New images have appeared all over town, bearing the image of a turkey sandwich and the single world “harlot" in large block letters. These billboards have caused some confusion, both due to their ambiguous message, and to the fact that the entire structure of the billboards materialized overnight. - Welcome to Night Vale
@Oh, squiggles I'm also going to reply to you up here, because reading this I think I get where you're coming from. I'm not angry at the concept of a post about object lust and how it hurts people, just the execution. What you just wrote is already miles better.
By sophia_h on 8 Headlines That Sound Like Upworthy, But Are Simply Attempts To Express My Withering Contempt For That Collective of Neo-Liberal Douchebags
Joke's on you, Petaluma already has a hot yoga studio!
...it's called Yoga Hell and its logo has a cartoon devil. Top that.
@meetapossum HAHA, now I'm just picturing your friends all staring, befuddled, through a misshapen hole your friend dug in the wall to get away.
@itiresias I've seen this picture around the Internets, and something about it really irks me. Also, I want to point out before I even start that I LOVE the sentiment behind it AND that I don't watch GoT, so I may not be understanding some of the humor.
Here's what pisses me off about it. Senator Davis was NOT wearing pink stilettos on the Senate floor. In fact, countless sources reported that Davis, a noted fashion plate, was wearing pink SNEAKERS, because there is no way in hell that ANYONE would want to wear heels if they had to stand for 13 hours straight. When it came down to sistahs doin' it for themselves, we ditched the torture-shoes and busted out shoes in which we could actually DO STUFF.
Why doesn't this image have a pink sneaker? Why does femininity have to be expressed through the silhouette of a shoe that Senator Davis pointedly did NOT employ in this fight, because it - very literally - would have harmed her ability to stand her ground?
(Note: I'm not calling you out for posting it. Like I said, I understand the feeling of bonfemmie that inspired the image. Just frustrated that we feel like we can only portray femininity with images like this.)
Also. Democracy. It's great. But women live under many more kinds of political and governance systems than democratic ones. And all of them. All of those women should have access to health care and the ability to decide what to do with their reproductive concerns without this kind of attempted government interference.
Sometimes, my American citizenship is fully trumped by the fact that I am woman like all the other women in the world. This is one of those times.
So. This is not, to me, really an American Democracy Issue. It is a Global Women's Health And Human Rights Issue. I don't actually care very much how it got done (although DROP THAT MIC GIRL BECAUSE YOU CLOSED THE HOUSE).
I just care that it got done.
@stuffisthings Cato the Younger invented filibustering in the Roman democracy in 60 BC. To say that this act is not democratic is to misunderstand history, the definition of precedent, the definition of democracy, and the laws of time and space.
@theinvisiblecunt Cosign to all of this. To all dudes: it is helpful to keep in mind that women's actual lives are at stake here. As in, some women will risk death or serious injury to obtain illegal abortions, and some women will die because their doctors are not allowed to terminate a pregnancy that is killing them. And as long as some legislators would rather see dead women than dial down their misogynist policies, then yes, I think screaming and shenanigans are entirely justified.
Re: "a tactic that is unfair and democratic:" filibustering is legal, it happens all the time, and the Senate's filibuster reform bill recently failed. If it is here to stay and being used, I am not willing to let only my opponents use it against me simply so I can say I am more high-minded while less advantaged citizens suffer as a result. This ties into your moan about "the credo of every autocrat throughout history:" if the dems play minorly dirty like I want to them to by engaging in this filibuster, the end result is that abortion remains legal. If the dems had said "no no I would never engage in a filibuster, I Am Taking The High Road," then women who would have chosen abortion will be abused by their partners (because domestic abuse often increases or begins during pregnancy), drop out of high school and college, end up on welfare, and generally suffer but at least you will get to say your party doesn't filibuster.
Re: "they wouldn't have been able to make quorum:" you are pedantically dissecting a rhetorical point. Think about it harder and don't be snarkily dismissive.
Re: "law of rule:" the law of rule is built on sand if one party regularly tramples it.
I'm sorry, I'm being pretty mean but basically what I am saying is that I wouldn't care if the Civil Rights Act was passed because of civil disobedience or because the Black Panthers found and stabbed every racist in congress because sometimes, results mean more than procedure.
Nah nope I find it inspiring and awesome that women in Texas have not had their access to abortion further restricted, and I find it inspiring and awesome to see democratic elected officials fighting for my rights exactly as hard as the other side fights to erode them.
edit: I do understand how, for a man, the airy philosophical side of this battle--which is essentially built on sand because one side will regularly ignore its supposed honor at every possible opportunity to do so and gain a political victory--is just as important as the part that significantly affects real women's lives, though.