I have sympathy with much of that Federalist article, but I do think a central logical error is caused by the whole US thing about Pro-Life being inexplicably aligned with Progressivism and Feminism. They are forced into straight-jacketed thinking because you're not allowed to line yourself up any other way without severe backlash from your own side.
How could I grieve a thing that didn’t exist?
Lots of women grieve greatly that they can't have children for biological reasons. That you grieve something means you have personalised it, not that it is a person. This is not an argument for abortion, merely pointing out that her understandable grief is not proof of her position, as the article supposes. (Indeed, the "pro-life" position that the "woman defines all" is criticised, and then an example of a person choosing to define things differently is then offered as the central point of the opposite argument.)
Why can't someone be anti-abortion without their Feminist credentials being called into question? Why can't someone be opposed to Feminism and pro-choice?
If only Rosie had known how much people cared for her during her life. Could none of the mourners have spared a kind word or a bit of doughnut before she cashed in her existential chips?
Lots of women grieve greatly that they can't have children for biological reasons. That you grieve something means you have personalised it, not that it is a person.
So my grief at hitting menopause before being a mother doesn't involve the thought of all those little people that never happened?
What the hell does it involve, then?
Motherhood isn't an abstraction; it exists ONLY in tandem with another PERSON's existence.
She damned well was mourning a real person: a tiny little person who is now forever absent in from her life. That she failed to recognize the personhood of the child she aborted doesn't remove the personhood from the child.
Why can't someone be anti-abortion without their Feminist credentials being called into question? Why can't someone be opposed to Feminism and pro-choice?
Because Feminism is predicated on the idea that women will never be equal with men until they can control -- absolutely -- when children do or do not come. This idea goes back 100 years, oh yes it does.
To permit another human being's existence -- even a human who was brought into being by the woman's consensual act -- is to submit to the Patriarchy, who objects to abortion ONLY because men want to punish women for being sexually autonomous. Hence Obama's statement about not wanting his daughters to be "punished with a baby."
Feminism's hostility to motherhood and biology is sociopathic, not compassionate, not rational, and not in any way healthy.
You can be pro-choice on the basis of hard cases but not on the basis of What Feminism Thinks About Motherhood.
LOL. Is it street art?
Posted by: Em | December 21, 2015 at 19:37
Similar.
Posted by: PiperPaul | December 21, 2015 at 19:39
Is it street art?
We’ll have to ask Franklin. But I was impressed by the hand-made coffin and funeral pyre.
Posted by: David | December 21, 2015 at 19:42
Similar.
The framed photo...
Posted by: David | December 21, 2015 at 19:44
Eh, it's been done! http://imgur.com/gallery/h9LRo
Posted by: The Proprietor | December 21, 2015 at 20:29
In other news, Miscarrying While Feminist.
I'm DYING to see what Laurie Penny makes of this.
Also, nominated for the Best PWNing category, the @starwars account pwns the idiot @neiltyson.
I thought BB-8 was CGI, too. Good on the puppeteers for creating a practical droid.
Posted by: dicentra | December 21, 2015 at 20:55
I have sympathy with much of that Federalist article, but I do think a central logical error is caused by the whole US thing about Pro-Life being inexplicably aligned with Progressivism and Feminism. They are forced into straight-jacketed thinking because you're not allowed to line yourself up any other way without severe backlash from your own side.
How could I grieve a thing that didn’t exist?
Lots of women grieve greatly that they can't have children for biological reasons. That you grieve something means you have personalised it, not that it is a person. This is not an argument for abortion, merely pointing out that her understandable grief is not proof of her position, as the article supposes. (Indeed, the "pro-life" position that the "woman defines all" is criticised, and then an example of a person choosing to define things differently is then offered as the central point of the opposite argument.)
Why can't someone be anti-abortion without their Feminist credentials being called into question? Why can't someone be opposed to Feminism and pro-choice?
Posted by: Chester Draws | December 21, 2015 at 23:48
If only Rosie had known how much people cared for her during her life. Could none of the mourners have spared a kind word or a bit of doughnut before she cashed in her existential chips?
Posted by: R.Sherman | December 22, 2015 at 00:53
"I’m assuming the janitor was on holiday."
Or perhaps half the janitorial staff was laid off, in order to hire more diversity consultants.
Posted by: pst314 | December 22, 2015 at 01:24
Eh, it's been done!
Virgil had a funeral for a pet fly, albeit for eminent domain issues . . .
Posted by: Hal | December 22, 2015 at 03:39
Lots of women grieve greatly that they can't have children for biological reasons. That you grieve something means you have personalised it, not that it is a person.
So my grief at hitting menopause before being a mother doesn't involve the thought of all those little people that never happened?
What the hell does it involve, then?
Motherhood isn't an abstraction; it exists ONLY in tandem with another PERSON's existence.
She damned well was mourning a real person: a tiny little person who is now forever absent in from her life. That she failed to recognize the personhood of the child she aborted doesn't remove the personhood from the child.
Why can't someone be anti-abortion without their Feminist credentials being called into question? Why can't someone be opposed to Feminism and pro-choice?
Because Feminism is predicated on the idea that women will never be equal with men until they can control -- absolutely -- when children do or do not come. This idea goes back 100 years, oh yes it does.
To permit another human being's existence -- even a human who was brought into being by the woman's consensual act -- is to submit to the Patriarchy, who objects to abortion ONLY because men want to punish women for being sexually autonomous. Hence Obama's statement about not wanting his daughters to be "punished with a baby."
Feminism's hostility to motherhood and biology is sociopathic, not compassionate, not rational, and not in any way healthy.
You can be pro-choice on the basis of hard cases but not on the basis of What Feminism Thinks About Motherhood.
That's why.
Posted by: dicentra | December 22, 2015 at 03:43
I already miss Rosie. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Yv6VkVkwgo
Posted by: Quint&Jessel, Sea of Azof, Bly, UK | December 22, 2015 at 06:56
More Insanity of the Left.
Apparently Ben Carson (yes, the black guy running for the Republican nomination to be U.S. President) is a "White Supremacist".
I kid you not.
As propounded in this Salon article:
"White Men must be stopped: The very future of mankind depends upon it".
http://www.salon.com/2015/12/22/white_men_must_be_stopped_the_very_future_of_the_planet_depends_on_it_partner/
And yet they claim that they are the ones who aren't racists....
Posted by: Wildgoose | December 22, 2015 at 17:12
"White Men must be stopped: The very future of mankind depends upon it".
Does this qualify as hate speech? Provocation?
Posted by: PiperPaul | December 22, 2015 at 18:09
Sorry for the OT, but, via Instapundit, this is worth a few moments.
Posted by: R. Sherman | December 22, 2015 at 19:58
this is worth a few moments.
That’s the spirit.
Posted by: David | December 22, 2015 at 20:27
http://talesofmytery.blogspot.com/2013/09/dino-buzzati-lo-scarafaggio.html
Couldn't find an English translation of it. Scarafaggio, obviously, is a cockroach.
Posted by: Hedgehog | December 22, 2015 at 20:36
Imagine the sh*tstorm that would have ensued if someone left a post-it with "Roach Lives Matter".
Posted by: Criticas | December 23, 2015 at 21:05
Well, that escalated quickly.
Posted by: Gregoryno6 | December 24, 2015 at 21:58