the drug store to use a coupon that expires tomorrow and was approached by two young men, one blond, one with a shaved head, attempting to hand out religious tracts and bottled water by saying, "Want a free bottle of water?"

(a) I'm not taking food or beverage from some random guy on the street and (b) no, I don't want your religious literature, please throw away your own trash.

So I said, "No, thank you," and kept walking.

Blond guy starts to implore me some more, Shaved Head grabs his arm and says, "Forget it, she's a witch."


So, totally forgetting that I have a Jägermonster sigil on my sleeve (see my profile picture), and not realizing what that would probably look like to the religiously sheltered, I assume he is saying "bitch" without actually saying it, and I stop and say, "Just because you replace the 'b' with a 'w' does not make that an acceptable thing to say about a woman!"

That's right, I caused a scene. I could actually hear my mother desperately hissing don't cause a scene! Too late, mom.

Religious dudes back away from me, almost into traffic, and Shaved Head's all, "I didn't- I didn't"

"How dare you call me a bitch?!"

Now people are stopping to watch. Due to the close proximity of the county courthouse, the federal courthouse and the university, the crowd includes lawyers in suits, defendants in suits and college students.

"No, no a witch!"


"You've got a demon on your arm!"

At this point, I'm pretty sure I've confronted a paranoid schizophrenic and I'm starting to feel bad about it, until a woman in a suit standing next to me taps the pin and says, "I think he means this."

"Oh, the Jägermonster sigil. It's from a-"

"I LOVE GIRL GENIUS!" shout two girls with blue hair and pink hair and tattoos and piercings- college students.

That's right, I found two people who love Girl Genius by starting a scene with a religious nutter. And, despite the fact that I am twice their age and do not have blue or pink hair, they think I am the coolest person evah for wearing the pin everywhere. In fact, I am officially "subversive".

Religious dudes still have no idea what just happened.

I Will Now Explain the Obvious

Here we go: Everyone in the world is not exactly like you. Everyone in the world does not think, feel, believe, live, eat, dress, etc. like you. This does not make everyone else wrong, it just is.

Red Cardigan doesn't seem to get this, as evidenced by a post about the fact that 1 in 5 women over 40 have never had children. It's the end of the world!

Granted, not all of the childless women are childless by choice; but that phenomenon is growing as well, along with the strangest (to me) iteration of this unusual lifestyle: the married couple who choose never to procreate.

C'mon over here and let me explain it to you, dollink: I do not want children. I have never wanted children. Neither does my husband. Therefore, we choose not to have children. Is that really so hard to understand? I mean, I love dogs and I have no intention of ever being without one for long, but I don't call dogless people names and imply things about their morality.

And that's another thing: "childless"? We will now be defining people solely by what they don't have? There is a precedent with those without permanent shelter, the homeless, but if you insist, I'm going to start referring to people as dogless, catless, tvless, xboxless, bachelor's degreeless, horseless, slothless and, to my great sadness, Jägermonsterless.

As a Catholic, I don't really understand the lifestyle choices of the "poor silly girls" who simply shack up with men on a serial basis,

full stop. I presume the people you are referring to are not, in fact, minor children, in which case they are women. Say it with me now: women. And why don't you make any reference to "poor silly boys"? Oh, I see, misogyny. okay then.

needing no more committment than a door key--but it is rather easy to understand why women in these irregular situations would choose to render themselves chemically sterile

use birth control? chemical sterilization is an actual medical procedure, it is not the same as using birth control. words: they have meanings.

or have themselves (or their partners) surgically spayed or neutered, so to speak.

dogs! people who choose to control their fertility are like dumb animals! i say this with love.

Bringing children into a tenuous relationship with a built-in "expiration date" would be beyond foolish. But it is much harder to understand why a married couple who is both physically capable of having children and not yet too elderly to do so would chose childlessness.

Because we don't want children. It's not rocket science, red. I'm not you. Got it yet? Oh, and "chose" is past tense, you're looking for "choose".

