I'm reading, in the NYT, "Hillary Clinton’s Master Class in Distraction/Democrats need to be focused on the midterms." by Michelle Cottle. The headline makes no secret of the staunchly partisan reason for pushing back Hillary after giving her a pass all these years.
President Trump being a pig and an alleged sexual predator in no way excuses Bill Clinton from being a pig and an alleged sexual predator. In fact, by declining to re-examine her own husband’s acts, Mrs. Clinton only makes it easier for Mr. Trump’s defenders to ignore the current president’s. (Juanita Broaddrick’s accusation that she was raped by Mr. Clinton in 1978 can be revisited in a recent episode of the Slate podcast “Slow Burn.”)...You're referred over to Slate for the damning details, and it's significant that Slate is doing this now. But on a fundamental level, nothing new is happening. The top priority is Democratic Party power, and the sexual subordination of women matters when it serves that interest and gets brushed aside when it doesn't.
[I]t is no secret that Mr. Clinton’s response to sexual scandal was to try to trash the reputations of the women involved. And while the degree to which Mrs. Clinton joined in such efforts may remain in dispute — in the CBS interview, she denies having played any role — her fundamental complicity is beyond reasonable doubt.
But why does Democratic Party power matter? The argument I've been hearing is that it matters because of the interests of women! Does that make sense? The interests of women are highlighted or hidden depending on whether it helps the Democratic Party amass power, and we're supposed to care about that party's power because it's for the good of women. It's laughable.
One way to attempt to make sense of it is that there are 2 different big women's issues at play. There are other issues that can be framed as woman-oriented, and just about anything can be reprocessed as gender politics. But there are 2 main issues: sexual subordination (rape, sexual harassment, etc.) and abortion. For as long as I can remember — at least 40 years — the Democratic Party has starkly distinguished itself from the Republican Party by supporting abortion, and — because no party is for rape and sexual harassment — the Democratic Party has given priority to abortion.
That priority was shown most memorably in the ludicrous, horrible case of Nina Burleigh:
In a 1998 essay for Mirabella, Burleigh described an occasion aboard Air Force One when she noticed President Bill Clinton apparently looking at her legs.... Approached by a Washington Post media reporter to discuss the Mirabella article, Burleigh stated, “I would be happy to give him a blowjob just to thank him for keeping abortion legal. I think American women should be lining up with their Presidential kneepads on to show their gratitude for keeping the theocracy off our backs.”I distanced myself from the Democratic Party during the Clinton impeachment, because I saw that the sexual harassment issues that had been so important in the Clarence Thomas hearings were turned into nothing when the party's own man was threatened. It's not a serious issue if it's only used selectively. It would be better to do nothing with it at all than to wheel it out when it works for your side and stow it away again when it doesn't. But if abortion is important enough to you, you might, like Burleigh, think it's worth it to turn sexual harassment and rape into nothing when it works to maintain access to abortion.
But what a kick in the head when it doesn't even work to keep your access to abortion! What if the Democratic Party is losing the midterms because the embodiment of its selective concern about rape and sexual harassment decides to go swanning about on the public stage 3 weeks before Election Day? Time for the liberal media to finally take her to task.
AND: 3 afterthoughts:
1. Male privilege can explain the priority of abortion over sexual harassment and rape. We see these as women's issues, and we might imagine that freedom from sexual harassment and rape is the stronger interest, because many women oppose abortion and only a minority want abortion completely legal. But men have an interest in abortion. Many men urge women to have abortions and pay for women's abortions. The availability of abortion is part of the agenda of sexual freedom. Hugh Hefner was a big supporter of the abortion rights movement. And the expanding definition of rape and increasing vigilance about sexual harassment in the workplace threaten the sexual freedom of men. Ask Charlie Rose and Matt Lauer. Gender politics-propaganda is designed to get women to vote for the party, so it's going to obscure the interests of men. But those interests are there, and they have their effect even — and especially — when they are not talked about.
2. Blowjobs deserve better than Nina Burleigh's famous quote. Her unstated proposition is that blowjobs are indeed jobs — work that you do for some sort of pay or because you owe a debt. It's not a pleasure for you, but a sacrifice. Worse than that, she's expressing the idea that women want something other than sex and they give sex to get those extraneous things. She's saying: Sex is not intrinsically valuable for a woman — it's a form of currency. We can buy what we want with it. In that construct, what's the sense of "buying" abortion rights? If you don't think sex is good in itself, don't have sex, and you won't ever need an abortion... unless you are raped. Which brings us back to the question which is the more important interest: access to abortion or freedom from rape and sexual harassment?
