Monday, 18 November 2019

Bloggers on Blogging: Part 4

Woohoo! Mandos the Elusive returns to blog about Feminism 101. He didn't offer a title so here it is.


For my contribution to the DAMMIT JANET commemorative blog party, I'm going to argue that sometimes undergoing maddening, pointless Feminism 101 discussions with people Just Asking Questions might sometimes actually do some good from time to time.

Nowadays I moved on to other things in my life, away from the quantity of Internet-argument I used to do before. But I joined DAMMIT JANET not quite at the beginning, but relatively close to it, and so I've shared a lot of the experiences of the DJ gang, and my path to it had a lot of shared stops, like rabble and Bread and Roses, at least in the latter part of my online career.  But otherwise, my path to DJ was probably somewhat unexpected.  I've been arguing on the internet for a long time, and I had an online presence on USENET and private NNTP forums way back before the commercial web was a thing.  If you, those who are "Internet-young" enough, think women and feminism are underrepresented in Internet-arguing now, well, let's just say that the Internet today is practically a "Take Back the Night" rally compared to then.  Back then, the default discussion around sex and gender issues revolved around whether, if we were going to allow abortion in the first place, men should also have the right to a "legal" abortion, meaning being allowed before any birth to make a declaration that they would not pay any support to the pregnant woman thereafter.  This was in some, if not most quarters, the progressive position -- the opposing position was preoccupied by how best to punish women who had abortions without male consent.

You can imagine how things were.  Actually, in most cases, abortion itself was acceptable, because these were Internet engineer-libertarians mostly, the kind who thought that they'd become Howard Roark any day now. The objection was merely the supplanting of the family "state" (a.k.a. "freedom") with the government state. I was pretty lefty back then, which was, again, even more of a challenge on the Internet than it is now, because of all the open Randroidery.  But you can see what sort of things even a lefty young guy might start to get concerned about, when the main issues being discussed regarding gender came mainly from different degrees of Father's Rights Activist. (The libertarianism was happily bent to find excuses to limit women's freedom, of course, because women's freedom was deemed to require government intervention.)

Mercifully, curated web forums became a thing, and there were even a few left-progressive ones, like the storied Old Rabble, the original Rabble community when it first formed.  These types of forums had a lot more women on them (going from 2% to like 20% maybe), and they even had dedicated feminism subforums.  And then along came the first wave of blogs, well before DJ, and there were even blogs dedicated to women's liberation.
Man, I must have been insufferable.

I spent the bulk of this period learning that the dichotomies and conflicts about gender issues that the USENET-world had taught me were central to the issue just . . . weren't. I learned that the main, most pressing issue wasn't men's alleged impending exclusion from the comforts of family life (e.g., the establishment of a science-fictional matriarchy), but rather, the price women had to pay for the social consensus that the human family needed to revolve even around a man who was violently abusive.  I learned that a variety of female-separatist fantasy, with men deliberately confined to a social periphery or bred out through genetics, was never seriously going to be enacted by any significant number of feminists, for any number of reasons, and that those fears were distracting hypotheticals from the pressing issue of real life and real human relations between genders. 

And, by the time I was invited to contribute to DAMMIT JANET, I came to the understanding that bodily autonomy was the cornerstone of individual and collective liberty especially in the modern, technological world, and that no one safe from tyrannical control if the pregnant woman wasn't safe from tyrannical control. 

I reached that point through a great deal of arguing with feminists, some of them even male pro-feminists further along than I, on all those web boards and the early blogosphere, chewing my way through all kinds of maddening, abstract, intellectualized hypotheticals. Not everyone was gracious about it; some forum contributors were probably rightly angry at me and some of the things I said, and of course, they themselves were hardly all perfect people with excellent character, as they themselves might have admitted.  But I realize with hindsight how tedious some of those arguments must have seemed, how arrogant it was to treat all those topics as interesting intellectual hypothetical scenarios, rather than painful aspects of real life.

I do not claim to be perfectly cured of that, although I like to think I am a little more self-aware than I used to be.  And at DAMMIT JANET, we built an amazing team that punched way above its weight in the overall battlefield of human rights in Canada.  Indeed, I would like at the end just to make just a little bit of a case, that chewing over the arrogantly abstracted hypotheticals and repeatedly rehashing Feminism 101 concepts can actually do some good in the world, even though I know it takes a significant amount of time and energy.

