FEMINISM - We received the following list from Leslie J. Sacks in an email. The ideas are certainly worth a read. Editor's Note: I've edited some of the wording of the commandments to make them more palatable.
"In these uncertain and consequential times, I humbly suggest that we put aside our penchant for iPods and immediate gratification and consider my 10 new commandments [below]." - Leslie J. Sacks, L.A. California.
1) Men should learn to think more with their brains and not their genitals.
2) Women should focus more on their intellects and temper their hearts.
3) Never use violence and intolerance except to defend liberty.
4) Morality exists only in behavior and actions. Preaching morality doesn't make it so.
5) Women are ALWAYS equal.
6) Freedom and democracy are both rights and irrevocable responsibilities that must be protected.
7) Each individual has the inalienable right to their political and religious beliefs.
8) No institution or belief should take precedence over any one person.
9) No path to happiness is exclusive or worthy of domination over any other.
10) People who seek to dominate, control, subvert or destroy the freedom of other people do not deserve the respect of the free world.
The Truth about Women and Gun Control
POLITICS - Gun control is actually a gender issue. Why? Because when you compare the percentage of men who support gun control and the percentage of women who support gun control you see some startling differences.
Support Gun Control
U.S. Men: 51%
U.S. Women: 64%
Against Gun Control
U.S. Men: 46%
U.S. Women: 30%
Undecided
U.S. Men: 3%
U.S. Women: 6%
(Source: Pew Research Center / 2008)
Education is also another big factor in who supports gun control (people with a college or university education are over 25% more likely to support gun control), as is race. 75% of African-Americans support gun control, but only 54% of Caucasian-Americans support gun control.
In Canada and the U.K. we have stricter gun control and it shows in our much lower crime rates.
For the purpose of this blog post however we're going to look at the example of Mavis Moore who was 4-years-old when she first had a gun pointed at her. She and her mother were picking up a newspaper in their small Saskatchewan town of Crown Butte when a neighbour decided to point his .22 at them and threatened to kill them both.
Mavis Moore was so frightened she remembers dropping her blue mitten in the snow.
“You can't imagine what it's like, this adult man having a gun on you and threatening to kill you and your mother,” says Mavis who is now 72-years-old. Her mother picked up her daugher and the mitten and left immediately.
She also recalls how decades later, while out hunting (Mavis is now an avid hunter) how a fellow hunter suddenly aimed his cocked rifle at her in the northern Saskatchewan bush. He claims he had mistook her 5-foot-4 frame, draped in red, for a moose.
Guns are a constant threat in the lives of rural Canadian women. Many rural Canadian families have guns in their homes (from my perspective, my family had 2 that I knew of).
Mavis Moore, who grew up in Crown Butte, Saskatchewan, says she is incensed at Prime Minister Stephen Harper's attempts to scrap the Long Gun Registry in Canada. Mavis is an avid hunter even at the age of 72, but she strongly supports the Long Gun Registry.
“That makes me so mad,” says Mavis, who still owns three licensed and registered long guns. “It's not a matter of rural versus urban. It's a public safety issue. How many women and children in rural Canada are threatened in their own homes with a gun? More than we want to know, I think.”
According to a Harris/Decima research poll released on Sept. 8th the difference between urban and rural men who support gun controlis very little.
48% of Canadian men say its a bad idea to abolish the Long Gun Registry.
42% of Canadian men support abolishing it.
10% of Canadian men are not sure.
There is only a 2% difference between whether the people polled who live in the city or the countryside in terms of support. [It should be noted only 18% of Canadians live in rural society.] So gun control support has very little to do with where you live.
49% of Canadian men who live in cities support the Long Gun Registry.
47% of Canadian men who live in rural society support the Long Gun Registry.
41% of Canadian men who live in cities support abolishment.
43% of Canadian men who live in rural society support abolishment.
In contrast
49% of Canadian women who live in cities support the Long Gun Registry.
47% of Canadian women who live in rural society support the Long Gun Registry.
30% of Canadian women who live in cities support abolishment.
40% of Canadian women who live in rural society support abolishment.
Overall 48% of Canadians support keeping the Long Gun Registry, while 38% support its abolition.
(Harris/Decima interviewed just over 1000 Canadians. A sample of this size has a margin of error of 3.1%, 19 times out of 20.)
Meanwhile 81% of Canadian police officers support the Long Gun Registry and say they use it help protect the public. Officers consult the registry before responding to domestic violence 911 calls to see if there are guns on site, and also for murder and criminal investigations.
Over 1,500 Canadians were refused gun licenses between 2006 and 2009 because background checks determined they were a criminal risk.
6,093 gun licenses were also revoked during the same period due to continuous screening, court orders and public safety complaints.
Police and criminal psychologists all agree these revoked gun licenses and refusals to grant gun licenses have saved lives, but unfortunately it's hard to document prevention. We have no way of knowing how many lives the Long Gun Registry and similar gun control measures have saved.
What is documented is that 69% of homicides, suicides and accidental deaths in Canada involved long guns in 2004, a drop from 72% of firearm deaths in 2001. More drops are expected in the future as more statistical data becomes available.
And what is also known is that rural and farm women are more likely to encounter domestic violence involving long guns.
“Rural and farm women who experience violence in the home describe a cycle of intimidation with guns . . . which makes it really difficult for women even to report what's going on, “ says Jo-Ann Brooke, director of the Women's Sexual Assault Centre of Renfrew County in Pembroke, Ontario.
Domestic abuse victims say they support the Long Gun Registry because it takes the responsibility for reporting the presence of guns out of their hands, and alerts police to the guns if they are called to a domestic violence incident.
The $4-million annual price tag for running the Canadian Long Gun Registry is worth it.
See Also
Gun Control in Canada
Handguns in Canada
RCMP Report vindicates Long Gun Registry
Canada needs to keep Long Gun Registry
Stephen Harper's Gun Raffle
Jordan Manners and the C.W. Jefferys Massacre
Killer Goth on the Rampage in Montreal
German gunman kills 11 women, 4 men
Support Gun Control
U.S. Men: 51%
U.S. Women: 64%
Against Gun Control
U.S. Men: 46%
U.S. Women: 30%
Undecided
U.S. Men: 3%
U.S. Women: 6%
(Source: Pew Research Center / 2008)
Education is also another big factor in who supports gun control (people with a college or university education are over 25% more likely to support gun control), as is race. 75% of African-Americans support gun control, but only 54% of Caucasian-Americans support gun control.
In Canada and the U.K. we have stricter gun control and it shows in our much lower crime rates.
For the purpose of this blog post however we're going to look at the example of Mavis Moore who was 4-years-old when she first had a gun pointed at her. She and her mother were picking up a newspaper in their small Saskatchewan town of Crown Butte when a neighbour decided to point his .22 at them and threatened to kill them both.
Mavis Moore was so frightened she remembers dropping her blue mitten in the snow.
“You can't imagine what it's like, this adult man having a gun on you and threatening to kill you and your mother,” says Mavis who is now 72-years-old. Her mother picked up her daugher and the mitten and left immediately.She also recalls how decades later, while out hunting (Mavis is now an avid hunter) how a fellow hunter suddenly aimed his cocked rifle at her in the northern Saskatchewan bush. He claims he had mistook her 5-foot-4 frame, draped in red, for a moose.
Guns are a constant threat in the lives of rural Canadian women. Many rural Canadian families have guns in their homes (from my perspective, my family had 2 that I knew of).
Mavis Moore, who grew up in Crown Butte, Saskatchewan, says she is incensed at Prime Minister Stephen Harper's attempts to scrap the Long Gun Registry in Canada. Mavis is an avid hunter even at the age of 72, but she strongly supports the Long Gun Registry.
“That makes me so mad,” says Mavis, who still owns three licensed and registered long guns. “It's not a matter of rural versus urban. It's a public safety issue. How many women and children in rural Canada are threatened in their own homes with a gun? More than we want to know, I think.”
According to a Harris/Decima research poll released on Sept. 8th the difference between urban and rural men who support gun controlis very little.
48% of Canadian men say its a bad idea to abolish the Long Gun Registry.
42% of Canadian men support abolishing it.
10% of Canadian men are not sure.
There is only a 2% difference between whether the people polled who live in the city or the countryside in terms of support. [It should be noted only 18% of Canadians live in rural society.] So gun control support has very little to do with where you live.
49% of Canadian men who live in cities support the Long Gun Registry.
47% of Canadian men who live in rural society support the Long Gun Registry.