3. When I say that now is the time for liberal media to take Hillary Clinton to task over rape and sexual harassment, you might hear resonance with #TimesUp. I didn't intend that, and I want to stress how wrong it would be to make that connection. "Time's Up" means that in the past it was possible for men to get away with rape and sexual harassment. It was done in private spaces, hidden away, lied about. Women who objected were ignored, paid off, suppressed. But that's all in the past. We don't do that anymore. That's what "Time's up" means. It's an idealistic assertion that embodies optimism. But when I say, now is the time for liberal media to take rape and sexual harassment seriously, I'm being sarcastic and cynical. I'm not saying the obscuring of the problem is a thing of the past and the future looks bright. I'm talking about party politics in the present, and I think the issue is forefronted in the run-up to the elections now because it seems useful. That's a transient and political motivation. Time isn't up. There's plenty of time in the future to do whatever people think works. I'm not a complete cynic: I'm saying these things harshly and openly because I think it can save people from getting taken in by political propaganda.
Posts
263 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 263 of 263tcrosse: good point, Hillary is the tip of the the dry rot and termite iceberg
Quaestor said...”It's clear to me that a zygote is not a person, but it is also clear to me that a normal near-term fetus probably is, and should be granted some degree of protection by the law. ... If the idea of third-party advocacy on behalf of chickens being processed for Campbell's Soup is acceptable to most progressives, their opposition to advocacy on behalf of the unborn is inconsistent at best and monstrous at worst.”
Quaestor wrote down my thoughts on abortion so I don’t have to.
Stand-up comic Lynne Koplitz says that men want three things from women: Food, Sex, and for them to STFU. The blow job satisfies the last two.
We acquired our personhood gradually between conception and birth.
It might be even later than birth that you learn to be human. But birth is a nice bright legal line, marking where society takes some concern for it. Or earlier, if you can show it's cute enougn.
"I think American women should be lining up with their Presidential kneepads on to show their gratitude for keeping the theocracy off our backs.”"
--
Those official Presidential kneepads could probably fetch a good price on Ebay.
"2. Blowjobs deserve better than Nina Burleigh's famous quote. Her unstated proposition is that blowjobs are indeed jobs — work that you do for some sort of pay or because you owe a debt. It's not a pleasure for you, but a sacrifice."
Right. Lets pretend a good portion of women not enjoying giving blowjobs isn't a thing. And that Men don't on occasion provide "service" to women in ways that are more work than enjoyment.
In 2014, a baby girl born in San Antonio, Texas became the youngest premature baby in the world. The daughter of Courtney Stensrud was born at 21 weeks 4 days and weighed 410 grams (less than a pound). Kaashif Ahmad resuscitated the baby after she was born. As of 2017, the girl was in preschool and on par with her peers.
This is puncturing holes in the abortion argument as well. Science is hard.
This won't stop Hillary. Bigger weapons than this will have to be brought to bear to prevent her from winning the nomination again. The New York Times and Slate can't recover their credibility this way- hypocrites always have excuses- it is one of the ways we identify them.
If marriage is nothing more than hiring a long-term prostitute
Prostitution, servitude (e.g. housewife), and beast of burden - "barefoot and pregnant"
To be fair, men and women should make a full commitment to each other, including sharing taxable labor and spoils.
Howard: "Quastar: I don't sabe your estrogen inspired word salad."
Add bacon bits.
This won't stop Hillary.
As long as the Big Money and the handful of people who control the Media are willing to bankroll her, nothing will stop her.
Listen, and understand! Hillary is out there! She can't be bargained with. She can't be reasoned with. She doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And she absolutely will not stop... ever, until you elect her!
Blowjobs deserve better than Nina Burleigh's famous quote. Her unstated proposition is that blowjobs are indeed jobs — work that you do for some sort of pay or because you owe a debt. It's not a pleasure for you, but a sacrifice. Worse than that, she's expressing the idea that women want something other than sex and they give sex to get those extraneous things. She's saying: Sex is not intrinsically valuable for a woman — it's a form of currency. We can buy what we want with it. In that construct, what's the sense of "buying" abortion rights? If you don't think sex is good in itself, don't have sex, and you won't ever need an abortion... unless you are raped.
I speak only for myself.
Underlying this is the idea it is the physical pleasure of sex that gets a man going. It's not: it's the acceptance by a woman of you, as a desirable mate that is the thrilling part of sex.
