Sunday Reads: Honestly, and I am being honest here…Posted: February 5, 2012
Perhaps I should word that a bit differently…Ron Paul is a jackass…if you prefer.
Hell, ass is used in the bible so the fundies shouldn’t have a problem with it.
And honestly, I don’t care if they do have a problem with it.Vodpod videos no longer available.
I am not sure Ron Paul, and the rest of the PLUBs for that matter, are fully aware of just how ridiculous their argument about “abortion lovin’…full term, nine pound baby killers” sounds to a rational person. I’ve written my reaction to this below…but first, here are some thoughts on his “honest rape” statement from those around the blogosphere.
Just what is a dishonest rape?
I don’t understand this notion that women who support reproductive freedom, choice (and it is my body dammit), translates into “liking abortion,” as if needing an abortion is a desirable, even enjoyable situation.
And also as well, from GottaLaff:
Is this what you call “small government”? Because, call me crazy, but your government intrusion into women’s reproductive rights isn’t exactly hands-off.
Misogyny is never pretty.
First, what exactly is the definition of an “honest rape.” Ron Paul, What Exactly Is An “Honest Rape” | Care2 Causes
Just in case there was any question, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) is no friend to women. The latest evidence came during an interview on CNN where he told Piers Morgan that only in cases of “honest rape” would he consider abortion acceptable, and even then in he would just advise the woman to go to the emergency room for “a shot of estrogen.”
“Honest rape”. So, where do we begin?
I guess I would start by asking Paul to follow-up on just what exactly constitutes an “honest” rape. What kind of evidence would we need to show a lack of consent? Does a woman need to have signs she resisted? How much resistance counts before a rape goes from being “fraudulent” to being “honest”? Can spousal rape ever be “honest”? What about other forms of familial rape? What exactly is the bright line here?
Let’s be honest, Paul and his cohorts of misogynistic hate don’t have an exact definition of honest rape, because in their mind…women have to be submissive, men must control them. To them women are not deserving of respect, period. They see women as second class citizens. Women do not warrant the distinction of enjoying the same “rights” and “privileges” as men, therefore, women have no real cause to cry rape.
So with that kind of mindset, the phrase “honest rape” is nothing more than a condescending jab to put women in their place.
As I was looking up news items on Paul’s honest rape statement I ran across this, Belief in sex consent studied as rape definition. It is an article dated June 5th 1980, and it regards a case where a man is accused of raping a woman. The defense in this case asked,
…whether a man should be convicted of rape if he honestly believes his victim consented to intercourse.
Citing a recent Canadian Supreme Court decision which said:
..honest belief is a legitimate defense.
The Canadian Supreme Court ruling, which “drew the women’s wrath…” is described in detail here.
I use this archaic decision from Canada to make a point about the status of women according to Ron Paul, and his attitude that men draw the line when it comes to any issue regarding women.
Listen to his story about some woman, I guess I should preface that with “abortion liking” woman, who attempted to have a discussion about Paul’s pro-life stance on a woman’s right to choose whether or not to have an abortion. Paul uttered phrases like “abortion liking” and aborting 7 month fetuses and killing a nine pound baby a day before it emerges from the womb…
He says the women tell him he is not defining abortion the same way they are defining abortion, in other words, that he is taking it out of context…but his response is to disregard the woman’s point entirely…in his mind he is right, the women who try to argue with him are not worthy enough for his consideration.
The entire episode is something we see repeatedly. Obviously, it is ridiculous for me to even try to explain the anti-woman message he is delivering in these interviews. I guess I should just go back into the kitchen and make him some pie…because servitude is the bottom line when it comes to the opinion of women from people like Ron Paul.
Nope, there is no such thing as rape, or a woman’s right to say no, or a woman’s right to make their own decisions as an individual identity. In Paul’s world, men have that “right” to honestly believe women are not equal to men.
Well, I have other links for you this morning, and since I am writing the post so damn late, I will just list the news items for you…
Yesterday, the big news was Russia and China Block U.N. Action on Syrian Crisis – NYTimes.com
The veto and the mounting violence underlined the dynamics shaping what is proving to be the Arab world’s bloodiest revolt: diplomatic stalemate and failure as Syria plunges deeper into what many are already calling a civil war. Diplomats have lamented their lack of options in pressuring the Syrian government, and even some Syrian dissidents worry about what the growing confrontation will mean for a country reeling from bloodshed and hardship.
The veto is almost sure to embolden the government of President Bashar al-Assad, which brazenly carried out the assault on Homs on the day that the Security Council had planned to vote. It came, too, around the anniversary of its crackdown in 1982 on another Syrian city, Hama, by Mr. Assad’s father, Hafez, in which at least 10,000 people were killed in one of the bloodiest episodes in modern Arab history.
“It’s quite clear — this is a license to do more of the same and worse,” said Peter Harling, an expert on Syria at the International Crisis Group. “The regime will take it for granted that it can escalate further. We’re entering a new phase that will be far more violent still than what we’ve seen now.”
There will be much hand-wringing in the West at China and Russia’s refusal yesterday to endorse a robust censure of the Syrian regime. But even if Moscow’s position had been different, little would have changed. The beleaguered regime of Bashar al-Assad is simply not amenable to diplomatic pressure. It is interested only in clinging to power, at whatever cost to the Syrian people and regardless of the consequences.