41% of Canadian men who live in cities support abolishment.
43% of Canadian men who live in rural society support abolishment.
In contrast
49% of Canadian women who live in cities support the Long Gun Registry.
47% of Canadian women who live in rural society support the Long Gun Registry.
30% of Canadian women who live in cities support abolishment.
40% of Canadian women who live in rural society support abolishment.
Overall 48% of Canadians support keeping the Long Gun Registry, while 38% support its abolition.
(Harris/Decima interviewed just over 1000 Canadians. A sample of this size has a margin of error of 3.1%, 19 times out of 20.)
Meanwhile 81% of Canadian police officers support the Long Gun Registry and say they use it help protect the public. Officers consult the registry before responding to domestic violence 911 calls to see if there are guns on site, and also for murder and criminal investigations.Over 1,500 Canadians were refused gun licenses between 2006 and 2009 because background checks determined they were a criminal risk.
6,093 gun licenses were also revoked during the same period due to continuous screening, court orders and public safety complaints.
Police and criminal psychologists all agree these revoked gun licenses and refusals to grant gun licenses have saved lives, but unfortunately it's hard to document prevention. We have no way of knowing how many lives the Long Gun Registry and similar gun control measures have saved.
What is documented is that 69% of homicides, suicides and accidental deaths in Canada involved long guns in 2004, a drop from 72% of firearm deaths in 2001. More drops are expected in the future as more statistical data becomes available.
And what is also known is that rural and farm women are more likely to encounter domestic violence involving long guns.
“Rural and farm women who experience violence in the home describe a cycle of intimidation with guns . . . which makes it really difficult for women even to report what's going on, “ says Jo-Ann Brooke, director of the Women's Sexual Assault Centre of Renfrew County in Pembroke, Ontario.
Domestic abuse victims say they support the Long Gun Registry because it takes the responsibility for reporting the presence of guns out of their hands, and alerts police to the guns if they are called to a domestic violence incident.
The $4-million annual price tag for running the Canadian Long Gun Registry is worth it.
See Also
Gun Control in Canada
Handguns in Canada
RCMP Report vindicates Long Gun Registry
Canada needs to keep Long Gun Registry
Stephen Harper's Gun Raffle
Jordan Manners and the C.W. Jefferys Massacre
Killer Goth on the Rampage in Montreal
German gunman kills 11 women, 4 men
The Truth about Eileen Nearne, aka Agent Rose
POLITICS - Eileen Nearne died alone on Sept 2nd at the age of 89. Nobody in her neighbourhood knew that she had been an WWII secret agent in France, spying on the gestapo and the German military during the German occupation. It was only after documents and photographs were found in her apartment, and her story was determined to be already listed in several historical books about WWII spies, that the truth about Eileen Nearne came out.
What had seemed an old woman destined for a pauper's grave is now being hailed as a British national hero. With no known relatives authorities searched her apartment looking for evidence of family... Amongst the things she left behind they found a treasure trove of medals and documents which referred to her as "Agent Rose", a wireless operator during Germany-occupied France and a member of the secretive Special Operations Executive (SOE).
At the age of 23 the brave young Nearne had flown into France under the cover of darkness in March 1944 to work as an undercover agent helping coordinate resistance fighters and spies.
She was arrested by the Gestapo in July but thanks to her fluent French was able to hide her British identity. Her family had lived in France during her childhood. She was arrested again weeks later and imprisoned at Ravensbrueck concentration, then transferred to a forced labour camp in Silesia. She and two French girls escaped the camp in April 1945 but were caught days later.
She was later released when Nearne convinced their captors of their innocence, claiming they had only joined the French Resistance because it was exciting.
After WWII ended, Nearne was awarded with a membership in the Order of the British Empire in recognition of her services. She lived most of her life with her sister Jacqueline, who had also served in the SOE.
The Royal British Legion has taken over the funeral preparations, scheduled next week. (Personal Note: I am planning to attend the funeral myself, if the general public is allowed in.)
On Tuesday a relative of Nearne was found living abroad, a niece who says she visited her aunt regularly and “she was always cherished by the family.” She added her aunt wanted her ashes to be scattered at sea.
Eileen Nearne’s story is well remembered by historians, including M.R.D. Foot in his popular book about the SOE in France (SOE, The Special Operations Executive 1940-1946, published in 1984) who writes:
"Eileen Nearne of WIZARD, who had transmitted a good deal of economic and military intelligence besides helping in the routine work of arranging drops for SPIRITUALIST, was caught at her set in July. She brought off a dextrous bluff, and persuaded the Gestapo she was only a foolish little shopgirl who had taken up resistance work because it was exciting; they never discovered she was half English. But they took her away to Germany all the same."
Later in the book, Foot recounts Eileen Nearne’s amazing escape from a Ravensbrück working party in April 1945. There are at least five other references to Nearne in the book. Foot’s book is not obscure either. Its quite popular. Eileen Nearne also apparently appears in Marcus Binney’s popular book "The Women Who Lived for Danger".
So Eileen Nearne's, aka Agent Rose's, story will be remembered by many.
What had seemed an old woman destined for a pauper's grave is now being hailed as a British national hero. With no known relatives authorities searched her apartment looking for evidence of family... Amongst the things she left behind they found a treasure trove of medals and documents which referred to her as "Agent Rose", a wireless operator during Germany-occupied France and a member of the secretive Special Operations Executive (SOE).At the age of 23 the brave young Nearne had flown into France under the cover of darkness in March 1944 to work as an undercover agent helping coordinate resistance fighters and spies.
She was arrested by the Gestapo in July but thanks to her fluent French was able to hide her British identity. Her family had lived in France during her childhood. She was arrested again weeks later and imprisoned at Ravensbrueck concentration, then transferred to a forced labour camp in Silesia. She and two French girls escaped the camp in April 1945 but were caught days later.
She was later released when Nearne convinced their captors of their innocence, claiming they had only joined the French Resistance because it was exciting.
After WWII ended, Nearne was awarded with a membership in the Order of the British Empire in recognition of her services. She lived most of her life with her sister Jacqueline, who had also served in the SOE.
The Royal British Legion has taken over the funeral preparations, scheduled next week. (Personal Note: I am planning to attend the funeral myself, if the general public is allowed in.)On Tuesday a relative of Nearne was found living abroad, a niece who says she visited her aunt regularly and “she was always cherished by the family.” She added her aunt wanted her ashes to be scattered at sea.
Eileen Nearne’s story is well remembered by historians, including M.R.D. Foot in his popular book about the SOE in France (SOE, The Special Operations Executive 1940-1946, published in 1984) who writes:
"Eileen Nearne of WIZARD, who had transmitted a good deal of economic and military intelligence besides helping in the routine work of arranging drops for SPIRITUALIST, was caught at her set in July. She brought off a dextrous bluff, and persuaded the Gestapo she was only a foolish little shopgirl who had taken up resistance work because it was exciting; they never discovered she was half English. But they took her away to Germany all the same."
Later in the book, Foot recounts Eileen Nearne’s amazing escape from a Ravensbrück working party in April 1945. There are at least five other references to Nearne in the book. Foot’s book is not obscure either. Its quite popular. Eileen Nearne also apparently appears in Marcus Binney’s popular book "The Women Who Lived for Danger".
So Eileen Nearne's, aka Agent Rose's, story will be remembered by many.
The Truth about Feminism in Britain
By Suzanne MacNevin - September 2010.
FEMINISM - I've been living in Britain for awhile now (on and off thanks to the fact I have dual citizenship) but one of the things I've noticed is that so-called British feminism suffers from a duality of problems.
#1. British feminism has a lot of history and there are a fair number of feminists here who support that history and stand on the shoulders of feminists who have come before them... the problem however lies in that they seem to have lost their spirit and have become more... academic. Its feminist historians arguing back and forth, very little activism.
#2. Girl Power is strong here (Spice Girls anyone?), but its done in a very post-feminist way... ie. they're selling their sex appeal at the same time. Sexy Feminists and Girl Power kind of leaves a bitter taste in your mouth after awhile. (Pun intended.)
I met earlier this week a few feminists from Oxford and I was astonished by how cynical and... for lack of a better word... complacent they were. They didn't think they would see major change in their life times. As one girl put it "its two steps forward and two steps backwards. We're not getting anywhere."
The feeling is that their message isn't getting across to young women out there so why bother trying? I disagree. The problem is that they're promoting the wrong message.
