We picked up protest signs from some young women on our way to the Capitol in Sacramento. The signs said Stop the War on Women and were distributed by Rock the Slut Vote. Rock the Slut supports birth control, reproductive health and according to its website, all women who believe in raising independent daughters. It also likes talking back to the radio blowhard, the slut-caller whose name will go unmentioned.
You might not have seen any news about the Unite Against the War on Women rally held Saturday in Sacramento. The media didn’t cover it, and there was only spotty news on duplicate events held across the country. But we left a footprint.
Half the crowd in Sacramento was young, which is encouraging and important because it’s their bodies and futures the religious right wants to mess with. Young people have more to lose in this War on Women than their mothers and grandmothers. But, plenty of us were in Sacramento, too, and surprised to be still marching for women’s rights.
“Thirty years ago we never thought we’d still be having debates on the role of women in the workplace and birth control,” said Congresswoman Jackie Speier in a message to the gathering.
Folk singer Holly Near was there on the Capitol steps, singing her classic, “We are a gentle, angry people. And we are singing for our lives.”
My group came in two carpools. Driving to Sacramento, we worried about the turn-out. The national protest was organized quickly by two women in February. Karen Teegarden in Michigan and Desiree Jordan in New York, fed up with vaginal ultrasounds, person-hood amendments and take-backs in women’s health care, named their effort Unite Women and called for a countrywide protest. The thing finally caught fire on Facebook.
Roughly 400 gathered in Sacramento. We saw a young man with duct tape on his mouth and a sign that said, “Fact: Women do not need men to speak for them.” An older woman’s sign said, “We brought you in as mamas. We will take you out as voters.”
In Denver more than 200 women and men rallied behind a banner saying “My uterus, my business.” In Helena, Mt., Dr. Susan Wicklund, the rare doctor unafraid to say she does abortions, said women should be outraged over attacks to shame them for getting a common, legal medical procedure.
There were 1,500 in Austin, Tex. where would-be president Gov. Rick Perry wants to get rid of Planned Parenthood. Some 300 gathered in Richmond, Va., the home state of .. wanna be vice president Bob McDonnell, who tried to force a vaginal ultrasound on women getting abortions.
Back in Sacramento, Patty Bellasalma, California president of NOW, urged parents to teach their sons “not to accept the entitlement of white, male privilege.” Grandmother Marcia Reimers warned if the far right takes over in November it will install Supreme Court judges “who will be able to control women for decades.”
In New York City, actress Martha Plimpton marched with Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney who famously blasted the all-male House committee hearing on contraceptive coverage, demanding, “Where are the women?”
They were in Oklahoma City, talking back to person-hood legislation and in Raleigh, N.C. against cuts in child care and early childhood education. They came out in Madison, Wis. Louisville, Nashville and even Phoenix. Twenty five people rallied in Coeur d’alene, Idaho. And the list goes on.
The day before the rallies, House Speaker John Boehner said he’d help young people on student loans but he’d take it out of the health fund that provides breast and cervical cancer screening. And then he once again declared there is no such thing as a war on women.
Really? In Vermont, former governor Madeleine Kunin told women we better get involved in political decision-making. Because, “If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu.”
Retta: The ladies represented here are beautiful women who have been through hell and learned the lessons from living in that place. If they do "have it all together" it is only because of what they have been through and the hard work they have h
Wow, didn't realize this was a site for perfect people who have it all figured out and are so well adjusted. I said nothing about denigrating my body or mind. I mentioned nothing about not liking myself or being influenced by silly magazines. My thou
The phrase “war on women” was coined by Nancy Pelosi. It’s a politically motivated tool— a phrase designed by a political tool (she who said we had to pass the healthcare reform bill so we could read it and then understand it!–there’s a brain trust for America) for political tooling, While I stand completely for reproductive rights — and I also stand repelled and sickened by the scraping and sucking of babies from wombs,
If I declared abortion a “War on Choldren”…..would you find that offensive? Of course. It’s a much more complicated, multi factorial issue than a soundbite portrays.
Ditto the so called “war on women”. A much more complicated, multi factorial issue than a soundbite can portray.
(hit send too soon, groan)
Just like I wouldn’t have voted for a bill I had not yet read…..I refuse to let a pithy phrase meant to inflame emotion drive my vote.
The issues are too broad and too vast to be so simple minded.
What “War on Women”? You want contraception? GO BUY IT YOURSELF! No one is going to stop you or your daughter. As far as the slaughter of the innocents: Go to http://www.feministsforlife.org for facts about abortion.
