Skip to content

#DearJohn: Sign the Petition to Stop HR3

So, we have spent the past few days, discussing what’s terrible about HR3, the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion If You Weren’t Raped Convincingly Enough, Or If You Have Insurance, Or Basically If We Just Don’t Feel Like It, Ever” Act sponsored by the terrifying Chris Smith of New Jersey, many terrible politicians including some very disappointing Democrats, and dubbed a top priority by John Boehner and his Congress, which just so happens to be deteriorating very rapidly into a nightmarish culture-war cartoon.

But just talking about things isn’t the way to stop them, sometimes. We’ve got to make sure that we know who we’re talking to, and how to reach them. We all oppose this act, but we have to make sure that everyone in power knows about this. Therefore, we’ve been working together to form a long-term strategy for opposing the bill, and bringing as much pressure as we can to the right people, so that they know they’ve got to stand up against it.

Right now, the bill is being handled by the Ways and Means Committee. They’re money people — NOT, notably, public health people — and if we don’t make it clear to them that this bill HAS to stop and that its redefinition of rape CANNOT be allowed to move forward, there’s a chance that they could miss how terrible it is. OR, you know, just move forward with it. Because who cares about the survivors affected by the “forcible rape” clause? Or all of the low-income people who are going to need abortions? Or, you know, WOMEN AND PEOPLE WHO NEED ABORTIONS, generally? There is only one Democratic woman on this committee, which is illustrative of the sort of odds we’re up against.

Therefore, we at Tiger Beatdown have been working on a petition for the people in the Ways and Means committee, to tell them that it’s imperative they stand up against this bill. It’s here. Please sign, so that we can deliver it to the right people, and make their voices heard. It’s easy for them to ignore us. Many of them want to ignore us. Ignoring the people most affected by anti-choice legislation is, basically, the only way this sort of extremist anti-choice legislation can ever move forward. So we’ve got to be as loud and as dedicated as possible, in terms of letting them know that we’re here. We do not support any politicians who back HR3, and we don’t support HR3.

Please sign, so we can keep moving forward and keeping this a safe country for women, survivors, and people who need abortions to live in.

#DearJohn: Taking It Big

AS YOU KNOW, we have been talking since Friday about how hideous and unacceptable the re-definition of rape in HR3 really is. (Along with EVERYTHING ELSE IN THE BILL: The attack on the Hippocratic oath posed by “conscience” clauses, the attack on your insurance if you have it, the overt and obvious and unacceptable attack on the most vulnerable people in our society.) Today, at Salon, I’m also talking about the fact that it’s a strategic move, which will make exemptions for any rape survivor unenforceable, in practice:

Every survivor who finds herself in need of abortion funding will have to submit her rape for government approval.

H.R. 3’s language brings us back to an ancient, long-outdated standard of rape law: “Utmost resistance.” By this standard, a rape verdict depended not on whether the victim consented, but on whether outsiders thought she resisted as hard as humanly possible. Survivors rarely measured up.

There’s an example of how “utmost resistance” worked in the 1887 text Defences to Crime. In this case, a man was accused of raping a 16-year-old girl. (A minor, but not incest: Already convicted by current standards, not enough for H.R. 3.) The attacker held her hands behind her back with one of his hands. I asked my partner to test this move’s “forcefulness,” by holding my wrists the same way; I was unable to break his grip, though he’s not much larger than I am, and it hurt to struggle. The attacker then used his free hand and his leg to force open her legs, knocked her off-balance onto his crotch, and penetrated her.

His conviction was overturned. Because the girl was on top.

All this, more horrifying examples, and which extremist anti-survivor groups this bill’s co-sponsors are willingly taking money from, at the link!

But also, obviously, this movement is getting big. It is way bigger than Tiger Beatdown; it is way bigger than Twitter. You can find an amazing, frequently-updated list of resources, including which groups are starting petitions and what action steps or educational resources are being provided elsewhere, right here. We’re working on our own petition for you to sign as well, targeting the Ways and Means Committee and delivered to our allies within that committee such as Shelley Berkley, so that we can oppose this as early and as strongly as possible.

