Soft on the outside with crunchy parts in the middle.
- Dr. George Tiller’s killing was not justifiable homicide, it was murder.
- Blowing up abortion clinics is terrorism.
- Defacing and covering abortion clinics in graffiti is vandalism.
- Chanting “You’re next!” at doctors and clinic administrators is threatening them.
- Preventing patients from entering a clinic by shouting at them, distracting them, walking in front of them, blocking their way with your bodies, or preventing them from exiting their cars is harassment.
You’re not a good person if you in any way, shape or form support, defend, or ignore any of these actions. Stop deluding yourself.
I can’t really fully count myself as a pro-life/anti-abortion person (I don’t think abortions should happen, but I know no matter what they will, and I would rather they be legal than they be illegal and women have to go back to methods that are often deadly for the mother as well), but who is disagreeing with this? Aside from a few crazies (and obviously the people doing it, which is disgusting), most people no matter what side they’re on can agree that going about things this way is sick.
Lots of people disagree with this. Anti-choicers raised their voices and demanded that the killer of George Tiller be tried for justifiable homicide. Operation Rescue, an entire “Pro-Life” organization, HELPED Tiller’s murderer stalk him, and then DEFENDED his actions. Not to mention the lists upon lists of both abortion providers and patients OR has released, making an easy-to follow hit list.
These are not the actions of a few, nor the fringe. These are the actions of the zealots who make up the true “Pro-Life” movement. Have you ever stood outside a clinic and witnessed what they do? Have you ever been screamed at, called a murderer, called an assistant murderer—watched them yelled and chase a young girl who’s fetus was already dead, refusing to listen as she sobbed at them, “By baby is DEAD, it’s DEAD!”?
They chant. They use fear mongering. They stand outside car doors to attempt to block patients from opening them. They yell tirades of insults at patients, they hold up fake images of “aborted babies,” which are in truth miscarriages.
This is not a fringe-group, this is the norm at any clinic that is frequented by anti-choice protesters. This is what they do. They terrorize, and they frighten. And what’s infuriating are the pro-lifers who ignore that this happens, they just conveniently ignore that the people on their side are committing these atrocities—they defend them, or they are silent about them.
This is the only critique I see of this post going around, that “The actions of the few are not the beliefs of the many,” but I’m here to tell you that this isn’t just a few people. This isn’t just some of the movement. This is a HUGE chunk of it, and it’s toxic, dangerous, and horrifying.
Reblogging because it can’t be said enough, THIS is what “pro-life” is about. It’s not just “a few bad apples”.
My friend and I just made this for another friend who is moving. The pattern is “Mitered Square Throw” by Lion Brand Yarns, using Cascade Yarns ‘Soft Spun’ in Grey, Rainier Heather (purple), Lichen Heather (green), and Blackwater Heather. It’s going to be hard to give away …
Holy yarnballs. That’s amazing! I’m really impressed. And covetous.
captaingalaga’s name means: 1) One that no one wants to talk to. 2) Futile effort.
dangermouses’s name means: 1) Homo. 2) Skilled at cross-dressing.
boazpriestly’s name means: 1) Knowing nothing but useless info. 2) To get excited after seeing homo.
Yes. All of it.
“Hannivernatters’s name means: 1) Skilled at cross-dressing. 2) Hnnnnnnng.”
Heh.
IT’S FINALLY DONE.
There’s a few glitches that are too late to fix though, but hopefully you guys enjoy it.
I’ll gif out a few scenarios later :)
“Sometimes—there’s God—so quickly!”
I pitched this to DC for a laugh years back. The idea was that, like Death of Superman, we had Rape of Wonder Woman; a twenty-two page rape scene that opened up into a gatefold at the end just like Superman did.
—Mark Millar
This is an actual quote. That he said.
Lois Lane is a dirty slut unworthy of Superman’s divinity and Wonder Woman should be raped. For a laugh. Oh haha. Rape is so funny, Millar.
Honestly, how this man exists in this world without getting punched by every woman he meets is beyond me. Horrible human being.
In another world, far beyond this one….Wonder Woman punches this guy in the face and then Lois writes a story about what it looked like when he got punched in the face.
Then, to finish it off, Superman punches him for slut shaming the love of his life and joking about how hilarious sexual violence would be against his best friend.
You know, for a laugh.
(via therearecertainshadesoflimelight)
I always find it funny when people forget that comic book writers (especially the ones at DC) are sick twisted people. Do you have any idea of how Wonder Woman came into conception? Someone getting their knickers in a twist over this better be a troll.
(via egonmancer)
Are you seriously arguing that being a bit into harmless kink and polyamory is on the level with joking about the sexual violation?
