Goodness, it has been a while

It has been 8 whole days since my last post - far too long. I have been in a bit of an emotional slump, and Rock is busy preparing for the bar. But as I feel someone alienated from my [now] old political forum. I would like to extend the scope of this blog to progressive politics in general, but still with a decidely feminist bent.

Speaking of feminism, I heard a sound bite on NPR this morning, that "dog fighting is no worse than legal abortion"

I assume that it is something about Michael Vick's dog fighting thing. First of all, what I think is more reprehensible than dog fighting were the cruel punishments of dogs that lost. One of which was to wet down a dog (which was needlessly identified as female, did that really need to be pointed out?) and electrocute it. Cruel, horrible, and UTTERLY POINTLESS.

As for if it is no better or worse than abortion. The human body rejects certain fetuses, biologically. It can be traumatizing, not to mention frustrating, especially for those having trouble concieving in the first place. Call me cold and cruel all you want, but we need to remember that mistakes happen. MISTAKES HAPPEN, even in biology.

So how does this relate to abortion? Well, miscarriages are, basically, abortions by one's own body, and for very good reasons - maybe your body isn't ready for a baby yet, maybe it never will be, maybe it has passed that time [my mother had a miscarriage in her 40s]. Maybe the baby hasn't been formed right. For whatever reason, the body aborted the baby. Abortions are what happens when the unconcious human processes can't detect any problems, but the concious human process can. Maybe a woman is not financially stable to even reliably support herself, maybe she is not at a point in her life when she could give the best care to herself for 9 months of pregnancy. Why is this such a problem? Well, duh, women are the ones best able to know when the pregnancy isn't right, and men get uptight when women have control over anything. Well, not "men" (though traditionally, that has been the case), just sexists.

In the Namib Dessert, one of the most arrid deserts in the world, a culture of people evolved that could only support a certain number of dependents. If a woman got pregnant and gave birth to a kid it couldn't support, after birth, the mother would quickly and quietly kill the newborn infant. This was a normal and accepted practice. I'm not sure if the practice still happens, but as with much in Africa, it probably still does.

So many like to paint the decision to have an abortion as frivolous, but, damn, it couldn't be further from the truth. Just another smear tactic from sexists who are afraid when women make decisions on their own.

So is legal abortion like dog fighting? Is legal abortion like an activity to starve and abuse animals so as to make them angry? Is the decision to not bring a baby into the world that one cannot or will not support adequately (even during pregnancy) the same as getting enjoyment out of dogs brutally killing each other? The answer should be apparent.

A Clarification on Language

Language matters, and I do my best to choose my words carefully.

• When I need to refer to a generic person, I will opt for the female pronoun first, if I cannot use a device like s/he or wo/man.
• When making an accusation of sexism, I will use the term sexist as opposed to "men". Though one could claim that everyone in our society is sexist, to some degree, I define sexist as someone who willfully espouses the tenets of sexism without acknowledgment of the negative repercussions.
• I use anti-feminist when talking about sexists that actively attempt to dismantle the feminist movement
• Important Reading

  Stop using gendered language thoughtlessly. There is a politics to language, and it is not just being "PC." That term was invented by right-wingers to fight back against things like women's studies, African American studies, and other non-white, non-male, non-imperial challenges to a racist, Eurocentric, and patriarchal canon. When you use male nouns and pronouns to describe human, you are reinforcing the idea and practice that makes male the norm. Calling the species homo sapien "Man" is a problem. Calling land and ships and other things "she" and "her," that men are seen to control, is a problem... because it assigns the controlling role to males. Saying that "it is colder than a witch's tit" is a sexist turn of phrase. Using the term "balls" to describe courage, and making courage a male characteristic, is a problem. Calling people who lack courage or strength "pussies" is a devaluation, as well as objectification, of women.
  
  From The Weaponized Phallus...

  
  

  In 1986 Douglas Hofstadter, a philosopher, wrote a parody of sexist language by making an analogy with race. His article ("A Person Paper on Purity in Language") creates an imaginary world in which generics are based on race rather than gender. In that world, people would use "freshwhite," "chairwhite" and yes, "you whiteys." People of color would hear "all whites are created equal" -- and be expected to feel included. Substituting "white" for "man" makes it easy to see why using "man" for all human beings is wrong. Yet, women are expected to feel flattered by "freshman," "chairman" and "you guys."
  
  From Why Sexist Language Matters

• Finally, if you "just don't get it", try Finally Feminism 101