I read this guest blog post over at Rage Against the Minivan with interest. Two comments in particular caught my attention.

The first:

Another usual reaction I get is the one that comes from my age group. It’s the question of “Should-I-have-dated-around-like-crazy-and-had-some-fun-before-I-tied-the-knot?” This is a fun reaction to deal with because frankly when discussing this with someone my age, what we’re really discussing is whether or not I should have whored it up for a while when I was still young. You know, because that’s what youth is for. Anyways, I’m still young and I do have fun. I happen to be married to my best friend and we have a blast together. And the best part of it is that I didn’t have to spend years of my life looking for him in all the wrong people.

The second:

The last reaction that I get is really just ignorance. It’s the thought that because I’m married and have a family, my life is over. I should have kissed all of my goals and dreams goodbye on my wedding day, tied on a pretty pink apron and put my baby making face on while climbing into a little domestic hole. That’s fine for some women because there is no shame in being a housewife and a mom, but I’ve had big plans for myself since a was a little girl and I read that marriage certificate and nowhere on it did it say I was signing over those dreams. I just get to do them with an amazing support system by my side. My husband knew me and what I hoped for my future as soon as we started to get to know each other. That’s the beauty of real love, not only do you accept the other person’s dreams, but you take them as your own. You gain a whole new set of goals that become just as close to your heart as your own. And those sets of goals and dreams come together to build up a future even better than the one you imagined years before.

My husband and I met very randomly and very briefly three weeks before law school started and then we reconnected when I was suprised to recognize him on the first day of school. A friendship quickly developed and then turned into something more. By the end of second year, we were married.

I remember the reaction of some colleagues when they learned that we were engaged when we returned to school in September for second year: shock. One woman just took my hand to confirm I was wearing an engagement ring, dropped both my hand and her jaw and then scrambled back to a group of other students to confirm that yup, we were engaged – after knowing each other for just a year. It was comical, if not a bit disconcerting.

And we were both 23 when we were married, not 18 like the author of the blog post and her husband. But more than once I was questioned (and even mocked) for choosing to marry at such a “young” age. I was asked by co-workers how I could possibly know what I wanted from a man or a marriage this early on in my life. Others hinted this could limit my future career or life options. I hadn’t even started my career yet! I was also strongly encouraged by several to sign a pre-nup. (I was in law school, so this type of feedback should probably be expected.)

But my experience reflects to some extent that of the author’s. Marriage has been my greatest adventure. My husband and I jointly hold each others’ dreams carefully in our hands, encouraging each other and believing in each other. It’s a pretty incredible thing to experience. We’re growing, dreaming and building a life together, while still exploring unique and personal interests and passions. Heck, I even worked into my wedding vows that I’d be his “greatest cheerleader.” (Yes, non-conventional.)

Marriage at a “young” age (as some in my life considered it to be), hasn’t stalled my personal growth. It hasn’t stunted me in any way. Rather, it has required that I grow up and mature a little faster. All my decisions directly affect another person. That makes a huge difference. And not a negative one.

And, like the author notes, we’re developing a whole new set of dreams and hopes for our shared life. In some cases, this includes dreams that neither of us had considered before we met.

So what does this happen to do with PWPL? I don’t know. I’m sure Andrea could come up with some elegant way to tie this blog post to PWPL’s greater mandate. The author’s blog post was a little (or a lot) counter-cultural and I wanted to touch on that.

photo credit: Martin Gommel via photopin cc

Following up on Faye’s post, this from ARPA Canada:

The Supreme Court of Canada has just declared that the prostitution laws in Canada are unconstitutional. A saving grace in the ruling however is that they have suspended their declaration of invalidity by one year, meaning that the current law remains valid until December of next year, giving our federal government time to rewrite the law.

It means that there is an opportunity for Parliament to enact legislation that could actually protect women.  Here’s hoping.  See more on this issue here, including a 6 minute interview with André Schutten, General Legal Counsel and Ontario Director for ARPA.

Watch these little two-year-old and three-year-old boys make basketball shots that the professionals would miss!

Kids are awesome!

Just a short follow-up to yesterday’s post. It is a sad day. You can read more here.

And Kim Pate, executive director of the Canadian Association of Elizabeth Fry Societies called it a “sad day.”

“We have now confirmed that it’s okay to buy and sell women and girls in this country,” she said. “I think generations to come, our daughters and granddaughters will look back and say, ‘what were they thinking?’ ”

Melissa Ohden survived her mother’s attempt at abortion. Here’s her story.

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4WJIvbEdWk]

This post isn’t about abortion, but Andrea said we could post about anything so here goes.

As most of you know, the Supreme Court of Canada is releasing its decision in the Bedford prostitution case tomorrow. Here’s what you need to know for what follows:

The Bedford case is a challenge to three of the key laws that inhibit prostitution in Canada, which would otherwise be completely legal. One of the laws whose fate we await is the Criminal Code provision that makes it a criminal offence to live on the avails of prostitution, or the pimping law.

This provision was struck down at the Ontario Superior Court, then rewritten at the Ontario Court of Appeal so that it would “only apply in circumstances of exploitation.” It has been argued before the Supreme Court and in the media by pro-prostitution groups that this provision prevents women in prostitution from hiring bodyguards, drivers, or even bookkeepers, thereby making their ‘work’ less safe. It’s a charming chapter in a fairy tale version of prostitution, in which the men involved in the prostitution industry are benevolent fellows whose interests lie in assisting and protecting prostituted women. But the thing about fairy tales is when you look a little deeper you often find something darker and more ominous.

I’ve never believed that fairy tale. And what my colleague Julia Beazley at the EFC heard about few weeks ago only further confirms that this fairy tale is a myth.