I’m also continuing my push to call the offices of every Democrat who supports HR3 — conveniently not called out or condemned by the DCCC, in their hypocritical “opposition” of the bill; stand up and speak out against the Democrats who support it, dudes, or let the people who actually care about more than their own immediate political gain do the talking — and, as Garland has already said, we would love for you to join us in calling your representative and the representatives that we need either to back down from their support of this bill, or to help us oppose it. Here’s how you can find your representative online:

But, speaking of me (AND WHEN ARE WE NOT), I have taken one or two media requests, and I’m always open to talk strategy or hear protesters concerns. But this is not just my protest; I am working with an amazing community of smart, informed, passionate, effective activists. And we’re all working to hear what you’re saying and to get things done as effectively as possible. If you need to reach us for strategy, or if you have a media request, please direct your e-mail to dearjohnmedia@gmail.com. We have several people taking point and media requests right now, including Amanda Marcotte, Jaclyn Friedman, Shelby Knox, Stephanie Herold, and myself in a limited way; for those seeking members of local grassroots groups to contact, Melissa Gira Grant is generously serving as a connect for us on that front. Contact us, and we’ll see who is the best person to speak with you or to take action, and we’ll respond accordingly.

Thank you. I love you. I’m amazed by how much this has grown. And I’m grateful: This is one of the worst bills to come our way in a very, VERY long time, and we have to make it clear to the people in power that our lives are not collateral damage. Rape survivors are not collateral damage. Low-income people who need abortions are not collateral damage. Not now; not ever.

#DearJohn: Resources for the Digital Activist

A number of people have expressed an ardent desire to join #DearJohn but asked for assistance with Twitter and I promised yesterday that I would post some resources for them. Deanna Zandt has written an introductory guide to the #DearJohn campaign, with links to step by step walkthroughs to help you sign in for the first time, start tweeting, and get your message to as many people as possible. Here are some things to keep in mind while tweeting, contacting your representative, or educating those in your community:

  • HR3 makes permanent the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits the use of federal funds for a legal medical procedure. As it stands, Hyde must be renewed each year.
  • HR3 strong arms private insurance companies into removing coverage for abortions by instituting an anti-choice litmus test to discriminate against companies and programs that cover them.
  • HR3 will make it harder for rape victims to seek justice, by creating a hierarchy of rape that is based on the worst elements of rape culture. HR3 is based on the idea that “good” people are only raped by strangers and “good” people are the only ones deserving of  medical care.
  • HR3 disempowers survivors economically, financially, legally, and socially. Under Hr3 a person who is drugged, raped, and forcibly impregnated could be left to withstand the ordeal of a rape trial while pregnant, going into the courtroom each day and facing their attacker, without the money or the resources to stop it.
  • Rapists already thrive on power. Rapists already want to control their victims, want them to get and stay pregnant as a constant reminder of the attack or out of a need for control. It is unconscionable that elected politicians are empowering rapists and using the lives of survivors to prove their anti-choice credentials.
  • The opening of the bill mentions that it provides “conscience protections” against tax dollars being spent on abortion. If your conscience tells you that abortion should be free, safe, and legal, it apparently isn’t worthy of protection. Every single person who co-sponsored this bill has sided with people who want to control other people’s bodies and call it morality.

We are all, to some degree, learning. Each protest, each act of activism is a chance to learn from others, to become stronger, better, faster, smarter. Activists learn by doing, by reaching out for resources, and by finding a need and creating ways to address it. Amadi has assembled a list of the co-sponsors of HR3, along with links to their Twitter accounts. We want you to get on Twitter, to call your representatives, to educate people within your own communities about HR3 and why we oppose it so vehemently.

When you do, do so within the bounds of acceptable discourse. Do NOT use violent or threatening language. The people who support this bill don’t want to withdraw it. They want to prove their “commitment to life” while conveniently forgetting the lives of survivors. They are no doubt scrutinizing every part of this protest looking for ways to discredit us, to spin their own complicity with rape culture, to make us all shut up and go away.

Don’t shut up. Don’t go away. Call your representative and tell them that for the reasons listed above and more, you insist that they take a stand for Reproductive Rights. Let them know that attacking Reproductive Rights, as they are doing in State Legislatures across the country, is a cynical attack on the most vulnerable among us, and we demand better.

#DearJohn: They Can See Us. Now They’ll Hear Us, Too.

“A ban on taxpayer funding of abortion is the will of the people,” quoth Speaker of the House John Boehner, thereby permanently confirming many a suspicion that he is not all that bright. In fact, American voters are concerned about the same thing they’ve been concerned about for the past three years, at least: Job loss, going broke, and the craptastrophe that is our economy. Not John, however! He’s decided that HR3, the “No Taxpayer Funding For Abortion Act,” is “one of our highest legislative priorities.”

Which means that one of his highest legislative priorities is denying medical care to rape and incest survivors. The bill seeks to codify the Hyde Amendment, which already restricts public funding for abortion so severely as to make it basically useless for the vast majority of low-income people, and to pass this into law. However, UNLIKE the Hyde Amendment, it doesn’t observe the long-standing truce between anti-choice extremists and rape survivors: Instead of holding forth, as even the rightfully-loathed Hyde Amendment and Stupak-Pitts Amendment have, that funding shall be made available for pregnant rape and incest survivors, it would only provide funding for survivors who have been “forcibly raped.”

Which, as you know, is a tiny, tiny minority of survivors. 70% of rapes are “non-forcible.” Rapists consciously seek out people and situations where they’ll have to use a minimum amount of “force”: They don’t want to get caught, and they’re cowards, so they prefer people who are already drugged, weak or unconscious. They groom their victims, isolate them, and use the minimum amount of force necessary to terrify their victims into compliance; their main weapons are fear, coercion, and the vulnerability of the victim. Under this bill, you don’t count if you were drugged, you don’t count if you were sleeping, you don’t count if you were coerced, you don’t even count if you were molested, because statutory rape doesn’t count under this bill, either. And if you’re an incest survivor? You don’t count if you’re over 18.

It is absolutely unacceptable for the government to minimize rape and attack rape survivors this way. It’s disgusting. It’s unconscionable. It’s not just about abortion; it is passing rape apologism and rape culture into law. We’re all familiar with the attitude that rape only “really” counts if someone jumps out of the bushes with a weapon and physically tortures, beats, or maims you in addition to raping you; that’s a big part of what this clause is about. This sets a terrifying precedent that takes us back to the days when the law wouldn’t define your rape as a rape unless you’d demonstrated “utmost resistance,” meaning that you’d risked your life to get into a physical fight with someone who already wanted to rape you, and wouldn’t have a problem with hurting you really, really severely to get that done. We cannot let this stand. It’s not something on which there can be any compromise, ever, at any time.

Oh, but good news, because even if you’re not a survivor, or just a decent person who doesn’t believe we should be attacking, disrespecting, and ripping government protection away from the majority of rape survivors? The rest of the bill is going to hurt you, too. Let us count the ways!

1) It targets the most vulnerable survivors and people. OBVS. The attitude toward abortion, even in the days when it was illegal, was that exceptions could be made for the rich and privileged. If you had the cash, someone could probably put you in touch with a doctor who could make this happen, safely, quickly, and off the radar. The people without money and connections, the people who died by being disemboweled in “vacuum” abortions, or bled to death using coathangers or other sharp objects, or killed themselves or broke their own bones by jumping down flights of stairs, or burned their insides or poisoned themselves by taking unsafe and potentially lethal chemical douches or potions, were often poor people or people of color, or simply very young people who didn’t know what to do or who to talk to. In other words, the very people who will be most affected by this bill. This bill, which makes abortion most impossible for low-income people, is economically discriminatory and racist, and seeks to take us back there. It preserves and strengthens a hierarchy of access to medical care that benefits only the most privileged people in America. Making abortion illegal or impossible to access doesn’t stop people from getting or seeking abortions. It only endangers, harms, and kills the most vulnerable members of society. We are REQUIRED, as feminists, as citizens, as PEOPLE, to speak for them.

