Archives for 2009

A propos nothing in particular (except that reasonably intensive training is always de rigueur this time of year – gotta look good in those new shorts, don’t we): I just got this fabulous book, Women’s Strength Training Anatomy, which describes in almost overwhelming detail the way our bodies work and how we can best improve them. Yes, this means more sweating and groaning. But somehow static forward lunges feel better when you can visualize exactly how your gluteus maximus (that’s the one you’re sitting on) is improving. At any rate, that’s what I’ll be telling myself.

Whatever helps, right?

A couple of comments about this piece in the Globe.

First, I feel like this is as pro-life as that paper is going to get in the near future. Enjoy it.

Secondly, the comments are really interesting–mostly supportive, some angry because the father wanted his daughter to have the baby at all, some angry because he wanted her to have the baby and give it away, not keep it. Altogether, interesting.

Finally, my opinion: It’s hard for me to imagine that he as the father clearly knows what a baby is (and when life begins) and he clearly has a pretty good relationship with his daughter (they are talking, he is involved in her life) and yet she doesn’t appear to really value life.

But perhaps it’s credit to having a good relationship with her that he was able to coax her away from abortion. (Does the daughter sound somewhat flippant about the whole thing to you? “I’m not keeping it.” “Ok, I will.”) But it’s all about the baby steps (so to speak, no pun intended).

In the balance, nice piece, I say.

New, in North Carolina, a sex hotline for teens. An impersonal, faceless text line so confused kids can get–no answers and a total lack of respect and love:

The texted question: “If I was raped when I was little and just had sex was it technically my first time when I was raped or when I recently had sex?” He wrote three drafts. An hour later, he texted back: “Your first time is whatever you make it. There is no ‘right’ answer: I believe your first time can be many things (good, bad, fun, embarrassing, wonderful) but it should never be non-consensual. Your first time is the first time you choose to have sex, not when some horrible person forces you.”

More from the same article:

Some [questions] reveal dangerous chasms of ignorance. “If ur partner has aids,” one teenager asks, “and u have sex without a condom do u get aids the first time or not?”

You know where there’s a dangerous chasm of ignorance? With the “adults” who started this thing up.

_______________________

Brigitte shakes her head in disbelief: To have so much sex ed and know so little… It would be funny if it weren’t so sad.

Here’s a nice story for you, Andrea.

I wonder if we could reverse his idea and sing songs in order to sell t-shirts?

I’m working on a few American history projects and just saw this 1956 video about futuristic designs. I just loooove their automated kitchen and push-button magic. Warning: Extremely cheesy. Viewer discretion is advised.

Like Andrea, I have rather a lot of work to do these days, which explains the light blogging. Unfortunately that means I will also have to miss the Tulip Festival’s opening weekend, where people evidently walk around with flowers in their hair and funny sunglasses. But hey. I will endeavour to take advantage of the sunshine this weekend to plant a few new flowers around the house and see how long they last this year (I am a professional non-gardener, but I’m trying, I’m trying).

The beauty of being a woman who is pro-life is that it is fairly easy to annoy my opponents simply by showing up. I don’t need to say all that much, when combatting the anachronistic notion that “abortion is a woman’s right.” I simply need to stand there (with shoes on, outside the kitchen!) and ask–hey, why is that self-evident? Because I don’t get it. And I don’t believe it. And by the way–that’s your opinion, not a fact.

Still, this little YouTube snippet reminds all of us not to shut up–whether you call yourself a conservative or a liberal is of no matter–most of our readers are here because they are pro-life. And my strategy on the life issue is two-fold, designed by prominent activist/communications gurus after much research and study. Ready?

One:  To show up.

Two: To not shut up.

Brilliant, non? Enjoy.  

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWHgUE9AD4s]

Our old buddy Antonia Z. is in well-deserved trouble. Here is what she wrote on her Twitter account, about Michelle Malkin.

Actually, I don’t believe she’ll really get in trouble. Why, when you attack a right-wing conservative kind of person, you can say any darn thing you like. It’s all fair.

I’m a pretty extreme free-speecher myself. I believe you should be free to say any stupid thing you like, with two reasonably narrow exceptions: Libel and incitement to violence. “Joking” that marksmen ought to “take” an identifiable person, no matter how much you hate that identifiable person’s guts, is far beyond the pale.

Michelle has the contact information here should you wish to voice your objections to the Toronto Star, for which Antonia Z. writes. Please remember to “exhibit the politeness and civility that Zerbisias lacks.”

_______________________

Andrea adds: My knickers remain unknotted here. Because Michelle Malkin is wrong on one important thing–she calls Zerbisias mainstream. I’ll grant she works for a mainstream paper. But if we recall the Canadian Blog Awards, Zerbisias won in the “professional pundit” category, where we won in the “best new blog” category. But I remember looking at the number of votes (wish now that I took screen shots, alas) and she got substantially fewer votes than ProWomanProLife.

If I’m correct on the voting thing, it’s a fairly astounding feat to have the platform of the country’s most highly circulated newspaper and still get fewer votes than a niche, upstart blog centred around an issue that arguably no one wants to talk about. I felt bad, actually. As here: I do think Zerbisias was trying to be funny, and possibly more at Cheney’s expense than Malkin’s. But my point is this: Mainstream is not a word I’d use to describe Antonia.