“He had heard her say, so many times, that a society that approved of making abortion illegal was a society that approved of violence against women; that making abortion illegal was simply a sanctimonious, self-righteous form of violence against women- it was just another way of legalizing violence against women, Nurse Caroline would say.”—
“You think he belongs to you because you want to belong to him. Don’t. It’s a bad word, ‘belong.’ Especially when you put it with somebody you love. Love shouldn’t be like that. Did you ever see the way the clouds love a mountain? They circle all around it; sometimes you can’t even see the mountain for the clouds. But you know what? You go up top and what do you see? His head. The clouds never cover the head. His head pokes through, because the clouds let him; they don’t wrap him up. They let him keep his head up high, free, with nothing to hide him or bind him. You can’t own a human being. You can’t lose what you don’t own. Suppose you did own him. Could you really love somebody who was absolutely nobody without you? You really want somebody like that? Somebody who falls apart when you walk out the door? You don’t, do you? And neither does he.”— Toni Morrison, Song of Solomon (via graham-bailey)
Still think people on food stamps have it too good? Chef Karl Wilder is trying to feed his family on the budget equivalent of what they would receive on food stamps. He’s been documenting his meals on his blog as part of an awareness campaign for the San Francisco Food Bank.
He just finished his two months on a food stamp budget, and he says, “I admit to being bored by it. I am sick of many of the foods that work in this budget. I am ready for it to be over.” He went to the doctor and found that although he’d lost weight, his body fat percentage went up, and his blood sugar, cholesterol and triglyceride levels were all higher.
Still think poor people have it made on food stamps?
The US Embassy reported that rising sea waters could also kill off the rice paddies of the Bangkok plains that contribute to Thailand’s status as the world’s largest rice exporter. ”Other Asian mega-cities such as Jakarta and Ho Chi Minh City face similar inundation scenarios.”
Can fat people be healthy? A provocative new study shows that obese people who are otherwise healthy live just as long as their slim counterparts.
And that wasn’t the only surprising finding. The study also showed otherwise healthy obese people are even less likely than lean people to die of cardiovascular disease.
“Our findings challenge the idea that all obese individuals need to lose weight,” study author Dr. Jennifer L. Kuk, assistant professor at York University School of Kinesiology & Health Science, said in a written statement. “Moreover, it’s possible that trying - and failing - to lose weight may be more detrimental than simply staying at an elevated body weight and engaging in a healthy lifestyle that includes physical activity and a balanced diet with plenty of fruits and vegetables.”
“Femmephobia can also be seen in marketing. We have diet soda, and we have diet soda FOR MEN; we have loofahs, and we have loofahs FOR MEN; we have canned soup, and we have canned soup FOR MEN. Men cannot be expected to consume feminine things like body care items or diet food or soup in cans (!?) unless it is specifically marked out as Not Girly, and therefore Not Bad. With a few obnoxious exceptions, such as tools for girls (they’re pink) or video games for girls (they’re pink and have Barbie), women who like traditionally masculine hobbies get to have the same fishing poles, golf clubs and bad Trekkie novels as the boys– because, since masculinity is valued, it doesn’t matter if a woman tries to become masculine.”—
Charity, you see, is for the deserving poor. The selected recipients chosen for profiles are carefully cultivated by charities and the organisations that do the profiles; a journalist who approaches a charity for a story will get a list of carefully vetted clients to interview, and the charity will exercise extreme caution when it selects people. Thus, a journalist talking about the food bank might interview a surgical nurse who was laid off and forced into economic hard times with a single dependent child who happens to be precocious and full of potential, but the mother with six children relying on welfare is not brought forward as an interview subject. One is ‘deserving’ and the other is not.
I don’t really get a clear answer out of her when I talk about abortion as a feminist issue. She indicates that she finds that concept to be a misdirection, when it should be about the children.
