My Twitter feed is abuzz with pro-lifers commenting on the situation in Texas.

Here’s the update: The Governor called a special session to do what an angry mob and a lengthy filibuster prevented last week, that is pass legislation banning abortion after 20 weeks and raising the standards in abortion clinics.

This resulted in the pro-abortion mob chanting “Hail Satan” outside the legislature, while pro-lifers sang Amazing Grace. You can watch that sad spectacle, here.

Two items catch my eye this morning.

One was this article about how women don’t like the news, says a study. “Consumption of news is ‘very much a masculine action, particularly in Canada, Norway, U.K and U.S.'” I found this as I was catching up with the news, thereby proving once again that I am unique among all of female kind. Ha!

The study authors then go to great lengths to try and figure why this might be:

He suggested three partial explanations. One is a “historical hangover” from an age when public affairs was men’s work, and women stayed home. Another is that women can be more busy than men, with less time for news. A third is that the men seem to be more prominent in current affairs, which can discourage some women from taking an interest or feeling involved.

Excuse me as I recover from laughing. “A historical hangover”? Seriously? NO ONE, no one, for one split second said to themselves, Hey! Maybe it’s because women are not interested!?

Next article was this one on how men only mature by age 43.

Given some fairly recent experiences I could easily quip that this one is perfectly true. But I won’t, because I’m, er, more mature than that. Ahem.

In any event, all jokes aside, in this article you don’t find any discussion of “matriarchal domination,” or the array of excuses we are prepared to provide women.

In short, men are immature, simply because they are. But if women don’t care enough to read the news it’s because a) there is systemic prejudice against us, or b) because we are so, so, so busy (and mature?) that we don’t have time.

I see a double standard. And I am weary of the long list of excuses we are prepared to provide women while not extending the same grace to men.

I had a delightful mini-vacay, involving some camping and time with the nieces. Things I have been given ample opportunity to ponder include the following: The old adage that “where there’s smoke, there’s fire” is not always true. If you are in holiday mode today yourself, that’s your discussion point du jour. Talk amongst yourselves, hopefully not in a cloud of fireless smoke as a light drizzle descends while you attempt to make morning coffee.

If not in holiday mode, please return to the situation in Texas, which I did, thanks to some links sent by a friend.

What had I heard about “the Texas situation”? What is the “Texas situation” and who is Wendy Davis?

Here’s what you might think: Ultra-conservatives were attempting to put in a very restrictive abortion law and this would close down most clinics in Texas. One woman, Wendy Davis, was lionized for a lengthy filibuster, including a “loud demonstration” (read angry mob).

I, of course, knew she was not my kind of “hero.”And as it turns out she is no one’s hero.

For the Texas law aimed to stop abortions happening after 20 weeks.

From this fine assessment of the situation:

We might recap: By the time that a baby has been in utero for one month, blood is pumping around the body. In the second month, facial features develop, including the growth of ears, eyes, arms, legs, toes, and fingers. At six weeks, the baby’s brain, spinal cord, and central nervous system are all pretty well formed — in outline at least. By the two-month mark, sensory organs begin to develop and bone replaces cartilage. Three months in, arms, hands, fingers, feet, and toes are fully formed, and the baby can grab with its fists as well as open and close its mouth. Teeth are on their way, as are reproductive organs. In month four, the baby is fully formed, and eyelids, eyebrows, eyelashes, nails, and hair develop. At this point, a baby can suck his thumb, yawn, hiccup, stretch, and make faces. At 18 weeks, the baby can move around, and experience REM sleep, including dreams. At 20 weeks, some studies show, it can recognize its mother’s voice.

At each of these stages, had the bill been passed, it would have remained legal in Texas to kill the child. The law that Wendy Davis and her fellow “pro-science” acolytes so bravely stood against would have rendered it illegal to kill the child after this point. And when I say kill, I mean kill. I mean break bones, rip apart limbs, crush skulls, drain fluids, still a beating heart, annihilate a brain that is capable of dreaming, and crush a nervous system. I mean: Kill. As David Freddoso put it yesterday, “Wendy Davis can now say, When the moment came to stand up for smashing the life out of a baby 6 mos into pregnancy, I was up to the task.” This is not an accomplishment of which she should be proud.

As for closing clinics, this it turns out was because the clinics would be forced to comply with safety regulations:

According to ThinkProgress, the bill would also have forced “all but five of the state’s abortion clinics to close their doors.” This statement, and variants of it, occurred repeatedly during the evening — and always without context. In truth, clinics would close only if they failed to meet new safety standards that have been drawn in response to the horror stories in Philadelphia and Houston.

Therefore, the modern “women’s rights advocate” stands for something so gruesome they won’t name it and in favour of lower health and medical standards at clinics.

Wendy Davis is not a hero to anyone when you examine the matter closely.

I am musing to myself this morning (God help us all) about whether there is enough content there to write a book–very least an Atlantic Monthly length article–on the nature of choice and control. What choice does and doesn’t mean. Not with regards to abortion and being “pro-choice,” just in life in general, as the example of “I want to be a foreign diplomat” versus “I am a domestic public policy analyst.”

