Woody's Wank Redux

To no-one's surprise, attention-whore Stephen Woodworth is back with another non-abortion abortion gambit.

Conservative MP Stephen Woodworth is out with another motion that could re-ignite the abortion debate in Ottawa, although he says it's merely about respect for human dignity in law.

Yaaaa. Just like Woody's Wank I was *not* about abortion either.

So why are all the usual suspects applauding the move then?

Here's LifeShite:

Tuesday’s media advisory was titled ‘Motion 312 – Next Steps’, suggesting Woodworth intends to piggyback on his previous efforts.

Great idea, Woody. Because M312 was such a resounding success. NOT.

Little problem, though. Woody is not on the list for private members' bills and motions.

But fellow fetus fetishists Liberal John McKay and Conservative Brad Trost are. Might they give up their chance to push their hobby horses for another kick at the abortion can?

I doubt it. But hey, anything to distract from current scandals, eh?

We at DAMMIT JANET! are ready to gear up again if we have to, so go ahead, Woody, bring it.

In particular, we are breathlessly awaiting Part D'uh of his genius ballooning 'allegory'. We wondered at the time why he titled it 'Part I'. Now we know and are holding our sides in anticipation of the sequel.

(No. I haven't been abducted by aliens. Just very very busy.)

Woody's New Wank

SHOCKING NEWS! Pro-choice group refuses to sign on to latest anti-abortion stalking horse gambit!

Woody's got a brand-new wank. And guess what? It's just like the old wank.

Woodworth said he reached out to Joyce Arthur, the executive director of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada, for support on the motion. The group is a prominent national pro-choice organization.

Woodworth said he wrote to the group in January with the specific wording of the motion: “That the Parliament of Canada declare that the equal worth and dignity of everyone must be recognized by Canadian law based on their inherent nature as a human being.”

He said Arthur wrote back the next day, and that he then responded and then received no further response from ARCC.

Arthur said she and her group declined Woodworth’s request because they felt it would lead to giving rights to a fetus, which would have dangerous consequences for pregnant mothers.

“He doesn’t seem to recognize that at all,” said Arthur. “When I bring up women’s rights over and over again, he thinks it’s some sort of sideshow. He doesn’t really get the issue, so what’s the point of talking about it with him?”

Woodworth said in a media release that he has "regretfully concluded" the ARCC "simply refuses to affirm human equality."

"We think the ulterior motive is that he's trying to include fetuses in the definition of 'everyone,'" Arthur said.

Ayup. Seems so.

We don't need to woman the barricades just yet. After the trouncing #M312 took last fall, he may have difficulty finding another kamikazi MP to co-sponsor this latest piece of bullshit.

Also, he'll have to wait until the next federal election, by which time if the good people of Kitchener Centre come to their senses, Woody will be wanking all on his lonely.

If you've got ten minutes to waste, listen to this radio interview, in which Woody seems genuinely surprised that ARCC didn't leap at the chance to join in fucking over Canadian women.

Is he really that much of a moran? Who the hell did he think was behind the campaign to Crush Motion 312?

ADDED BONUS: Seems Woody has memory-holed his genius analogy about abortion and ballooning. Pity that. But I found a thorough and fun fisking of it that really captures the lunacy.

In Canada, Pro-Choice Is Winning

If you've been wondering about fetus fetishists crowing about winning and pro-choice losing lately, this TIME magazine cover story is what it's about.

Amanda Marcotte responds.

There's much to like about Kate Pickert's Time cover story (hidden behind a paywall) on abortion rights 40 years after Roe v. Wade. Unlike the majority of big media stories on this issue, this one actually portrays abortion patients accurately, particularly pointing out how most of them are grown adults with children at home and notes the wide range of feminist activism—from fighting for women's economic rights to promoting contraception access—that actually results in lower abortion rates. Pickert even mentions the phrase "reproductive justice," a framework that takes a more holistic approach to improving people's reproductive lives and one that appeals strongly to younger activists, especially activists of color.

Too bad, then, that Pickert portrays the increasing restrictions on abortion access as the result of the failings of the pro-choice movement, a narrative which inevitably leads to blaming pro-choicers for being "hard line," "tone deaf," and lacking "nuance."

She tries to pass the whole deal off as 'business as usual'.

Two-steps-forward-one-step-back is the ugly reality of progressive politics.

That's often true, but not necessarily.