Its a bit like you're trying to sell a car. You don't try to sell the car based on whether you can get to work in it. You sell the car with the lifestyle and freedom that comes with it.
Same thing goes with feminism. Its not about corporate climbing and breaking the glass ceiling. Its a LIFE STYLE of freedom from sexual persecution. A woman's goal should be to ignore love and only pursue her career, the idea is for her to have the freedom to do everything she sets her mind on, whether its career, politics, family, education, hobbies, sports, whatever she wants to do. Her sex and gender should not interfere in those goals.
My advice to the women of Britain, and the rest of the world: Stop thinking of feminism as a means to an ends. Think of it as a philosophy of life and don't hinder yourself based on what people say you can and can't do... because if you choose to have a career AND a family there is no one stopping you but yourself.
Let your heart think big and follow it always.
FEMINISM - I've been living in Britain for awhile now (on and off thanks to the fact I have dual citizenship) but one of the things I've noticed is that so-called British feminism suffers from a duality of problems.
#1. British feminism has a lot of history and there are a fair number of feminists here who support that history and stand on the shoulders of feminists who have come before them... the problem however lies in that they seem to have lost their spirit and have become more... academic. Its feminist historians arguing back and forth, very little activism.
#2. Girl Power is strong here (Spice Girls anyone?), but its done in a very post-feminist way... ie. they're selling their sex appeal at the same time. Sexy Feminists and Girl Power kind of leaves a bitter taste in your mouth after awhile. (Pun intended.)
I met earlier this week a few feminists from Oxford and I was astonished by how cynical and... for lack of a better word... complacent they were. They didn't think they would see major change in their life times. As one girl put it "its two steps forward and two steps backwards. We're not getting anywhere."
The feeling is that their message isn't getting across to young women out there so why bother trying? I disagree. The problem is that they're promoting the wrong message.
Its a bit like you're trying to sell a car. You don't try to sell the car based on whether you can get to work in it. You sell the car with the lifestyle and freedom that comes with it.
Same thing goes with feminism. Its not about corporate climbing and breaking the glass ceiling. Its a LIFE STYLE of freedom from sexual persecution. A woman's goal should be to ignore love and only pursue her career, the idea is for her to have the freedom to do everything she sets her mind on, whether its career, politics, family, education, hobbies, sports, whatever she wants to do. Her sex and gender should not interfere in those goals.
My advice to the women of Britain, and the rest of the world: Stop thinking of feminism as a means to an ends. Think of it as a philosophy of life and don't hinder yourself based on what people say you can and can't do... because if you choose to have a career AND a family there is no one stopping you but yourself.
Let your heart think big and follow it always.
Ack! The Truth about Cathy
ENTERTAINMENT - Love her or hate her the popular comic strip 'Cathy' is ending on October 3rd 2010. Cartoonist Cathy Guisewite is ending the comic strip after 34 years of what she calls the "four basic guilt groups" of food, love, mothers and work. Oh and shopping, don't forget shopping.
Cathy was a groundbreaking comic strip. When it first appeared the vast majority of comic strips were male-dominated... ie. Beetle Bailey, Hagar the Horrible, etc. Married female characters like Blondie were hardly pushing the envelope... and then along came Cathy, a single woman with no children, trying to find love, unable to resist the urges of chocolate and shoe shopping, while juggling work and the generational gap between herself and her mother.
At its peak Cathy was in 1,400 newspaper funny pages. In recent years its dwindled to 700, not because she's not still popular, but because newspapers have been making cutbacks in recent years as the internet becomes the new medium of choice. Cathy Guisewite, 60-years-old, decided it was time to focus on her own family and other creative pursuits.
“Nobody is more shocked than I am, believe me," says Cathy Guisewite in her California studio. "If you read the strip, you’ll know that I don’t make decisions lightly. I go to 400 malls to buy one pair of socks. So it was a very big decision for me to give this up."
The cartoon started when Cathy Guisewite was working at a Detroit ad agency (a bit like Mad Men) and was sending cartoons home to friends and family depicting her troubles at work / etc. It was her mother who convinced her to send the strip to Universal Press Syndicate, now known as Universal UClick. Her mother even threatened to go there herself with "a cover note from Mom." (Thus it was the same pushy mother who made Cathy a reality.)
What followed was 30 books and hundreds of pop culture references in many shows thanks to Cathy's infamous catchphrase: Ack!
But not everyone likes Cathy. They don't get the humour in making fun of female stereotypes like chocolate and shoe shopping. Its a bit like the male obsession with meat, cars and power tools, except men don't get upset about that stereotype. If anything men embrace that because it reinforces their masculinity.
Some women, including a few feminists, just don't understand the humour that comes from being self-deprecating. ie. A man who jokes about his small penis is waaaaaay more funny than a man who brags about the size of his. Not only is it more humourous, but it also means he's not worried about trying to impress women and that shows more confidence.
In Cathy's case its rather autobiographical. The cartoon does reinforce stereotypes about women, but its also making fun of those stereotypes at the same time, which for the cartoonist are very personal.
Typical themes in her cartoons include women who ruin their finances by overshopping, treating nice guys like crap even though she knows they make better marriage material, the horrors of being single... all the anxieties that women have and often don't get to express them.
Sometimes Cathy is empowering and other times she is filled with self-doubt. She's human and not afraid of her faults.
To Rina Piccolo, creator of the cartoon 'Tina’s Groove' and part of the all-woman team behind 'Six Chix', Cathy Guisewite was a trailblazer. "All the female characters were like Blondie. They were either a housewife or a glamour girl. Cathy totally changed the page. Here’s a young woman talking about, basically, her fat ass and how she couldn’t fit into a swimsuit or that she had had it with her boyfriend and all the little neurotic things that a lot of women go through in day-to-day living. She was the first female character to really let loose and say what a lot of women were thinking at the time," says Piccolo.
After four decades Cathy Guisewite ran the gag into the ground. There was nothing more for her to talk about and make fun of. She had done it all. For those that don't like the comic strip the shtick had gotten old and people were starting to get sick of it.
Even the classic "Who's On First" is only funny the first couple of times you see it. It stops being funny and just becomes moronic after you've seen it 5 or more times. Its entirely possible many of Cathy's jokes just aren't funny any more because they've become a cliché.
And if they're that classic that they've become a cliché... well then its probably a good time to retire anyway.
Cathy was a groundbreaking comic strip. When it first appeared the vast majority of comic strips were male-dominated... ie. Beetle Bailey, Hagar the Horrible, etc. Married female characters like Blondie were hardly pushing the envelope... and then along came Cathy, a single woman with no children, trying to find love, unable to resist the urges of chocolate and shoe shopping, while juggling work and the generational gap between herself and her mother.At its peak Cathy was in 1,400 newspaper funny pages. In recent years its dwindled to 700, not because she's not still popular, but because newspapers have been making cutbacks in recent years as the internet becomes the new medium of choice. Cathy Guisewite, 60-years-old, decided it was time to focus on her own family and other creative pursuits.
“Nobody is more shocked than I am, believe me," says Cathy Guisewite in her California studio. "If you read the strip, you’ll know that I don’t make decisions lightly. I go to 400 malls to buy one pair of socks. So it was a very big decision for me to give this up."
The cartoon started when Cathy Guisewite was working at a Detroit ad agency (a bit like Mad Men) and was sending cartoons home to friends and family depicting her troubles at work / etc. It was her mother who convinced her to send the strip to Universal Press Syndicate, now known as Universal UClick. Her mother even threatened to go there herself with "a cover note from Mom." (Thus it was the same pushy mother who made Cathy a reality.)
What followed was 30 books and hundreds of pop culture references in many shows thanks to Cathy's infamous catchphrase: Ack!But not everyone likes Cathy. They don't get the humour in making fun of female stereotypes like chocolate and shoe shopping. Its a bit like the male obsession with meat, cars and power tools, except men don't get upset about that stereotype. If anything men embrace that because it reinforces their masculinity.
Some women, including a few feminists, just don't understand the humour that comes from being self-deprecating. ie. A man who jokes about his small penis is waaaaaay more funny than a man who brags about the size of his. Not only is it more humourous, but it also means he's not worried about trying to impress women and that shows more confidence.
In Cathy's case its rather autobiographical. The cartoon does reinforce stereotypes about women, but its also making fun of those stereotypes at the same time, which for the cartoonist are very personal.