I know how Wonder Woman came into being. Probably better than you, you dismissive little fucker. It’s not on the same level as this. Aside from it being a rape joke, which is not funny, it’s equating a fight scene where a male hero struggles and fights back and ultimately stops an unstoppable monster at the cost of hgis life with a female hero enduring extended sexual violation and humiliation.
Marston had a little fun with subtext and parodying adventure tropes while doing a complete reversal of gender roles and giving us a woman who absolutely worked with the story roles that had up to then been given to men. Millar’s suggestion shows that he is not only boorish, twisted, and has little regard for the feelings of women, but that he is still mired in the misogyny that sees sexualized violence as something that happens to women and totally the counterpart in a woman’s story for a man’s heroic physical struggle.
It’s completely fucking different and you are a moron for equating a little consensual sexual nonconformity and winking at the adults in the audience with this complete surrender to misogyny.
Fuck you.
(via latkje)
Oh, Mark. Jesus. :( (via gailsimone)
From this moment forth, I cannot, in good conscience buy a single thing that has Mark Millar’s name on it.
(via sonofbaldwin)Y’all should read this interview, and then go buy all of his books, and then read them all under the covers with a flashlight if you have to.
Until today I’d assumed “whitewashing” (the practice of bleaching one’s skin to alter its color to a lighter and thus more appealing tone) had all but died in most parts of the modern world.
Holy fuck was I wrong.
This year, British Vogue’s November 2011 cover features none other than Rihanna (aka, the sexiest woman I’ve ever known) posing in one of her classic fierce stances in a blonde wig. When I first saw the cover I was a bit confused why Rihanna looked so different; but, knowing Rihanna’s penchant for unconventional hairstyles, I was initially able to naively overlook her seemingly Marilyn Monroe-inspired do; but a doubletake of the whole ensemble made me realize something a little disconcerting. Rihanna doesn’t just have Marilyn’s hair, but also her eyes, her pose, even her skin. “But Vogue is a fashion magazine, that look is chic, sexy, couture.” Vapid fashion vocabulary aside, it certainly sells, right? Now, I definitely don’t want to deny or minimize the blatant and subliminal sexism the fashion industry is chronically rife with; given fashion magazine’s long history of blatant sexism, it might not be immediately disconcerting to the average reader. But what is disconcerting to anyone who loves the Barbadoan babe like I do is how fucking white Rihanna looks.
As colorlines.com so eloquently put it:
It could be the actual lighting on set, it could be that we’ve gotten used to her wearing a fire engine-red wig, or it could be that someone forget to tell Vogue’s retoucher that Rihanna is in fact black.
Now before you chime in with “what’s so wrong about white skin?” I’d like to point out that there’s absolutely nothing wrong with it. However, there’s certainly nothing wrong with looking black, either. And call me cracked, but in my mind a few red flags go up when I see an international organization that claims to decide what’s hot and what’s not is photoshopping a world-famous superstar in the name of fashion sense.
Apparently Rihanna hasn’t been the only one “touched-up” with the desaturation tool either. Back in January of this year, ELLE India went with a lighter-tinted version of Aishwarya Rai, the sensational Star of Bollywood making headlines all over the internet and the world, and named by 60 Minutes as the Most Beautiful Woman in the World.
So why does the supposed “Most Beautiful Woman in the World” need any photoshopping? Isn’t she already the pinnacle of perfection? Thankfully, not everyone agrees. Especially Miss Rai, who stated to The Times of India that the former Miss World is “furious with the bleaching blotch-up” and is considering pursuing legal action against the magazine.
But unfortunately Miss Rai isn’t the only celebrity ELLE’s taken to the light room. Oscar-nominated actress Gabourey Sidibe also miraculously changed colors on the cover of U.S. edition of ELLE back in October of 2010.
And judging from some more photo shoots taken in 2009, L’oréal isn’t above whitewashing either. Just do a double-take of international stars Beyoncé and Freida Pinto. Any red flags yet?
As colorlines.com journalist Julianne Hing points out:
It’s a common, tired practice, and the routine is well-practiced: beauty companies and fashion magazines regularly lighten women’s skin (and darken the faces of black men), pissed off consumers shout back, and sometimes an apology is issued. But come the next fall collection or election season, photo retouchers are inevitably back to trying to make women of color more attractive by lightening them, and darkening the skin of men of color to make them seem more dangerous and suspect. Color, still, is everything.
At some point you have to stop and wonder just what the fuck is going on.
Fortunately, in the case of Aishwarya Rai at least, Change.org has begun a campaign asking the magazine to issue a public apology. However, in light of the situation (no pun intended), why should a campaign be necessary? Shouldn’t ELLE make a statement free of coercion by activist groups, regretting the mistake they knowingly made? I mean they do regret their “mistake,” right? Which brings me around to my point: Why the fuck is this still occurring?