The Catholic mindset views children as blessings from God, desirable for their own sake and because they are at all times the living symbols of their parents' love. So deep is the connection between marriage and childbearing that I have seen several Catholic priests say or write that for a Catholic couple to attempt to marry in spite of a publicly expressed intention never to have children at all invalidates the marriage; that is, upon examination if the publicly expressed intention is revealed their marriage will be held to be invalid. Now, what constitutes a publicly expressed intention, etc. will vary, so it would be imprudent for casual observers to pronounce on the validity of a marriage; but in general, a Catholic couple may not enter a valid Catholic marriage having expressed a desire to remain childless by choice

Ah, the Catholic Church. I'm not feeling very creative, so go ahead and insert your own snarky comment about an endless supply of boys and girls for the predators behind the pulpit. Guess what? I'm not Catholic. Guess what else? Neither you nor the Catholic Church gets to determine the validity of my marriage. That's not your job. I don't need your approval or the Pope's approval to live my life.

But what about those who are not Catholic or not particularly religious, who want marriage (e.g., they aren't satisfied with merely shacking up), yet who insist they don't want children? Are they merely selfish, or are there other factors at work?

Selfish? What fucking business is it of yours whether or not i want children and what my reasons are? Really? Why is that your business? Let me put it to you this way: I don't want children. Why on earth would you think it would be a good idea to expose innocent children to being raised by someone who doesn't want them? It would be selfish of me to have children and then not raise them properly. Knowing that I do not want children and not having children is the right thing to do, for everyone involved, theoretical or otherwise.

I spent some time this afternoon reading what childless couples and those who have studied them have to say about their reasons to avoid having children. Though there are many reasons, I noticed that one word cropped up again and again: fear. Take the following, for instance:

nice of you to link to these studies and writings. or, you know, not. we wouldn't want anyone drawing their own conclusions, would we? besides, look at how reasonable these "fears" are:

--fear that having children would mean giving up some of their privacy as a couple;

--fear that children will take up too much of their time;

--fear that children will cost them too much of their money;

--fear that their careers would suffer from the demands that children and child-rearing would put upon them;

--fear of change;

--fear that things like freedom, social lives, the ability to travel or be spontaneous, etc. would disappear;

--fear of certain specific aspects of child-rearing (diaper-changing gets mentioned a lot, as if childless couples think there is something so disgusting and horrific about changing an infant's diaper that they would much rather not reproduce than ever have to experience this act);

--and, saddest and most telling of all, the fear that having a child would so negatively impact their relationship with their husband or wife that the marriage would fall apart.

you know what, red? I would say that these people know themselves and their relationships best. They know what will harm them and their relationship and they have a right to protect themselves from that. I can tell you that one of the things about child rearing that turns me off the most (and I have done it. i raised a relative's child for a number of years) is having somebody on me 24 hours a day. I can't stand it. I can't be "on" all the damn time. Left to my own devices, I can go days without speaking. I have an inherent need to not interact, which is not a choice with children.

Now, you could say that this is a flaw on my part, that I am a terrible person because of this, but that's not really the point, is it? I know what I can stand and raising a child just isn't in it. It would be terribly unfair of me to say, "fear is the mind killer- I'm having babies I totally won't be able to stand. Who are eventually going to figure it out and will think there is something wrong with them because mommy is losing her frigging mind trying to interact all the time."

Fear, like pain, is not a bad thing, in and of itself. Pain is the body's way of saying "stop that! you're getting damaged!" Fear is much the same: don't do that, you could get damaged. All fear is not unreasonable. What is a bad thing is assuming that competent adults are not capable of analyzing themselves and their situations and coming to reasonable conclusions.

Red, I trust you to reach a reasonable conclusion about your own life. Trust me to reach a reasonable conclusion about my own.

Monday, June 28, 2010


As I've mentioned before, my brain has an interesting self defense mechanism: it simply refuses to process anything too stupid. My brain reads "I don't have a religion, I have a relationship" as "I blahblahblahblahblah Jesus!"

This can make interacting in real life a little dicey, since I am frequently called upon to react to something I didn't really perceive at all. Usually, I just nod and say something noncommittal. Sure, I totally agree with you that we can achieve the goal of freeing Middle Eastern women by ripping their burqas off them one by one. That makes total sense. Whatever you say.

So you'll have to forgive me for being completely unable to finish Fuzzy Logic's* made up word femisogisomething, because I just can't. I think it means that feminists hate women. Or something. I . . . yeah, sure, whatever you say.