2) And if you are lucky enough to be insured, good news! This bill hurts you, too. It would make it impossible for the insured to deduct abortion as a “medical expense” on their taxes. This not only disincentivizes your insurance company to cover abortion in the first place, it’s a push toward a world where we no longer recognize abortion as a medical procedure in the first place.

3) It codifies and strengthens “conscience” clauses. Meaning that your doctor can just straight-up refuse to provide you medical care, laying the Hippocratic Oath to waste at will, because of their, ha, “conscience.” No matter what your circumstances are, no matter what your funds are, they can just refuse to do their job. And if you want to get a sense of how that works in practice, here’s one example: In 2000, I was kicked out of a clinic in rural Ohio, and told to “keep my legs closed” by a doctor. Because I’d asked for the Morning-After Pill. Codifying “conscience” clauses doesn’t just harm women who need abortions; it harms any person who might need any form of contraception in his or her lifetime.

We cannot let this stand. This is an attack on survivors, on women, on the poor, on anyone who stands to conceive, and on anyone who stands to be sexually assaulted: It is really, really, really fucking far from “the will of the people.” It’s just culture war, pushed by a group of people with ties to an extremist, openly anti-survivor, anti-choice movement that doesn’t reflect the opinions, the beliefs, or the values of most Americans. That’s how far from “the will of the people” it is.

But, although we can’t let this stand, we also can’t just be outraged about it on the Internet. It’s essential that we make the huge public opposition to this bill as visible as possible: That’s why we’re Tweeting at Boehner and others at #DearJohn. But we also absolutely have to make sure our representatives hear us in person. It’s the beginning of the work week. And that means that all those Congresspeople need to hear from us, on the freakin’ phone, until they get the message that their jobs are going to be very, very hard until they acknowledge the massive public opposition to HR3. We need to reach out to the people who might stand for us, like the Victims’ Rights Caucus and the Pro-Choice Caucus, to applaud them for standing up for us and to ask them to make defeating this bill a crucial mission. We need to put massive amounts of pressure on the people who clearly don’t stand with us, like Rep. Chris Smith of New Jersey, whose bill this is, and all of its co-sponsors, particularly those (male) few who happen to be Democrats: Our party is not allowed to sell out to those who deny medical care to survivors and attack people who need abortions, ever. We need to reach out to the Ways and Means Committee, which is currently handling this bill, and which has one — ONE! — Democratic woman on board. We need to reach out to Shelley Berkley, that one Democratic woman, and ask her to be our champion.

Click on this, and it should take you to a page where you can find out exactly who your rep is, and what their contact information is. Look that person up on Wikipedia, to get a sense of who they are, if you don’t already know. Then, CALL THEM. Be polite; be professional; do not threaten or use violent or abusive language under any circumstances. Explain to them that their constituents don’t support this bill, explain how and why it’s a bad bill, and let them know that if they support or fail to oppose this bill, they can expect that to impact them in a very bad way when it comes to the matter of keeping their jobs. We hired them; we can fire them. We want to flood them with calls, today and tomorrow. We need to stand up and be counted. And we can. But we need to make sure they don’t just see us talking on the Internet. We need to make sure they hear our voices, one by one by one.

#DearJohn: For When Boehner Decides Your Rape Just Wasn’t Enough

Well, hey there! What a beautiful Saturday afternoon it is! The sun is shining, the air is clear, the slush on the sidewalk is a sparkling shade of Pollution Beige, and OH LORD NO WHAT FRESH HELL IS THIS:

Rape is only really rape if it involves force. So says the new House Republican majority as it now moves to change abortion law.

For years, federal laws restricting the use of government funds to pay for abortions have included exemptions for pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. (Another exemption covers pregnancies that could endanger the life of the woman.) But the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” a bill with 173 mostly Republican co-sponsors that House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has dubbed a top priority in the new Congress, contains a provision that would rewrite the rules to limit drastically the definition of rape and incest in these cases.

Yep, you got that right! The job-focused, tax-focused economy-building new Congress is getting started right away, with a bill to… deny health coverage to rape survivors.