Typical themes in her cartoons include women who ruin their finances by overshopping, treating nice guys like crap even though she knows they make better marriage material, the horrors of being single... all the anxieties that women have and often don't get to express them.Sometimes Cathy is empowering and other times she is filled with self-doubt. She's human and not afraid of her faults.
To Rina Piccolo, creator of the cartoon 'Tina’s Groove' and part of the all-woman team behind 'Six Chix', Cathy Guisewite was a trailblazer. "All the female characters were like Blondie. They were either a housewife or a glamour girl. Cathy totally changed the page. Here’s a young woman talking about, basically, her fat ass and how she couldn’t fit into a swimsuit or that she had had it with her boyfriend and all the little neurotic things that a lot of women go through in day-to-day living. She was the first female character to really let loose and say what a lot of women were thinking at the time," says Piccolo.
After four decades Cathy Guisewite ran the gag into the ground. There was nothing more for her to talk about and make fun of. She had done it all. For those that don't like the comic strip the shtick had gotten old and people were starting to get sick of it.Even the classic "Who's On First" is only funny the first couple of times you see it. It stops being funny and just becomes moronic after you've seen it 5 or more times. Its entirely possible many of Cathy's jokes just aren't funny any more because they've become a cliché.
And if they're that classic that they've become a cliché... well then its probably a good time to retire anyway.
The Truth about Crisis Pregnancy Centres
FEMINISM - If you don't know what a "crisis pregnancy centre" is go to your local abortion clinic... and then go to the 'friendly' place right next door to it. Its not an abortion clinic, in fact its not even affiliated with it... but they try really hard to convince women who are confused about what to do.
"Pregnant? Confused? We can help." says the pamphlet.
Once inside they usher you into a soft-lit room with a comfortable couch, a coffee table, scale models of fetuses nestled in a womb... they offer you water or tea. Not coffee however because they don't want to damage the baby.
These counselling rooms are setup via registered pro-life charities. The women who work there are often paid, not necessarily volunteers. They've made it their living to convince women to have babies instead of an abortion. The charities sometimes also gives away baby clothes, cribs and diapers.
And yes, its still your choice, but they will bombard you with a series of lies designed to make you rethink your decision.
Lie #1: Terminating a pregnancy is dangerous. You could die during the procedure.
Lie #2: You may suffer permanent damage and never be able to get pregnant again.
Lie #3: Abortion clinics sell "pieces of babies" to medical research, describing in detail how "a big truck arrives and all the fetal parts are collected in a bin and put up for sale".
Lie #4: A terrifying description of the abortion procedure, with pictures of bloody aborted fetuses handpicked to look as horrible as possible.
Lie #5: Abortion is always - ALWAYS - the wrong decision because its unnatural.
Lie #6: You will become hardened, lose part of your soul and suffer from 'Post Abortion Depression' for the rest of your life.
Lie #7: Terminating a pregnancy will increase your chances of getting breast cancer and ovarian cancer by 80%. (Any idiot can tell that statistic is a flat out lie, but the few gullible people out there might fall for it.)
Such misleading information is designed to discourage women from choosing an abortion. When asked they will claim to be pro-choice and non-judgmental support, but in reality they're feeding you as much false information as they can in an effort to scare you.
The modern abortion clinic is a clean, professional atmosphere. There is no pushing women one way or another. If they're there in the first place it usually means they've already made their decision. The 'crisis pregnancy centre' next door is there preying on the confused and promoting free pregnancy tests and free counselling to promote the other options of adoption and single-parenthood, all the while promoting the idea that abortion is something to be avoided at all possible costs.
Now don't get me wrong, I support adoption and single mothers. I think people who adopt are fabulous people and every child would be lucky to have such loving parents. And single mothers are the bravest, most courageous people I can think of.
But it ultimately comes down to the choice of the individual. Trying to scare and trick someone into choosing a different option is immoral. Let people think for themselves and they will always pick the course of action which is right for themselves.
These centres are run by compassionate people who clearly believe what they're doing is right, and they firmly believe lying to convince women towards adoption and single motherhood is an 'acceptable sin' from their religious perspective.
Throwing false statistics at women in such a case could arguably be worthy of suing a crisis pregnancy centre, but I have yet to hear of a case of someone suing such a place. They don't make any promises to help support the women. Their goal is to convince a woman towards a different decision and then move on to the next confused woman.
Crisis pregnancy centres are here to stay however. The era of protesters picketing outside abortion clinics is gone. Humiliating doctors, threatening violence, blowing up abortion clinics with explosives... some of this still happens but its become more rare. The focus these days is to trick women into walking into the wrong building and convincing them that they've made the wrong decision.
And the biggest lie they will tell you is: “We’ve seen so many women that said, ‘Oh my goodness, I wish I had been told the truth and if someone would have told me, I would have kept my baby.’”
And they can say that because there's nothing to back it up. No statistics. No quotes from actual women.
And I know it to be completely false because I know plenty of women who have had abortions over the years. Not a single one regrets it. True, there might be a few women out there who do regret it (ie. they became religious later in life and became convinced that the abortion they had years earlier was murder), but these born-again Christians are - excuse my French - often full of shit and willing to say anything to promote their new found religion.
All of this misleading information just makes it more difficult for REAL family planning centres (which offer advice about abortion, adoption and single motherhood but are not judgemental about it). They end up spending a lot of their time trying to explain the real statistics, dispel the myths being promoted by the crisis pregnancy centres and be reassuring and supportive of whatever decision the woman chooses to make.
Here's a fact for you: The chances of having complications during or from an abortion is so low you're more likely to have a fatal car accident between the time you decide to have the abortion and the three days later when you finally do. The technique is ridiculously safe (and if it wasn't it wouldn't be allowed in the first place).
There are 17 crisis pregnancy centres in Toronto alone, paid for by 14 local religious charities. Across Canada there is an estimated 197 centres spreading misinformation, including 83 in Ontario alone... in contrast there is only 151 abortion clinics in Canada (36 in Ontario)
But that is nothing compared to the 4,000+ crisis pregnancy centres operating in the United States where they often get funding from Republican party members, and local state funding depending on who is the governor at the time.
In Canada they receive zero funding from provincial and federal governments. Health Canada has no role in telling women what to do with their own bodies beyond asking people to try and live in a healthy fashion.
Obviously you shouldn't go to a crisis pregnancy centre for information about abortion because they're only going to give misinformation. TALK TO YOUR DOCTOR INSTEAD. Doctors are trained to be non-judgemental in these matters, to do otherwise would lead to malpractice suit. The doctor can refer you to people who can give you more information and that info will be accurate.
ABORTION MYTHS
There are three main risks that crisis pregnancy centres claim are associated with abortion. According to medical experts they are just myths and exaggerations.
BREAST CANCER
Depending on which centre you visit they might claim the increased risk of breast cancer is "as high as 80%".
The U.S. National Cancer Institute convened a workshop of more than a hundred leading international experts in 2003 to review the existing studies and concluded that neither abortion nor miscarriage increases the risk of developing breast cancer. The Public Health Agency of Canada and the Canadian Cancer Society both support this conclusion. The Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada recommends that women be reassured that there is zero risk when they seek information about abortion from their doctors.
EMOTIONAL TRAUMA
The centre will claim abortion can cause negative psychological effects ranging from sadness and guilt to substance abuse and suicidal thoughts, claiming this is based on first-hand knowledge of talking to people but with no statistics to back it up. They will mention post-abortion support programs, which tend to be Bible-based and lead women toward asking for forgiveness for terminating a pregnancy. They describe it as “Post Abortion Stress” or “Post Abortion Syndrome”, sometimes referred to simply as PAS.
The American Psychiatric Association does not list either “Post Abortion Stress” or “Post Abortion Syndrome” in its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, considered the authoritative index of mental illnesses. The association issued a statement in 2008 noting the lack of evidence linking abortion to psychiatric illness.
“A woman may have many emotional reactions to an unwanted pregnancy and abortion – most commonly relief, but also sadness and a sense of loss. These feelings can coexist and, like feelings about any important life decision, they can vary over time,” said the statement, adding that negative feelings are often associated with the circumstances that led the woman to choose abortion, and not the procedure itself.
FERTILITY PROBLEMS
Crisis pregnancy centres say abortion increases the risk of future miscarriages and premature births, often with counsellors telling stories of women they had met who had chosen to terminate their pregnancies in the past and were now suffering because they are infertile.