Hmmmm. Let me know in the comments whether you think such a book would be interesting, whether it’s been done, etc. etc. Any thoughts at all most welcome.

This report highlights that fertility woes for older women are not as pronounced as we are led to believe:

Surprisingly few well-designed studies of female age and natural fertility include women born in the 20th century—but those that do tend to paint a more optimistic picture. One study, published in Obstetrics & Gynecology in 2004 and headed by David Dunson (now of Duke University), examined the chances of pregnancy among 770 European women. It found that with sex at least twice a week, 82 percent of 35-to-39-year-old women conceive within a year, compared with 86 percent of 27-to-34-year-olds. (The fertility of women in their late 20s and early 30s was almost identical—news in and of itself.)

Good news, and I agree, under-reported.

Ultimately, though, is this article the other side of the coin for the fear mongering about the rapid decline of female fertility after age 27?

I think I’m trying to live with a different worldview. It is one that relinquishes control over that which we cannot control. For example, I studied German, German history, geo-politics and international affairs with an eye to becoming a diplomat or working in foreign affairs. I thought I might do a PhD examining totalitarianism in Europe. (Holy vague topic, Batman, good thing I didn’t. I would have been one of those “ten years and counting” PhD students.)

My point: What I’m actually doing is arguably the precise opposite of what I wanted to do. I work exclusively in English. I am primarily preoccupied with domestic issues. I did not know the job title of “public policy analyst” existed until after university was complete.

I use this personal example to highlight that we lack control in many areas of life. However, we loooooove the illusion of control.

With something so deeply emotional, intimate and personal as having children, our desire for control is heightened. That’s why unplanned and unwanted pregnancies are so difficult. That’s why longing to be pregnant when you can’t be is so difficult. My sense is that IVF is the flip side of an abortion-friendly culture, even while doing the opposite (creating life instead of ending it).

I say that without judgement of those women who pursue IVF, because I know–trust me, I know–what it feels like to want children. The temptation is there to pull out the Excel sheet and start plotting the points on the graph about how our lives will go. Children by 35, successful career too. Family and professional success. It’s not wrong to desire that. But it is not always under our control.

On Monday, all on one short day, I learned one friend has a cancer diagnosis, another friend got engaged. A low. A high. Neither were controllable.

The pressure is there: I should have a house! People my age are doing X, Y and Z! It is so hard to let go. My personal comfort lies in the dusty Bible on your shelf:

Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go to such and such a city, and spend a year there and engage in business and make a profit.” Yet you do not know what your life will be like tomorrow. You are just a vapor that appears for a little while and then vanishes away. Instead, you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and also do this or that.” But as it is, you boast in your arrogance; all such boasting is evil. Therefore, to one who knows the right thing to do and does not do it, to him it is sin. (James 4:13-17)

I am trying to live in a manner that shows my life has a purpose and a plan, while at the same time openly acknowledging that I am not the author of said purpose and plan.

Someone sent me the article above and I’ll freely admit it’s what I want to hear. I’ll drink to the notion that women in their mid and even late thirties can have children too. I’ve certainly seen it often enough. But ultimately, I’ll be lifting my glass to this crazy life with all its twists and turns. Not to get too super duper religious in one short blog post, but the Lord gives, and the Lord takes away; blessed be the name of the Lord.

Here ends the sermon.

Yesterday was a rant, today is a sermon. I just never know where my writing will take me.

(Me with a rental car, some five years ago, back when I still believed I had lots of control. Which raises the question of why I chose that car.)

___________________________

Faye adds: This really is an interesting, myth-busting piece. Huh:

The data, imperfect as they are, suggest two conclusions. No. 1: fertility declines with age. No. 2, and much more relevant: the vast majority of women in their late 30s will be able to get pregnant on their own. The bottom line for women, in my view, is: plan to have your last child by the time you turn 40. Beyond that, you’re rolling the dice, though they may still come up in your favor. “Fertility is relatively stable until the late 30s, with the inflection point somewhere around 38 or 39,” Steiner told me. “Women in their early 30s can think about years, but in their late 30s, they need to be thinking about months.” That’s also why many experts advise that women older than 35 should see a fertility specialist if they haven’t conceived after six months—particularly if it’s been six months of sex during fertile times.

Now that I have your attention, I’m not talking about a concerted effort to censor me/us by nefarious powers that be.

I’m talking about the censorship I do to myself.

This morning I ran into a reader of PWPL in the drugstore checkout. We had a nice chat. She shared that she is going to be retiring and is going to do more work on “these issues.” She then said “I don’t feel comfortable saying that word out loud!” I agreed that sometimes I struggle with the same thing.

Self-censorship: We are our own worst enemies. Why wouldn’t you mention the A word? Why not ask questions? Why not be up front about the work we do “on these issues”?