In Canada, we did it differently.

Merkin feminists won the right to abortion on January 22, 1973 with the Supreme Court decision in Roe v. Wade.

Immediately legislatures around the country started enacted restrictions.

In response to Roe v. Wade, most states enacted or attempted to enact laws limiting or regulating abortion. . . Congress in 1976 passed the Hyde Amendment, barring federal funding of abortions (except in the case of rape, incest, or life of the woman) for poor women through the Medicaid program. The Supreme Court struck down several state restrictions on abortions in a long series of cases stretching from the mid-1970s to the late 1980s, but upheld restrictions on funding, including the Hyde Amendment, in the case of Harris v. McRae (1980).

Merkin feminists have been fighting -- and largely losing -- rearguard skirmishes ever since.

Canadians watched in horror as the huge victory got nibbled to death by ducks.

We were like the younger sister. We got to watch Big Sis make terrible mistakes. And like the smart younger sister, we learned. We vowed to ourselves the political equivalent of 'blue eyeshadow is NEVER a good idea'.

It took 15 more years in Canada, until January 28, 1988, to achieve our victory, R. v. Morgentaler.

But because we watched and learned, we were ready for the ducks. Every time -- every fucking time -- the fetus fetishists show signs of screwing around with our rights, we act.

Recently, with Ken Epp's Kicking Abortion's Ass Bill, we were a little slow off the mark.

So when Woodworth's Wank, aka Motion 312 surfaced, we were ready.

And we are ready for its sequel, Warawa's Wank, aka Motion 408.

As a matter of fact, the more the so-called debate heats up here in Canada, the more support we gain.

So, bring it, fetus fetishists.

We watched Big Sis fuck up.

We won't.

ADDED: Joyce Arthur's excellent Rabble piece on The Benefits of Decriminalizing Abortion.

Woodworth and 'Modern' Science

Aww. Isn't this cute? MP Stephen Woodworth, he of Woodworth's Wank, is still in the public eye he has grown addicted to.

But uh-oh, look at this.

Under the heading Woodworth garnering all the wrong attention Joseph McNinch-Pazzano writes:

After Kitchener-Centre Member of Parliament Stephen Woodworth’s failed attempt to reopen the abortion debate in Canada, you might have thought he would gracefully exit the spotlight of hot button social issues. Regrettably, this is not the case.

On Oct.7, Woodworth was a featured guest for an event in Quebec where he appeared alongside Michel Lizotte, an outspoken advocate who believes that gay people can become straight if they simply choose to do so.

Woodworth was criticized in the House of Commons, but has not yet responded to the criticism nor made a public statement disowning what Lizotte advocates.

At the event, Lizotte reportedly delivered a lecture on sexual re-orientation.

Lizotte advocates for gays to learn “how to be freed from thoughts, attractions or unwanted homosexual behavior while taking the path of heterosexuality.”

One of two things could explain Woodworth’s silence.

The MP could actually believe the psychologically-debunked nonsense that Lizotte trumpets.

Or, Woodworth could oppose what Lizotte advocates but refuses to publicly state his disagreement—which is equally detrimental to gay rights.

McNinch-Pazzano goes on to demolish Lizotte's nonsense. Then winds up:

In his attempt to reopen the debate about when life begins, Woodworth stated that “our 400-year-old definition of a human being says a child does not become a human being until the moment of complete birth, contrary to 21st century medical evidence.”

If Woodworth wants to invoke his conceptions of modern medicine in the abortion debate, he must give equal time to the notion in the gay rights debate.

Woodworth cannot simply turn a blind eye to an activist who is living in 1970s psychology textbooks.

Among the Kitchener-Centre constituents that Woodworth purportedly represents are young men and women who are looking for guidance and acceptance of who they are.

If Woodworth does not have the decency to come out in strong opposition to Lizotte and his views, then perhaps he should reconsider whether he espouses the necessary values to represent the people of Kitchener-Centre.

Or, perhaps better yet, the people of Kitchener-Centre should tell Woodworth that they would like to have a full-time representative instead of one who seems to be more interested in advocating for the social issues that keep him in the national spotlight.

So much for 'modern' science when it doesn't toe the Vatican Taliban line, eh, Woody?

Um, Woody, About That 'Preoccupation'. . .

Woody is still wanking.

"Woodworth Says Opponents of M312 Must Give Up Single-Minded Preoccupation with Abortion"

That's the headline about Motion 312 that should have been applied to every commentary.

