Sunday, September 16, 2018

Manafucked = schadenfreudelicious...but we're still very much under attack

Treason's greedings, fellow Dot Calm readers, freedom fighters, and truth crusaders!

My dad and I have had several trips and health challenges this summer...including a death in the family and a few fun things, like seeing family, friends, and HAMILTON!!!!!

Himself, who asks nothing, wanted to see Hamilton several months ago, when it was still on Broadway. That would have cost me an arm and a leg to get us there and back, get handicap-friendly hotel accommodations, get tickets, etc. It might as well have been Timbuktu.

So...when the show came to our part of the world, I got us tickets...and off to a nice dinner at a fancy restaurant and to see Hamilton we went. Yay!

My own health challenges have been minor--things like common colds and chronic ailment flare-ups.

My dad's challenges have (thankfully!) been minor, too, looking back--we think he had a TIA (aka mini-stroke) that seems to have left almost negligible right-side weakness...and he has been under-medicated for thyroid (which regulates metabolism) for weeks, and the lethargy etc. finally caught up with him and hit him (and me as his care-giver) like a ton of bricks.

So, we've had a challenging summer--especially the two weeks before the past two weeks--and (thankfully!) the last two weeks have been oh-so-much better. My dad is much much much more his usual self, and that's all the medicine I need, so I'm a lot happier, too.

And that, in a nutshell, is where I've been since Second Civil War Day (LOL!).

So.

Now that I'm back...

As you know, with tRUmp in office, we get a month's fire-hose of news on a daily basis, hence my usual updates coming mostly as near-weekly video posts on Dot Calm's shadow's M00bies from the Resistance.

But I'm even behind on that because I've been out of town and sick so often of late...and I promise I'll catch up as soon as I can.

So where does that leave us Patriots right here right now?

Unfortunately, it leaves us still under attack.

Democrats have been able to delay the vote on Kavanaugh by a week. So NOW IS THE TIME to call EVERY senator who hasn't yet thumped the table announcing a loud "NO!" and give them a piece of your mind.

Although it's possible that, once back in power, Democrats would impeach and remove Kavanaugh for perjury--for which he belongs disbarred and possibly in prison rather than on the Supreme Court--but I wouldn't want to bet money on Dems having any kind of backbone when they wouldn't even hold chimpie and dickhead cheney accountable for torture and murdering hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis.

Speaking of w the chimp, allow me to disabuse you of mistaking him for a "kinder, gentler" (to quote his benighted father) Republican: w is NOW FUNDING THE COVER-UP of tRUmp's many crimes.

It is to barf...urk.

But I digress.

Back to Kava-OH-HELL-NO...

1. Kavanaugh has already demonstrated both his ignorance and his undying fealty to extreme right-wing philosophy by pronouncing pregnancy-preventing BIRTH CONTROL to be abortion-inducing. This is how insane these creatures are--they are so divorced from reality that they can't even understand that you can't abort a pregnancy that you prevent in the first place.

2. One of Kavanaugh's many lies to deliberately-gullible Senators like Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski is that Roe v Wade is established law, not subject to being overturned by SCOTUS. But there is proof that he believes otherwise--that he believes it both possible and desirable to overturn Roe v Wade--and that he is more than willing to work toward that end.

Handmaidens, anyone?

3. Christine Blasey Ford has made a credible accusation that, in high school, Kavanaugh and a fellow male student attempted to rape her.

Frankly, I would not find it hard to believe that such a man, who clearly hates and fears women with a seething passion, wouldn't have sexual assault as a pattern behavior.

4. Kavanaugh LIED REPEATEDLY under oath--he perjured himself repeatedly over the course of several years--so that he could arrogate the power of judgeships from which to enact the extreme right-wing agenda.

Remember, friends--perjury is a federal crime punishable by up to five years in prison.

And THIS is who tRUmp and the gropey oligarch perv-pedo-putinists want lording over us from the highest court in the land for the next two generations.

But wait--there's moar (double urk!).

Kavanaugh believes that Democratic presidents should be thrown under the jail but that Republicans are above the law.

While he was all for indicting Bill Clinton for lying about adult consensual extramarital sex, he doesn't believe that tRUmp should even be investigated, let alone questioned, let alone impeached and removed from office.