When a youngster puts notches on his belt, is he talking about "conquests?" I think he is talking about "Look what a lucky guy I am! All these women accepted me!"
Even when thinking of it as "conquest", it's that women let you. It affirms your male desirability that women let you, and so women define our masculinity.
What this means is that women have tremendous power over the male self-image.
As a great admirer of female beauty (I can't help that, women evolved me to appreciate them, what an amazing trick!), going to a strip club is degrading. Even, movies with beautiful women in them is a trick, as are all the Gal Godots showing off how beautiful they are to all the drooling men (Look at how beautiful I am, don't you wish you had me?)
That men are willing to pay for it shows how desperate men are for female acceptance. They are willing to lie to themselves that a woman wants them.
There is only one better trick. That is pretending that women willing to take money (no matter the currency) for sex are sacrificing. They are subjugating men to their will, telling the man "I'm not doing this because your a MAN, darling, only because of your money." How humiliating.
"beating around the Busch."
Ah, a beer joke. Good one. But methinks Brett was a Bud man.
Assuming the Republicans hold the House and get to 55-45 in the Senate, the RNC needs to send Diane Feinstein a floral bouquet and a nice fruit basket.
"Assuming the Republicans hold the House and get to 55-45 in the Senate, the RNC needs to send Diane Feinstein a floral bouquet and a nice fruit basket."
Good luck keeping Inga in a basket!
Own goals* by Diane Feinstein and Elizabeth Warren back to back. Hillary Clinton's unbelievably tone-deaf campaign. Heitkamp getting sued by women she outed as rape survivors. Is there any such thing as a Democrat woman with political sense?
_____________
* Soccer term for when you accidentally kick the ball into your own net. Equivalent to a football player running the wrong way and scoring a TD for the opponents.
"She can't be reasoned with. She doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And she absolutely will not stop... ever, until you elect her!"
-- I'm honestly surprised the anti-Clinton wing hasn't put up a bigger fight over this. It's a huge, glowing red, video game weak spot on her, and they're just letting it slide.
Howard wrote: think white and make your point, we don't have all day to experience your precious feelings
Word salad is what underachieving teens say about anything more demanding than a comic book.
The only feeling I have when you show up is pity.
Think period, and you might be worth my time.
"Let's not go overboard. HIllary has never been credibly accused of using under-age trafficked girls for sex."
Her husband though appears to have bee a frequent traveler on Brian Epstein's Lolita Express to his Pediphile Island. Still, it appears that Crooked Hillary went along several times, and if true, you have to ask yourself why?
"She can't be reasoned with. She doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And she absolutely will not stop... ever, until you elect her!"
LOL. The Terminator reference is timely. Another iconic line from that flick is Schwarzenegger's laconic "I'll be back" which he says before crashing his truck.
Paging Michael K or any other doctor in the house re: abortion.
I had this thought the other day that even if there was an affordable abortion clinic on every street corner open 24/7 - could you even staff them with enough physicians interested in doing abortions to meet demand? When we consider the academic work that goes into a medical degree, the plethora of specialties one could go into - is doing abortions really all that challenging? Why would a professional driven to fix *disease* and help people *live* - consent to a professional life doing the same simple procedure over and over when they could be on the cutting edge? If you are smart enough to further our treatment of cancer, neurological disease...why would you only use half of your potential doing something as simple as abortions?
...you have to ask yourself why?
Since DNA testing is popular with Dems let's see one done on [insert stupid name here] Chelsea.
I've always had doubts about the Billery pairing. He's an extreme horndog who'll fuck anything moister than a knothole, but she seems asexual bordering on full-on lesbian. (Huma?) Others have noted that Chelsea doesn't look like Bill's child. Is it possible Bill and Hillary have the quintessential Sixties-style open marriage — you fuck who you want, I'll fuck who I want. Neither will complain and each will defend the other, and together we'll get rich and powerful beyond the dreams of avarice?
>>Equivalent to a football player running the wrong way and scoring a TD for the opponents.
Not possible. You can only score a safety for your opponents. It would only be equivalent if an own goal in soccer scored 1/3rd to 2/7ths of a point.
My question: Does socialism lead to soccer, or does soccer lead to socialism?
I'd love to find an old Christopher Hitchens piece in which he predicted Clinton would beat Obama because the Clintons are just those awful people who never leave, and those people prevail in the end. He was wrong, but he was right.