A tangent: I was recently out on a gelato date. One of the flavours is called “Sexy Chocolate.” “Sexy Chocolate” is just plain ole’ chocolate, in case you are wondering. After eating “Sexy Chocolate” absolutely nothing about me had changed. Except possibly my weight. It’s disappointing, to be frank. People, if I order “Sexy Chocolate” I want some sort of outcome guarantee.

Anyhoo, when I’m in that store (not too terribly often; please reference point A about the weight change) I always feel it is slightly pathetic that we feel we must add this descriptor (“Sexy!”) to just about everything. It’s an ice cream shop, for crying out loud.

And the lady serving the “Sexy Chocolate” described right there how a child had kind of stumbled over the word “sexy” in making the same order recently.This piqued my interest.

The immediate question to pop into my mind was “Why are you making a child order sexy chocolate?” Do they not expect children in their ice cream shop? Or is “sexy” just a standard, run-of-the-mill word, to be learned early? As in “See Sexy Spot Run.”

However, I self-censored and didn’t say anything.

I continue to challenge myself to stop doing that and I challenge you to do the same. My goal here isn’t to be annoying, but rather to be honest with myself on how I am feeling. Or, often enough, about my life’s work. Honest and cordial. That’s all.

Here ends the rant. (By the way, it is cool to run into friendly readers in the drugstore!)

“Sexy” or “Regular” chocolate? I’ll never know…

What follows is the press release of the Susan B. Anthony List:

House Moves to Protect Women, Unborn with Late-Term Abortion Ban Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act Will Stop Future “Houses of Horror”

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, the national pro-life group Susan B. Anthony List (SBA List) praised the U.S. House of Representatives, led by courageous pro-life women, for passing the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act (H.R. 1797), which safeguards babies nationwide by banning abortion past 20 weeks gestation, the point at which they can feel pain. According to a January 2013 Gallup poll, 80 percent of Americans would make abortion illegal in the third trimester and 64 percent would make abortion illegal in the second trimester.

“Congress has taken an important first step toward making sure we stop abortionists like Kermit Gosnell and his horrific abortion clinic and procedures. The House listened to the overwhelming majority of Americans, men and women, who instinctively recoil at the dehumanizing and degrading practice of late-term abortion,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, President of the SBA List. “This pro-woman, pro-science, Constitutional bill deserves an immediate vote in the U.S. Senate. It’s simple: children capable of experiencing unimaginable pain from abortion must be protected across the country.
“The big abortion industry cannot defend late-term abortions. Americans are disturbed by the callous nature of this practice, the disgusting clinic conditions in Pennsylvania, Delaware and other states, the 330,000 abortions Planned Parenthood of America performs every year as it receives half a billion in taxpayer dollars, and the repeated harm women experience as a result of their exploitation. Women and the unborn deserve better than abortion, and making late-term abortions illegal is a simple step in that direction. Votes have consequences. Congress should take note we’re pulling together our 2014 target list tonight.”

The SBA List has compiled an ever-expanding fact sheet on abortion industry negligence and brutality occurring nationwide.

Last month national and statewide pro-life groups launched the Stop the Gosnells coalition dedicated to exposing the horrors of the late-term abortion industry and encouraging legislative response.

The Susan B. Anthony List, and its affiliated Political Action Committees, the SBA List Candidate Fund and Women Speak Out PAC, are dedicated to pursuing policies and electing candidates who will reduce and ultimately end abortion. To that end, the SBA List emphasizes the education, promotion, mobilization, and election of pro-life women.  The SBA List is a network of more than 365,000 pro-life Americans nationwide.

This is a well done video. Give if you can.

[youtube:https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3JesJ0gSqBo]

Jonathon Van Maren, tell us how you really feel. LOTS of zingers in there. Happy Father’s Day, indeed.

Abortion, of course, is the generally proposed solution to the inconvenient presence of a developing human being that showed up to spoil all the fun. Since Frat Boy Tom really didn’t want to have a baby with Sally From The Bar, Tom can gently—or, more often, loudly—suggest that Sally go to a clinic and have their brand new, blissfully unaware offspring shredded by a suction aspirator and tossed in the trash. Problem solved—Tommy’s conquest now has an actual body count, but at least he dodged having to explain to his now-deceased child how he met Mommy or mitigating his travel plans with child support payments. But—horrors—what if Sally doesn’t want to allow the local fetus exterminator to force his way into her uterus and forcibly evict the baby that could well have her laugh and Tom’s eyes? What is poor Tom (who hasn’t even found himself yet!) to do?

You can learn about this new palliative care facility called Emily’s House through Global News, here.

I link to this because I follow the blog of Lindsey Yeskoo, whose daughter is Emily, after whom the facility is named. Lindsey’s daily writing, which tells of her family, her life and the story of how she has cared for Emily for many years now (I joined in maybe two years ago) has been something of an inspiration to me. So much grace to absorb from her words and her example. Grace and peace: two qualities I long to possess, but oftentimes show little. I’m working on it!