In other words, Kavanaugh believes that, as long as tRUmp remains in office, he is above the law.

And for as long as tRUmp is above the law, then he can do anything and everything he likes...from shooting someone in cold blood on 5th Avenue to eschewing term limits and declaring himself king for life so that he dies in office a free man, regardless of whatever crimes he's committed.

See why this is so important?

Please, friends--call your senators if you're unlucky enough to have Democrats Donnelly, Manchin, McCaskill, Heitkamp, Nelson, or Jones or if you've got Republicans Collins, Murkowski, Flake, Corker, or Paul (contact information below).

I was shocked at how late Virginia's Mark Warner came to the party--unbelievable that a so-called Democrat would even have considered NOT voting "no" immediately on someone of Kavanaugh's ilk.

Yikes.

I'm sure that it was all the calls and e-mails and tweets from me and like-minded Virginians that finally swayed him into doing the right thing.

But that's not much of a comfort, friends, is it?

I hope we get a decent primary challenger for Warner--right now, his only charm is that he's ostensibly better than a Republican.

Meanwhile...

If you'd like even moar ammunition for contacting your senators than what's in todaze post, then please consider the following items, posted below my sign-off for your comfort and convenience.

Reading the first piece from Design Mom's blawg is not a request--it's mandatory. It's an amazing piece of reasoning that was originally presented as a monster Twitter thread, which is where I first found it. So please do read the whole thing and please don't trap on a missing detail here or there--remember the 280 character limit the lady was constrained to writing the thread, which she captured and posted on her blawg, typos and all.

Keep fighting--and, whatever you do, make sure that you and all your Democratic friends are registered to vote and that you know where your polling places and times are because, when Democrats vote, we all win!

- Dot Calm's shadow

P.S.--I know I've relegated one of the yummiest stories of one of tRUmp's shittiest weeks evar to a mere footnote, but let me just say that seeing Paul Manafucked has been absolutely schadenfreudelicious. Given that as the crowning glory to Bob Woodward's book "Fear" (which I've already ordered) and the fascist-coward-trying-to-pretend-he's-on-the-right-side-of-history New York Times Op-Ed essay writer, tRUmp must well and truly be shitting bricks...which means that, aside from worrying and wondering whether all of the non-white, non-Christian, non-rich, non-straight non-men will get skrooed out of their rights by an alt-right SCOTUS, it's been a dam fine week.
 