He then goes on to whine about the 'preoccupation with abortion' that he thinks killed his motion and in the process uses the word 'abortion' eighteen times.

Here's a sample:

Support a study about how best in Canada to honour the principle that human rights must be extended to every human being? No, our preoccupation with abortion tells us that studying how best to recognize the equal and inherent worth and dignity of every human being would be "the first step on a slippery slope," one said.

That last sentiment is more worthy of a bloodthirsty, fascist regime than of the democracy most of us would like Canada to be.

Project much, Woody?

Image source.

Woodworth's Wank: A Personal Reaction

I watched the vote on Woodworth's Wank yesterday online. People had been predicting/guessing how many yeas it would get. I said 58. Kady O'Malley, the CBC House reporter who had in effect told us not to worry our purty little heads about it, weighed in with her number: 30 to 50. (I think she refined it later to 50, but I'm not sure.) Of the ones I saw or that used the #M312bet tag, Aaron Wherry won the fruit basket with 90. (It was 203 to 91.)

As MPs bobbed up and down for yeas and nays, my head was spinning and my gut was clenched. I quickly lost track of the count, but it was crystal clear that this was no crushing defeat.

There were waaaay too many yeas.

I felt I was going to throw up.

My reaction surprised me. It was visceral and emotional and not too rational.

When the count was final, I was dazed. Then I saw this tweet from JJ*.

Relieved but still feel like puking. That was like waiting for a decision from a Therapeutic Abortion Committee*: remember those? #M312

— JJ (@jjhippie) September 26, 2012

She nailed it.

.@fernhilldammit Total strangers making my most personal decisions, all over again. I'm *very* relieved, but also very teary-eyed #M312

— JJ (@jjhippie) September 26, 2012

And people wonder why women worry our purty little heads about this 'trivial' stuff?

Later, @juicexlx offered a 'group hug'.

* Therapeutic Abortion Committee.

Woodworth's Wank: The Vote

Woodyworth's Wank was defeated.

A motion to study the Criminal Code's definition of when human life begins was defeated in the House of Commons Wednesday night.

Members of Parliament voted 203 to 91 against Motion 312, sponsored by Conservative MP Stephen Woodworth.

Not the crushing defeat we were hoping for. But defeated, nonetheless.

More maybe tomorrow. Now to decompress.

MORE: How they voted, alphabetically.

Woodworth's Wank: Update for Sept. 24/12

To no one's surprise, Arch Abortion Foe and 44-Year-Old Virgin, Jason Kenney, is in favour of Woodworth's Wank.

But today's news is that he, as a Cabinet Member in the government that swore up and down it would ^NOT reopen the abortion debate, is going to vote in favour of it.

Hm. Does that mean he is ^NOT a member of the government? Or that the government is ^NOT opposed to reopening the abortion debate?

Inquiring minds want to know. . .

In related news, via @canadiancynic, we offer this fabulous video.




The vote will be held Wednesday, September 26, at 5:00 p.m. EDT. All it needs is a simple majority, then presto! Twelve politicians -- seven, including the Chair, from the CON party -- will begin to investigate when Canadian Uteruses Become Wards of the State.


If you haven't yet sent your MP and PMSHithead emails, go here and get it done. And pass the link along.

Public Women, Private Women

I so do not belong to what this Guardian article calls paparazzi culture. Don't own a camera or cellphone. Don't do Facebook (I did for a period around the 'No Prorogue' stuff, but under my bloggy name). I have never liked having my photo taken -- the front-tooth-less bathtub shot (haha, Mom) was a heavy straw on that camel's back -- so there are just not a lot of pictures of me.

I have uploaded exactly one photo of myself -- that a couple of weeks ago onto LinkedIn. (I had and have severe misgivings about it, but hey, I need work.)

I had never heard of 'creep shots' and 'revenge porn'.

I had of course heard of the Royal Breasts Kerfuffle. But I didn't know this:

I suspect the most arresting photograph of the scandal will actually prove to be the one that shows where the photographer was apparently standing. An 'x' marks a spot on a public road, so far from the chateau where the couple were staying that you can barely make out the building itself. The perspective makes any argument against the right to privacy seem laughable, yet they continue. The editor-in-chief of Denmark's Se og Hør magazine, which published a 16-page supplement of the photos, has implied Kate must accept some responsibility for "willingly revealing her breasts towards a public road".