Bloggers on Blogging: Part 3

The third instalment is by my co-conspirator, deBeauxOs. (Boy, embedding a video is a lot easier than I remember.)


_Let's do the Time Warp Again_

That would the more hip way of saying: "Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose."


Yesterday afternoon was spent re-reading *old* DJ! blogposts and feeling all verklempt about the writing and some of the questions we addressed.

The spark behind every blogpost was righteous and rightful outrage. Yes, I'm using the term _right_ in opposition to the notion of wrong: wrongful, wrong-headed, wrong-doing. Malfeasance and malevolence, in other words.

Fernhill and I were battle-weary veterans of decades-long campaigns to ensure that women and girls would never again face the dangers of back-alley abortions, as our foremothers did.

So we climbed back down into the trenches and deployed this nifty communication instrument called "Blogging".

The rest is history as they say. In the course of writing, first at the now-defunct _Birth Pangs_ then at our own spiffy blogsite whimsically dubbed DAMMIT JANET! (thank you Peter) about pro-choice issues, we discovered that everything is indeed connected. Thus we wrote about the Harper government's corruption and hypocrisy, Pope Maledict, global concerns, Mother Teresa, dominionism -- basically highlighting how the convergence of political and religious forces was a declaration of WAR on human rights and social justice.

Blogging provided a place and a space to write concisely or profusely, to practice rigour or abandon myself to the excesses of lampoonery. 

However.. when I discovered the vicarious allure and _Wham! Bang! Boom!_ pleasures of tweeting, the depth and demands of blogging lost its appeal.

Whereas writing a blogpost is often a painstaking and laborious expression of sorrow, pain, fear and anger, tweeting provides an immediate outlet for rage. 

Thus my focus and writing style adapted to this hot new medium.

If blogging was a new, democratic frontier for political and ideological explorations, we soon discovered that Twitter was nothing but _Blazing Saddles_. A quick and dirty adrenaline jolt versus substance and reflection.

I'm grateful to my co-blogger who coaxed me into the joys of blogging, then prodded me to deploy my penchant for one-line zingers by tweeting.

But dammit... I need to return to a social medium that provides the intellectual grist that twitter does not.

Sunday, 17 November 2019

Bloggers on Blogging: Part 2

This is fun!

Second in the series is by Kev and is also up at his blog Trapped in a Whirlpool. He is also known as @trapdinawrpool on Twitter.

Edited to add:

Why won't Blogger let me link to some sites? Grrr. I've forgotten how to do this.


Twitter Killed the Blogging Star

First off I want to thank the folks at DJ for all the amazing work they have done over the years you are an inspiration to many of us.

I have kept my blog open because I keep telling myself that I will start writing again but the truth is that I get all the detritus roiling around in my head out on Twitter. I also find that my writing has been infected by the shortcuts the old 140 character limit forced on us.

Also lost along the way was the motivation to do the necessary research required to write credibly on any subject. Bloggers have only one currency and that is their credibility, without that you merely end up shouting into the wind.

We were a community there for each other, correcting each other when required or adding to to our knowledge of a topic, often writing on the same issue from different perspectives. Blogging opened up my world and lifelong friendships have been forged in the process and while the same can be said of twitter the depth of the relationships forged through blogging is just not there.

In the end we were able to go from oh you're just a blogger to in many instances having the media steal our work. Many legacy media outlets eventually started calling their own opinion writers bloggers in an attempt to appropriate the culture we had established.

The blogging community broke many stories, changed the narrative on many others and added depth to the debate, in the process opening some eyes to the truth of what this world has become. In the end though change comes, twitter and facebook will wither away as well with something new replacing them but the blogging community will always be closest to my heart.

Bloggers on Blogging: The All-Star Lineup

DAMMIT JANET! turns ten years old today. Well, I thought it did, until I started looking for the first blog post.

Turns out deBeauxOs and I started this site 11 years ago.

As the kids say: whatevs.

It's hard to believe now how vibrant the blogosphere was back then. First order of the day's business was to see if yesterday's post had attracted any comments overnight. Then on to check out what others were talking about.

The easiest way to find out what was happening was to go to an aggregator. DJ! was on Progressive Bloggers. (Good grief, it still exists.) We were accepted reluctantly. Admins made a point of telling us that our acceptance was "not unanimous."