***** ***** ***** ***** *****

https://www.designmom.com/twitter-thread-abortion/

My Twitter Thread on Abortion

September 13, 2018
Today, I tried something new. I wrote a Twitter thread for the first time. It’s about abortion, and how I think we need to approach the topic differently.  I thought I’d share it here, because I know many of you don’t use Twitter. 
So here’s the thread, broken up into small Tweet-size pieces.
: )
I’m a mother of six, and a Mormon. I have a good understanding of arguments surrounding abortion, religious and otherwise. I’ve been listening to men grandstand about women’s reproductive rights, and I’m convinced men actually have zero interest in stopping abortion. Here’s why…
If you want to stop abortion, you need to prevent unwanted pregnancies. And men are 100% responsible for unwanted pregnancies. No for real, they are. Perhaps you are thinking: IT TAKES TWO! And yes, it does take two for _intentional_ pregnancies.
But ALL unwanted pregnancies are caused by the irresponsible ejaculations of men. Period. Don’t believe me? Let me walk you through it. Let’s start with this: women can only get pregnant about 2 days each month. And that’s for a limited number of years.
That makes 24 days a year a women might get pregnant. But men can _cause_ pregnancy 365 days a year. In fact, if you’re a man who ejaculates multiple times a day, you could cause multiple pregnancies daily. In theory a man could cause 1000+ unwanted pregnancies in just one year.
And though their sperm gets crappier as they age, men can cause unwanted pregnancies from puberty till death. So just starting with basic biology + the calendar it’s easy to see men are the issue here.
But what about birth control? If a woman doesn’t want to risk an unwanted pregnancy, why wouldn’t she just use birth control? If a women can manage to figure out how to get an abortion, surely she can get birth control, right? Great questions.
Modern birth control is possibly the greatest invention of the last century, and I am very grateful for it. It’s also brutal. The side effects for many women are ridiculously harmful. So ridiculous, that when an oral contraception for men was created, it wasn’t approved…
… because of the side effects. And the list of side effects was about 1/3 as long as the known side effects for women’s oral contraception.
There’s a lot to be unpacked just in that story, but I’ll simply point out (in case you didn’t know) that as a society, we really don’t mind if women suffer, physically or mentally, as long as it makes things easier for men.
But good news, Men: Even with the horrible side effects, women are still very willing to use birth control. Unfortunately it’s harder to get than it should be. Birth control options for women require a doctor’s appointment and a prescription. It’s not free, and often not cheap.
In fact there are many people trying to make it more expensive by fighting to make sure insurance companies refuse to cover it. Oral contraceptives for women can’t be acquired easily, or at the last minute. And they don’t work instantly.
If we’re talking about the pill, it requires consistent daily use and doesn’t leave much room for mistakes, forgetfulness, or unexpected disruptions to daily schedules. And again, the side effects can be brutal. I’M STILL GRATEFUL FOR IT PLEASE DON’T TAKE IT AWAY.
I’m just saying women’s birth control isn’t simple or easy. In contrast, let’s look at birth control for men, meaning condoms. Condoms are readily available at all hours, inexpensive, convenient, and don’t require a prescription. They’re effective, and work on demand, instantly.
Men can keep them stocked up just in case, so they’re always prepared. Amazing! They are so much easier than birth control options for women. As a bonus, in general, women love when men use condoms. They keep us from getting STDs, they don’t lessen our pleasure during sex…
… or prevent us from climaxing. And the best part? Clean up is so much easier — no waddling to the toilet as your jizz drips down our legs. So why in the world are there ever unwanted pregnancies? Why don’t men just use condoms every time they have sex? Seems so simple, right?
Oh. I remember. Men _don’t_ love condoms. In fact, men frequently pressure women to have sex without a condom. And it’s not unheard of for men to remove the condom during sex, without the women’s permission or knowledge. (Pro-tip: That’s assault.)
Why would men want to have sex without a condom? Good question. Apparently it’s because for the minutes they are penetrating their partner, having no condom on gives the experience more pleasure.
So… there are men willing to risk getting a woman pregnant — which means literally risking her life, her health, her social status, her relationships, and her career, so that they can experience a few minutes of _slightly_ more pleasure? Is that for real? Yes. Yes it is.
What are we talking about here pleasure-wise? If there’s a pleasure scale, with pain beginning at zero and going down into the negatives, a back-scratch falling at 5, and an orgasm without a condom being a 10, where would sex _with_ a condom fall? Like a 7 or 8?
So it’s not like sex with a condom is _not_ pleasurable, it’s just not _as_ pleasurable. An 8 instead of a 10. Let me emphasize that again: Men regularly choose to put women at massive risk by having non-condom sex, in order to experience a few minutes of slightly more pleasure.
Now keep in mind, for the truly condom-averse, men also have a non-condom, always-ready birth control built right in, called the pull out. It’s not perfect, and it’s a favorite joke, but it is also 96% effective.
So surely, we can expect men who aren’t wearing a condom to at least pull out every time they have sex, right?
Nope.
And why not?
Well, again, apparently it’s _slightly_ more pleasurable to climax inside a vagina than, say, on their partner’s stomach. So men are willing to risk the life, health and well-being of women, in order to experience a tiny bit more pleasure for like 5 seconds during orgasm.
It’s mind-boggling and disturbing when you realize that’s the choice men are making. And honestly, I’m not as mad as I should be about this, because we’ve trained men from birth that their pleasure is of utmost importance in the world. (And to dis-associate sex and pregnancy.)
While we’re here, let’s talk a bit more about pleasure and biology. Did you know that a man CAN’T get a woman pregnant without having an orgasm? Which means that we can conclude getting a woman pregnant is a pleasurable act for men.
But did you further know that men CAN get a woman pregnant without HER feeling any pleasure at all? In fact, it’s totally possible for a man to impregnate a woman even while causing her excruciating pain, trauma or horror.
In contrast, a woman can have non-stop orgasms with or without a partner and never once get herself pregnant. A woman’s orgasm has literally nothing to do with pregnancy or fertility — her clitoris exists not for creating new babies, but simply for pleasure.
