Some commenters were pointing out that the supply of abortion providers might be just a tad influenced by the violence whipped up by the demonization and dog-whistles perpetrated by so-called mainstream anti-abortion activists and media.
Frequent commenter Ken owns up: Yup, stigmatizing R us.
If it wasn't for the resistance from pro-lifers the whole matter would be ignored.
I took a screenshot of my reply being held (forever?) in moderation.
Anybody wanna bet Ken's comment will go bye-byes too?
UPDATE: Oh. Look. Ken is still there. And one with a date-stamp after mine. Gee. Colour me gob-smacked.
(Edited to remove fetal porn redirect.)
9 comments:
Nah, Ken's comment will stay. After all, he's one of HER favorite commenters!
Things are spiraling into bad craziness over there. That idiot Jill is now linking to the Army of God as her homepage -- can you believe it? A known terrorist group, on the DHS list etc.
I thought SUZANNE believed in non-violence :(
JJ: I just said this at your place, but it fits here too. 'Seriously, every day lately I’ve thought: "Ok, that’s it. It cannot get any nuttier down there." Then the next day dawns. . .'
JAB: I'm giving her a while longer -- the dog ate my Haloscan excuse -- but already Ken is still there followed by another comment date-stamped after mine. So, Ken's comment can stand, but not the logical inference from it. Just one more example of why we call them lying liars.
I posted a comment around 3:30, WTF?
She linked to the last page of the Post article, but if you go to the first page, it's all about the "stigma" being because doctors are afraid. NOT because abortion is "icky", which is what she's insinuating. All operations are gross -- as surgical procedures go, abortion is actually a pretty quick and easy one (early term, anyway, later it gets more complex).
Anyway, I linked to the first page so they could read the whole article and get the proper context of the word "stigma".
What's the point? I seldom go there anymore since she started moderating and cherrypicking comments. She'll let a psycho like Army of God Jill say "If you don't like shooting abortion doctors, don't shoot them", but she won't publish my comments. Fuck 'er.
Is this where all the angry women hang out?
Amazing to read all the anger directed at Suzanne for hosting a blog about pro-life, and because she wants to manage the comments on her blog.
You guys over here I am sure have some interesting things to say about choice, so say them, but don't just go off on Suzanne because she has a reasoned opinion that differs from yours.
And don't blame her for your anger. Own it and figure it out for yourself. She is just doing her dance of life, just like you all. She is not your enemy, just a fellow traveller with a different opinion to which she is as entitled as you are to yours.
Calling her names doesn't show your superiority, just the opposite.
I find it amazing how strong language, mockery, and sarcasm from women automatically translates for anti-feminists as 'anger'.
Our little problem with SUZANNE is that she is actively working to recriminalize abortion. SHE is working to restrict our right to bodily integrity.
And that is NOT going to happen.
mbrandon -- It's funny you should say "enemy", because SUZANNE is the one who uses the word "enemy" to describe her political opponents. Although the movement she shills for is most certainly an enemy of womens' freedom, I wouldn't call SUZANNE herself an "enemy". She's just not that important.
I comment at her blog because I find her more accessible than most anti-choicers who, quite frankly, are generally batshit insane.
I don't care for SUZANNE's attempt at interference in others lives.
Suzy ALL CAPS has a "reasoned opinion"?
Where???
Post a Comment