She was referring to this piece of faff in which a 'progressive' blogger blames the polarized abortion debate on the media and agrees there should be a 'respectful' discussion.
And now another 'progressive' boyo weighs in. Gordie get his jollies riling the wimminz up.
Fasten your seat belts, here comes the abortion debate. . .
In just under three and a half years I have written or touched on the topic of abortion 21 times. In fact the most often read post on this blog is "Abortion in Canada Legal – Right Up Until Time of Birth".
Well, here goes number 22.
Wheeeee! Look at meeeee! I'm being controversial!
You can feel the breeze from the wagging of his little tail.
That idiotic post he's so pleased with racked up 24 comments, mostly of the spanking, get-a-clue-you-moran sort.
A fast zip through recent posts reveals that his brain-farts normally garner from zero to three comments.
No wonder he's revved.
I made the mistake of commenting on both posts, as did others.
I regret it and counsel others to refrain. It only encourages them.
Yet, still, and again, I continue to be mystified by the inclusion of such people in any aggregation with the name 'progressive' in it.
ADDED: JJ has a message for the wankers.
UPDATE: Misogyny and debating human rights is all hunky dory with 'Progressive' Bloggers.
Those blogpost/sites have been looked at, and it was unanimous amongst the moderators & the site admin (7-0) - we see no grounds for action.
— Progressive Bloggers (@Prog_Blog) April 6, 2012
And *this* is why the Liberal Party is totally fucked.
16 comments:
You know, when I see 'progressives' like this, with so little regard for the threatened rights of their female compatriots, I get really tired. I'm not given to expressions like "male privilege", but wow, I can't think of any other way to describe this phenomenon.
Gordie clearly didn't learn a goddamn thing from his last disastrous foray into this topic. Very disappointing to see him trotting out the same old tired and *Wrong* arguments.
What really kills me is that you'd think these guys might consider consulting with progressive women on this topic before verbally fapping all over the internet. Oh right, Gordie consulted with SUZANNE, who of course buried him alive in fetus pron and other propaganda. It's offensive in the extreme... and it takes a lot to offend me.
*Sigh*
I am (obviously) not a "progressive purity" freak, and I think a little contrarianism on some issues is good for democracy... but not human rights issues. On those kinds of issues there is only a right side and a wrong side, there's no "nuance".
Here we go again, eh?
I hear ya, JJ. I'm sick and fucking tired of it too.
But I keep looking southwards. Give the bastards a millimetre and they'll take your uterus.
Someday, I'd like to just quit.
Lifetime struggle, kiddo, lifetime struggle.
I am completely miffed. I finally get a response from Woodworth on the letters that I have sent him. He does not even have the decency to respond to me. He just sent me an email with a bunch of attachments of his media releases on M312. So lame!
Sorry, I do not mean "him" per se, I mean his office. Because those are the people who respond back to emails.
Ms Laura, Woodworth obviously knows the toastmaster's psychological tactic of consistent repetition. He can't go off-message with canned responses and if you weren't one of the informed few, you'd be more impressed with such official looking drivel in print. Too many folks still think if it's 'published' *anywhere*, it's true.
JJ, Fern. Welcome to every woman's Motherhood, where civil rights activists are forced to withstand the equivalent of kids unceasingly whining with the same-bad-arguments under the concept that it's a different day and reality now leans in favour of bullshit, until you give in to their demands out of sheer collapse and other demands on your life.
It's not costing them anything to send one dope out after another to kick the ball against the garage door, complete with excuses from 'daddy' Steve that he's not condoning it, but 'shrug' boys will be boys Where'stherealharmDon'tbesuchadragonIt'sonlyagaragedoor?
The only reason analagous attempts to legislate creationism taught in Science classes as Science in the US have been chilled is by taking it to court as breaches of separation of church and state and only THEN because it costs the would-be theocrats tons of money when they inevitably lose.