No matter how many orgasms she has, they won’t make her pregnant. Pregnancies can only happen when men have an orgasm. Unwanted pregnancies can only happen when men orgasm irresponsibly.
What this means is a women can be the sluttliest slut in the entire world who loves having orgasms all day long and all night long and she will never find herself with an unwanted pregnancy unless a man shows up and ejaculates irresponsibly.
Women enjoying sex does not equal unwanted pregnancy and abortion. Men enjoying sex and having irresponsible ejaculations is what causes unwanted pregnancies and abortion.
Let’s talk more about responsibility. Men often don’t know, and don’t ask, and don’t think to ask, if they’ve caused a pregnancy. They may never think of it, or associate sex with making babies at all. Why? Because there are 0 consequences for men who cause unwanted pregnancies.
If the woman decides to have an abortion, the man may never know he caused an unwanted pregnancy with his irresponsible ejaculation.
If the woman decides to have the baby, or put the baby up for adoption, the man may never know he caused an unwanted pregnancy with his irresponsible ejaculation, or that there’s now a child walking around with 50% of his DNA.
If the woman does tell him that he caused an unwanted pregnancy and that she’s having the baby, the closest thing to a consequence for him, is that he may need to pay child support. But our current child support system is well-known to be a joke.
61% of men (or women) who are legally required to pay it, simply don’t. With little or no repercussions. Their credit isn’t even affected. So, many men keep going as is, causing unwanted pregnancies with irresponsible ejaculations and never giving it thought.
When the topic of abortion comes up, men might think: Abortion is horrible; women should not have abortions. And never once consider the man who CAUSED the unwanted pregnancy. If you’re not holding men responsible for unwanted pregnancies, then you are wasting your time.
Stop protesting at clinics. Stop shaming women. Stop trying to overturn abortion laws. If you actually care about reducing or eliminating the number of abortions in our country, simply HOLD MEN RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS.
What would that look like? What if there was a real and immediate consequence for men who cause an unwanted pregnancy? What kind of consequence would make sense? Should it be as harsh, painful, nauseating, scarring, expensive, risky, and life-altering…
… as forcing a woman to go through a 9-month unwanted pregnancy?
In my experience, men really like their testicles. If irresponsible ejaculations were putting their balls at risk, they would stop being irresponsible. Does castration seem like a cruel and unusual punishment? Definitely.
But is it worse than forcing 500,000 women a year to puke daily for months, gain 40 pounds, and then rip their bodies apart in childbirth? Is a handful of castrations worse than women dying during forced pregnancy & childbirth?
Put a castration law on the books, implement the law, let the media tell the story, and in 3 months or less, tada! abortions will have virtually disappeared. Can you picture it? No more abortions in less than 3 months, without ever trying to outlaw them. Amazing.
For those of you who consider abortion to be murder, wouldn’t you be on board with having a handful of men castrated, if it prevented 500,000 murders each year?
And if not, is that because you actually care more about policing women’s bodies, morality, and sexuality, than you do about reducing or eliminating abortions? (That’s a rhetorical question.)
Hey, you can even have the men who will be castrated bank their sperm before it happens — just in case they want to responsibly have kids some day.
Can’t wrap your head around a physical punishment for men? Even though you seem to be more than fine with physical punishments for women? Okay. Then how about this prevention idea: At the onset of puberty, all males in the U.S. could be required by law to get a vasectomy.
Vasectomies are very safe, totally reversible, and about as invasive as an doctor’s exam for a woman getting a birth control prescription. There is some soreness afterwards for about 24 hours, but that’s pretty much it for side effects.
(So much better than The Pill, which is taken by millions of women in our country, the side effects of which are well known and can be brutal.)
If/when the male becomes a responsible adult, and perhaps finds a mate, if they want to have a baby, the vasectomy can be reversed, and then redone once the childbearing stage is over. And each male can bank their sperm before the vasectomy, just in case.
It’s not that wild of an idea. 80% of males in the U.S. are circumcised, most as babies. And that’s not reversible.
Don’t like my ideas? That’s fine. I’m sure there are better ones. Go ahead and suggest your own ideas. My point is that it’s nonsense to focus on women if you’re trying to get rid of abortions. Abortion is the “cure” for an unwanted pregnancy.
If you want to stop abortions, you need to prevent the “disease” – meaning, unwanted pregnancies. And the only way to do that, is by focusing on men, because: MEN CAUSE 100% OF UNWANTED PREGNANCIES. Or. IRRESPONSIBLE EJACULATIONS BY MEN CAUSE 100% OF UNWANTED PREGNANCIES.
If you’re a man, what would the consequence need to be for you to never again ejaculate irresponsibly? Would it be money related? Maybe a loss of rights or freedoms? Physical pain?
Ask yourselves: What would it take for you to value the life of your sexual partner more than your own temporary pleasure or convenience?
Are you someone who learns better with analogies? Let’s try this one: Think of another great pleasure in life, let’s say food. Think of your favorite meal, dessert, or drink.
What if you found out that every time you indulge in that favorite food you risked causing great physical and mental pain for someone you know intimately. You might not cause any pain, but it’s a real risk.
Well, you’d probably be sad, but never indulge in that food again, right? Not worth the risk!
And then, what if you further found out, there was a simple thing you could do before you ate that favorite food, and it would eliminate the risk of causing pain to someone else. Which is great news!
BUT the simple thing you need to do makes the experience of eating the food slightly less pleasurable. To be clear, it would still be VERY pleasurable, but slightly less so. Like maybe you have to eat the food with a fork or spoon that you don’t particularly like.
Would you be willing to do that simple thing, and eliminate the risk of causing pain to someone you know intimately, every single time you ate your favorite food?
OF COURSE YOU WOULD.
Condoms (or even pulling out) is that simple thing. Don’t put women at risk. Don’t choose to maximize your own pleasure if it risks causing women pain.
Men mostly run our government. Men mostly make the laws. And men could eliminate abortions in 3 months or less without ever touching an abortion law or evening mentioning women.
In summary: STOP TRYING TO CONTROL WOMEN’S BODIES AND SEXUALITY. UNWANTED PREGNANCIES ARE CAUSED BY MEN.
The end.