Many of the blogs on our blogroll over there on the right were also on ProgBlogs. I've clicked on a few links and found that at best, they have sporadic posting, at worst they've disappeared completely. Some are just ghosts, frozen at their last offering years ago. Two that I know of are still posting regularly: Montreal Simon and Accidental Deliberations. Good on them.

So -- as it turns out on false pretenses -- to celebrate what I thought was our tenth anniversary, we invited some of our old blogger pals to reflect on the Good Old Days.™ (This is not to say they will blog on blogging. But they've been told that's what we were going to call the series, but, you know, trying to herd bloggers is futile.)

Over the rest of the month, we'll publish their contributions.

Here's the first up, by Catelli.


On Blogging

Coincidences can be fun sometimes. Often when I am in my car, or in the shower I ruminate on topics that interest me. A recurring topic lately that I have been pondering has been on Blogging, and how I miss those days. Lo and behold, Fern reaches out to me and asks if I would be interested in sharing my musings on that topic. (Happy 10 year anniversary to the DJ group! You made it longer than most!)

A little backstory on who I am, or was. The first part of the 21st century were heady days politically. The echo of the 1995 Quebec referendum was still playing out, the Adscam scandal was exploding and we had two Conservative parties vying for attention. Throw in 9/11 and the mess that resulted from that (massive understatement here) and there was no shortage of opinions and hot takes and outrage. It was in this environment that I jumped into blogging as Closet Liberal. I was pissed at what the Liberal Party of Canada had become, and my blogging identity was a mocking reflection that the Liberal party had driven this liberal into the closet.

Time passed and I felt that identity was too constraining. I deleted that blog, and resurrected as Catelli, with a new blog “Not Quite Unhinged.” Catelli is an old nickname from high school, and the blog name was a reflection of what I felt and still feel. That our politics and our society is pushing me to being a little bit, but not quite, unhinged. Let’s just say it’s a good thing Canada doesn’t have easily accessible volcanoes to throw oneself into. That character is now hanging around as Catelli2.0 on Twitter. (

Back then I didn’t really move in the same blogging circles as the DJ group, though I was certainly aware of them. It took Twitter to bring us all together…..

I held onto Blogging as long as I could. But one by one, all of the blogs I frequented were going silent. Their owners had jumped onto this platform called Twitter. Eventually, as an opinionated fellow that hated shouting into a vacuum of silence, I made the jump too. I tried to keep my blog alive as the best platform for long form thoughts. Twitter with its then 140 character limit and horrible threading ability was too limiting. But I noticed an odd thing. Even though I have a pretty well engaged Twitter follower list, hardly anyone read my blog posts. Even though I would promote them on Twitter, repeatedly, I would only get a few reads at most.

And that basically ended blogging for me. Twitter threads are where it’s at! Until a new platform turns Twitter into a wasteland.

But I can’t help missing those days. The conversations I had then were enlightening, fun, engaging and at times infuriating. But it truly felt like a true debating platform. That’s what it was for me. The group I engaged with didn’t argue, we debated. It’s from that perspective that I really do miss Olaf of Prairie Wrangler and John of Dymaxion World. Those two in particular challenged this centrist from the right and the left, respectively.

Do I blame Twitter for ending that though? Not really. Twitter makes it easier to keep track of conversations and interactions, which is what I was using a blog for. But I had to jump around from blog to blog to blog to monitor the comment sections. It wasn’t convenient or efficient.

I think what I truly liked about blogging is what I am starting to dislike about Twitter.
Learning new things. It’s why I joined both. To opine and to learn. It’s easy to have opinions, but learning new ideas, facts and concepts is where it really was at for me.

Back then the conversations were focused, usually on the blog topic at hand. I learned a lot, but it was trickling in, and easily digestible. Reading blogs in many ways was like reading a book. You could pause and absorb the information in. You chose the speed by which you obtained that information.