As the right strives to reclaim feminism from the faux feminists on the left, we would do well to learn from their manifold mistakes. As Lori Ziganto reminds us, women "already are equal to men." Feminists on the right understand that our rights, and our equality, do not come from man or from the government. Leftist feminists or, to use Lori's apt term, femisogynists have long held and hard hammered the belief that women are somehow less than men, that we need to stress our similarities while hiding our differences, preferably under shapeless tops, baggy trousers, butch haircuts, and strident rhetoric. They've formulated their concept of "equality" and subsequently tried to force it on society, most significantly on women, cramming all women, especially those who do not fit their idea of what makes a powerful woman, into a one-size-fits-all pigeonhole.

Yes, women have always been inherently equal to men in exactly the same way blacks are inherently equal to whites, but that's not the issue. The issue is whether or not women are treated the same, are given the same opportunities, receive the same protections. If you think that women and men are treated the same and given the same opportunities in this country, in this day and age, I would like to introduce you to my friend, Reality.

So, where do rights come from? God? Have you read the Bible? No, that's right, only atheists read the Bible. Silly me.

Also, um, "shapeless tops, baggy trousers, butch haircuts, and strident rhetoric". I wish I could show you what I am wearing right now. No portion of my outfit is shapeless, baggy or trousers, nor is my haircut . . . butch? Oh, lezbos. They all have buzzcuts. Or something. My pushup bra would just like to say that you're a moran. As would my winged-out eyeliner, my shaved legs and my delightfully purple toenails**.

See, even if your logic is fuzzy, you should know what a Strawman is. You just set one on fire, now come on down and join the actual argument.

The leftist tendency to infringe on the rights and freedoms of American women in favor of embracing and adopting the restrictive practices of other cultures is an ominous one (as in the case of female genital mutilation being permissible in "revised" form as "nicking"). We have won the right to our own bodies and to reject these barbaric, misogynist practices, and that is not a right that I intend to cede. When you see everything through the prism of gender and multiculturalism, you will naturally get a skewed picture, even an incorrect one (we see this also in the leftist insistence on seeing everything through the prism of race).

I saw a lot written about "nicking". It was all written by feminists who were quite opposed to it. We aren't ceding anything. As for seeing everything through the prism of gender and multiculturalism, um, fail. Scroll up a little in your own post and you'll see yourself decrying baggy and trousers and butch, but you don't see gender? Really? As for Teh Evil Multiculturalism: newsflash- other cultures aren't just like ours! I know, it's totally amazing. And it really pisses off women from other cultures when you barge in and say, "Take off the burqa and then it will be cocoa and schnapps for everyone! Yay!"

Just as we in the Western world defend our right as women to be stay-at-home moms (embracing that bane of faux feminists: the image of a woman in the home) or to embrace our beauty and sexuality by not "masculinizing" our appearance (as is all but demanded by femisogynists), shouldn't we also defend Muslim women's right to be who they are . . . even if that includes wearing garb that we deem insulting to women, misogynistic, and oppressive? Shouldn't we avoid dictating women's choices, avoid cramming women into a pigeonhole, albeit a different one than the faux feminists favor? Encouragement to assimilate will do what no law or court order can: enable women to see and embrace the fact that they already are equal to men.

Women choosing to stay at home are not the bane of feminists. Women "in the home" are only the bane of feminists if they have no choice whether or not to stay in the home. Does the fire marshall know about all the strawmen you're setting ablaze? Again, my pencil skirt would like to have a word with your about masculanizing my appearance, feminsowhatever that I am.

Encouragement to assimilate will do what no law or court order can: enable women to see and embrace the fact that they already are equal to men. This follows a screed about a Muslim victim of sexual assault being required to remove her niqab while in court. How this relates to femisostfu, I have no idea. I guess "fuzzy logic" means "whatever I write will eventually descend into a brown people bashing session". Also, how will assimilating into a patriarchal society that still can't quite decide whether women can be trusted with their own bodies or not teach anyone that women are equal to men?

Logic: Ur doin it rong.

*My brain is also reading "Fuzzy Logic" as "Get Fuzzy", which I really enjoy. So I'm actually feeling pretty positive about the whole thing.