The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in the United Kingdom reviewed induced abortions and concluded there are no proven links between terminating a pregnancy and subsequent infertility. They did note a tiny increase in the chance of future miscarriage but noted that the evidence is inconclusive. The relative risks are extremely rare and more influenced by the age of the mother, which becomes more infertile as their biological clock keeps ticking.
Minor damage to the uterus happens less than once per 1,000 procedures, but the damage is so minor it only requires corrective surgery less than once every 10,000 procedures. This is according to 'A Clinician’s Guide to Medical and Surgical Abortion' (Churchill-Livingstone, 1999).
Thus the risks are so low it becomes self-evident these stories have been ridiculously exaggerated.
See Also
Open Letter to Anti-Abortionists
"Pregnant? Confused? We can help." says the pamphlet.
Once inside they usher you into a soft-lit room with a comfortable couch, a coffee table, scale models of fetuses nestled in a womb... they offer you water or tea. Not coffee however because they don't want to damage the baby.
These counselling rooms are setup via registered pro-life charities. The women who work there are often paid, not necessarily volunteers. They've made it their living to convince women to have babies instead of an abortion. The charities sometimes also gives away baby clothes, cribs and diapers.
And yes, its still your choice, but they will bombard you with a series of lies designed to make you rethink your decision.
Lie #1: Terminating a pregnancy is dangerous. You could die during the procedure.
Lie #2: You may suffer permanent damage and never be able to get pregnant again.
Lie #3: Abortion clinics sell "pieces of babies" to medical research, describing in detail how "a big truck arrives and all the fetal parts are collected in a bin and put up for sale".
Lie #4: A terrifying description of the abortion procedure, with pictures of bloody aborted fetuses handpicked to look as horrible as possible.
Lie #5: Abortion is always - ALWAYS - the wrong decision because its unnatural.
Lie #6: You will become hardened, lose part of your soul and suffer from 'Post Abortion Depression' for the rest of your life.
Lie #7: Terminating a pregnancy will increase your chances of getting breast cancer and ovarian cancer by 80%. (Any idiot can tell that statistic is a flat out lie, but the few gullible people out there might fall for it.)
Such misleading information is designed to discourage women from choosing an abortion. When asked they will claim to be pro-choice and non-judgmental support, but in reality they're feeding you as much false information as they can in an effort to scare you.
The modern abortion clinic is a clean, professional atmosphere. There is no pushing women one way or another. If they're there in the first place it usually means they've already made their decision. The 'crisis pregnancy centre' next door is there preying on the confused and promoting free pregnancy tests and free counselling to promote the other options of adoption and single-parenthood, all the while promoting the idea that abortion is something to be avoided at all possible costs.
Now don't get me wrong, I support adoption and single mothers. I think people who adopt are fabulous people and every child would be lucky to have such loving parents. And single mothers are the bravest, most courageous people I can think of.
But it ultimately comes down to the choice of the individual. Trying to scare and trick someone into choosing a different option is immoral. Let people think for themselves and they will always pick the course of action which is right for themselves.
These centres are run by compassionate people who clearly believe what they're doing is right, and they firmly believe lying to convince women towards adoption and single motherhood is an 'acceptable sin' from their religious perspective.
Throwing false statistics at women in such a case could arguably be worthy of suing a crisis pregnancy centre, but I have yet to hear of a case of someone suing such a place. They don't make any promises to help support the women. Their goal is to convince a woman towards a different decision and then move on to the next confused woman.
Crisis pregnancy centres are here to stay however. The era of protesters picketing outside abortion clinics is gone. Humiliating doctors, threatening violence, blowing up abortion clinics with explosives... some of this still happens but its become more rare. The focus these days is to trick women into walking into the wrong building and convincing them that they've made the wrong decision.
And the biggest lie they will tell you is: “We’ve seen so many women that said, ‘Oh my goodness, I wish I had been told the truth and if someone would have told me, I would have kept my baby.’”
And they can say that because there's nothing to back it up. No statistics. No quotes from actual women.
And I know it to be completely false because I know plenty of women who have had abortions over the years. Not a single one regrets it. True, there might be a few women out there who do regret it (ie. they became religious later in life and became convinced that the abortion they had years earlier was murder), but these born-again Christians are - excuse my French - often full of shit and willing to say anything to promote their new found religion.
All of this misleading information just makes it more difficult for REAL family planning centres (which offer advice about abortion, adoption and single motherhood but are not judgemental about it). They end up spending a lot of their time trying to explain the real statistics, dispel the myths being promoted by the crisis pregnancy centres and be reassuring and supportive of whatever decision the woman chooses to make.
Here's a fact for you: The chances of having complications during or from an abortion is so low you're more likely to have a fatal car accident between the time you decide to have the abortion and the three days later when you finally do. The technique is ridiculously safe (and if it wasn't it wouldn't be allowed in the first place).
There are 17 crisis pregnancy centres in Toronto alone, paid for by 14 local religious charities. Across Canada there is an estimated 197 centres spreading misinformation, including 83 in Ontario alone... in contrast there is only 151 abortion clinics in Canada (36 in Ontario)
But that is nothing compared to the 4,000+ crisis pregnancy centres operating in the United States where they often get funding from Republican party members, and local state funding depending on who is the governor at the time.
In Canada they receive zero funding from provincial and federal governments. Health Canada has no role in telling women what to do with their own bodies beyond asking people to try and live in a healthy fashion.
Obviously you shouldn't go to a crisis pregnancy centre for information about abortion because they're only going to give misinformation. TALK TO YOUR DOCTOR INSTEAD. Doctors are trained to be non-judgemental in these matters, to do otherwise would lead to malpractice suit. The doctor can refer you to people who can give you more information and that info will be accurate.
ABORTION MYTHS
There are three main risks that crisis pregnancy centres claim are associated with abortion. According to medical experts they are just myths and exaggerations.
BREAST CANCER
Depending on which centre you visit they might claim the increased risk of breast cancer is "as high as 80%".
The U.S. National Cancer Institute convened a workshop of more than a hundred leading international experts in 2003 to review the existing studies and concluded that neither abortion nor miscarriage increases the risk of developing breast cancer. The Public Health Agency of Canada and the Canadian Cancer Society both support this conclusion. The Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada recommends that women be reassured that there is zero risk when they seek information about abortion from their doctors.
EMOTIONAL TRAUMA
The centre will claim abortion can cause negative psychological effects ranging from sadness and guilt to substance abuse and suicidal thoughts, claiming this is based on first-hand knowledge of talking to people but with no statistics to back it up. They will mention post-abortion support programs, which tend to be Bible-based and lead women toward asking for forgiveness for terminating a pregnancy. They describe it as “Post Abortion Stress” or “Post Abortion Syndrome”, sometimes referred to simply as PAS.
The American Psychiatric Association does not list either “Post Abortion Stress” or “Post Abortion Syndrome” in its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, considered the authoritative index of mental illnesses. The association issued a statement in 2008 noting the lack of evidence linking abortion to psychiatric illness.
“A woman may have many emotional reactions to an unwanted pregnancy and abortion – most commonly relief, but also sadness and a sense of loss. These feelings can coexist and, like feelings about any important life decision, they can vary over time,” said the statement, adding that negative feelings are often associated with the circumstances that led the woman to choose abortion, and not the procedure itself.
FERTILITY PROBLEMS
Crisis pregnancy centres say abortion increases the risk of future miscarriages and premature births, often with counsellors telling stories of women they had met who had chosen to terminate their pregnancies in the past and were now suffering because they are infertile.
The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in the United Kingdom reviewed induced abortions and concluded there are no proven links between terminating a pregnancy and subsequent infertility. They did note a tiny increase in the chance of future miscarriage but noted that the evidence is inconclusive. The relative risks are extremely rare and more influenced by the age of the mother, which becomes more infertile as their biological clock keeps ticking.
Minor damage to the uterus happens less than once per 1,000 procedures, but the damage is so minor it only requires corrective surgery less than once every 10,000 procedures. This is according to 'A Clinician’s Guide to Medical and Surgical Abortion' (Churchill-Livingstone, 1999).
Thus the risks are so low it becomes self-evident these stories have been ridiculously exaggerated.
"Given time an exaggeration becomes a rumour, a rumour becomes a myth, a myth becomes a legend and then legend is misconstrued as fact." - Suzanne MacNevin.
See Also
Open Letter to Anti-Abortionists
Media Messages that Kill
The following is a Guest Post by Dr S. Jeanne Bramhall - June 2010.