***** ***** ***** ***** *****

http://dotcalmspage.blogspot.com/2015/10/mcfall-v-shimp-does-not-exclude-women.html

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 07, 2015


McFall v. Shimp Does Not Exclude Women


The 1978 ruling of Judge John P. Flaherty, Jr., in McFall v. Shimp established bodily autonomy as a legal precedent that does not exclude women, including those seeking abortions.
 
Here are some key points.
 
The plaintiff, Robert McFall, suffered from a rare bone marrow disease and sought the court to compel the defendant, McFall's cousin Shimp, to donate bone marrow to save McFall's life after Shimp refused.

The question posed by the plaintiff was that, in order to save the life of one of its members by the only means available, may society infringe upon one's absolute right to his "bodily security"?

The court found the decision to rest with the defendant, stating that "to compel him to submit to an intrusion of his body would change every concept and principle" upon which American society is founded.

Justice Flaherty continued: "To do so would defeat the sanctity of the individual, and would impose a rule which would know no limits, and one could not imagine where the line would be drawn.
 
"... For a society which respects the rights of one individual, to sink its teeth into the jugular vein or neck of one of its members and suck from it sustenance for another member, is revolting to our hard-wrought concepts of jurisprudence. Forceable extraction of living body tissue causes revulsion to the judicial mind. Such would raise the spectre of the swastika and the Inquisition, reminiscent of the horrors this portends."

So, whose property is a woman's body? Does it belong to the state, which may then decide who lives and dies? Does it belong to some stranger she never met and may never meet? Does it belong to her father or her husband, as the Bible says?

Or does a woman's body belong to the woman herself just as a man's body belongs to the man himself?
***** ***** ***** ***** *****
 
CALL YOUR SENATORS NOW!!!!!

https://www.senate.gov/senators/index.htm

posted by Dot Calm @ 7:51 PM