“They always think, ‘It’ll ruin me, it’ll affect my life’,” she says. “Well, you shouldn’t have laid down and done what you did. It’s the farmer’s principle, right? Reaping and sowing. You ‘made a mistake’ and now let’s just erase it really quick and act as if it never happened?”
This is the mindset behind every anti-choicer, no matter how nice they are about it. I will never understand how a baby is supposed to be a gift and/or miracle from God while simultaneously being a punishment for opening your legs. There is no love for babies or children in that mindset at all. Why would you want a child to have a parent that can’t or won’t take care of it?
I’m convinced it’s because of the sheer joy that people get when they get to judge those parents at the mall or the grocery store when the children are ill-behaved and they are paying with food stamps. When they get to judge them for pregnancy weight they never lost or for being “sluts” if they did get their bodies back. When they get to judge them for not working or for working too much and neglecting their children.
As soon as a person gets pregnant, there is very little they can do that will ever be “right.”
The people who would force a person to have a child as a “punishment” are vicious, hateful, and mean. Unlike a lot of bullies, however, they’ve found a clever way of creating their own targets.
“Pro-life” has never been about children. They simply don’t give a shit what happens to children once they’re out of the uterus. It’s entirely about controlling and punishing female sexuality and making sure that women know their place. If these people realised that it wasn’t just women who are affected by these things, they’d probably consider it a special bonus that they can punish “queers” as well.
Two birds with one stone.
People who are pro-life are seriously sick and twisted human beings.
More and more ISP’s are limiting and throttling BitTorrent traffic on their networks. By throttling BitTorrent traffic the speed of BitTorrent downloads decrease, and high speed downloads are out of the question.
The list of ISP’s that limit BitTorrent traffic, or plan to do so is growing every day, and according to the BBC, the ‘bandwidth war’ has begun.
But there is a solution. Encrypting your torrents will prevent throttling ISP’s from shaping your traffic. Below is a step by step walkthrough on how to enable encryption in Azureus, uTorrent, and Bitcomet, the three most popular torrent clients.
“…fat people (especially fat women) die every year because they walk into doctors’ offices with complaints that are ignored by doctors who can’t see past fat. Shortness of breath? Lose weight. Whoops, that was…
This is an article about how dangerous religious-affiliated hospitals are to women’s health in regards to pregnancy complications. This is becoming a growing problem and if you are pregnant and experience complications I implore you to go to any hospital that is NOT affiliated with a religion. You could die if you experience a miscarriage and go to a Catholic-affiliated hospital instead of a secular one.
Conscience clauses will protect doctors from treating you and, essentially, allowing you to die while in their care. Do NOT go to a religious-affiliated hospital if you can avoid it.
From the article:
“Most women assume that when they go to a hospital they will be offered the best medical treatment options for their diagnosis,” said NWLC Co-President Marcia D. Greenberger. “But this report paints a chilling picture of women with ectopic pregnancies or suffering miscarriages who are not offered the full spectrum of medically appropriate treatment options because they have gone to a hospital whose religious affiliation conflicts with the provision of those options. To make matters worse, women denied certain medical options may never even be told that these options could, for example, improve their chances of having a healthy pregnancy in the future. Women who fail to receive appropriate treatment or to be informed that preferable options would be provided in another hospital can suffer serious harm with long-term adverse consequences to their lives and health.”
The reports highlight stark cases where doctors noted a discrepancy between the medically-accepted standard of care for miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy and the treatment provided by hospitals due to their religious affiliation. For example, while the standard of care for certain ectopic pregnancies requires patients to receive the medication methotrexate, doctors in the study reported that their hospitals forbade the use of the drug. Instead, patients were either transferred to another hospital or required to undergo unnecessary and invasive surgery to resolve their condition, thereby being denied the standard of care.
One doctor in the study reported several instances of potentially fatal tubal ruptures in patients with ectopic pregnancies at her Catholic-affiliated hospital. She said that her hospital subjected patients with ectopic pregnancies to unnecessary delays in treatment, despite patients’ exhibiting serious symptoms indicating that a tubal rupture was possible. These patients, therefore, were denied emergency care to which they were legally entitled.