I obsess (and blog) a lot about pro-war and anti-civil liberties messages in the media because they are easiest to recognize. As a woman, I am far more concerned about the stereotyped treatment of women in the media. As a child and adolescent psychiatrist I worry particularly about the culture of extreme thinness in our society – which is one hundred percent media driven.
How Feminism Shapes My Views
I confess I am also a feminist. This is an embarrassing confession. Feminists, gays and dark-skinned people are subject to much ridicule and scorn in contemporary society. In my opinion the controversy stems from confusion around the definition, which has somehow been associated with an irrational hatred of men. I use the word feminist in its broadest sense – to describe women who refuse to automatically subordinate their own (or their children’s) needs to men, the male power structure or a male-oriented view of society. I happen to like men. Some of my best friends are men. As a feminist health professional, I am enormously concerned that young girls are continuously bombarded with messages from TV, movies, music videos and youth and fashion oriented books and magazines that leave them with a distorted – and dangerous – view of themselves and their bodies.
Romantic Love is Dangerous to Your Health
Among the most pernicious is the constant emphasis on being young, thin and attractive to men. It relates, in large part, to a carefully crafted myth that romantic love is the highest ideal a woman can achieve in contemporary society. It is so powerful that the majority of women grow up believing in a highly stereotyped version of romantic love, as well as a self-concept that they are utterly worthless without a man to love them. This myth, like Santa Claus and the diamond engagement ring, are creatures of an elaborate and sophisticated marketing industry. It bears little relation to real life. In fact the myth hurts men almost as much as women because it is largely to blame for our high rate of divorce and broken families.
On Being Young, Attractive and Dead
As a health professional I am most distressed by the extremely narrow and stereotyped standard of attractiveness – young, perfectly chiseled and starvation thin – necessary to succeed in the fashion, TV or movie industry. There is no question media marketing deliberately aims these messages at teens and pre-teens who lack the critical thinking necessary to differentiate what they see on the screen from real life.
This strategy is immoral and should be illegal. All women exposed to this stuff learn to hate their own bodies. This universal self-hatred is responsible for an exponential increase in potential fatal eating disorders such as anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa.
The U.S. Statistics Speak for Themselves
I obsess (and blog) a lot about pro-war and anti-civil liberties messages in the media because they are easiest to recognize. As a woman, I am far more concerned about the stereotyped treatment of women in the media. As a child and adolescent psychiatrist I worry particularly about the culture of extreme thinness in our society – which is one hundred percent media driven.
How Feminism Shapes My Views
I confess I am also a feminist. This is an embarrassing confession. Feminists, gays and dark-skinned people are subject to much ridicule and scorn in contemporary society. In my opinion the controversy stems from confusion around the definition, which has somehow been associated with an irrational hatred of men. I use the word feminist in its broadest sense – to describe women who refuse to automatically subordinate their own (or their children’s) needs to men, the male power structure or a male-oriented view of society. I happen to like men. Some of my best friends are men. As a feminist health professional, I am enormously concerned that young girls are continuously bombarded with messages from TV, movies, music videos and youth and fashion oriented books and magazines that leave them with a distorted – and dangerous – view of themselves and their bodies.
Romantic Love is Dangerous to Your Health
Among the most pernicious is the constant emphasis on being young, thin and attractive to men. It relates, in large part, to a carefully crafted myth that romantic love is the highest ideal a woman can achieve in contemporary society. It is so powerful that the majority of women grow up believing in a highly stereotyped version of romantic love, as well as a self-concept that they are utterly worthless without a man to love them. This myth, like Santa Claus and the diamond engagement ring, are creatures of an elaborate and sophisticated marketing industry. It bears little relation to real life. In fact the myth hurts men almost as much as women because it is largely to blame for our high rate of divorce and broken families.
On Being Young, Attractive and Dead
As a health professional I am most distressed by the extremely narrow and stereotyped standard of attractiveness – young, perfectly chiseled and starvation thin – necessary to succeed in the fashion, TV or movie industry. There is no question media marketing deliberately aims these messages at teens and pre-teens who lack the critical thinking necessary to differentiate what they see on the screen from real life.
This strategy is immoral and should be illegal. All women exposed to this stuff learn to hate their own bodies. This universal self-hatred is responsible for an exponential increase in potential fatal eating disorders such as anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa.
The U.S. Statistics Speak for Themselves
Eating disorders are a major cause of death for women age 15-24.
4% of American women are afflicted with a life-threatening eating disorder.
Approx. 10% of American women with eating disorders die within 10 years of developing the disorder.
20% of American women with eating disorders die within 20 years of developing the disorder.
The Truth about Female Rites of Passage
Do you remember your first period? Was it embarrassing or were your proud of it?
Well, be thankful you live in a modern civilized part of the world... some regions have some pretty strange Rites of Passage for young women experiencing their first period. Some of these are done for religious reasons, some are mostly harmless traditions.
Genital Mutilation
The Massai tribe of Kenya uses female circumcision to completely remove the outer parts of the female genitalia. This results is complete deprivation of sexual sensation, increased susceptibility to HIV and may cause life-threatening infections. Crude tools and no anesthesia. The Massai tribe is not the only group that does this. Every year 2 millions girls are forced to undergo genital mutilation.
Burning Hands + Biting Ants
The Carib Tribe of Suriname burns the hands of young menstruating girls using a handful of burning cotton to symbolize their future "handiwork" as women. They're also forced to wear a mat/skirt covered with a breed of stinging, biting ants.
Abdomen Slicing
The Tiv Tribe of Nigeria slices young girls across the belly four times (or more) leaving deep scars to signify her womanhood and her fertility.
Fattening Ritual
The Okrika Tribe of Nigeria has their young girls experiencing their first period enter a hut called "fatting rooms" where they feast on rich local foods until they've gained sufficient weight. Its intended to be a spiritual and physical metamorphosis.
Three Months in Isolation
The Ngoni Tribe of Malawi secludes the young girl in a flooded tent for up to three months. Her face and body are daubed with white flour as a sign of spirituality. Inside the tent she must sit in a pool of water until the women of her tribe determine she is finally a woman (which can take up to 3 months).
Swimming to Shore
The Nootka Natives of the Vancouver Islands in Canada used to take young girls who experience their first period for a canoe ride out to sea... and then leave them there to swim back to shore. This is no longer practiced.
Buried Neck Deep in Sand
The Luiseno Tribe of Southern California used to bury girls up to their neck in sand and then have an older woman of the tribe give them a stern talking to about "the birds and the bees" and the proper behavior of a woman and wife. This is no longer practiced.
Four Days of Running & Rituals
The Navajo Tribe of the American Southwest have their girls wear heavy buckskin outfits in a four day ritual involving a foot race, making food for all their relatives and sitting upright on the first night of the ritual. The Apache tribe have a similar ritual shown below.
I have a hunch many mothers these days simply take their daughters out for a day of shopping, food and buying their first tampons / pads. Not quite the status quo, but close enough.
Well, be thankful you live in a modern civilized part of the world... some regions have some pretty strange Rites of Passage for young women experiencing their first period. Some of these are done for religious reasons, some are mostly harmless traditions.
Genital Mutilation
The Massai tribe of Kenya uses female circumcision to completely remove the outer parts of the female genitalia. This results is complete deprivation of sexual sensation, increased susceptibility to HIV and may cause life-threatening infections. Crude tools and no anesthesia. The Massai tribe is not the only group that does this. Every year 2 millions girls are forced to undergo genital mutilation.
Burning Hands + Biting Ants
The Carib Tribe of Suriname burns the hands of young menstruating girls using a handful of burning cotton to symbolize their future "handiwork" as women. They're also forced to wear a mat/skirt covered with a breed of stinging, biting ants.
Abdomen SlicingThe Tiv Tribe of Nigeria slices young girls across the belly four times (or more) leaving deep scars to signify her womanhood and her fertility.
Fattening Ritual
The Okrika Tribe of Nigeria has their young girls experiencing their first period enter a hut called "fatting rooms" where they feast on rich local foods until they've gained sufficient weight. Its intended to be a spiritual and physical metamorphosis.
Three Months in Isolation
The Ngoni Tribe of Malawi secludes the young girl in a flooded tent for up to three months. Her face and body are daubed with white flour as a sign of spirituality. Inside the tent she must sit in a pool of water until the women of her tribe determine she is finally a woman (which can take up to 3 months).
Swimming to Shore
The Nootka Natives of the Vancouver Islands in Canada used to take young girls who experience their first period for a canoe ride out to sea... and then leave them there to swim back to shore. This is no longer practiced.