A mass text message was sent to women engaged in prostitution in the GTA warning them that if they were currently working independently and they didn’t put themselves under the thumb of a pimp by December 15, there would be serious consequences. The text opens with the words “Attention All Bad B*****s/Working Girls/Escorts/Strippers… Exile Season Starts December 15!”

Julia doesn’t post the text message in its entirety because the language is just too horrifying, but here is her summary:

The exile season warning is directed at all women known to be prostituting in the Greater Toronto Area, and possibly even more widespread, whether on the streets, in massage parlours, escort services or in strip clubs. Intended to intimidate and threaten, it is a less than subtle directive that failure to ‘choose’ a pimp to work with on a ‘100% basis’  would result in those women no longer being permitted to work, period. The text makes it clear that enforcers – whose nicknames aren’t fit for print – are ready and willing to deal with non-compliers. The message is unambiguous: working independently, anywhere, will not be tolerated; and those who don’t play by the rules will face consequences.

I was sickened by what I read. I’m told this type of communication is just part of ‘the game,’ and must be taken seriously. These men are not drivers or bodyguards. They are dangerous individuals, exercising a perverse sense of power and entitlement, and bent on maintaining control.

There has been no news coverage of this mass text message, and this story should be getting coverage, especially in light of tomorrow’s decision.

Is legalizing prostitution really pro-woman? Is this best we can offer our country? According to Julia’s research, 90% of women would leave prostitution if they could. That says something.

For more information on the case, and to learn about alternatives to our existing prostitution-related legislation, read Julia’s post.

Pope Francis is Time’s man of the year. Like Father Raymond de Souza’s take on this:

The 20th century posed three enormous challenges, not only to the Church, but to all of Western civilization. The first was from “above,” the totalitarian state seeking to crush all social institutions, including marriage, family and the church. The second was from “below,” the sexual revolution and its attendant social changes, which undermined marriage, family and the church. The third was in the entire intellectual environment, in which the possibility of knowing the truth at all, especially moral truth, was radically questioned.

It is possible to understand John Paul II and Benedict XVI as two parts of an epic, world-changing, 35-year pontificate, which went into battle on all three fronts. Call it “police work” or manning the barricades or clambering aboard the ark in rough waters — it was necessary. If Francis now is able to return to what the Church usually does in times of relative tranquility, it is because of what went before. Does the Church appear to be more attractive under Francis? Time is right about that, for she is attempting to be more of who she properly is.

Many pro-lifers are concerned that Pope Francis was telling them their work was not important. But I did not hear this in his message, personally. And more to the point, I am unwilling to trust a radically anti-Catholic media’s interpretation of the Pope.

I do think the pro-life message is itself an act of charity, and that the “telling the truth” element of it is heard best when accompanied by old-fashioned charity. (As a side tangent note, which I’ve made so often before, pro-lifers are very often denied the opportunity to be hands-on charitable, so quick does our cultural outlook nurture a trip to the abortion clinic. Because this is the case, countless pro-lifers spend their time serving those who are born. It is the mark of someone who knows nothing at all about pro-lifers who says otherwise.)

Read about this here:

McKenzie’s daughter Marit, a freshman at the University of Calgary, died after suffering four heart attacks, a pulmonary embolism, and bleeding in the brain in late January after less than a year of taking Diane-35, manufactured by Bayer.

Diane-35 is a controversial hormone pill intended to treat acne and excessive hairiness in women but is often prescribed by doctors as an off-label contraceptive.

I remember Diane 35 from my uni days. I didn’t distinguish between it treating acne and being a contraceptive and I don’t think anyone else did either.

Ah, The Pill. I will never forget this dude “a friend” dated in first year university. He took her aside, sitting on the front steps of her dorm, just across from Toronto’s ROM and in loving care and concern asked her if she didn’t want to get on The Pill because…wait for it… it would help her cycle. Ah yes. It is *so good* (sarcasm alert) to be cared for in that way. Imagine. No greater love hath man than this, than to ask his girlfriend to get on the Pill, pronto.

My sincere condolences go out to the family who lost their daughter on this drug and I wish them every success in their lawsuit.

It works.

[youtube:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMyExi2q-ZI]

Like this book: The Anonymous Us Project: A Story-Collective on 3rd Party Reproduction, edited by Alana Newman.

I discovered the Anonymous Us Project website a few years ago. It’s a sobering piece of internet real estate to visit. Children born of third party reproduction (sperm and egg donation and surrogacy) share their own stories about what it means to be conceived in that way.

Many testimonies reveal heart-break, loss, confusion and anger. Here are a few snippets:

“Who are you to deny me half of my family tree—branches rich and strong with stories I may never be told? Who are you to give away my heritage, knowing it will be replaced with something false?”

“I am a human being, yet I was conceived with a technique that had its origins in animal husbandry. Worst of all, farmers kept better records of their cattle’s genealogy than assisted reproductive clinics … how could the doctors, sworn to ‘first do no harm’ create a system where I now face the pain and loss of my own identity and heritage.”

“As a donor-conceived person, I have a sense of being part of an underclass … Having a child is a privilege not a right.”

This article includes a review of Alana Newman’s book and some additional commentary on the consequences of third-party reproduction:

We must acknowledge the painful truth that, as infertile couples seek to remedy their suffering through third-party reproduction, they are unwittingly inflicting pain on their future children. Eventually, those children must wrestle with the circumstances surrounding their conception. In aiming to satisfy their very natural desire for offspring, infertile couples go to great lengths to create children who are destined to experience complex crises of identity and purpose.

Check out the Project website and read that article (and buy me a copy of the book). It’s a lot of food for thought. And this issue and these children deserve our consideration.