Oh, but, you know, that only applies the rape survivors who just don’t count. Meaning the majority of rape survivors. Under this new bill, the only rape survivors who would be able to receive funding would be those who were able to prove that their rapes involved “force.” If your rapist drugged you, intoxicated you, or raped you while you were unconscious, you don’t get coverage. If your rapist used coercion, you don’t get coverage. If this is a case of statutory rape — that is, if you are a thirteen-year-old child, raped by someone outside of your family — you don’t get coverage. If you’re an incest survivor over the age of eighteen — if, say, years of abuse only culminated in a pregnancy after your nineteenth birthday — you just don’t get coverage. And if you live in a state that doesn’t distinguish “forcible rape” from “rape,” you might not qualify, meaning that no matter what the circumstances of your assault were, well, sorry: You might not get coverage. 

That’s a lot of survivors, suddenly deprived of coverage. And no, it’s not a coincidence that rape involving “force” — and remember that proving “force” often means proving an overwhelming and potentially deadly amount of violence; other sorts of force often get swept under the rug — is less common than other methods. This bill would deny coverage to most survivors. That’s what it’s about. That’s what it’s intended to do.

There are already restrictions on the use of “taxpayer funds” to pay for abortion: The Hyde Amendment limits them. The Stupak-Pitts Amendment limits them. But both the Hyde Amendment (in its current, post-1977 form) and the Stupak-Pitts Amendment make exceptions for survivors of rape and incest. The federal funds provided through Medicaid cannot be used cover abortion, except in the cases of rape, incest, and when the life of the mother is in danger. The fact is, about half a million women who have abortions each year qualify for Medicaid. And Medicaid only covers around 80 or 90 abortions per year. Of those women, many are probably getting the funding because their pregnancy endangers their lives, not because they’re rape survivors: This big, bold, vital bill is aimed at ripping coverage away from maybe, GENEROUSLY, forty-five people a year. Heck, why not go for broke and say sixty people? Or even seventy-five! WHOA! Staggering numbers, that Boehner and the GOP are targeting here. Clearly, this is a vital target.

But it’s the “except” they have a problem with: That “except” bothers them. The No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act wants to take that one “except” off the table. It thinks all that compassion we have for rape and incest survivors is a silly idea. Because, you know. What if their rapes really weren’t that bad?

They’re coming for the abortion funding, and the first thing they’re doing is breaking the long-held taboo that says, whatever else you do, don’t come after the rape survivors, they’ve been through enough. According to this bill, you’ve only been through enough if the GOP decides you’ve been through enough. Otherwise, no matter how traumatic your rape was, or how desperately you want or need control of your life and body, you’re fair game. Having had your right to consent to sex violently ripped away, your right to consent to pregnancy and childbirth can now be ripped away as well. 

And yes, of course: If you care at all about the right to choose, the bill is already reprehensible, just on its face. It deprives low-income women of much-needed financial aid for their abortions, when their chances of getting it are already vanishingly slim. It targets the most vulnerable people in our society, and deprives them of much-needed control over their family planning, their lives, and their finances, which they need to survive and keep afloat. Oh, and bonus for the rest of us: Even if you have insurance, this bill might make it impossible for your insurance to cover an abortion. It’s just not okay, any way you look at it.

But this, the part where we decide whose rapes matter and whose rapes don’t, and seek to pass into law a radical redefinition of rape that just so happens to erase the vast majority of rape survivors, is horrifying. Instead of maintaining that rape is always rape, that there’s no such thing as a “minor” or “excusable” rape, the GOP is putting forth a bill that says some rapes are so very minor and excusable as not to warrant consideration. Making this attitude law — any law, anywhere — sets a truly terrifying precedent. It’s unconscionable.

And you know what we like to do when things get unconscionable.

That’s right, kids: It’s time to make the Internet a big, scary problem for some sexists, once again. Our favorite teary-eyed pun-inducing anti-choice lawmaker, John “[BOEHNERS]” Boehner, has dubbed this bill a “top priority” for the new Congress. Which means our top priority is telling him, and all of our representatives, that he’s wrong. Where once there was #MooreandMe, now there is only… #DearJohn.

I’ve been working with fellow feminist writers, activists, organizers, and organizations since last night to get this thing started. The Tweets are already rolling. But you, dear lovely all of you: What could we possibly achieve, without you? Not much, is the answer!