**The exact color of grape Nerds!

Jesus to Return by 2050

So, ever wondered how many of your friends and neighbors fully expect Jesus to come riding out of the clouds on a white horse in the near future? As it turns out, about 40%, depending upon your definition of "near".

Although many Americans (41 percent) believe the Second Coming will happen soon, slightly more people (46 percent) say Jesus will definitely or probably not return.

The prediction is divided along religious lines with 58 percent of white evangelical Protestants saying it will definitely or probably happen in the next 40 years. By contrast, only 27 percent of white mainline Protestants, about a third (32 percent) of Catholics and a fifth (20 percent) of religiously unaffiliated say Jesus Christ will return to Earth in this period.

I'm not surprised that nearly 60% of white, evangelical Protestants fully expect Jesus to return somewhat soon, but it's definitely a tribute to how deeply they affect American culture that 20% of the religiously unaffiliated agree.

What's really interesting, though hardly surprising, is how these statistics break down along educational lines.

Only 19 percent of those who graduated from college expect Jesus to return by 2050, while 35 percent of those with some college experience and 59 percent of Americans with no college experience expect the Second Coming in the next few decades.

I can certainly see why fundamentalist groups are entirely opposed to public school and college for their children- it seems to make one less likely to swallow bizarre beliefs whole.

Sunday, June 27, 2010

Sheraton Wilmington, DE

The Sheraton in Wilmington, DE pissed me off so much, I decided to share it with you. Everything I am about to say is demonstrably true. I will not exaggerate, conflate or lie. Your mileage may vary, but my recommendation is: stay anywhere else. Your car would be a better choice.

First, I would like to say that the people who work at the hotel are fantastic. The employees of the Sheraton in Wilmington, DE could not be nicer, more professional or more helpful. I asked for more complimentary coffee and I got it, lots of it. I asked for more towels, and I was immediately sent a whole stack of towels. The last day, I was trying to get 18 people a last minute reservation at a restaurant, and the gentleman behind the counter called for me and got me a reservation right away. The employees of the hotel are not the problem.

What was the problem? The room I reserved included 2 beds and one pullout couch. If you're poor like me, that sleeps a minimum of 6 adults. (Depending upon how friendly you are.) So, we intending to sleep 5 adults and one preteen. The preteen and I were going to sleep on the pullout couch. The mattress of the pullout was essentially a sheet wrapped around coiled wires. There was no sleeping on that thing. The preteen got friendly with 2 other people, I slept on the floor- which was more comfortable than the pullout. Look, I don't expect tempurpedic* for $150 a night, but I do expect more comfortable than the floor.

Wifi. I use a friend's old first gen iphone for internet access when I'm not at work. (Which is why you only see weekend posts if I remember to set them up in advance.) I get wifi at home, at Dunkin Donuts, at the hospital, at McDonalds, but the Sheraton in Wilmington, DE wanted to charge me $10/day for wifi access. For wifi they're already providing and a room I already paid $150/night for. Seriously, fuck off. McDonalds gives me free wifi if I buy a $1 burger, but Sheraton can't give me free wifi for $300 worth of room?

Free internet. In the lobby, you can access the internet for free in a nice little cybercafe area- in the main lobby. Surf while the entire world shouts as it passes by! Yay! Not only that, you have to log in with your room number and the last name of the person the room is registered under, and you only get 45 minutes. Per day. Per room. There were 6 people in that room (the 11-year-old is a veteran surfer), we were considering a deathmatch for internet time by the first afternoon.

Parking. $12 a day. In their parking garage. I paid $300 for that fucking room, you are now going to charge me for parking- in the garage attached to the hotel?!

The elevator. Now, I had to use my tax return to pay for this, so I don't spend a lot of time in hotels. The elevator may be entirely standard these days, but it was obnoxious. You had to use your room key card to go anywhere in the elevator (or to use the stairs, or to use the bathroom in the lobby) and the card reader was slow and touchy. Every guest I saw was cursing the thing. It was especially annoying because as soon as the door closed it would start going up or down, so if you only needed to go up or down one floor, you were going to the top (or bottom) and hitting your floor on the next go round. Which was especially annoying because of . . .

The ice machines. On floors 8, 11 and 15 only. Which I missed. Several times. It took me 15 minutes to get ice. I gave up after that. Which may have been the point.