In this case, the Conservatives will let it happen because it doesn't cost them, as individuals or a party, a copper. It will all happen on the taxpayers' dime and the Cons can idly rinse and repeat the effort as often as pleases them.
That private member's bill before it even reaches a vote? All the expenses related to it, even in the writing up and putting it forward? The press time? The press releases? The email responses? The 'research' done on it beforehand? Who pays for it? To whom is it paid?
Meantime, the advocates for ^not making women State prisoners of their own bodies? Where does their money and time come from?
For creationism, it's ' where's the harm. Teach the controversy'. This is being framed as 'Where's the harm. Debate the controversy', even by those helpful 'progressive' opiners.
This motion of Woodworth's is being touted on the *same* execretory pseudoquacktruthiness foundation as creationism, by the same people, for the same Faith-based authoritarian reasons.
Creationism (by any name) is not science, it is the insistence of privilege-anxious religious sect mythic creeds, and has no place in science classes being treated as an equivalent of evidence-based data.
A womb-owner's control over personal procreative power is not negotiable and is not to be criminalized in a State's prescriptive powers by the sniveling of the self-same anti-scientific proof, anxious privilege mythionaries.
On the other hand Laura, do compare Woodworth's condescending attitude and behaviour towards those who do not agree with him, to that of his old-school progressive conservative colleague MP Bruce Stanton, a man of personal integrity who deals respectfully, directly and honestly with his critics.
One always think their views to be progressive while others who disagree...well their views must be wrong and regressive, sigh.
I did not consult with Suzanne, although I do know to whom you refer, I'm actually surprised she never commented.
So its about human rights, and your argument is that a 3rd trimester(even Morgentaller himself used the term babies for that stage of development) is 'not human'.
I disagree.
I've allowed Gordie's comment.
I'm going to say one thing then not engage him further.
Gordie has accepted Woodwank's bogus framing. Feminists do not deny -- and have never denied -- that a fetus is biologically human. What the fuck else would it be?
What it is NOT is a legal person with rights equal to the woman carrying it.
There. I'm done with Gordie.
Gordie - I was referring to the first time you went through this BS a couple of years ago. You consulted with SUZANNE of all people and totally blew off pro-choicers. She was obviously telling you what you wanted to hear.
As for terminology used to describe a pregnancy, WTF difference does it make what Dr.M or anyone else calls it? I've called it a baby, kid, fetus etc etc... whatever. You think semantics are a good reason to put at risk the rights I've spent most of my adult life fighting for??
This issue is NON-FUCKING-NEGOTIABLE. It's a woman's private business between her and her doctor and not YOURS or MINE or the GOVERNMENT'S or anyone else's.
For those who don't know the back-story, here's a link to Gordie's idiocy of a couple of years ago.
Ms Fern, apparently, according to Mr. gord at his place, you've now 'conceded' the unborn are human.
I think that sums his coherency up right there, but if one is to take him at his word as to language around the subject, his choice of 'unborn' and 'preborn' are large ringing Tells as to what arguments he's willing to grant weight.
That and his martyrdom and mansplaining about how edifying debate on the matter of women having the right to be considered Legal Persons so they can Vote, and have other Legal Graces that men already possess will be.
Why? because, after so long a period of time where the matter wasn't argued, people in this modern culture might not be thinking every hour of every day about the weighty and horrific potential of letting female suffrage continue on unrestricted.
It's good to be an intellectually gray male.
FFS.
In other news, on Twitter I'm promoting the idea of a Prog Blogs strike. Real progressives withdraw their feeds until the misogynists are booted.
Got 3 takers already.
Here's yer progressive feminist ally with a timely piece.
Pharyngula on anti-choicers
Thanks for that, Niles. I just tweeted it. I love PZMyers. Once, someone asked him if it were Pee Zee or Pee Zed. He said he was bilingual, both OK. :D
Gord wants the hand of the government in the vaginas of the nation, since it's clear his never will be.
Post a Comment