The Invisible Hand Is Amazingly Stupid

Musings of Avast! Right Winger* is all upset that we don't know where General Gordon's horse's grave is. Apparently, celebrating the Civil War is much more popular in the South than it is in the North . . . except for Pennsylvania, which isn't mentioned once in the post. Do you know why? Because Gettysburg** is in Pennsylvania, and there is no Civil War site more visited. Every person in Pennsylvania has been there. All school children in Pennsylvania make the trek at least once. All of which makes it a little odd that a piece of the coat Lincoln was wearing when he died is mentioned- pieces of coats are unsurprisingly unpopular- but the site of Lincoln's most famous speech is not. Hmmm.

____________________________________________________

I am alarmed when people think successful business owners would necessarily make great mayors, governors and presidents. Seriously alarmed. Why? Because what makes you great at business isn't anything you want unleashed on a country.

For example, the IT guys had been telling my boss forever to buy actual surge protectors and UPSs instead of those "surge protector" strips. Those things do nothing. My husband's studio has over $500 worth of surge protection, including a power conditioner. (I guess it makes the electricity soft and frizz free.) But no, meanboss don't spend no money, bichez.

Then we got a windstorm with 50mph winds. The power line was torn off the building and the resultant surge fried every computer that was on: our server and the billing computers doing backups. Oh, yes, we're screwed. You think he's the only business owner that pulls that shit? Think again. Business owners are all about the right now, what's making me money now, what's saving me money now. Next quarter, next year, next decade doesn't mean shit to them. Why do you think we're in the infrastructure mess we're in right now, anyway?

____________________________________

All mothers are women, but not all women are mothers.

I can't have children because it would likely kill me (why, yes, restrictions on abortion do make me nervous, why do you ask?), but I had decided not to be a mother long before I knew that. You know why? Because I know I wouldn't be a good mother. I simply don't have the patience or the boundless affection necessary to be a good mother***. I have the patience and affection necessary to be a good dog owner, so I do that instead.

Does this make me a bad person? I don't think so. I think what would make me a bad person is knowing that I don't have what it takes to be a good mother but doing it anyway.

There is a myth that simply have two X chromosomes automatically qualifies one to be a good mother, and that bad mothers are aberrations, crazy people and very, very rare. Yeah, not so much.

But mothers kill their children in this country much more often than most people would realize by simply reading the headlines; by conservative estimates it happens every few days, at least 100 times a year. Experts say more mothers than fathers kill their children under 5 years of age.

At least 100 times a year isn't an aberration, nor were every single one of those women delusional or psychotic at the they killed their child. Some women just aren't good mothers. Unfortunately, they have children anyway.

I think we should start taking women at their word when they say no to childbearing.

*Actually, it's Musings of a Vast Right Winger, but I think mine makes more sense.

**I'd give you a link, but there are so many pages with "gettysburg" in the address, I can't even figure out what the official website is. Because nobody in the North cares about the Civil War.

***I know, I know, it's different with my own kid/once you have a kid. Maybe. And if it's not, I've done something horrible to a person who had no say in it.

An Honest Look at Adoption

abortion, adoption, birth, mother, prochoice, prolife,
Look, I'm not saying adoption is a bad thing. I think it's a good thing. It's certainly a wonderful thing for people who can't have children and desperately want them. But I have never, ever, seen anything written from the point of view of the birth mother (who in this case had previously had an abortion). Now I have.

****Warning****

The post is a tough read. It's not freakin' Juno. It made me very sad, and very angry. Maybe, just maybe, before we suggest adoption as the panacea to unwanted pregnancies, we need to address the very real concerns brought up by a very real birth mother.

Just a few highlights for those who don't like to click.

Adoption fucked up my head far worse than abortion. I've googled over the years about the psychological aftereffects of giving up a baby, and what little I found is astonishing. Depression and suicide rates ridiculously high, comparable to PTSD - and beyond a shadow of a doubt, there is no way you can cook any post-abortion trauma study to come anywhere near post-adoption trauma levels. Strange how peer-reviewed studies on this are damn near non-existent; strange how nobody mentions any of this when it's not just your mind on the line, but also that of your kid or kids (more on that later). Strange how this is never on the radar when these stupid obstructionist anti-abortion rules are proposed by retrofuckwits.

. . .

Emotional fallout only matters to [pro lifers] as a political talking point, in a conversation that includes space only for what is convenient to their preexisting narratives. There's no space to talk about, for example, how, to give a baby up for adoption, you've got to get the father's signature on the papers, or else face legal hell (now, or later). I was raped, by a so-called friend; I had to go through legal hell to get a signature anyway. It was pretty damn adversarial.

. . .

To wind this down: one size fits all doesn't apply to adoption, any more than it does to abortion. If there's going to be discussion about mental issues arising from abortion, then there had damn well better start being just as much - if not more - discussion about mental issues arising from adoption. I cannot say that I'd be surprised to find out that any concern on the part of pro-lifers about birth mothers ended the second she signed the papers; I will scream "Hypocrisy!" as loud as I can if they try to pass off their latest brainfarts as such. You've seen this already: they also argue about the sanctity of a fetus' life, but I see no legislation addressing the quality of life of adoptees.