So, my advice would be any hotel but the Sheraton in Wilmington, DE. Wilmington itself was very pleasant.

*I don't own one, but having slept on a tempurpedic, I wish I did.

Friday, June 25, 2010

Altruism: a Slow Guide

Apparently, you don't need holy writings to be a good Samaritan.

Fight to Adopt

Please, pretty please with sugar on top, give all the support you can to Vanessa and Melanie Alenier. (Even just a like on FB would help.) They are attempting to adopt a little boy (who actually is related to Vanessa), whom they have cared for since birth. If it weren't for Vanessa and Melanie, this little boy would have ended up in the foster care system. Unfortunately, Florida law believes that a baby is better off in the foster system than being raised by a gay couple.

This needs to change. You can help.

The Alenier's story:

Our son was 9 days old when he was released to us from the hospital. What a glorious, miracle of a day. We are blessed beyond words to be mommy's to this precious little creature. He is amazing. We love him more than we could ever explain. We are his family. He is our child.

Since his birth in January 2009 we have been fighting the state of Florida every step of the way to prove to them that we are deserving parents of this wonderful child. Not only that, but that he is deserving of our home as well. The 1977 ban is so black and white that those who continue to support it cannot see beyond its walls of homophobia. The road we have endured over the last year and a half has been filled with home visits by DCF once a month, home visits by the Guardian Ad Litem once a month, court hearings, trials, and many hours of e-mails and meetings with our lawyers Alan Mishael and Elizabeth Schwartz. It took several months to finally be heard in our trial for adoption which occurred November 2009. Our wonderful judge, Maria Iglesia-Sampedro, ruled that the law was unconstitutional and granted our adoption in that trial. However, it took DCF until January 2010 to submit all proper documentation in order for the judge to sign off on the adoption. DCF then had 30 days to decide whether to appeal, which DCF did. Since February 2010 we have been moving forward to defend in the appellate court the trial court’s decision that the ban is unconstitutional as to every gay man and woman in the State of Florida. If we win there, our case may then go to the Florida Supreme Court.

Fighting the system has become financially and emotionally draining. We have no idea how much longer this may take. Our home-life hangs in the balance at this point. The only thing that gets us through the motions is knowing that if our case is heard and the law is ruled unconstitutional in the higher courts, then the law will hopefully be thrown out in Florida. That would open the doors for all gay couples and gay foster parents to begin adopting in Florida. So many children need permanent homes and families. Why would Florida want to prevent these children from being adopted by human beings that should have equal rights and equal love to give?

Thursday, June 24, 2010

You Can Have That Car In Any Colour You Want

As long as it's black. (I am somewhat misquoting Henry Ford.)

That was the first thing that came to mind when I read this defense of the traditional role of women at Ladies Against Feminism. The title of the post is "A Dream Deferred", which is really odd because the rest of that Langston Hughes quote is "is a dream denied", which would seem to contradict the entirety of the post, but who am I to expect consistency and logic from misogynistic fundys?

Every gift, passion, or longing we feel on our lives should be subject to the precepts of our Lord. From walking on the moon -to beating Thomas Edison’s patent record -to writing the screenplay for an Academy Award winning film -to becoming a wife and mother.

I’m convinced that every gift we have been given can be used to further the Kingdom through God-ordained means -I am further convinced that Christian young people (young women in particular) have believed the lie that we have been fed that tells us that the only way to realize our ambitions is to cast aside the sacred calling of our home -and, finally, I am convinced that, too often, we have used our dreams as an excuse to forsake the calling that we have been given by Christ -for so many of us, that calling will be towards our home.

Every gift can be used to further the Kingdom of God- unless you're a woman, in which case you don't have gifts so much as you have a uterus, start using it. If a dream deferred is a dream denied, then what is a dream that has been squashed, stamped out and discarded? Actually, Mr. Hughes has an answer for that one, too.

Hold fast to dreams
For if dreams die
Life is a broken-winged bird
That cannot fly.
Hold fast to dreams
For when dreams go
Life is a barren field
Frozen with snow.


What happens to a dream deferred?

Does it dry up
Like a raisin in the sun?
Or fester like a sore--
And then run?
Does it stink like rotten meat?
Or crust and sugar over--
like a syrupy sweet?
Maybe it just sags
like a heavy load.
Or does it explode?