You can score a touchdown for your opponent by laying the ball down in the wrong end zone and celebrating prematurely.
Yancey that's not correct. If you do that, your *opponent* still has to recover the ball. If they don't, they don't score.
The only way to score for your oppenent in football is a safety. You can help them score, but you can't score for them beyond a safety.
Which can only be 1 or 2 points.
It is exhausting repeating the same base truth. Abortion has no constitutional jurisdiction, other than, 'those things not an enumerated power of the federal govt, belong to the States'
When Roe gets shredded by SCOTUS rulings one constitutional restriction at a time, abortion will not be illegal. Abortion was never illegal, it was available in every state in the union, with requirements established by the citizens through their elected representatives.
That was my point, Dan- you move the ball to the end-zone and lay it down- the recovery was implied.
could you even staff them with enough physicians interested in doing abortions to meet demand?
Probably not but there are a few Gosnell types.
There are doctors who destroy their lives for no good reason, but that is characteristic of humans in general.
When I was a surgery resident in 1969, abortion was legal in California and they were done, with a psych consult first, on the GYN admitting ward at County Hospital. I did a few because I was there doing my GYN rotation and nobody wanted to do them.
Eventually the County found some docs that were willing to do them and let the residents off the hook.
There was a guy in my medical school class who flunked out and repeated the first year. He ended up running an abortion clinic in the Valley. I knew about it because, a few years later, he was convicted of murdering his girlfriend.
He was a really weird guy as a medical student.
Read "Blind Eye" sometime.
But, if you are going to go for the semantics of it, you don't score a safety for your opponents, either. They either tackle you, drive you out of bounds in the end zone, or force a penalty while you are in their end zone with the ball. On only the middle of those can one arguably "score" the way you are trying to use the verb.
>>the recovery was implied.
And who scores in that scenario? Not the team that puts the ball on the ground. The opponents score. So it's not an own goal.
Technical distinction, yes. But when team has a pick-six, we don't call that an own goal, right?
Now, let's move on to something even more ridiculous and arcane: What's a "catch"?
:)
So if abortion is legal at any point, would any reason for the abortion be allowed? For example, it's a girl, and girls' are a pain in the ass, so should be terminated? Is that allowed? Or the 'generally accepted fact' that there is a gay gene, and because they are going to be gay it is acceptable to terminate?
the youngest premature baby in the world. The daughter of Courtney Stensrud was born at 21 weeks 4 days and weighed 410 grams (less than a pound).
In 1967, I operated on a baby that weighed 1 pound 10 ounces. At the time she was the youngest premie to survive. We had no infant respirators and she just survived. We had a feeding tube in her stomach but nothing else but an incubator.
Her name was "Baby girl Dee" and I have often wondered how she turned out. When she was 4 pounds she could kicked herself down to the end of the incubator. She is 51 if she is alive.
Does socialism lead to soccer, or does soccer lead to socialism?
In the UK football (i.e. soccer) definitely is and always was more popular among Labour voters than cricket, Labour being at least quasi-socialist if not outright Marxist. Socialism is always accompanied by violence and intimidation at first, followed by genocide later on. Consequently, soccer hooliganism comes naturally with the sport. On the other hand, hooliganism and cricket are inconceivable bedfellows... except in Pakistan.
I think the testament of history must support the latter more than the former.
I'll put my chit down. Soccer definitely leads to socialism. That's a dead-certain fact.
One of the tenets of socialism is equality of outcome as opposed to equality of opportunity. Everybody here probably has a tale about awards day at your local kids' soccer program. Everybody gets a fucking trophy. That's nice say the soccer moms, no child should have his dreams of athletic glory crushed by receiving no recognition on awards day. The problem is it's a habit-forming vice. I remember watching the Women's World Cup finals back in '07 (I kinda like talking about dates like a grizzled Yukon Sourdough) which had an interminable awards ceremony afterward with EVERY FUCKING BODY getting trophies and mementos, including the woman in charge of travel arrangements. Good grief, it was like a Seinfeld episode in which George complains about not getting a World Series ring. Every woman on that 2007 World Cup team thinks socialism is cool. I guarantee it.
I said: "I'd love to find an old Christopher Hitchens piece in which he predicted Clinton would beat Obama because the Clintons are just those awful people who never leave,"
It was an interview with Hugh Hewitt:
HH: 20 seconds, who’s going to be the next president of the United States?
CH: Hillary Clinton.
HH: Oh…because of yesterday?