Already, somewhere between 5,500 and 7,500 people have been killed, and perhaps 35,000 seriously wounded. Tens of thousands have been imprisoned and thousands have simply disappeared. Torture is rife. There are some 20,000 refugees, mainly in neighbouring Turkey and Lebanon. There’s every reason to believe that it can only get worse.
Many of the Syrian protesters have been clamouring for outside intervention to protect them from their government’s ruthless onslaught. But the reality is that there is little the outside world can do, short of intervening militarily. After Libya, that’s not on the cards. The Arab League has tried and failed to mediate a solution. Neighbouring Turkey supports the opposition, but not to the extent of invading Syria on its behalf. Economic sanctions have had a serious effect, but not enough to bring down the regime. Bashar al-Assad and his family know that the most they have to fear from the UN – even if the Russians drop their protective veto – are toothless resolutions.
The full text of Susan Rice’s statement regarding the UN Security Council meeting and vote can be found here: Explanation of Vote by Ambassador Susan E. Rice, U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations, At a Security Council Session on Syria, February 4, 2012
Mr. President, the United States is disgusted that a couple of members of this Council continue to prevent us from fulfilling our sole purpose here-addressing an ever-deepening crisis in Syria and a growing threat to regional peace and security.
For months this Council has been held hostage by a couple of members. These members stand behind empty arguments and individual interests while delaying and seeking to strip bare any text that would pressure Asad to change his actions. This intransigence is even more shameful when you consider that at least one of these members continues to deliver weapons to Asad.
There are also reports that Assad’s regime has released the terrorist behind the 7/7 attacks in London. Syria releases the 7/7 ‘mastermind’ – Telegraph
Abu Musab al-Suri had been held in Syria for six years after being captured by the CIA in 2005 and transported to the country of his birth under its controversial extraordinary rendition programme.
But he is now said to have been released as a warning to the US and Britain about the consequences of turning their backs on President al-Assad’s regime as it tries to contain the uprising in the country.
Meanwhile, in Russia, Anti-Putin protest makes a splash – Europe – World – The Independent
Tens of thousands of Muscovites endured icy temperatures of around minus 20 degrees to attend a protest march against Vladimir Putin yesterday.
A month before the Russian Prime Minister stands for re-election as president to the Kremlin, the first major rally since the New Year showed that the anti-government protests which began after parliamentary elections in early December are not just going to go away.
After the march yesterday, a number of opposition leaders addressed the crowds from the stage. One ripped up a portrait of Mr Putin to loud cheers, while others demanded new, free elections. “Russia without Putin,” the crowd chanted repeatedly. The organisers claimed 120,000 people had attended.
Over here in the US, Romney won the Nevada Caucus yesterday. The only thing I have to say about that is to post a link to this cartoon:
From Minx’s Missing Link File: Inuit Insight on Fear of Killer Whales : Discovery News
Biologists from Manitoba visited 11 Canadian Nunavut Inuit communities and collated information from over 100 interviews with hunters and elders as part of this research. They published their results yesterday in the open access journal Aquatic Biosystems, saying that the increase in hunting territories available to killer whales in the Arctic due to climate change and melting sea ice could “seriously affect the marine ecosystem balance.”
Killer whales are top marine predators wherever they are found. The whales “seem to eat everything from schools of small fish to large baleen whales, over twice their own size,” reported the biologists. “Aarlirijuk,” or the fear of killer whales, apparently influences the behavior of killer whales’ prey. Smaller mammals seek refuge in shallow waters or on shore, and larger prey run away, dive deep, or attempt to hide among the ice. Even narwhal, which are capable of stabbing a killer whale with their tusks (although this is likely to result in the deaths of both animals), will run to shallow waters and wait until the whales give up.
Inuit were also able to describe first-hand how killer whales hunted, including several reports of how killer whales co-operated to kill the much larger bowhead. During the hunt some whales were seen holding the bowhead’s flippers or tail, others covering its blowhole, and others biting or ramming to cause internal damage. Occasionally dead bowheads, with bite marks and internal injuries but with very little eaten, are found by locals.
Easy Like Sunday Morning Link of the Week: Here is an article by James Wolcott, Portrait of the Artist as a Young Chain-Ganger | Blogs | Vanity Fair
All Me, a documentary about the African-American artist Winfred Rembert directed by Vivian Ducat, tugs the viewer along amiably and then takes you into a darker place, a chapter of history that even the most well-meaning movies set during the civil rights have prettified, Hollywood being Hollywood. At first All Me seems like a folksy, inspirational, educational portrait of an accidental, self-taught, artist that could be condensed into a segment on CBS’s Sunday Morning, the perfect complement to the first sip of hazelnut coffee. Born in Georgia in 1945, Rembert leads us on a tour through his past, the juke joints and barber shops and churches, Saturdays at “Colored Folks’ Corner” where you had to watch out for a character nicknamed Black Masterson, who’d hit you with the horseshoe he always carried around just for the hell of it, the daily hell of picking cotton in the broiling sun for fifty cents or a buck a day, which he started doing at the strapping age of six. (Cotton balls are the pointillistic dots of his Southern scenes.) Even the hardship, the indignities of being called nigger by white storeowners, and the thick humid air of intimidation that clung during the Jim Crow era are related in a manner that relegates them to a past that we can feel safely put to bed, this country after all what Gore Vidal called the United States of Amnesia.
Please read the rest of Wolcott’s piece at the link.
Since it is getting late, almost 9am, I will finish it up here.
What are you all reading about today? See you down in the comment section later on…