I'd say something else about dreams that come only in one colour, the same for you and me and all with two X's and no lucky Y, but c'mon, Langston Hughes. Can't beat that.

No Middle Ground

You're with me, or you're against me. You're for christ, or the antichrist. You believe exactly as I do, or you are evil. Fundamentalists are getting more and more polarized, and it's disturbing.

The absolute worst part about this is that every atheist, at least in America, has to be friends with theists. There simply aren't enough atheists in America for atheists to deal exclusively with other atheists, even if we wanted to, and I don't know any atheists who do. It's an example of Christian privilege, really, for Christians to eschew relationships with any but other Christians. We don't have that choice and they're complaining about having to deal with all the evil, antichrist unbelievers? Really? Oh, and they totally want to save us from hell. Without every crossing our paths, I suppose.

What would you do if you made a new friend but then found out they mock the Bible and their friends mock Christ? Would you turn a blind eye or would you end the friendship. I ended the friendsip because if she is not for Christ she is antichrist. She says I am ignorant not to accept people who don't share my views. I know the Bible says there is only ONE way to Heaven. Would you be yoked with unbelievers or not. I am just left so alone because everyone I meet is an atheist but I can't be their friend knowing they laugh at and hate my Savior.

I have to wonder what "mock" means in this situation? Actually mock (words have meanings, folks), or simply make passing comments that they don't believe it to be literally true? Also, "antichrist" does come up in the Bible, but it has nothing to do with being for or against Christ. It has to do with attitudes and behaviors opposite those of Christ. So, if an atheist gave to the poor and forgave those who hurt him, but a Christian horded his money and his hurts, it's the Christian who would be the antichrist. Why am I the only one reading the Bible here?

Also, there is just no way everyone you meet is an atheist. (If there is, I really want to know where you live.) Words have meaning. Everyone you meet might not be your particular strain of Christian, but that does not make them atheists. By definition.

Also by definition, atheists do not hate Jesus. We don't believe he existed. Do you hate Thor and Zeus?

How do your mocking friends deal with future Bible prophecy that is about to happen?

The same way I deal with horoscopes, I would imagine. Seriously, "how do you deal with events that haven't happened yet?" is a really peculiar question.

I'm not sure if it because I am maturing more in my walk with God, but I have no desire to have an unequally yoked relationship. The few I did have for a while just felt so superficial--not sincere at all. I was always grieved when I talked to them, so I just stopped talking to them. We eventually just went our separate ways and I've really not looked back, and I doubt they have. I've planted the seed, and its just out of my hands.

I think you did the right thing in this situation. If my friends were openly mocking God and His Word, we'd be butting heads, and that would be the end of that friendship. So far, the ones who did bring into question the deity of Christ, I've cut ties with them. I'm sure there will be more along the way, but that is why I want to be built up in God's Word to be able to stand firm in the face of adversity, and to shine for Christ.

I want to shine for Christ, over here, in my little corner where nobody but other people who already believe can see me. Are these people producing some sort of antilogic field with all their praying, because it doesn't seem like any logic is getting through.

Can light have fellowship with darkness?....

why is darkness a bad thing? i really can't figure this out. i have become very sensitive to light so even bright lamps are painful to me. (the sun is a blinding inferno of squinty pain) stop by my house at night and you'll find me happily puttering about in the lowest lighting possible. so for me, light is bad and darkness is good. i guess you should all just sell me your souls now.

I say no, I would find it hard to be friends with an atheist, I actually have one atheist in my family (not close kin though), when I found out they were an atheist, I feel bad about saying this but I lost alot of respect for that person...

don't worry, they didn't lose respect for you. can't lose what you don't have. it's good that you qualified that your blood relationship is distant. otherwise, i wouldn't want to get to close to you.

The person has never been outspoken about that, but she actually got mad at someone who lost a family member in an accident after they were saying things like they would see them again, she got mad and actually physically attacked her, telling her that there is no God, now I can't respect anyone like that family or not...

i find it hard to picture this event, unless the person is also mentally ill. or, maybe it was both her family member, too. grief makes people weird. i usually don't care about heaven talk, but when my grandma died, i was ready to hit someone with a chair after a while.

Atheist and those given over to absolute mockery and rebellion toward God,

those people are not atheists. you cannot rebel against what you believe doesn't exist, unless you are currently in rebellion against Poseidon. (in which case, stay away from the sea)

there is no reason to put yourself in the position to be around that kind of garbage.... Also since your born again, I would suspect its hard to be around that stuff, I can't even stand to be around people who drink, cuss, and blaspheme with every breath

now we're all alcoholics? i don't even drink casually. i do put truckers to shame with my cussing, though.

(which describes almost all my former friends), notice I call them former friends... I still hope and pray for them but I will not hang around them anymore, because it grieves me too much.


I truly feel bad for atheists. While I don't have any as friends, I do rub shoulders with some at work. I would love to be able to quit my job but can't and I figure God wants me there for a reason...and maybe that reason is those atheists, if only for them to think about where the beievers went to after the rapture?

I want to know what "beievers" are, then I might be able to ponder their whereabouts.

I share my faith with them but I do not embrace a friendship with them, no desire, nothing in common. If they want to call me narrow minded or ignorant, feel free. I answer to the Lord, not them.

As a Christian, he no longer has to obey rules of etiquette, either.

Julie, as you know we have a lot in common. Finding warm-hearted, accepting people is not easy.

no, as evidenced by this thread in which you all admit to dumping your "atheist" friends, finding warm hearted, accepting people really isn't easy.

I would tell them that Jesus is important to me, and that we're a package deal.

In my case, if they were mocking and offensive towards Him I wouldn't call them my friends anymore, after sharing the gospel, I would refuse to return calls.

Hey, I've said what I have to say, now go away! It's like a really unamusing one night stand.

Little do these people know that we are the best friends that they will ever know as we love them so much that we want them to spend eternity with us and to love Jesus in the same way we do. But, in this world, that is hard for them to see. Sometimes we can come across as impatient, no fun, borderline angry, and all sorts of demeaners can come to the forefront when we feel our Lord is being ignored and replaced with worldly garbage. Our Spirits our grieved and sometimes we are just exhausted from the Spiritual warfare.

You love me so much you have to hit me?

We as believers are in a very difficult place. To witness to worldly people in this corrupt world is a daunting task and one we just can't do alone, we need the Holy Spirit to help us and when all is said and done we are mocked anyway.

A difficult place of being surrounded by other believers? Yeah, that's rough. I love that I am bombarded by their religion every day, everywhere I go. If I turn on the tv, there's Jesus, whether it be Law & Order or House or football. If I listen to the radio, there's Creed, and a hundred other bands like them, extolling the virtues of power chords and Christ. 90% of the people I know in real life go to church, pray regularly, read the Bible on occasion, enjoy religious themed movies, etc. Yet these people can't handle it if one person says something slightly different from what they believe. That's the freakin' antichrist.

Very well said HFJ! The Bible tells us we will be hated for His Name's sake. Because we stand for Him, defend His Name, share His love with others, refuse to take part in the jokes or mocking of Him, we are hated for it. Many can't stand the name of Jesus and because we stand for Him we too are shunned and despised. Those whom belong to satan (if you're not of God then you're of satan no matter how "mean" that sounds, it's the hard cold truth) do not like Christ or Christ in us.

Yes, yes, you're persecuted and I'm evil.

Our duty is to share the truth in love regardless of what the world thinks of us. We can't water it down, we can't conform to their thinking, and we can't conform to their lifestyle or actions. If our words and actions are truthful and loving but offensive, their pride is the only thing to blame.

It's my fault you hit me?

These people make me tired.

Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Sluts, Unicorns and Other Such Myths


It's a word every woman fears. There is no judgment worse than slut. To be labeled a slut is devastating, socially and personally. And it's permanent. Once a woman is labeled a slut, she is always a slut.

This word is ugly, shameful and misogynistic. It is control. "Act nice or you're a slut. Obey or you're a slut. Give me the power or you're a slut. I control the rest of your life with one little word." There is no equivalent word for men because, quite simply, the behaviors described by slut- in control, powerful, enjoying one's sexuality- are entirely positive for men. Sauce for the goose is never sauce for the gander in the patriarchy.

So colour me unamused* to see the above picture.