Twitter on the other hand is a firehose of information. It is 14 dozen cable news networks all at once. And if you watch a lot of cable news, you start getting depressed. The stark reality of Twitter is that it can be a real-time window onto the entire world. There is so much going on at once that I feel insignificant and ineffectual. Even the topics I care about are swamped by the issues that are piling on every day. I couldn’t even get people to read my blog, how the hell do I get enough time from people to care about what I care about? The fault doesn’t lie with Twitter, it’s just the vehicle delivering the overwhelming reality of the world right now. The Liberal International Order we all thought we were building turned out to be a fragile illusion that is collapsing worldwide. And we’re watching it live.

I don’t mean for this retrospective to be depressing. I guess it’s part of human nature that witnessing terrible things causes us to look back with rose tinted fondness at events in our past. It’s moments when you start to miss George W. Bush that make you realize, “Holy hell!? Really? That war criminal?”

If Twitter never existed and we were still on blogs, the horrible news that affects us would still be happening. Maybe I would just be able to hold onto blissful ignorance a little bit longer.

So do I miss blogging? I miss some of the people I knew. I have found so many more since then, so maybe I should just count my blessings. 187 Tweeps on Twitter is worth a few bloggers in the archive.

But yeah, I do miss the fun and the excitement of it all. It was a moment in time that I will cherish. I am glad I was there for it, and that I participated. And thanks for the memories to all that were there for it. You made it worth it.

Friday, 19 July 2019

An Unplanned Silver Lining

Well, that was a roller-coaster ride, wasn't it?

Unplanned, the movie about the very questionable events around the conversion of a pro-choice Planned Parenthood employee into a howling fetus freak, has mostly finished its run in Canada.

It opened in March in the US, but not in Canada. Some of the cast spoke at the March for Lies in Ottawa in May. Sponsored by some Conservative MPs, it was screened as part of the bun-fest.

The next we hear of it is that it was "banned." No, it wasn't, it just did not have a Canadian distributor. "Wah-wah-wah," from the anti-abortion crowd, "we are being persecuted. Again."

The same gang of MPs, led by Brad Trost, agitated online to bring the movie here. (Now that Trost has lost his nomination bid for re-election, he is free to be all anti-abortion all the time. See his Twitter account.)

So then it got a distributor, who moonlights as a Christian pastor.

A few independent theatres agreed to show it. But then there were
allegations of threats
made to two indy houses. "Aha! See? It's the pro-choice side that's violent!!!"

Then Cineplex and Landmark Cinemas announced they were giving it a limited run in a few of their theatres.

There were protests by pro-choice people against Cineplex.

The protests centred around the fact that the story itself is highly dubious (see first link), the depiction of abortion is misleading, sensationalized and just plain wrong, and the portrayal of abortion providers shows them to be cartoonishly evil. In short, it is USian anti-choice propaganda.

Anyway, the film ran, there were a few protests, and reviews were written. In the opinion of NOW's film critic, Norm Wilner, the whole schmozzle was orchestrated and we were all played.

As is clear from the links above, Canadian mainstream media covered the hoopla.

But what about the reviews?

It has been said that bad reviews are more fun to write -- and read. ALL the reviews of Unplanned here are bad. And fun. Canadian movie critics had a ball with Unplanned.

(The Guardian review has been included because it's fun too.)

Here are five Canadian reviews from mainstream outlets: Maclean's, Winnipeg Free Press, Globe and Mail, Ottawa Citizen, and even the Toronto Sun. A "fact check" piece was done by the Toronto Star.

All the reviewers call the movie "propaganda."

All the reviewers question the truthfulness of the story.

And three of the five reviews, plus the fact check, counter the movie's lies with facts.

First from The Guardian, Jordan Hoffman, March 29.
The deck:
In a dim-witted Christian drama part-financed by the disgraced founder of a pillow manufacturer, a woman discovers abortion is evil.

Despite the many ghastly scenes of blood (so much blood), Abby has her epiphany observing cheap, risible CGI of an ultrasound. A fetus presents what could be misinterpreted as fear or pain during the procedure. As Abby mugs, the callous doctor barks orders and the music swells just as the prayer group is mid-chant outside. We get corny closeups of medical tubes overflowing with what look like raspberry Icees. It’s enough to make anyone turn to a higher power, just to get this movie to end!

Next, from Maclean's Anne Kingston, July 15. Kingston also counters lies with facts and questions the story's truthfulness.

Such [ethical] queries aren’t pondered in Unplanned, a movie whose disturbing content has less to do with gore than its stealthy scare-mongering and misinformation about abortion that could put women’s health at risk.