CH: No, no, I’ve feared it for a long time, and there’s something horrible and undefeatable about people who have no life except the worship of power.
HH: The Mummy is back.
CH: …people who don’t want the meeting to end, the people who just are unstoppable, who only have one focus, no humanity, no character, nothing but the worship of money and power. They win in the end.
HH: Mordor. Christopher Hitchens, a pleasure. Thank you for joining us from Vanity Fair.
"I'm saying these things harshly and openly because I think it can save people from getting taken in by political propaganda."
Yeah, well, good luck with that.
The most interesting thing about about Nina Burleigh and her kneepads is that in her 1998 Mirabella article cited in the post - look who showed up!
"I like to think I have rejected the old customs and mores. Masters of the Universe don't do it for me. The richer and more famous they are, the less appealing. Donald Trump? Ugh."
1998. He was already in their heads.
Thank you Michael K!
"Everybody gets a fucking trophy. "
Not any more. Our local soccer organization got rid of that practice. And guess what, the kids don't even care.
Oh, and the kids keep track of scores and how many goals they have and how many assists they have. They secretly know how the world works, especially when mom and dad don't encourage the victim mentality.
And since I've come to appreciate soccer (my son is 15 and plays religiously) as a much more physical sport than people give seem to understand. You A) run all the time unless you're out of the game or the keeper and B) beat the crap out of one another when contesting possession.
Quastar: I know you have a good point in there somewhere like cutting off abortion at 8- or 12-weeks, but your obscession with sounding literary and grammatical makes it unreadable. We know you are smart, you don't have to hide your feelings of stupidity behind that smokescreen of words.
There were more than one good point. It was worth the read, had you bothered.
Think of it this way: what if this whole issue is not a simplistic matter of pro or anti? I’m glad someone came along and logically dissected the issue and showed that it’s possible to be nuanced about it.
Of course, nuance might not be a strength to some people...
In that construct, what's the sense of "buying" abortion rights? If you don't think sex is good in itself, don't have sex, and you won't ever need an abortion... unless you are raped.
Abortion is the one power than women have over men, without question. Where men have absolutely zero say about it. For feminists, this is worth the fight. Other women have been emotionally manipulated into believing it’s that important.
Here’s the irony: in the grand scheme of things, this isn’t that important an issue.
Asked for comment, Queen Cacklepants said, "You know (hic) who's accusing Bill and me of bad stuff? (hic) F*cking Jew bastards, that's who!" (Hic)
I believe most acts of cunnilingus are done out of a sense of fair play and reciprocity, at least after the first minute or two. Some sex acts are dutiful rather than exuberant. Blowjob is a reasonable term.
After reading the first four sentences of afterthought No. 2, I can only conclude that Meade is a lucky man indeed.
Quaestor said...
...but that very much misses the point that these women DO value the power that it gives them over men.
More evidence of the fact that feminism, or let's say "post-modern feminism", is gnawing at the roots of civilization. If marriage is nothing more than hiring a long-term prostitute, as feminists like Nina Burleigh and Hugh Hefner strongly implied (Surprise! Hefner declared himself as such way back when.) then Hobbes is going to finally win out over Locke and republics will fall to autocracy.
This is actually getting to the point about what is happening to the democrat party right now.
It has been explicitly taken over by the prog left. Overwhelmingly white.
But also structurally feminized.
A ton of college educated white women who have jobs in education administration and corporate HR departments. They have "studies" degrees with no actual productive skills.
Warren is their leader and trailblazer.
They are going to destroy the democrat coalition.
The human gestation period of 40 weeks seems to have two semesters, not trimesters. The first in which the baby is forming. The second when it is formed and needs to grow. If the youngest baby survival is now at 21.5 weeks, abortions in the first semester should be okay and in the second semester considered infanticide. If both mother and child's lives are in danger, a second semester abortion should be legal.
Period. And most Americans would support that.
> Of course, nuance might not be a strength to some people...
Most "nuance" is a smoke screen to tell you things like why it is OK for Bill Clinton to grope a woman, even rape a woman, but why Black Clarence Thomas is fair game to be attacked by the "I believe you Anita" people with their disgusting Volvo bumper stickers.
It's nuance there were no "I believe you Juanita" bumper stickers. It's nuance that a woman can handle a little grope. The one grope rule is nuance. Conveniently, nuance shows up whenever hypocritical leftists want two sets of rules, one for the pigs, and one for everyone else.
Smug leftists with their smug, 2 bit words. There, is that "nuanced" enough for you?