Really? Towards a public road?

The article describes creep shots and revenge porn and the Internet sites devoted to them. It details the harrowing experiences of young women caught by the creeps. And not just celebs, but ordinary women as well.

But really, this isn't surprising. It's just new technology applied to the male compulsion to control and dominate women, especially our sexuality.

This bit, however, jumped out at me.

The story prompts questions about why there is such a market, and therefore audience, for these pictures. As others have pointed out, it is not as though there is any dearth of bare breasts, consensually exposed and shared, on the internet. The answer involves a familiar combination of desire and humiliation. There is an interest in seeing not just any breasts, but all breasts, a sense that female bodies are public property, fair game – to be claimed, admired and mocked.

All breasts. All women as public property.

That made me think of Gerda Lerner, feminist historian and author of The Creation of the Patriarchy (1986), which I read avidly back then, being as perplexed as anyone as to how the hell it happened.

From an undated interview:

MISHLOVE: You're very explicit about this in your analysis of the ancient cultures that grew up in the Middle East, in ancient Mesopotamia. You point out that the subordination of women's sexual rights preceded even the creation of private property.

LERNER: That's right, and it in fact in my opinion led to what I call the invention of slavery, because it is a fact that has been acknowledged by every historian of slavery that the first slaves in every civilization that we know were women and children. But other historians have stated that fact, but they have never asked the simple question, well, why was that so? What does it signify? And I have occupied myself with that question very thoroughly and studied it.

While her book makes plausible arguments, it's a little short on hard evidence, natch. Until she comes to the Code of Hammurabi.

The Code concerned itself with contracts, property, and family relationships. What struck Lerner was that very harsh penalties were reserved for women who veiled themselves without proper authorization.

Because to be veiled was to be protected.

Since recorded history in Mesopotamia and Persia, the veil was a sign of nobility and seclusion for respectable and noble women.
. . .

Gerda Lerner cites the Code of Hammurabi as the institutionalizing of patriarchal control in the family. The state now controlled who must wear the veil and who must not wear the veil. The veil was a sign of the delineation between elite and common women.

Or between private and public women. To claim privacy for oneself was a serious crime.

The Code dates back to about 1772 BCE.

So, how far have we come, baby?

Judging from the creepsites, revenge porn, Royal Tits, shrieky reactions to Slut Walk, and the current tussle over reproductive rights represented by Woody's Wank, not very fucking far.

We are all still public women. And with new technology, more public than ever.

I watched the debate on M312 yesterday and followed along on Twitter during and afterwards. I read the reports and the comments on them.

I was dismayed by the ignorance and credulity. But what is most dismaying is the rage. Rage that women want to control their own lives. Rage that women want to own themselves. Rage that women want to grant themselves the status of private woman.

Middle-age has granted me a sort of veil. I have a red sun-dress that attracts double-takes. A male glances, registers 'Red Dress and Skin', looks back, registers 'Oh, Old Broad'. I grin at their disappointment. If I'm lucky, they blush.

That's my version of revenge porn.

Quick Way to Tell Your MP How to Vote on M312

For people not on Twitter, leadsnow.ca has an automated email to PMSHithead and your MP on Woody's Wank.

It's gratifying to see so many different people on the #M312 hashtag making the announcement 'Stop the covert attempt to criminalize abortion' and the link to leadnow.

The fetus fetishists infesting that hashtag have numbered about five, twit-spamming the same message over and over: 'I love #M312. Please vote for it' aimed at today's short list of MPs. Amusingly, the NDP Communications Twitter account is almost always included.

So, if you haven't yet emailed your MP, this is a really quick way to do it.

Synchronicity, Baby!

Some weird synchronicity is going to occur on September 26, 2012.

The vote to kill Woody's Wank, aka M312, aka the Motion to Create a Sub-Class of Canadians Formerly Known as Pregnant Women, will be held. At 5:00 p.m., we're told.

By the power of whatever body that declares such things, it is also designated World Contraception Day, or as we sluts call it, World Sex Without Squalling Consequences Day.

And, in consolation perhaps for their Crushing Defeat on M312, fetus fetishists will begin their bi-annual Persecution and Prayer Fest, 40 Days of Harassment.

Sounds to me like a good day for a party.

Woody's Last Wank

It's soon over. Really.

Woodworth held what was billed as an 'update' on the status of Woody's Last Wank this morning.

There was nothing new of course. Just the same old, tired talking points.

Kady O'Malley was live-tweeting/blogging it.

And here is all we need to know about it in three tweets.

"Don't you think women themselves have given this a lot of thought?" asks @dreahouston. #M312

— kady o'malley (@kady) September 17, 2012

"I don't think *parliament* has given it a lot of thought," #Woodworth shoots back. Take note, women. #M312

— kady o'malley (@kady) September 17, 2012

It's actually adorable that Stephen @woodworthmp suggested women hadn't pondered abortion as deeply and intellectually as he had.

— CC (@canadiancynic) September 17, 2012

Someone tweeted that the last hour of debate is this Friday at 1:30 p.m. with vote on September 26 at 5:00 p.m.

Then it will be over.

Well, except for the martyrgasms and persecution fest. Which, while predictable, are fun at least.

Wankworth's Last Stand

Contained in the modern version of a 'brown envelope', this was slipped over DJ!'s transom.

A stupendously dishonest letter, with attachments, from Woody himself begging his colleagues to support Woodworth's Wank, aka Motion 312, aka A Duplicitous Motion to Prepare the Ground for Recriminalizing Abortion.

Here it is with his own bold faithfully reproduced.

September 14, 2012
Dear Colleague:
Re: Motion 312

1. I am enclosing a copy of Subsection 223(1), the law which is the sole focus of Motion 312. You will see that Subsection 223(1) is a 400 year old law which decrees the dehumanization and exclusion of an entire class of people we know to be human beings, namely, children before the moment of complete birth.

This is a direct assault upon the principle of universal human rights, which insists that every human being has an inherent worth and dignity which the state must recognize rather than merely a value assigned by others based on the utility or inconvenience of that human being.

2. I am also enclosing an extract from the judgment of Supreme Court of Canada Justice Bertha Wilson in her 1988 Morgentaler decision throwing out Canada’s abortion law. Justice Wilson was a woman of impeccable feminist credentials.

You will see from this extract that Justice Wilson left open the question of protecting the rights of children before birth for resolution by Parliament. Subsequent Supreme Court of Canada decisions have also left open this question for Parliament to resolve. Far from "re-opening" this issue, Motion 312 proposes the consensus-building dialogue which is the only path to finally closing it. This is in fact what Justice Wilson suggested.

You will also see that Justice Wilson concluded, like me, that the existing recognition only at complete birth is wrong, suggesting that it ought to be at some point in the second trimester of the child’s development. She did not regard this to be inconsistent with her decision on abortion.

3. Finally, I am enclosing a copy of Motion 312 itself. Please note that Motion 312 proposes no legislation (on abortion or anything else) and insists that the Committee also refrain from doing so. The Committee will merely study the evidence and report all available options.

Please also note that Motion 312 directs the Committee to respect all Supreme Court of Canada decisions. All existing women‟s rights are protected by this provision!

Laws like Subsection 223(1), which decree the dehumanization and exclusion of an entire class of people, deny the principle of universal human rights. That principle, which asserts that every human being possesses equal and inherent worth and dignity is the bedrock upon which all of other our laws rest.

No 400 year old law should be frozen in time, forever immune from democratic review and forever immune from advances in understanding.

Please support the mere study proposed by Motion 312.

Sincerely,

Stephen Woodworth
Member of Parliament
Kitchener Centre

Breath-taking, isn't it?

I could go through each word and phrase and thought and rip it all to ribbons of duplicitous, mealy-mouthed horseshit, but I'm so thoroughly disgusted and enraged that I will -- at least for now -- point out two things only.

1. The clear intent of this charade from its inception has been to close the abortion debate -- without, miraculously, opening it -- by setting the scene for a law limiting abortion to the period ending at mid-second trimester.

2. Woodworth does indeed have the words 'woman' and 'women' in his vocabulary, but uses them only a) to invoke a Canadian feminist icon or b) to outright lie about their rights.

There is more to say, of course, and I'm sure wise, sensible people will weigh in with their howls of derision/outrage observations.

The good news is that there is just a little more to endure. Monday, Woody will hold a press conference; Friday will see the final hour of debate; and then there's the vote on September 26 to once and for at least a generation kill any notion of turning back the clock on reproductive rights.

And we can finally say buh-bye to this shit.

BONUS: JJ writes From the Horse's Ass Mouth.

UPDATE: In the comments choice joyce reminds us that Chantal Hébert thinks the vote might be close. Gender Focus has the goods on what we need to do next.

UPDATE 2: ARCC now also has a page with what needs doing now.

Official Radical Handmaids' Drinking Game

Get ready for September 21, when Woodworth's Wank, aka The Debate on When the State Takes over Your Uterus, gets its second hour of debate.

I want to add under 'take a sip' -- 'womb'.

Further suggestions and cocktail recipes welcome.

Image source.

Link to larger version.

Juxtapose!

What the whistler whistles.

[September 5, 2012] Woodworth maintains that M-312 is not about abortion but fact-finding, and that Parliament should act on whatever evidence was presented by medical and scientific experts.

What the dogs hear.

September 10, 2012 – Motion 312 is recognized by many as having direct implications for the status quo on abortion in Canada.

Just so we're clear.

Pray'n'Phone Update: You Can Skip the Praying Part

On the Pray'n'Phone Facebook page a high-school social studies teacher suggests that making M312 a 'Christian issue' is not a good strategy.

To which Miles, the genius behind PnP, replies (bold mine):

Aha now I know how you caught my spelling error. You're a teacher ;) Well, I never meant to marginalize those who don't follow the Lord. I appreciate the fact that there are unbelievers who want to protect unborn children. However we have to be extremely careful when we start to appeal to science as the absolute standard or truth. Let's not forget that the original criminal code defining unborn children was based on the science of its day. What makes us think we have all of our science perfected today? Look into it and you will find that there are many scientists today who deny the fact that the unborn are human beings. No, we have to appeal to an authority greater than our diary of observations (science). We appeal to the Creator of human beings. Now we're not going to start a debate here, the last thing we need is a division. I put the encouragement to pray in there because it is the most important thing we can do. If someone out there doesn’t want to pray, then I guess they can skip that step. God bless - Miles

Yo! Woody! You getting this? Contrary to your long-drawn out wank about updating the 'old' definition of human being in the Criminal Code with modern science, your latest (and I do mean 'late') supporter thinks science is unreliable.

And there, folks, is why M312 is going to be Dead on Arrival.

Saturday Pictures: Bellies and Vaginas

There are three categories of preferred fetus fetishist imagery: cute children, gory dead fetuses, and featureless and/or headless heavily pregnant bodies.

(By the way, the media is also MASSIVELY guilty on this score. Most stories about abortion are illustrated with stock photos of enormous headless bellies. Bellies far beyond the point that 98% of abortions actually occur. Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada provides some more appropriate stock photos here.)

Have a look at the current or recent offerings in the genre.

deBeuaxOs points out:

The pregnant women are featureless incubators, whose human rights are secondary to the *personhood* rights that Blob Blogging Whinge-Nut SUZANNE and other assorted lobbyists for The Fetus©™ would shove down the throat of the majority of Canadians who believe that the current manner of administering abortion works well.

The fetuses look like one-month-old infants, not the *preborn* that the lying liars are always yammering about.

Our sharp-eyed commenters had more to say.

Beijing York 9 August, 2012 3:05 PM

I think #2 is the independent, single, career woman whose partner's condom broke (and is at risk of taking the pill because of her age). But she should be punished nonetheless for failing to give her womb to the man and woman marriage cause, especially when her eggs where in their prime and many babies could have followed to fill that empty quiver.


Sixth Estate 9 August, 2012 5:15 PM

I'm with BY on this one. I can't help but notice that the middle one with the terrified child is the only woman wearing pants.

Have a look at a few more.

And one I just ran into at the Facebook page for Pass 312, the Pray 'n' Phone nutters.

Yet fetus fetishists go insane over 'vulgar, disgusting images' like this.

Well, they would, wouldn't they? Fun, creative, pretty vaginas -- WITH HEADS AND FACES AND OWNERS AND OPINIONS! SHRIEEEEEK!

We at DAMMIT are starting a collection of headless and/or featureless pregnant belly pictures. If you've got a fave, leave a link in the comments.






Code Pink image source.

Oh Noes! Woodworth's Wank Will Now Pass for Sure!

This is so awesome I had to share.

As someone I know says, this is awesome with awesome sauce.

First, there was the cunning teaser for something mysteriously named Pass 312.

Then today, as promised, the Big Reveal.

It's hot off the presses and not up on their site yet.