So here’s what is up. Right now, we’re Tweeting at the Boehner — oh, look! Here he is — and at all of our representatives, and we’re going to keep Tweeting, to tell them that this bill is an attack on the rights of survivors everywhere, and that it will not stand. We’re Tweeting to say that all rape is rape. We’re Tweeting to tell them the many ways that this leaves women open to attack and reproductive coercion.  We’re Tweeting to tell them that the exemption for cases of rape and incest must stand, and that it must apply in all cases. We’re Tweeting to tell them that we will not support them if they back it, we will not support them if they “compromise” on “just this one thing” — the rights and dignity of rape survivors are never to be compromised, under any circumstances — and they will not be able to push this redefinition of rape forward. We’re the American people; we got them the jobs they have, and if we are unsatisfied with their performance? We can get them oh, so very, very fired.

Don’t know who your representative is? Find them here, along with ways to contact them. Don’t know how to find your representative on Twitter? Use the Google! We’ll be planning other ways to contact these representatives, and to co-ordinate that action: Stay tuned, as always, for exciting action alerts. And, last but not least: Don’t know why getting involved matters? Try this on for size:

They told us we didn’t count. Imagine their surprise when we all speak up, all at once, to tell them that we do.

SEXIST BEATDOWN: Attack of the Tiger Ladies Edition!

So, here’s a thing you know about: SUPERIOR CHINESE TIGER MOM! She was in the Wall Street Journal, talking about how Chinese mothers were sooooo superior to Western mothers, and you should totally scream and call your kids names and chain them to the radiator until they’ve cured cancer, and she was like totally unrepentant and endorsing these messages and SHE HATES YOU. So awful, right?

Except for the fact that she didn’t choose the “Chinese Mothers are Superior” headline. And the Wall Street Journal bit was an excerpt from a book, which details how she came to lose faith in these particular methods. And — unbelievably — some of the descriptions were written to be purposefully over-the-top, as jokes.

Awwww, fuck it. Print the headlines about how “Superior Chinese Tiger Mother may scream her way to getting her own movie” anyway. Write about how she’s oppressing and victimizing her white husband, who is but a blameless victim in this scenario! (You guys, he basically doesn’t even know that he HAS children. How could he have ANY SAY OR COMPLICITY in how they are being raised? Also, he’s a dude!) Not like you’re, I dunno, feeding into anything nasty, right? It’s about time for a good old-fashioned race-and-culture-off! ASIAN PEOPLE VERSUS NON-ASIAN AMERICANS: WHO WILL WIN????? (Hint: Not people who would like to enjoy a delightful day on the Internet without encountering any “me so horny” jokes, that’s for sure.) Oh, and PS? She’s a girl. DOUBLE BONANZA!

Ugh, you guys? Some of the shit decribed in that Wall Street Journal article was just plain mean and unacceptable. We all know this. We can talk about this. But, hey, to switch up the focus for a second: You know what’s also pretty mean? Being a racist asshole in the name of good parenting. Or just generally, really. Allow Amanda Hess of TBD and I to explain!

ILLUSTRATION: Perhaps Western mothers should be stricter when teaching their children to spell racist Internet meme captions.

(Continued)

TRAVELS WITH GARLAND: Mountain Home, Arkansas

Fun Fact: I spent a month or two in Arkansas when I was but a lisping lad of mincing cluelessness. I don’t want to talk about it! But I feel like I should do a full disclosure as to why this surprises me not a bit:

Harps Grocery Store, Mountain Home, Arkansas

The Twitter user it came from is claiming she took it at a Harps Grocery Store in Mountain Home, Arkansas. The blogger who made the above juxtaposition has included the phone number of the store. Perhaps a polite, respectful phone call is in order? Just to get all of this sorted out?

I mean, I’m not saying the store is treating queers like their love is pornographic, but every child knows what’s behind that sign. Dirty. Filthy. Not to be looked at, would make your mother and the baby Jesus cry if you read that, that trash. That love between two men. Gross. Get it away.