The so-called War on Women….. is a completely manufactured fallacy created just in time for the coming elections. Political expediency by the democrats, and in-kind exploitation (it’s politics, what did you expect?) of the theatrics of the non-electable religious right lugnuts. like Rick Santorum, who never had a chance to win the nomination but whose ignorance gave rise to this folly. (Ii am equal opportunity offended by both political parties.)
Obama knows his numbers are down across the board in most all demographics, Including women. But less so women than men, He also knows that the number 1 issue on the minds of voters is the economy…polling says its #1 for women and men.
So here’s an idea……direct from election headquarters:
Let’s rile the women up. Let’s run with this “war on women ” idea. MAybe if we dazzle and scare them to death, they’ll forget about the economy, slow job growth, etc If we can capture a bit more of the women”s vote on the basis of this non-issue…….maybe thats the ticket to reelection. Well dazzle them with bullshit that doesn’t really exist except with a few idiots with mics…. Idiots who will never be on a presiential ballot as a nominated candidate of either party…..It’s a slight of hand trick, but hey– it’s politics.
And heres a campaign video idea. Taking care of Julia from cradle to grave….let’s pander to women some more!!! Tell them about all these government prgrams to help hem their entire lives!!!!Hopefully they won’t notice how demeaning it is to tell women they need the government to take care of them….we know you don’t need a man, but hey ….you have big brother the government! And maybe they wont notice we aren’t mentioning how to pay for this level of entitlement either…..don’t bring up MONEY they might actually remember the #1 issue in polling again.
Because after all,,,they were stupid enough to fall for the (non) war on women as a diversionary tactic to begin with!
Gggggrrrrrrrr. We are smarter than this abject silliness.
Ahhh, the golden Age of Aquarius…Amen DallasLady! Also, these women have this idea that contraception if a constitutional right! This a war on individual responsibility, NOT on the rights of women. All these entitlement programs are bogus and too expensive to maintain, we don’t need another one. The preamble of the US Constitution says “…PROMOTE the general welfare…” NOT PROVIDE for the general welfare. How smart and independent is it to expect others to pay for your irresponsible behavior. Oh, and while we’re at it, let’s call a slut a slut and not try to make it a virture.
OOPS! I meant to say “IS” not “…if a constitutional right”. While I’m back here, even the Roe v Wade decision was a bogus and manufactured decision based on lies (See DR. Bernard Nathanson, founder of NARAL and abortionist turned pro-lifer) and the personal situation of one of the justices. There is nothing in the Fourth Amendment that can be REMOTELY ascribed to the right to an abortion, abortifacients, OR contraception for that matter. That was the beginning of the bastardization of the Constitution and has led to this “War on Women” crap.
I disagree with both Dallas Lady and slpteacher.
No matter the often patronizing and insulting labels and words tossed out in postings using *simple minded* *crap, *abject stupidity* and *sluts* regarding issues that millions of women are very much affected by and intelligently interested in , there has been a decidedly nasty approach in politics towards eliminating existing women’s rights while invasively attempting to control very personal issues, that, if not addressed now and with considerable determination, will definitely damage and irreparably harm women Now and in their future.
A war. On women.
Guilded Lily, neither you, nor that frozen-faced dinosaur Nancy Pelosi, nor anyone else have provided any facts to support this paranoia called the “War on Women”. I’m a woman with TWO daughters. How come many women, including myself, don’t feel threatened or that there will be “damage and irreparable harm” to women? Could it be that they are intelligent enough to NOT believe any rhetoric that comes from either party and are truly independent and responsible women who make smart decisions instead of relying on the government to “save” them from themselves? I don’t understand why women who believe that taxpayers (that’s who “the government” really is)need to pay so they can engage in irresponsible behavior with natural consequences are “independent”. I repeat, there is no virtue in being promiscuous. If women took RESPONSIBILITY for their “choices” instead of trying to take easy ways out or making someone else pay, we wouldn’t be having this debate that has been going on for over 50 years now.
Just because Nancy Pelosi declared a “war on women” on the basis of a handful of rightwimg idiots doesn’t make it factual. Harold Camping claimed the world would end on May 21, 2011 on flimsy evidence too. Both statements are pure fiction.
Tell us GL….what rights as a woman have you personally lost in the last 40 years? Name one. You can’t. No woman in the USA can
Romney will win the republican party nomination without question. And if he were to be elected, your rights to murder your unborn child remain. As they have for 40 years, 70% of which were under republican administrations.
I just posted facts. Not hyperbole or fear mongering or political theatrics. And I put both Nancy Pelosi and Rick Santorum down as fear mongering idiots.
Let me make this clear for you.
I don’t need to give you any proof of anything that I believe. Nor do I have to resort to name calling to attempt to prove that what you believe is *paranoia*, isn’t, in my opinion. The number of daughters you have has nothing to do with the issue.
To the point: I disagree with what you say and think about intelligent and independent women and what I see as the war on those women. I disagree with your comments on promiscuity and rhetoric and government involvement in some choices but not others. I have nothing to do with what you are able to understand or not understand about other women. I don’t want to either. I have stated my view. Period. I don’t care if you can’t accept that.
I am voicing my opinion.
No, you don’t have to offer proof, but if you do post, then you are expected to “expect scrutiny” and hence you shouldn’t get angry when asked for it. Directly from VNs Community Guidelines:
“When you post about a controversial topic, expect that your point of view will be challenged and vigorously questioned. If you put your ideas out there, expect scrutiny. If being expected to defend your position makes you uncomfortable, please don’t post about that topic.”
I’m not angry or uncomfortable.
I am stating very clearly where I stand about an issue so there is absolute clarification of my beliefs, that were challenged.
Those who *scrutinize* are basically asking for clarity. I complied.
Your interpretation of the motivation/emotion of my words is just that.
I’ll continue to share
For the record,,., I’ll continoue to challenge and vigorously question on what basis you form that opinion too.
. And I’m still unclear on that.
First of all – love your post, Susan, way to help our sisters. And, thanks for your opinion, Lily. I agree.
Whether you have any daughters or 5 daughters is not the issue here. Any woman who can afford a computer and posts their opinion on this site can most likely afford birth control for themselves or their daughters. And probably has the tools and intelligence needed to teach their daughters well.
Unfortunately, we have approximately have 46 million people living in poverty in the U.S. and the people who don’t want to pay for feeding and clothing them are the very same people who want to deprive them of health care for birth control and the right for an abortion. This I will never understand.
Dallas Lady, I have to question your statement: “Tell us GL….what rights as a woman have you personally lost in the last 40 years? Name one. You can’t. No woman in the USA can.”
Can you prove that not one woman in the U.S. has personally lost any rights just because she’s a woman? I’m guessing you don’t know any poor, uninsured, unemployed women. Or anybody whose made a mistake or been raped.
Yes, the political system is f***ed up. It is all about power. But, that’s why, I, for one will exercise my right to vote and speak up for every woman’s rights not just those that affect me personally. That’s not fear. That’s reality.
Vonnie,
I certainly concur with your statements about the contradictory nature of those people wanting to block or change a woman’s right to reproductive choice/health, but will also support the cutting or refusal of helpful programs and funding for those already born and in need.
In regard to right’s being denied, I don’t respond to the question about specific woman’s rights that have been taken away because my stance here has always pointed towards this:”there has been a decidedly nasty approach in politics towards eliminating existing women’s rights while invasively attempting to control very personal issues”.
The denied question is moot to me because the insidious nature of intending or attempting to cut away at these rights is as hideous as any actual law that may eventually succeed. Proactively, it is essential to fight hard against anything that attempts to reduce those rights. And those attempts include, but are not limited to unnecessary medical procedures including trans vaginal ultrasounds, forced ultrasounds, controling medical conversations between women and their Drs. and created road blocks to a very legal law to have an abortion.
In regard to my stance here are links that pinpoint just some of the attempts and sadly, successes http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/updates/2011/statetrends12011.html http://www.guttmacher.org/statecenter/spibs/spib_RFU.pdf
Other attacks on Planned Parenthood target not only already legally banned federal funds towards abortions but denying funding for cancer detection, ovarian cancer testing, reproductive problems and very basic health care for poorer women. The attacks like those in Texas and currently Arizona’s new bill, must be challenged always.
First of all, I too bemoan the introduction of many new laws (we have too many already) or much revisionist legislation. Its wasteful and non productive. I’ve said that repeatedly. But I also know that it wont go anywhere. It simply wont. The best predictor of future performance is past performance, they say. Abortion laws have remained in effect unchanged for 40 years. So really, the rally cry of a “War on Women” just doesn’t move me at all. Its theatre, nothing more. Nothing will come of it. What a waste of words and what a waste of time. Nothing will come of it……
Except poor dumb legislation introduced tongue in cheek in retliation. Do 2 wrongs make a right? Or is it just exposing that idiots exist on both sides? It’s a trend I’m disgusted to see: countering stupid, prejudiced, and ill-advised legislation with equally idiotic legislation…. the ultimate in educational sarcasm! Both sides should hide their faces in shame.
I remain pro choice. It’s a choice I could never, ever make, but I wont tell you that you can’t. But I’ll fervently tell you that you shouldn’t.
And what an ugly, ugly and unnecessary choice abortion is. And you know what? I’m not against ultrasounds prior to abortion. Because abortion is murdering children. You cant ignore that, hide from that, or put your hands over your eyes and ears and go “blah blah blah” and wish it away.
I’ll say it again: Abortion is murdering children.
Now about those ultrasounds. First, they are considered by many to be the “best practice” in medicine. Those who content so say its important to verify how far along a woman is prior to abortion to deliver the right mix of drugs to avoid harming the mother. That position (ultrasounds being the gold standard) is arguable and there are opinions that differ on this one. I’m not a clinician and I wont comment beyond that….except to say this: Many Planned Parenthood organizations require ultrasounds as part of the abortion process.
I belive it is now 8 states that legally require them. Not all 8 require the pregnant woman to hear the heartbeat…some do, some make it optional. But here’s the deal: A baby’s heart beat begins at 18 days after the mother’s egg is fertilized by the father’s sperm to make that baby……..a mere 4 days after a missed period. By the time most women realize they are pregnant, that baby has a beating heart.
And so if actually hearing the heart beat or seeing the baby via ultrasound –transvaginal or not– changes 1 woman’s mind about the abortion….and has her considering adoption as an alternative….then candidly, I think its worth it.
So sue me. I’d like to save a life, and I’d like to make some childless couple ecstatic.
Oh, carrying an unwanted child is oh so inconvenient for 9 months? Fine. Have the abortion. But its too painful and traumatic for that aborting mother to have to actually see or know that’s a baby with a heart beating before she chooses to abort it?
Imagine how painful or traumatic to be sucked and scraped from your mothers womb, or to be surrounded by poison that kills you.
Sounds like a War on Children to me. Not a War on Women. But your rights to do just that have been firmly in tact for 40 years and remain in place. You just might have to face the reality that you killed a baby with a beating heart before you do so.
Sorry if it makes you uncomfortable. That’s MY clarity on this situation.
Your comment to me about poverty is immaterial to legal rights–the question I asked about. (yet another “look over here “!diversionary tactic). Women and men have the same legal rights whether they are rich or poor. The poor may not have the same resources. Rights and resources are not the same thing My question remains unanswered
Attached in an article written by a friend in the Texas Observer. It’s an interesting read.
‘We Have No Choice’: One Woman’s Ordeal with Texas’ New Sonogram Law
Before I leave this conversation permanently, I want to say, I’m not uncomfortable with the views of DL or Slp. You’re entitled to your opinion just as I’m entitled to mine. However, I am uncomfortable with the harshness and tone.
I walk away from people who refer to refer to me as ‘ilk’. We live in two different worlds and I like mine better.
How heartbreaking to find out at 6 months into a wanted pregnancy the child isn’t viable . It’s a horrific situation. The need for a ultraound in this type of circumstance as described is indeed questionable. However this circumstance is a statistical rarity, the odds of this are infinitely small, and most important to this conversation–This abortion is not the type of situation we are talking about here, This diverts the conversation from voluntary to imvioluntary termination of pregnancy, This is in eseence a theraputic abortion, not a voluntary termination of a pregnancy, This story is heartbreaking but not really that germaine to the issue, It id an outlier circumstance . And Had I been her doctor I wouldn’t have enforced the aspect that required listening to the heartbeat or visual observation in this circumstance.
But the reality is that 55 million babies have been murdered in the USA voluntarily by their parents since 1974 simply because they weren’t wanted. An ultrasound , a full knowledge of what that baby ‘s functions are, and 24 hours to think aout it after that occurs before aborting a baby isn’t too much to ask.
Babies in utero have heartbeats, functioning lungs. Etc. The truth doesn’t change according to our ability to stomach it.
Thank-you for that link Vonnie. It could have been written about a relative of mine, ironically in Texas as well. This would have been her third child.
Utterly souless legislation and at the absolute core of this issue.
I prefer being in your world, too, by the way. Hope to communicate on other threads. I enjoy your voice.
This one is no longer palatable for me, as well.
Dear DL, I appreciate your well-thought out comments regarding the topic of this thread.
Dear GL, Based on the comment from SS that started this thread, the fact that I have two daughters is relevant, so is my use of the word “slut”. Secondly, I didn’t ask you to be responsible for my “understanding” of women I disagree with. I was, however, anticipating a more intellectual response instead of something like “I believe it and that’s that”! If ignorance is bliss, you must be in heaven.