And Hillary sucks.
I would much rather see her brought up on charges for what she did as SOS and a candidate. The amount, and seriousness of what she did to harm national security and to weaponize and personally monetize the deep state is worse than Benedict Arnold, and it's laughable to think she didn't know what she was doing and others were doing on her behalf. She is a criminal of the nighest order. Lock her up.
I guess "nighest" kinda works too.
Shall we leave Lewinsky out of this for the nonce? I mean, I simply don't believe HRC on Lewinsky. If the man in the case were not her husband, but rather a corporate CEO in oil or pharma or Wall Street, and the woman were still just a little older than his own daughter, and unpaid, can you imagine her taking this line? I can't.
I want to know what HRC has to say about the nonconsensual cases. Paula Jones. Kathleen Willey. Juanita Broaddrick. Especially Broaddrick, because she alleges completed rape, which is more than Kavanaugh was accused of (until Avenatti and his Incredible Gang-Rape Consortium, which I've seen essentially no one at all take seriously), and we are "in the business of believing women's stories," except when we aren't. Because they're all just "white trash." "Black trash," of course,does not exist.
But, hey, just "bimbo eruptions," right? Because if it accuses Your President, it's a bimbo, something retrieved by dragging a $100 bill through a trailer park. B/c, trailer parks bad, BAD. They have poor people in them. Poor white people, which is to say "trailer trash," because if you are white and live in a trailer, obviously you're trash.
How can HRC conceivably sign on to any of this? How can she write off Broaddrick? How can she not see that she is enabling her "better put some ice on that" rapist husband?
A human life evolves from conception. Self-defense is the only legal and moral standard to justify terminating a human life. That said, there are ethical standards to rationalize elective abortion for selective and opportunistic causes.
So, casting couches full of women, chambers full of unbabies, trails full of tears, monopolies of capital and control, courts full of warlocks and witches, concepts of Jew privilege, and diversity or color judgments. Yeah, bad optics.
Really interesting post, Ann.
I hadn't really thought about all the men who are pro abortion -- the way the issue has been presented typically pits men against women, the right win men being anti-abortion because they want to control women's lives and bodies, and the left wing women being pro abortion because they want to control their own lives and bodies. Why are the pro abortion men so quiet? Are they pro abortion because they want to continue with their irresponsible sexual activities or because they believe women should have the ultimate choice? As you say, it's probably the desire to continue behaving without responsibility sexually. Is there any correlation between amount of consensual sexual activity and political identity and abortion? I haven't seen any articles discussing these questions.
Men don't have much say about birthin babies, neither. That's how the pro-life radical matriarchal housewives control their men: saddle them with a gaggle of kids, don't work and expect the man to bring home the bacon and eat her word salad, buy a home, a commuter car and a mini-van with DVD and automatic doors, mow the lawn, get the car fixed, ... It's the oldest man-trap in the world.
How's that for nuance?
The stork is real, Stork is a fantasy, and spontaneous human conception is a myth that some women and men tell themselves to rationalize a Pro-Choice code of ethics.
the desire to continue behaving without responsibility sexually
This is what #MeToo is in principle, but apparently not in practice. Instead, it's about bedrooms without babies and its corollary shared responsibility. Pro-Choice is a code of ethics -- a quasi-moral philosophy -- adopted by both women and men.
saddle them with a gaggle of kids
I wanted six but ended up with only five, Took two wives, though.
Howard said...
Men don't have much say about birthin babies, neither...
Easy: don’t stick it in crazy. That was entirely your choice to make. Once she conceived, you have zero choice in the matter.
Cut and dry difference.
Once she conceived, you have zero choice in the matter.
Fair enough. However, she shouldn't either. Her right to chose happens exactly where mine does, the choice to have sex.
I'ze knows all 'bout birthin babies, Miz Scarlett.
Everybody gets a ... trophy.
When wife and I downsized and moved from high-tax Fairfax County, Virginia, to the beautiful Shenandoah Valley our son came to the old house and carefully packed the trophies he felt he had won into a box along with with souvenirs from the Penn Relays and other events he ran in to be stored here in our new home. The participation trophies he tossed in another box and took out to the trash.
If you don't think sex is good in itself, don't have sex, and you won't ever need an abortion... unless you are raped.
Raped women don't need abortions. They need emergency birth control.
Michael K said...
I wanted six but ended up with only five, Took two wives, though.
--
So what specified six in your mind?
Post a Comment