Buried Neck Deep in Sand
The Luiseno Tribe of Southern California used to bury girls up to their neck in sand and then have an older woman of the tribe give them a stern talking to about "the birds and the bees" and the proper behavior of a woman and wife. This is no longer practiced.
Four Days of Running & Rituals
The Navajo Tribe of the American Southwest have their girls wear heavy buckskin outfits in a four day ritual involving a foot race, making food for all their relatives and sitting upright on the first night of the ritual. The Apache tribe have a similar ritual shown below.
I have a hunch many mothers these days simply take their daughters out for a day of shopping, food and buying their first tampons / pads. Not quite the status quo, but close enough.
Being Raped? There's an app for that
FEMINIST/TECHNOLOGY - Over a year ago Apple's iPhone came out with the slogan ‘There’s an app for that’, essentially the idea of a little program built into the SmartPhone which allowed you to do everything from calculate tips, play the piano, count calories, learn French or looking for the nearest washroom.
Looking for the nearest store that sells dental floss? There's an app for that.
But during that process of designing all these applications they neglected to create one for if you're being stalked, being creeped out by some guy on the subway and you're suddenly wishing you had taken some self-defense classes... See Self Defense Against Rapists.
Well, now there's an app for that. It just took awhile for someone to create it.
No, not an app for learning self-defense, although you could always look into that... the app is the YWCA Safety Siren app. Its free to download from iTunes.
Basically its a combination of functions:
#1. A rape whistle, available with a choice of three ear-splitting wails.
#2. An automatic email function to contact preset emergency numbers/email addresses for the authorities, complete with sending a Google map of your current location.
#3. Tips on how to avoid trouble, smart and safe ways to meet people, how to avoid guys who are potentially dangerous.
#4. A map which shows you the nearest health and rape crisis centres.
There are other apps available too, one for if you're being assaulted, one for finding the nearest safe location, one for telling you what streets are less safe to walk alone, etc.
But frankly all of this is AFTER THE FACT. Its a bit like the Morning-After-Pill. Chances are likely you won't think to use such applications until after you've been raped or assaulted. With luck you might be able to use the Rape Whistle function during the actual attack, but frankly I put more stock in a good solid kick to the balls (which will give you more time to activate the device on your iPhone as you run away).
If you really want to prevent rape you need to do several things:
#1. Walk with confidence. Rapists target shy, mousy women because they're less likely to struggle, shout or put up much of a fight.
#2. Take up jogging, running and go to the gym regularly. Boxing, kick boxing, self defense classes would be good too. Not only will you be more likely to outrun an attacker, but if you're more athletic your ability to fight back and escape will be dramatically improved.
#3. THINK FAST! Keep your head on your shoulders and don't panic. Keep your wits about you as quick thinking may be the difference that saves you. ie. You could rip the condom. Rapists typically use condoms these days because they're worried about leaving DNA evidence behind. Its safe to assume they only brought one and their plan will fall apart if it gets ripped.
#4. Keep your hands free. Carry your purse or bag on your shoulder or on your back.
#5. Avoid uninhabited places. Busy streets are better.
#6. Be prepared, get your keys out early when going to your car or building.
#7. Men have several vital points: Genitals, eyes, nose and neck. Kick the genitals, poke their eyes out, punch their nose or neck. A punch to the nose can stun him. A good solid punch to the neck can actually kill a man.
None of this of course will prevent you from being raped by the Apple company with their bills however.
See Also:
Stop Rape
The Ten Worst Countries for Women
Looking for the nearest store that sells dental floss? There's an app for that.But during that process of designing all these applications they neglected to create one for if you're being stalked, being creeped out by some guy on the subway and you're suddenly wishing you had taken some self-defense classes... See Self Defense Against Rapists.
Well, now there's an app for that. It just took awhile for someone to create it.
No, not an app for learning self-defense, although you could always look into that... the app is the YWCA Safety Siren app. Its free to download from iTunes.
Basically its a combination of functions:
#1. A rape whistle, available with a choice of three ear-splitting wails.#2. An automatic email function to contact preset emergency numbers/email addresses for the authorities, complete with sending a Google map of your current location.
#3. Tips on how to avoid trouble, smart and safe ways to meet people, how to avoid guys who are potentially dangerous.
#4. A map which shows you the nearest health and rape crisis centres.
There are other apps available too, one for if you're being assaulted, one for finding the nearest safe location, one for telling you what streets are less safe to walk alone, etc.
But frankly all of this is AFTER THE FACT. Its a bit like the Morning-After-Pill. Chances are likely you won't think to use such applications until after you've been raped or assaulted. With luck you might be able to use the Rape Whistle function during the actual attack, but frankly I put more stock in a good solid kick to the balls (which will give you more time to activate the device on your iPhone as you run away).
If you really want to prevent rape you need to do several things:#1. Walk with confidence. Rapists target shy, mousy women because they're less likely to struggle, shout or put up much of a fight.
#2. Take up jogging, running and go to the gym regularly. Boxing, kick boxing, self defense classes would be good too. Not only will you be more likely to outrun an attacker, but if you're more athletic your ability to fight back and escape will be dramatically improved.
#3. THINK FAST! Keep your head on your shoulders and don't panic. Keep your wits about you as quick thinking may be the difference that saves you. ie. You could rip the condom. Rapists typically use condoms these days because they're worried about leaving DNA evidence behind. Its safe to assume they only brought one and their plan will fall apart if it gets ripped.
#4. Keep your hands free. Carry your purse or bag on your shoulder or on your back.
#5. Avoid uninhabited places. Busy streets are better.#6. Be prepared, get your keys out early when going to your car or building.
#7. Men have several vital points: Genitals, eyes, nose and neck. Kick the genitals, poke their eyes out, punch their nose or neck. A punch to the nose can stun him. A good solid punch to the neck can actually kill a man.
None of this of course will prevent you from being raped by the Apple company with their bills however.
See Also:
Stop Rape
The Ten Worst Countries for Women
The Truth about the Sexual Revolution & the Pill
SEX - 50 years ago tomorrow (it was first approved on May 9th 1960) a miraculous pill appeared on the market that prevented pregnancy 100% of the time if used properly. Sometimes mistakes were made or women forgot to take their pill for the day, but otherwise it was an ingenious little tool for freeing the libidos of women both young and slightly older.
Some people however tend to blame/credit the Pill with the Sexual Revolution of the 1960s. Oh how wrong they are.
The truth of the Pill is statistically it did nothing to the abortion rate. Women kept getting pregnant when not on the pill, often due to inexperience and some men not knowing how to do the "pull out at the last minute routine". Thats the routine men were doing prior to the Pill and it apparently was working at least part of the time.
The little compact case and the "magic pills" it contained was somewhat synonmous with the 1960s: Peace, love and rampant sex in the mud at Woodstock.
But what would have happened if there had been no pill?
Peace, love and rampant sex in the mud at Woodstock, that's what. People still would have been having sex, the difference would have been a lot more couples using the pull out technique instead and couples would have been getting less enjoyment out of sex.
So thats the truth right there. The Pill resulted in couples being able to enjoy sex more. It did very little it stemming unwanted pregnancies because all too often people made mistakes with the oral contraceptive and got pregnant anyway.
And the other truth of the matter is that it wasn't all hippie chicks who rushed out to take the Pill. It was mostly married women in their late 20s, 30s and even early 40s. They already had several kids and didn't want any more. Thus this sexual revolution was more in the married bedrooms than the single bedrooms.
“Within the first five years of its release something like a quarter of all married women of reproductive age had used the Pill, so clearly there was a big shift and a concomitant decrease in the proportion of women using diaphragms and condoms,” says Elizabeth Watkins, author of "On the Pill: A Social History of Oral Contraceptives, 1950-1970" and a professor of history at the University of California, San Francisco.
Before the Pill came on the market there was already a sexual revolution going on. Between 1940 and 1960 the number of single mothers had tripled. Women were having sex, getting pregnant, and probably have a good time during the process.
It was after all the 1950s Baby Boom period. Everyone was having sex, women were getting pregnant whether they were married or not and it wasn't until 1960 when the Pill became available that they realized they could have even more sex and didn't have to use the pull out method any more. Married women and men no doubt celebrated with a rousing bout of hide the weasel in the bushes.
Thus the Sexual Revolution was already in full swing when the Pill arrived. It just gave the revolution an extra push.