Dear V, in research you can’t prove a negative and that’s what you’re suggesting that DL do. Additionally, you went right to the same tired and unsubstantiated arguments about the poor, raped, etc, as well as assumptions about DL and me that your ilk always trot out in these debates. As DL said, diversionary tactics. They’re not facts, they’re not debate, they’re just…noise. Reproductive rights as defined since 1973, have not made the lot of poor women better, abused women, or women who have been raped, better (See http://www.feministsforlife.org), why would an supposed expansion? So, throw that straw man (no pun intended) out the window. And you don’t know anything about DL and me, so throw those assumptions out too. That leaves you with…[crickets]. These politicians don’t give one iota about women, what they are about is control and they can get it by granting “rights”. You want freedom or security? You can’t have both. If it’s yes to the latter, then you deserve neither (to paraphrase Benjamin Franklin).
You want to be one of the lemmings? That’s your “right” too. Go ahead and jump over the cliff with the others. I am not trying to convince you otherwise because I know I can’t, even with facts. You would disregard them anyway. I have presented my opinions based on facts, not “because I said so”. Like DL, I’m still waiting for answer as to what this “War on Women” and these opinions for it are based upon. I do not intend to continue to participate in this thread due to the unsupported/uninformed opinions, half-truths, lies, and innuendos propagated so far by those in the WoW camp. I would however, like to leave people who “believe” in this mythical war with some quotes from a VERY FAMOUS POLITICIAN of the 20th Century:
“Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it” and
“All propaganda has to be popular and has to accommodate itself to the comprehension of the least intelligent of those whom it seeks to reach.” Adolph Hitler, the most heinous leader in the modern world.
Ciao.
Thank you, Fox news.
Dear V,
Thank you for proving my points.
DL and Slpteacher-I stand with you. I have yet to see substantiated facts that there is any agenda on the part of anyone of substance that is directed toward reduction of women’s rights. There is a lot of rhetoric. Rhetoric is the capital of politicians and their strategists when trying to appeal to the emotions of any voting demographic. I am a cynic. I refuse to be manipulated by rumor and innuendo. As a matter of fact, I am rather insulted that it is assumed that I can be manipulated in such a manner. Politics is a dirty business .
Isn’t it wonderful that we are entitled to our opinions and have the right to express them?
Dear V, If you perceived a “harshness” and “tone(?)”, there’s nothing I can do about that. I can’t say that I’ve perceived any warm fuzzies in your posts either. Perception is what it is on the internet, especially where debate and passion for your own opinion is concerned.
BTW: Instead of ignoring your reference, I DID read the gut-wrenching article you referenced and, yes, my heart ached for that woman. I’m really sorry that she was unwilling to complete the pregnancy. However, it is one woman’s story and I know some would say that she represents [put imaginary number here] women. I counter that with all of the women (and their husbands) who choose to bring their children to term despite “gross” abnormalities They cradle that child lovingly as he/she takes his/her only breaths in this world. Do you think that’s easy? But, they get genuine closure to the pregnancy and the life. Additionally, there are those couples who accept their developmentally delayed/disabled child “as is” despite what the resulting hardships may be. These are people I come into contact with in my profession. I see them as more courageous and virtuous than someone who opts to “interrupt”. (It used to be “terminate”. Can we sanitize it some more?) DL prefers the word “murder”. I prefer the word “kill”. The fetus. While that is an appropriate medical term, contrary to popular belief “fetus” does not mean “non-human”, “clump of cells”, or “parasite” as it has come to be defined. The word “fetus” is Latin for “offspring”, but I digress. The article was implying that informed consent is a roadblock to an abortion. Since it a required step prior to any surgical procedure no matter how big or small, and abortion is considered to be just another medical procedure by many, I fail to see why abortion should be exempt. As far as a wait period, even when I was diagnosed with breast cancer, my doctor encouraged me to take a day or two to consider the all of options based on the best information he could provide. (You can argue it wasn’t by law, and you would be right, but that’s really not relevant. It’s still a standard best practice in medicine.) I hardly see that as a “roadblock” to “choice”, perhaps an inconvenience to a hasty and potentially regrettable decision (www.feministsforlife.org) , but certainly not stopping a “woman’s right to choose”.
I still suggest you look at what the late Dr. Bernard Nathanson, co-founder of NARAL and abortionist turned pro-lifer, said about why he had a turnaround regarding this hideous procedure. I join him in the ranks of pro-life supporters (The “ilk” your “ilk” negatively calls “anti-choice”) and abortion abolitionists.
As for your closing remarks, would you have felt differently if I had used the words “kind”, “class”, “group” or “persuasion”? Because that’s what the word “ilk” means. So, go ahead, take your ball and go home and continue to live happily ever after in your “world”. (YIKES! Now THAT was harsh!) Until we collide again, best and good night.
Well stated Hawk Lady.