From Winnipeg Free Press, on July 15, Jen Zoratti:

In Unplanned, abortion is depicted as dangerous, scary and something obtained only by white teenage girls. In reality, the procedure is safe, common and women from all socio-economic backgrounds access abortion care. The thing about propaganda is, it has to be persuasive to be effective. Unplanned is too simplistic to do much more than preach to the converted.

Now for a quite glorious review by Barry Hertz on July 10 in the Globe and Mail.

Anti-abortion film Unplanned is a disgusting piece of propaganda that may endanger the health of women

Unplanned will make you writhe in agony over how such an ugly, malicious and potentially dangerous piece of religious and political propaganda could have made its way into this world.

On July 11, Chris Knight of the Ottawa Citizen weighed in.

But none of this matters, because the film is preaching to the choir; no one who disagrees with its central tenet will be watching. And even if presented to a mixed audience, Unplanned is neither smart enough to rally anyone to its cause, nor dumb enough to alienate those who believe its message. As propaganda, therefore, it’s basically useless.

And finally, the surprise from the Toronto Sun by Liz Braun on July 9.

People are not protesting the movie here for pro-choice reasons but for pro-truth reasons — the film is said to be full of misrepresentations about abortion procedures (bloody! dangerous! terrifying!) and lies about Planned Parenthood, suggesting the organization pushes abortions. In fact, Planned Parenthood is a crucial health service for women in America and provides cancer screening, birth control materials and counselling, Pap smears, breast exams, STD testing and other services.

Just to round out the coverage, here is the fact check piece by Cherise Seucharan and Tessa Vikander from July 12 in the Toronto Star.

For pro-choice in Canada, while the movie is dangerous, it has proved to have a silver lining. The mainstream media agree: anti-choicers tell a lot of lies that the media is prepared to call out and counter.

And there was a very satisfying response of outrage and protest from ordinary people on social media and letters to the editor. Plus, of course, people who actually turned up to demonstrate.

There is absolutely no doubt. The response to Unplanned proves it. Canada is pro-choice.

UPDATE: July 21/19
More proof that Canada is pro-choice and wants nothing to do with USian propaganda bullshit.

Cineplex and Landmark chains refuse to extend Unplanned's one-week run.

In Lethbridge, two pro-choice groups paid to run ads with the movie.
Moreover, two local groups — one styling itself the Concerned Citizens of Lethbridge, the other a “pro-choice” association — each paid for a 15-second still advertisement in the eight-minute rotation that plays while people wait for the movie to begin, Binning said.

The Concerned Citizen ad stated: “The Unplanned movie is grossly inaccurate; for more information from a real medical professional go to” and the message from Pro-Choice Society of Lethbridge & Southern Alberta read: “Abortion? Birth control? We support and empower reproductive choice.”

And 68 radio stations have refused to run ads for it.

Canada is good.

Wednesday, 3 July 2019

Revoke Charitable Tax Status of Anti-choice Groups

The petition signers call upon the government of Canada and the Canada Revenue Agency to:

• Revoke charitable tax status from all anti-choice groups
• Not allow new anti-choice groups to become charities
• Require that charities not work to oppose Charter and human rights, as per the similar requirement for the Canada Summer Jobs program

The numbers:
About 225 anti-abortion groups in Canada have charitable tax status – 71% of all anti-abortion groups. Of these 225 groups, 147 are “crisis pregnancy centres” that try to dissuade women from abortion, 73 are groups that advocate against abortion, and 5 are abstinence education or adoption promotion organizations. In comparison, only 3 of 26 pro-choice groups have charitable tax status.

Anti-choice groups do not meet requirements for charitable tax status because:

• They do not serve any public benefit, act to oppose human rights, and are harmful and discriminatory.

• Abortion has been legal for over 30 years and has become a fundamental Charter right for women and transgender people under Sections 7 and 15 (security of the person and equality). Yet anti-choice advocacy groups oppose these rights and ultimately want to re-criminalize abortion. Anti-human rights groups should not have charity status.

• "Crisis pregnancy centres” (CPCs) provide medical misinformation to their clients and the public, and thereby pose a threat to Canadians’ access to necessary healthcare and their right to unbiased, accurate information. CPCs create societal harm by reinforcing abortion stigma, and fostering feelings of guilt, fear, anxiety, and confusion in clients considering abortion.