In July in India, Vaseline launched a facebook app that allows the user to lighten their profile pictures to a more “appealing” tone. In 2005 Indian cosmetics mogul Emani began a new product campaign aimed at both men and women’s insecurities, launching their new skin-whitening cream for men called “Fair and Handsome” (the women’s version of course being called “Fair and Lovely”).
Closer to home, a study conducted by Dr. S. Allen Counter of Harvard Medical School in 2003 showed some pretty frightening findings:
96% of over 300 patients in the Southwestern United States that have higher than normal mercury levels were female and all had used skin lightening products; likewise 90% of women tested in clinics in Arizona who were Mexican-American had been using the same products (2).
Women more often try to whiten their skin and as a consequence poison their bodies. These lightening creams such as ‘Crema de Belleza-Manning’, which is made in Mexico, contain mercurous chloride and is easily absorbed through the skin.As you may or may not know, toxic levels of mercury lead to mercury poisoning, which causes neurological and kidney damage, as well as being a possible cause of psychiatric disorders. It can also cause birth defects. So it’s some pretty serious shit.
Aside from the horrors that survey alone should instill, there’s more where it came from:
Doctors in the UK were confused by symptoms presented by a woman when no reason for her weight gain, stretch or stripe marks and inability to conceive could be found. It was only after further questioning that she admitted to using a skin lightening product (1).
The product, which is illegal in the EU, was clobetasol. This is a cream containing high levels of the steroid corticosteroid. Typically this cream is prescribed for skin conditions including eczema and psoriasis, and is only to be used for up to two weeks at a time.
The UK doctors reported that the woman far exceeded the recommended usage, using two tubes of clobetasol a week for over seven years.
Such products are being increasingly used by people in a number of countries in an attempt to lighten the skin. Older people as well use skin lightening to remove age or liver spots and other skin darkening conditions.
However few people are warned of the dangers of the toxic ingredients which, as well as containing steroids, includes hydroquinone. While hydroquinone is allowed in the US by the FDA, it is banned in Europe because of the potential to cause cancer.
The list of side effects of the steroid corticosteroid is long. The most serious is Cushing’s disease, a malfunction of the adrenal glands leading to an overproduction of cortisol. Other side effects include:
* increased appetite and weight gain
* deposits of fat in chest, face, upper back, and stomach
* swelling
* slowed healing of wounds
* osteoporosis
* cataracts
* acne
* muscle weakness
* thinning of the skinKind of ruins that old saying “beauty is only skin deep,” doesn’t it?
So yeah, there’s that. If it wasn’t already alarming that people are getting whiter on paper, in reality the lightening products themselves have some terrible, toxic side affects. If you’re willing to lighten your skin color for the sake of appearing more attractive, you’re also willing to risk a myriad of other much more devastating skin problems (if psoriasis, eczema, acne, and thin skinning weren’t enough of an indication). In the end, the real cost of lighter skin is often paid in irreparable or even fatal damage to the user’s health, mind, and body—and often the products themselves advertise much better than they actually perform. So why does the fashion industry support this? Why, despite not only obvious health risks and the even more obvious fact that dark skin is beautiful all by itself, is lighter skin encouraged? Maybe it happens because people don’t really know all the serious risks behind skin whitening; maybe fashion companies are simply more concerned with a better quarterly statement than the health of their customers. Or maybe skin lightening is a symptom of the stigma that remains after hundreds of years of oppression, colonialism, and racism latent in our still very segregated and unequal world today. Maybe it’s all true. Whatever way you choose to view it, it’s a grim reality and a heavy price to pay, all for the ‘right look.’ But in our world, it’s the price of beauty.
There are some bad, bad people on the right.
They’re saving their own skins by ruining people’s lives.
Please, Wisconsin, please … get Scott Walker out of office on Tuesday.
Always reblog.
One day (hopefully soon), I’m going to make a counted cross stitch with this on it.
And that will be a great day.
- nobody unless they damn well want to now shut your mouth
I have to disagree. If someone closeted is working against equality, especially in an elected capacity that represents a consituency, I support outing. Because I’m not here for your self-hatred hurting others.
i dont even recognize north carolina as a state right now as far as im concerned we have 49 states although im not even sure wyoming is real
have you ever met someone from wyoming???
exactly
my mom lives in wyoming
yes but have you ever met her
well fuck now where am i supposed to live
LOL WYOMING
Think this shit’s funny?
Keep making rape jokes then.
Let’s hurl some acid at those female Democratic senators.