Because if they are doing that to young queer children, if they are putting that self-hatred on them that early in their lives, on top of growing up in Mountain Home, Arkansas, then we need to push back. This shit starts far too early in life for us to pretend we can make a nice video about being brave and every broken thing will be healed. That’s not how life works.

Net Neutrality, Keith Olbermann, and the Limits of Schadenfreude

On Friday, Keith Olbermann signed off of his show Countdown with Keith Olbermann for the last time. He told a story about hearing he had lost his job at ESPN through his ear piece while on camera, referenced the 1976 film Network, and then thanked his audience. Fairly classy. Certainly not a simple Ben Affleck impersonation.

And of course people want to know if I’m happy, that Olbermann’s time at MSNBC is over. Because they assume that when you protest a man’s actions and you call yourself a feminist, you want the remainder of that man’s life to play out like the Book of Job, with the boils and the weeping and the losing of high-profile jobs at left-leaning networks. They assume that I cannot separate him from his actions, that I hate him personally and wish him ill. I’m only speaking for myself, but I don’t hate Olbermann. Before #MooreandMe I sort of liked Olbermann. His condemnation of Bill O’Reilly following the assassination of Dr. Tiller really articulated my frustration with the way the fringe right is baited into committing violence to do the wet work for ideologically toxic Distraction Pundits, people whose job is to draw attention away from the looting of America by the corporations and the obnoxiously rich. I preferred Rachel Maddow to him, because I found her analysis to be more incisive and more intellectually rigorous than his, but he was occasionally entertaining.

(Continued)

WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU DOING? A Post of Answers

Well! Perhaps you have not heard of a certain event called Rock Out for Roe? It takes place tonight! In fabulous NYC! You will have the opportunity to win fabulous door prizes! Meet fabulous people, including the lovely Shelby Knox and Steph Herold, the equally lovely Jessica Valenti, bloggers from the Feministing and the Jezebel, and more! And also me. However, since I have no book to give you, my own opportunities to contribute to the fabulous door prizes are slim. If you bring your Tiger Beatdown shirt, I will personally write [BONERS] on it? I will, uhhh… personally tell a mean-spirited knock-knock joke about Keith Olbermann? I know you like those things!

However, this is more than a swank lady-party, my friends. Oh, so much more! For all proceeds will be going to benefit the New York Abortion Access Fund, which gives financial assistance to low-income folks in the NYC area, who can’t afford abortions. Details at the link above. But also, details at the right here!

Biddy Earlys

43 Murray St
New York, NY

Starts at 7:00! Bring your $10 or more at the door, so that ladies can have abortions when they need them! It’s very exciting!

And yes, it is the 38th anniversary of Roe v. Wade. Which is, if nothing else, a sign that constant and non-stop and fanatical and awful attempts to repeal it have failed thus far! And hopefully, they will in the future. But, if you would like to know why it matters, here is a gallery of lovely and smart people, who will explain. Oh, also, I am there! Again: Hi!

Hot Dude is Hot, Conflicted About It

“Trust me to end up working in the only industry in the world where women get paid more than men, and treated loads better,” he told the Sunday Times Style. “We’re trying to change that. In the hierarchy of a shoot, you have the photographer, the female model, the stylists, the assistants, then the male model. You are the lowest of the low.”

The person who wrote those words is obviously in a very dark place, emotionally. I mean Jesus people, he’s being treated worse that a woman. I don’t know. I think we might want to call off Feminism. His name is David Gandy, and he is paid a lot of money to be in front of cameras while they are taking pictures:

David Gandy has problems. Sultry problems.

I think we can all agree that that is a pretty great head start, for David Gandy. Not to mention that we are all sitting here, acknowledging the existence of the very famous and handsome David Gandy, as David Gandy complains that the ladies are just treated too well in fashion, which is demonstrably false. Women are treated like disposable dolls in fashion, they surrender their bodies to its tyrannical standards of beauty and get very little in return. So David Gandy is essentially saying that as an attractive white dude, he’s unhappy with the small amount of respect the fashion industry pays these women it will end up tossing aside once they’ve expired.

David Gandy, next time you’d like to tell us how hard it is being hot and famous