• The use of medical misinformation and ideological propaganda by anti-choice charities cannot have any public benefit since it is not based on sound research or evidence, and fails the requirement that charities be “truthful, accurate, and not misleading.” Further, the information provided does not allow for informed decision making or the weighing of competing viewpoints, thereby not meeting the definition of “education.” And contrary to the definition of “healthcare,” anti-choice CPCs do not provide any direct healthcare – only biased counselling by untrained peer counsellors. Instead of “preventing or relieving a mental or physical health condition” – i.e., unwanted pregnancy – they hope to dissuade clients from using contraception and having abortions.

Petition by Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada.

Sign the petition here.

Thursday, 27 June 2019

The Making of a Grassroots Activist

A woman in Haldimand Norfolk County in Ontario has made such a pain in the neck of herself that when a giant inflatable baby went missing, several people suspected suggested that she was involved.

Oddly, it was the same promotional inflatable that first caught Georgia Gamble's attention. Just over two years ago, a local restaurant used a picture of Baby Hope (awww) on its Facebook page to advertise a fund raising campaign for Norfolk Pregnancy & Family Resource Centre, an anti-choice crisis pregnancy centre.

She says: "The restaurant made it clear that they supported a woman’s choice and that this group they were raising money for 'were not like those kind of groups' which don’t support a woman’s choice.  This just didn’t sit well with me and I started to investigate just what crisis pregnancy centres were all about."

She came across a blog post here at DJ! about 100 Who Care groups and specifically about Women Who Care Norfolk.

(Briefly, here's how 100 Who Care groups work. A bunch of people get together a few times a year to hear pitches directly from good causes in their communities. Most groups require that the good cause be a registered charity. They listen, vote, and write cheques for $100 each. The Women Who Care Norfolk raised $14,600 for the Norfolk Fake Clinic.)

Georgia contacted the restaurant and explained what CPCs were about and from the response, she suspected the Norfolk centre hadn't been entirely candid with the restaurant about its true agenda.

Which we know is to lie to, manipulate, and shame pregnant people out of exercising their right to abortion.

Someone alerted Georgia to the fact that United Way of Halidimand-Norfolk also supported the anti-abortion group (page 6 here in United Way Annual Report 2017). When Georgia tried to enlighten UW, it insisted it was supporting parenting programs.

And an activist was born.

She began to research what other community groups and businesses were supporting CPCs. There is another fake clinic in the area -- Haldimand Pregnancy Care Centre, which by the way, received $36.4K in Canada Summer Job Grants, putting it in the top 5 nationwide. Until pro-choice activists put a stop to the practice.

She shared this information via social media like Facebook and Twitter. The Haldimand Norfolk Pro-Choice Coalition was created.

"My goal was to expose fake clinics and the harm they do in the community. I wanted people to know that they were donating to anti-choice groups.

"And it’s not always about raising money. Some groups and people continue to support the CPCs by allowing them to participate in local events. The Dunnville Bell Let’s Talk allows the Haldimand Pregnancy Centre to have an information booth at the Mental Health Fair.  The CAMHS Wellness and Recovery Centre in Simcoe allows the Norfolk Pregnancy Centre to have a information booth at their Wellness Event. For two years I have contacted them and let them know about the inaccurate information these two groups share but they continue defend their decision.

"The RBC Port Dover branch collected money from clients.  We contacted corporate and they defended the partnership saying they 'don’t take a stand on women’s reproductive healthcare'.

"The Norfolk Rotary and Haldimand-Norfolk Soroptimists International continue to donate to them."

But there have been successes. The United Way’s allocation committee did not choose either of the CPCs to receive any money this year. Domino's Pizza in Simcoe went from supporting the Norfolk centre with a Family Fundraising event, complete with bouncy castle, to denying that it was going to support them in the first place.

And of course, the Norfolk fake clinic is pretty unhappy with these efforts. Its website is pretty slick.

Norfolk Pregnancy & Family Resource Centre is a non profit, non-judgmental, safe place where anyone in the community experiencing pregnancy, parenting issues and/or related concerns, can come for loving, professional, FREE help and support.
It gets around the religious "mission" issue with this FAQ.
Is NPC a branch of a church or churches?