In some of the miscarriage cases described in the Ibis Study, the standard of care also required immediate treatment. Yet doctors practicing at Catholic-affiliated hospitals were forced to delay treatment while performing medically unnecessary tests. Even though these miscarriages were inevitable, and no medical treatment was available to save the fetus, some patients were transferred because doctors were required to wait until there was no longer a fetal heartbeat to provide the needed medical care. This delay subjected these patients to further risks of hemorrhage and infection and could have violated their right to receive emergency medical treatment under federal law.
Malcolm Gladwell argues professional sports don’t operate like a normal business, citing former Red Sox owner Tom Yawkey as an example. Even though it would have boosted attendance in the 1940s and 1950s, the Red Sox integrated the team very late in the game:
Yawkey was not just a racist, in other words. He was a racist who put his hatred of black people ahead of his desire to make money. Economists have a special term they use to describe this kind of attitude. They would say that Yawkey owned the Red Sox not to maximize his financial benefits, but, rather, his psychic benefits. Psychic benefits describe the pleasure that someone gets from owning something — over and above economic returns — and clearly some part of the pleasure Yawkey got from the Red Sox came from not having to look at black people when he walked through the Fenway Park dugout. In discussions of pro sports, the role of psychic benefits doesn’t get a lot of attention. But it should, because it is the key to understanding all kinds of behavior by sports owners — most recently the peculiar position taken by management in the NBA labor dispute.
This is one of the main reasons why I don’t buy the Libertarian argument that the Civil Rights Act was unnecessary, or that Black people in the post-Reconstruction South remained oppressed due to the enshrinement of discrimination in the law via Jim Crow. Libertarians argue that if discrimination hadn’t need given State sanction, private forces would’ve naturally given Blacks alternatives to meet their needs, because it would’ve been profitable to to do so.
The argument also assumes that there was a body of White business owners in the South large enough to give Southern Blacks, in aggregate, meaningful alternatives to the racist shops that refused to serve them. Assumedly it would’ve been profitable for some people to tap into the “Black” market to get the customers that racist business owners were turning away. But this again, misses the forest for the trees: what do you think happened to White people that helped Blacks in the post-Reconstruction South? Do you think they were merely rapped on the knuckles?
LTMC nails it again. I always knew the problem of psychic benefits but I never knew the right words to describe it. Despite libertarians insistence money is not all powerful. There are human characteristics that run deeper and stronger than the urge for profit
EXPLOITING INDIGENOUS PEOPLES The Body Shop claim to be helping some third world workers and indigenous peoples through so-called ‘Trade Not Aid’ or ‘Community Trade’ projects . In fact, these are largely a marketing ploy as less than 1% of sales go to ‘Community Trade’ producers , and it has been shown that some of these products have been sourced from mainstream commercial markets . One such project, which has been the centrepiece of the company’s marketing strategy for years, is with the Kayapo Indians in Brazil. The Body Shop have claimed that by harvesting brazil nut oil (used in hair conditioner), the Indians are able to make sustainable use of the forest thereby preventing its destruction by mining and logging companies . But only a small number of the Kayapo are involved, creating resentment and internal divisions within the community . As the Body Shop are the sole buyer of the oil, they can set any price they like . The project does nothing to safeguard the Indians’ future interests . Furthermore, the company have used them extensively for PR purposes for which they have not been compensated .
Such projects take attention away from the need to oppose the threats to the survival of indigenous peoples. Rather than encouraging them to be tied into the market economy controlled by foreign companies, people should be supporting their freedom to control their own land and resources and therefore their future .
One recent Body Shop advertisement extolled their commitment to indigenous peoples and the American Express card (the ultimate symbol of consumerism). At the time American Express was a major backer of a massive hydroelectric scheme due to flood vast areas of Cree Indian land in Quebec against Cree opposition .