Its also known that the Pill was rather expensive when it first arrived. A bit like Viagra is today (I'll get back to the Viagra topic later) and thus married/working women were the only ones who could easily afford it.
There are other things that pushed the Sexual Revolution too.
In 1947 Professor Alfred Kinsey founded the Institute for Sex Research at Indiana University. Kinsey's research about human sexuality during the 1940s and 1950s was groundbreaking and the first of its kind. His books "Sexual Behavior in the Human Male" in 1948, followed in 1953 by "Sexual Behavior in the Human Female" reached the top of bestseller lists and turned Kinsey into an instant celebrity.
In 1950 Ernst Grafenberg, a German gynecologist, discovered the G-Spot.
In December 1953 Hugh Hefner’s Playboy Magazine featured Marilyn Monroe as its first cover girl and nude centerfold in the premiere issue.
In 1959 The Immoral Mr. Teas was directed, produced and released by Russ Meyer. Meyer was a pioneer in the porn industry, creating softcore porn (he even created the term) in films like Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! (1965) and Vixen! (1968) and pushing the limits of censorship in America. He continued making films well into the 1970s.
And there are hardly the only things.
What the Pill did really was allow women to more fully enjoy sex, right up to moment of orgasm and even afterwards for round 2 or 3.
“Polls taken at the time indicated that single women who were already sexually active were enthusiastic about the Pill because it allowed them to enjoy sex more fully,” says Elizabeth Tyler May, professor of American studies and history at the University of Minnesota, is the author of the just released 'America + The Pill: A History of Promise, Peril, and Liberation'.
It wasn't until 1967 that Time magazine dubbed the Pill the “miraculous tablet”.
“If the Pill can defuse the population explosion,” the magazine theorized, “it will go far toward eliminating hunger, want and ignorance.”
But that never really happened. The Catholic Church pushed the agenda that the Pill was a sin to use, thus while population growth rates have declined unwanted pregnancies still exist because the percentage of women on the Pill never reached a "breakthrough level" where it became the driving force behind population control. Instead women kept getting pregnant by accident, men kept using the pull-out method and it wasn't really until STDs like AIDS appeared that people started taking condoms more seriously.
The Pill was more of a contraceptive stepping stone in legitimizing the use of other contraceptives like condoms, diaphragms, injections, patches, rings, the Morning After Pill, Lybrel, a continuous low-dose period-free pill with no placebos, etc. It created a Contraceptive Revolution... but it was hardly the cause of the Sexual Revolution which was already in full swing anyway.
And it also kickstarted the sex-pill revolution... Pills like Viagra, Cialis and what will eventually become the Viagra 4 Women pill (or whatever name they choose) are a growing (sometimes disturbing) trend. Just this past week Britain released a new pill called Prilogy which cuts down on Premature Ejaculation and allows PE sufferers to last 3 times longer.
Just wait they'll invent pills that cause instant orgasms, feelings of love, induce abortion without the need for surgery, allow men to orgasm without releasing semen, make women more sensitive so they can orgasm easier, pills to make us younger, more energetic... Disturbed by the possibilities yet?
And frankly it will all become a bit disturbing because it won't be just the younger generation popping pills, it will be the older generation getting it on. There's nothing more disturbing than our parents and grandparents having booty calls.
Some people however tend to blame/credit the Pill with the Sexual Revolution of the 1960s. Oh how wrong they are.The truth of the Pill is statistically it did nothing to the abortion rate. Women kept getting pregnant when not on the pill, often due to inexperience and some men not knowing how to do the "pull out at the last minute routine". Thats the routine men were doing prior to the Pill and it apparently was working at least part of the time.
The little compact case and the "magic pills" it contained was somewhat synonmous with the 1960s: Peace, love and rampant sex in the mud at Woodstock.
But what would have happened if there had been no pill?
Peace, love and rampant sex in the mud at Woodstock, that's what. People still would have been having sex, the difference would have been a lot more couples using the pull out technique instead and couples would have been getting less enjoyment out of sex.
So thats the truth right there. The Pill resulted in couples being able to enjoy sex more. It did very little it stemming unwanted pregnancies because all too often people made mistakes with the oral contraceptive and got pregnant anyway.And the other truth of the matter is that it wasn't all hippie chicks who rushed out to take the Pill. It was mostly married women in their late 20s, 30s and even early 40s. They already had several kids and didn't want any more. Thus this sexual revolution was more in the married bedrooms than the single bedrooms.
“Within the first five years of its release something like a quarter of all married women of reproductive age had used the Pill, so clearly there was a big shift and a concomitant decrease in the proportion of women using diaphragms and condoms,” says Elizabeth Watkins, author of "On the Pill: A Social History of Oral Contraceptives, 1950-1970" and a professor of history at the University of California, San Francisco.
Before the Pill came on the market there was already a sexual revolution going on. Between 1940 and 1960 the number of single mothers had tripled. Women were having sex, getting pregnant, and probably have a good time during the process.
It was after all the 1950s Baby Boom period. Everyone was having sex, women were getting pregnant whether they were married or not and it wasn't until 1960 when the Pill became available that they realized they could have even more sex and didn't have to use the pull out method any more. Married women and men no doubt celebrated with a rousing bout of hide the weasel in the bushes.
Thus the Sexual Revolution was already in full swing when the Pill arrived. It just gave the revolution an extra push.Its also known that the Pill was rather expensive when it first arrived. A bit like Viagra is today (I'll get back to the Viagra topic later) and thus married/working women were the only ones who could easily afford it.
There are other things that pushed the Sexual Revolution too.
In 1947 Professor Alfred Kinsey founded the Institute for Sex Research at Indiana University. Kinsey's research about human sexuality during the 1940s and 1950s was groundbreaking and the first of its kind. His books "Sexual Behavior in the Human Male" in 1948, followed in 1953 by "Sexual Behavior in the Human Female" reached the top of bestseller lists and turned Kinsey into an instant celebrity.
In 1950 Ernst Grafenberg, a German gynecologist, discovered the G-Spot.
In December 1953 Hugh Hefner’s Playboy Magazine featured Marilyn Monroe as its first cover girl and nude centerfold in the premiere issue.
In 1959 The Immoral Mr. Teas was directed, produced and released by Russ Meyer. Meyer was a pioneer in the porn industry, creating softcore porn (he even created the term) in films like Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! (1965) and Vixen! (1968) and pushing the limits of censorship in America. He continued making films well into the 1970s.
And there are hardly the only things.What the Pill did really was allow women to more fully enjoy sex, right up to moment of orgasm and even afterwards for round 2 or 3.
“Polls taken at the time indicated that single women who were already sexually active were enthusiastic about the Pill because it allowed them to enjoy sex more fully,” says Elizabeth Tyler May, professor of American studies and history at the University of Minnesota, is the author of the just released 'America + The Pill: A History of Promise, Peril, and Liberation'.
It wasn't until 1967 that Time magazine dubbed the Pill the “miraculous tablet”.
“If the Pill can defuse the population explosion,” the magazine theorized, “it will go far toward eliminating hunger, want and ignorance.”
But that never really happened. The Catholic Church pushed the agenda that the Pill was a sin to use, thus while population growth rates have declined unwanted pregnancies still exist because the percentage of women on the Pill never reached a "breakthrough level" where it became the driving force behind population control. Instead women kept getting pregnant by accident, men kept using the pull-out method and it wasn't really until STDs like AIDS appeared that people started taking condoms more seriously.The Pill was more of a contraceptive stepping stone in legitimizing the use of other contraceptives like condoms, diaphragms, injections, patches, rings, the Morning After Pill, Lybrel, a continuous low-dose period-free pill with no placebos, etc. It created a Contraceptive Revolution... but it was hardly the cause of the Sexual Revolution which was already in full swing anyway.
And it also kickstarted the sex-pill revolution... Pills like Viagra, Cialis and what will eventually become the Viagra 4 Women pill (or whatever name they choose) are a growing (sometimes disturbing) trend. Just this past week Britain released a new pill called Prilogy which cuts down on Premature Ejaculation and allows PE sufferers to last 3 times longer.
Just wait they'll invent pills that cause instant orgasms, feelings of love, induce abortion without the need for surgery, allow men to orgasm without releasing semen, make women more sensitive so they can orgasm easier, pills to make us younger, more energetic... Disturbed by the possibilities yet?
And frankly it will all become a bit disturbing because it won't be just the younger generation popping pills, it will be the older generation getting it on. There's nothing more disturbing than our parents and grandparents having booty calls.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)