Watch and marvel.

How to PASS 312 from OpenEye Creative Lab. on Vimeo.

The brilliant strategy! The majestic simplicity! The stunning production values! The Amerikan spelling!

Two steps to victory: 1) Pray and 2) Phone.

Sheer genius.

But it requires immediate attention.

Having been in some kinda Kristian rapture since Woodworth's Wank first appeared on the horizon on December 21, 2011, these junior fetus fetishists urge their fellows to get on the case from September 17 to 25, because, you see, the vote is to be held on September 26!

Get on your knees now!

I don't know about you, DJ! readers. This is just so crazy -- and brilliant -- it may work. I am officially skert now.


ADDED: Of course the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada has had all these tools and more available for months.

Numbers, Numbers, Numbers

The big push is ON! The scary new tactic that will 'innundate [sic] our parliament with a message they can't possibly ignore!' will be revealed tomorrow in Woody's Last Stand.

And now we're getting skert.

Yesterday, We Need a Law (Like a Hole in the Head) issued a media release on the MASSIVE number of petitions MPs are receiving.

In the last session of Parliament on almost 250 occasions, MP's stood up on behalf of their constituents to present petitions in support of Motion 312 and calling Parliament to "restrict abortion to the greatest extent possible". The number of signatories to these petitions totaled nearly 19,000 different names.

Nearly 19,000 different names!

Gee. This online petition opposing Woody's Wank also has nearly 19,000 names.

Guess that's a wash.

The letter-writing campaign that was aiming for 100,000 letters to MPs and caught a lucky break when the vote on the motion was postponed from spring to fall, now has 65,318 letters recorded.

The postcard people (you remember those entrepreneurs, don't you?) aren't boasting any numbers. But they have a Facebook page, with 146 likes!

You skert yet?

Pass 312 -- they of the Big Reveal tomorrow -- has numbers too!

An estimated 100,000 plus letters and emails have been sent to our MPs this summer urging them to support Motion 312.

Estimated, double/triple-counted, number pulled out ass. OK, sure.

Pass 312 has a (now) working link to a Facebook page. It's got 176 likes!

And more numbers! Pass 312 intends to unleash a 'Street Team', now with 65 members across Canada. I guess we'll find out what the Street Team is gonna actually do to innundate [sic] MPs tomorrow.

Well, we certainly hope they won't be innundating MPs with idiotic compelling posters like these. (My fave is the one with the bullets. How did they do that? Get the bullets to stop like that? Though the car seat in DANGER is pretty compelling too.)

I doubt MPs could withstand a barrage of such hard-hitting messages and images. Particularly terrifying is the ransom note effect. *snigger*

Stay tuned. We'll be on the Big Reveal tomorrow.

Woody's Last Stand

Yee haw! Join the last stand for Motion 312!

The website lists five important 'facts', including this one:

3) Evey political party in Canada is opposing Motion 312.  Prime Minister Stephen Haper made it clear that he will vote against it.

But fear not! They have 4 million (ignorant) weapons they're about to unleash.

5) There are over 4,000,000 evangelical Christians in Canada.  That means 4 million people who have no excuse for ignoring the abuse of our unborn children (Psalm82:2-4).  Nearly 4 million people, however, who have no idea what Motion 312 is and have not yet contacted their MP in favor of it.

Yay! Four million ignoramuses! Who have failed to twig despite nearly nine months of SHRIEEKING by fetus fetishists!

Now for the threat! With wizard spelling!

You now know all that you need to know.  The responsibility is yours to act, to be the voice of millions who cannot speak for themselves!  How will you do that? On September 7, 2012 we will be anouncing [sic] a plan that will innundate [sic] our parliament with a message they can't possibly ignore!  Stay connected and spread the word!  We must act as one body in unison to make this work. We cannot fail our children!

And the Facebook link doesn't work.

Behold the 'last stand' of what JJ calls Profiles in Cluelessness.

But then again, why not: it’s in line with the haphazard and utterly clueless way the rest of the M312 campaign has been run, a confused and riotous crusade of Twitterspam, fetusmobiles, inconsistencies, transparent lies and general dumbness.  For an initiative thought by some to be the last kick at the anti-abortion can for a long, long time, the ineptitude of its handling has been breathtaking to behold.

And fun to watch.  Did I mention fun to watch?

Also, mercifully, soon over. The vote is scheduled for September 26.