NPC is an independent organization with its own charitable status. We are a provincially incorporated organization.  Although many churches support the work we offer to those who choose our services we are not affiliated with any one church, denomination or business. 

But elsewhere on the site there's this.

And about that "abducted" inflatable baby? It was returned with a ransom-style note saying the abduction was a prank.

As for Georgia, she is finding this grassroots activity very satisfying. She continues to check social media and share information with her community. The Facebook page is growing.

She has some advice for others who might want to take up a similar hobby. "Just keep at it. Don't give up. Keep exposing organizations that are partnering with the CPCs. Share the disinformation, lies and harm that CPCs spread in communities. Let people know that CPCs aren’t what they appear to be. They say they aren’t faith based but that couldn’t be farther from the truth."

Follow Haldimand Norfolk Pro-Choice Alliance at @Prochoice_HN.

Saturday, 8 September 2018

Anti-Choice in Our Schools

New school year, new challenges and questions. For parents and students alike.

In Ontario, the Fraud government is trying to axe the "new" sex ed curriculum and is running into more trouble than it expected.

In Calgary, the school board has severed ties with a fake clinic that taught sex ed in PUBLIC schools.

A couple of other school boards in Alberta have done the same. @ABProchoice tweeted a thread of other anti-choice organizations that offer sex ed. I used Threadreader (very easy, even for TechnoDork) to compile the info more permanently.

The information comes from Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada's study of Fake Clinics' (aka Crisis Pregnancy Centres) websites updated. (The study was in 2016.)

I plan to get to work on compiling similar info for the rest of Canada, but if any reader knows of anti-choice groups teaching sex ed in a public school board or school, please let us know.

Saturday, 11 August 2018

Lawless Abortion: No, We Do Not Need a Law

We Need a Law, the astroturf wing of Dominionist group Association for Reformed Political Action*, has put up its first billboard in Dartmouth, NS.

No doubt to the group's delight, it is causing controversy.

Pattison Outdoor, which rents the space, says it has received complaints, but will not take it down unless instructed to by Ad Standards.

So, friends of truth and choice, we need to complain. Ad Standards has made this relatively easy.

Go here and read the instructions. There is a handy online form.

For this ad, I think the section of The Code that applies is 1(a) under "Accuracy and Clarity."
In assessing the truthfulness and accuracy of a message, advertising claim or representation under Clause 1 of the Code the concern is not with the intent of the sender or precise legality of the presentation. Rather the focus is on the message, claim or representation as received or perceived, i.e. the general impression conveyed by the advertisement.

(a) Advertisements must not contain, or directly or by implication make, inaccurate, deceptive or otherwise misleading claims, statements, illustrations or representations.
Section 14 "Unacceptable Depictions and Portrayals may also apply and has been successfully used against anti-choice advertising in the past.

Getting back to "Accuracy and Clarity," while technically accurate, the ad has two misleading implications:

1. That there is no regulation of abortion. This is not true. Like all other medical procedures, abortion is regulated by the practitioners, in this case the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. Here are the guidelines.

2. That patients and providers are doing something wrong or illegal. Also not true. Abortion was decriminalized in 1988. It is a common medical procedure, fully covered by Canada's universal health insurance.

On the second point, Section 14(c) and (d) may apply.
(c) demean, denigrate or disparage one or more identifiable persons, group of persons, firms, organizations, industrial or commercial activities, professions, entities, products or services, or attempt to bring it or them into public contempt or ridicule;
(d) undermine human dignity; or display obvious indifference to, or encourage, gratuitously and without merit, conduct or attitudes that offend the standards of public decency prevailing among a significant segment of the population.

Let's do this. We Need a Law (Like a Hole in the Head) plans to put up 70 of these billboards across Canada.

Complain. Complaining works.

(Note: The online form takes a while to load. It's not loading for me at all, so I'm going to email. info @

ADDED: ARCC also has a guide to lodging complaints with Ad Standards.

*I've written about ARPA a lot. It is a political action group devoted to imposing Christian theocracy.

The mission of ARPA Canada is to educate, equip, and encourage Reformed Christians to political action and to bring a biblical perspective to our civil authorities.
They lobby the hell out of government, meddling in abortion matters, assisted dying, freedom of religion, and other shit that is none of its business.

It is not a benign influence on civic debate.