First of all, the above picture does not prove why I am a slut and no man will ever be. It's just a lot of male victimhood. Poor, poor man who can't get laid. Poor, poor man tricked into fatherhood by the lying slut. Poor, poor man who has to buy a car to get a girlfriend. Reality: you don't live in it.

Here's the thing, asshole: the only world in which women use sex only to get stuff is a world in which women don't like sex. I love sex. Orgasms rock. Oh, yes, they do. Sex feels good and I like sex. Of course, I don't have to fuck you to know that I don't like sex with you. You hate women. You can't possibly have great sex with someone who hates you. Great sex doesn't require love, but it does require a certain amiability, which you lack.

The fact that women have no interest in sex with you, oh creator of misogynistic quasiart, has nothing to do with the women and everything to do with you.

One final piece of advice: if you can't find someone else to fuck, go fuck yourself.

*It's a shade of mauve.

Religion: a Sick System

How to Keep Someone Forever is a guide to creating a sick system in a business or a relationship, but the corollary to religion is striking. Perfect, in fact.

Rule 1: Keep them too busy to think. Thinking is dangerous. If people can stop and think about their situation logically, they might realize how crazy things are.

Religion is good at this one: pray 5 times a day, attend prayer meetings, worship services, bible studies, read the bible regularly, pray regularly, have as many children as you can, evangelize constantly, and on and on and on.

Rule 2: Keep them tired. Exhaustion is the perfect defense against any good thinking that might slip through. Fixing the system requires change, and change requires effort, and effort requires energy that just isn't there. No energy, and your lover's dangerous epiphany is converted into nothing but a couple of boring fights.

This is also a corollary to keeping them too busy to think. Of course you can't turn off anyone's thought processes completely—but you can keep them too tired to do any original thinking. The decision center in the brain tires out just like a muscle, and when it's exhausted, people start making certain predictable types of logic mistakes. Found a system based on those mistakes, and you're golden.

See number one, especially the fundy strains that require many, many children, like Quiverfull.

Rule 3: Keep them emotionally involved. Make them love you if you can, or if you're a company, foster a company culture of extreme loyalty. Otherwise, tie their success to yours, so if you do well, they do well, and if you fail, they fail. If you're working in an industry where failure isn't a possibility (the government, utilities), establish a status system where workers do better or worse based on seniority. (This also works in bad relationships if you're polyamorous.)

Also note that if you set up a system in which personal loyalty and devotion are proof of your lover's worthiness as a person, you can make people love you. Or at least think they love you. In fact, any combination of intermittent rewards plus too much exhaustion to consider other alternatives will induce people to think they love you, even if they hate you as well.

God above all else. That is what religion demands. God above you, god above your family, your spouse, your children, your friends. Are any of the people you love not of your religion? Shun them. Only god matters. And you must prove your loyalty constantly. How much are you praying, how much have you sacrificed, how often are you attending church and evangelizing? And the rules, are your following them? No matter how insane the rules, you must constantly strive for a level of perfection humans can't attain, but don't stop trying, or you're not loyal enough. (See also, rule 1, rule 2)

Rule 4: Reward intermittently. Intermittent gratification is the most addictive kind there is. If you know the lever will always produce a pellet, you'll push it only as often as you need a pellet. If you know it never produces a pellet, you'll stop pushing. But if the lever sometimes produces a pellet and sometimes doesn't, you'll keep pushing forever, even if you have more than enough pellets (because what if there's a dry run and you have no pellets at all?). It's the motivation behind gambling, collectible cards, most video games, the Internet itself, and relationships with crazy people.

Casinos live on the principle of random reinforcement. There is no more powerful force. I see it with my dog every day. I trained him to sit by always giving him a treat when he obeyed the command. Today, he sits on command about 75% of the time. However, he stalks Teh Hubby while he cooks because every now and again something tasty falls on the floor.

How does religion harness this power? Prayer. Pray and pray and pray. Pray for everything, for mom to survive cancer, for little Billy to make the team, pray for love, pray for rain in the desert. Every now and again, your prayer will be answered- god is great! Never mind the 43,000 other times your prayers were ignored.

I highly recommend reading the rest of the post, it's brilliant- and frightening. The section following reward intermittently is an excellent description of my office, in case you'd like to know what my normal workday looks like.
Creative Commons License
Forever in Hell by Personal Failure is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at