“[Their issues are] anti-abortion, anti-gay rights — but they also have … the belief that government should not be involved in social safety nets, that the country is becoming socialist, if not communist. … — All of what we’ve come to call ‘Tea Party issues’ of very small government. In the case of the Apostles, they believe this because they believe that a large government that handles the safety net is taking away what is the domain of the Church and of Christianity.”—
A new Christian movement that seeks to take dominion over politics, business and culture in preparation for the end times and Jesus’s return, is becoming more of a presence in American politics. On today’s Fresh Air, Rachel Tabachnick, who researches the religious right, explains its beliefs and influences. (via nprfreshair)
I can’t believe that this never occurred to me before, the idea that much of the religious right is against social programs because it prevents the poor from becoming dependant on the church and thus reduces the church’s power over the lives of the poor. Oh my god.
“So in the DSK rape case, we’re supposed to believe that an African immigrant housekeeper suddenly decided to have sex with a wealthy white man 30 years her senior for 3 minutes on a bathroom floor in the middle of her work shift. To believe this story, you must know nothing about race, class, power and rape.”—
No. We are supposed to believe that even if she didn’t decide to do any of those things, since she is not as blameless and sinless as the Virgin Mary, she cannot receive justice for what happened to her.
Alright, so in the field of economics, there is plenty of discussion about the stimulus and if you are interested in economics you probably know a thing or two about it, or at least know the arguments that both sides use so I’ll keep it short and not waste your time
“Capitalism is not interested in freedom, and neither are landlords.”—Ourben. This whole post is extremely quoteable. I stole the idea of quoting it from atomicsocialist though. brilliant post. (via anticapitalist)
“Realize that anyone who tries to put you down about your appearance is assuming that it is your job to please them visually. Once you realize that it isn’t your job to be visually pleasing to anyone, ever, it becomes very hard for anyone to make you feel bad about yourself.”—
Mind Control is a suite of psychological techniques that cult leaders attempt to control their members with. Mind Control is not some magical device which can take away peoples’ free will. In other words it does not turn people into some sort of remote control…
wow. Title should be: mind control used by cults, government, religion, corporations and basically any entity that wants power and money.
Former President Jimmy Carter issued a statement Sunday announcing he is severing all ties with the Southern Baptist Church due to their treatment of women. A devout Southern Baptist for more than sixty years, Carter left the church in 2000 because of ideologically differences where the religion justifies the subordination of women. His announcementcomes after the Elders, a group of world leaders with which Carter is affiliated, released a statement on the issue of discrimination against women and girls by religion. In his statement, Carter calls “on all leaders to challenge and change the harmful teachings and practices, no matter how ingrained, which justify discrimination against women.”
I’m a market anarchist. I support meritocracy, but I believe that the workers have a right to their labor, and the arbitrary owner of capital does not get to choose the value of labor, but the market should.
That’s why workers should unite and take control of the materials they use to create…
I think there’s a serious problem. The minute that the Republican Party becomes the party – the anti-science party, we have a huge problem. We lose a whole lot of people who would otherwise allow us to win the election in 2012. When we take a position that isn’t willing to embrace evolution, when we take a position that basically runs counter to what 98 of 100 climate scientists have said, what the National Academy of Science – Sciences has said about what is causing climate change and man’s contribution to it, I think we find ourselves on the wrong side of science, and, therefore, in a losing position.
The Republican Party has to remember that we’re drawing from traditions that go back as far as Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, President Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan and Bush. And we’ve got a lot of traditions to draw upon. But I can’t remember a time in our history where we actually were willing to shun science and become a – a party that – that was antithetical to science. I’m not sure that’s good for our future and it’s not a winning formula.
i think the difference between men getting raped by women and women getting raped by men is not something ridiculous like “men can’t be raped” or “women can’t rape” - they’re both equally harmful and devastating acts - but that we live in a culture that actively…