None of which matters to the kind of people who picket clinics. Not me, not the kid, nothing. All they care about is whether or not they win.

Truer words were never spoken.

Accidental Wisdom

right, religious, religion, palin, christian, abstinence, sex, teen, mother
Every now and then you see someone achieve wisdom, perhaps without even knowing it. Such is the case in the following rant from the Rapture Ready message boards.

Original post:

Cellophane: Teen abstinance unrealistic say's Bristol Palin
I'm surprised this hasn't been here yet!

Quote:
So says Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's 18-year-old daughter, Bristol, who told Fox News' Greta Van Susteren Monday night that the abstinence her mom preaches is "not realistic at all."

Bristol Palin, who gave birth in late December, described the rigors of being a teen mom, and while she wouldn't go into detail why it isn't realistic for guys and gals her age not to have sex, she did say it isn't smart to get knocked up.

"Everyone should wait 10 years," Palin said. "I hope people learn from my story. It's so much easier if you're married, have a house and career. It's not a situation you want to strive for."

She denied that her mother's anti-abortion views were the reason she went ahead with the pregnancy."It was my choice to have the baby," she said. "It doesn't matter what my mom's views are on it. It was my decision."

I'm not surprised that wasn't on the RR message boards before. Sarah Palin is their hero: fundamentalist, pro life, wife, mother to 5 children, dumb as a rock.

This post has so far generated 3 pages of replies, but it's this exchange started by Felixthecat that I find interesting.

Felixthecat: Well we do't have Palin family values in this household. If Sarah and her husband can't raise their own family properly, I sure don't want her as my President which is also a postion of leadership ... .I like Paul ... and his requirements for positions of leadership ... home life had to be lived as an example and that included the kiddies ... .

This is exactly what liberal critics of the religious right have been saying all along. Don't preach about everybody else when your own actions are exactly the same as those you preach about. (Felixthecat is not a troll. He/She has been posting regularly, in accordance with all the rest, for as long as I've been following the RR message boards.)

HeIsEnough (a SUPER Moderator!): That's really only in reference to leadership in the body of Christ, which is a higher calling than even the President of the United States, imo. So you only need to practice what you preach if you are a minister? Presidents shouldn't be expected to live up to their own morals? I bet that's exactly the tune SuperMod would sing if Obama were caught en flagrante.

Howdy: So easy to judge

felixthecat then achieves wisdom, perhaps accidentally: Oh, so Christians aren't to strive for what are His values? Since when is this true?

So a politician who openly claims to be a politician doesn't have to live what they believe? Where in the Bible are politicians excluded from this? I missed that.When any person takes on a public office they are being judged. We are to make judgement calls. THAT is in my Bible.

How they live and what their values and beliefs are are reflected in their lifestyle choices. How they raise their family shows their values and beliefs in action and how well they manage others.

To be brutally blunt I am so tired of Christianty used as a club to silence people like me when hypocrisy is pointed out. I am so tired of leaders of either stripe claiming to be "Christians" and leading lives that are very unChristian.

This kind of unChristian living hurts Christianity. It makes Christianity laughable. It fuels disbelief and cynicism.

Next you'll hear ... "no one is perfect". Of course that's true but many do a significantly better job than others and are more credible as authority figures and better suited for leadership in a church or politics.

Teen pregnancy is a MAJOR problem. Not all teens get pregnant. And here you have a duaghter proclaiming that it is impossible to have self control when it comes to sex. Now what does this say about "family values"? Or even "family values" from a Christian standpoint? Has abstaining just become a campaign slogan to recruit social conservatives? Is it I say one thing and my family lives another and that's fine?I'm a wierdo.

If someone claims to be a Christian, I want Christian family values promoted and lived by the person claiming to be a Christian. I YEARN for someone, male or female that can LIVE Christian values in the political arena. I'd like to see a Christian run, win and show how Christian family values DO WORK and see it in their family. THAT would be the example I'd like in a leader - secular or "religious".I know the media says otherwise ... but it is really true that Christian PARENTS can make a huge difference in the life of their kids. Parents teach them right from wrong. It is PARENTS that have the most impact. When they aren't around much ... trouble brews.

Getting back to the Bible, Paul also talks about the obligation to the family if a person serves Him directly. Often "saving souls" and "missionary work" is used as an excuse to NEGLECT their own family. I see lots of that going on ... . For what? Fame? Self game? It's not worth it.

wow. I'm used to that sort of stunning indictment- from the left, from atheists, not from fundamentalist christians. felixthecat is absolutely right. Abstinence, prolife, family values, etc are just campaign slogans used to secure votes. I've never seen anyone on the right actually notice before.

note: I am not blaming Sarah Palin for her daughter's behavior, nor am I judging Bristol Palin's decisions. However, the blatant hypocrisy of the right setting themselves up as the ultimate arbiters of "family values" is just plain wrong.