I don’t want to have kids. I don’t need or want to be defined by a biological process and a couple of organs that I don’t even need. Reproductive organs don’t define womanhood, and I am not my ladyregion, and conflating them doesn’t do anyone any good.
I’m not currently single, which is good, because if I were on the market, apparently I’d be expected to date Trump supporters for the good of humanity, and no.
Ivanka Trump, trotted out of late as proof that obviously Donald can’t possibly be a misogynist because some of his sperm has X chromosomes in it, has taken to video to tell us all about Donald’s policy proposals for working moms. (It’s the one he only developed because Ivanka herself pushed him to it, saying, “Daddy, daddy, we have to do this!” because nothing says “I respect women” like making your adult daughter sound like Veruca Salt at a campaign stop.) And because we can’t have woman- and family-friendly policies in place just because they’re the right thing to do in our current economy and societal structure, Ivanka had to come right out of the gate telling us that the most important job that any woman can have is mother.
She, her inherited real estate job, her clothing company, and her nanny speak directly from the heart.
So I, my freelance job, my sporadic blog writing, and my two largely self-sufficient dogs will do the same.
Hey, what goes on in a person’s bedroom is their own damn business, and the number of people wittingly or unwittingly invited into a couple’s relationship is also their own damn business. (My personal feeling is that honesty is the best policy, but you do you.) (Or other people, if that’s your thing. Like I said, not my business.) That said, if you’re going to actively fight against marriage equality on account of family values, and claim that it will result in the collapse of traditional marriage and the destruction of families, it helps to have your own marriage on the up and up. It definitely helps to not turn over your credit card information and personal profile to a site dedicated to helping people have affairs like some kind of extramarital OK Cupid. Especially when that site is vulnerable to hacking and massive data dumps.
[Content note: a topic that’s been discussed to hell and back and yet is being discussed back to hell again because this is my blog and I get to]
It’s happened again. Again. It’s always going to happen, and it’s always going to spur debate: A couple brought a kid to a restaurant, the kid was noisy, there was an exchange of some level of vehemence between the restaurant owner and the parents, and everyone has flipped out.
An Elle Decor essayist has come out with a horrible confession: She and her husband sacrificed a child to buy their dream home.
(How awesome would it be if that were the actual story? “Our realtor didn’t mention the fiery, bottomless hellpit in the basement into which we have to throw a small child at the peak of the new moon to keep our mortgage rate low. She said it was a walk-in wine closet.”)
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court passed down its ruling on the question of same-sex marriage: By a 5-4 decision, states are required to license same-sex marriages and to honor marriages of same-sex couples from other states. Their ruling in Obergfell v. Hodges calls on the Fourteenth Amendment’s preservation of fundamental liberties and equal protection for all citizens.
When it comes to kids and hugs, I fall strongly, strongly on the side of “only if they want to.” I’m a hugger under many circumstances, and the U.S. Deep South certainly encourages it. That said, I’m not an indiscriminate hugger, and even as an adult woman I resent being expected to submit to hugs when I don’t want to as a condition of friendliness, or because the hugger is old/”harmless”/etc.
Trigger warning: pregnancy-related health emergencies Hello all, I’m really, really sorry I dropped off the face of the earth. I didn’t mean to. At first it was just an unfortunate concatenation of events (somebody should organize an F/SF con called…
With Alabama’s recent, brief, chaotic attempt at marriage equality in mind, Republican Sen. Greg Albritton has proposed Senate Bill 377 to “bring order out of chaos,” he says. Under the proposed law, which passed the Senate Judiciary Committee in April, the probate’s office would no longer issue marriage licenses — in fact, couples wouldn’t need licenses at all to get married.
Digby at Hullabaloo notes that occasionally even David Brooks can be correct: privacy for normal citizens going around their everyday personal, family and community lives is essential for our very sanity, which is why the question of government agencies monitoring our every keystroke is such an important question of liberty. But as Brooks points out in his NYT op-ed and as Digby elucidates further, privacy for police officers on duty is a very different question.
This series of tweets from @twoscooters sums up the major division in autism activism – the parents of autistic children not listening to the opinions of adults living with autism based on their own life experiences, and too many media and medical organisations siding with those parents: