Things and, Oh, You know, Just Rivers Running Backwards, No Biggie

–So, overnight, the Mississippi ran backwards.

–“History’s ghosts are powerful. Those who dare summon them should be clear about what they want, and be prepared for the consequences.” Do you think it’s too late to add that as an epigraph to the Sue Allen project?

–Apparently, I should have just bought some reviews for A City of Ghosts or something. How is this remotely ethical? How does that not result in Amazon reviews you simply can’t trust?

–The Professor, excuse me, Dr. Professor, ruined my lunch by sending me this quote, “I believe that if you have to choose between new life and existing life, you should choose new life. The person who has had an opportunity to live at least has been given that gift by God and should make way for new life on earth.” This is Paul Weyrich explaining why it’s totally cool to let moms die. And this is pro-life. I am convinced women do not count as life in some circles.

–I will give you a dollar if you can explain to me how

Carr, who is a delegate at the convention, was summarized Tuesday in a publication called the Memphis Flyer as saying that he agreed with Akin that women are capable of terminating pregnancies after being raped.

He denied saying that on Tuesday.

can be immediately followed by

“I understand there is a body of scientific evidence out there that suggests that a woman who has been violently raped has some biological mechanism that may inhibit her ability to conceive,” Carr said.

and make a lick of sense. Are reporters really under the delusion that what Akin said is different than what Carr is saying? If Akin was actually implying that women could abort a pregnancy through sheer force of will–if anyone believed that–, conservative church services across this land would look a lot different. They believe abortion is wrong. There’s no “Unless you use witchcraft to bring it about” exception.

15 thoughts on “Things and, Oh, You know, Just Rivers Running Backwards, No Biggie

  1. Count the weasel phrases: “I understand” “out there [somewhere! surely!]” “suggests” “some biological mechanism” “may inhibit.”

    This unimpeachable body of evidence must be vetted by a peer review board common to the Campfield School of Epidemiology.

  2. No, the difference is between “terminat[e] pregnancies” and “inhibit her ability to conceive.” If there’s no conception, there’s no pregnancy to terminate. Of course, Akin said the latter, not the former, so Carr is agreeing with him.

    But, ya know, I now understand the conceptual problem these folks are having: they are confusing human women with female rabbits, who can auto-terminate pregnancies in dire circumstances.

  3. Yeah, I think it’s the Gannett folks’ inability to understand what Akin is saying. I got in an exchange with Chas Sisk about this yesterday. Clearly, there’s not a pro-life person who would be cool with women just aborting pregnancies we didn’t want through use of mind power, since they’re against women aborting pregnancies.

    Akin simply has to be talking about women being able to prevent conception. Gannett’s strange inability to see his nutjobbery clearly is pissing me off.

  4. I think it’s more of the new model of portraying “objectivity,” which is to present both sides as if both have equal merit and leave it up to the reader to decide which is most persuasive. Thus does the “truth” emerge.

  5. And on that Paul Weyrich thing: I don’t care what Paul Weyrich thought about the relative importance of potential and actual lives. He, and the women he loved, were free to live their (actual) lives according to their beliefs. What I do care about is that by attempting to make (traditional Catholic) beliefs the law of the land, Paul Weyrich’s followers are attempting to make an establishment of religion, and trampling on my rights as an observant Jew to say that if such a choice must be made, the actual life takes precedence. This is not just attempting to control women; it is attempting to control the ways others can observe their own religious tenets.

  6. About the Amazon review thing…which has been up my butt for awhile–I now only buy a book after I’ve read 3 two-star reviews. I trust the bad reviews for honesty that I can no longer believe to be in the good reviews. And, honestly, a lot of times what people don’t like about a book tells me whether or not I will like it. (Too long, too much history, too much sex, too much foul language….these are two-star reviews that send me for the “buy now” button post-haste.)

  7. As to the Weyrich quote….that attitude goes a long way to explaining why I and other pro-life women like myself no longer affiliate with the political “pro-life” movement, which is really a “pro-birth, infant fetishising” movement.

  8. I can’t talk about more about that quote – but I appreciate nm voicing that important point too.

    I can talk about amazon. I think it is a problem. But it’s not exclusive to books. It’s about truth in advertising all over the place. When developers theoretically portion out condo units to their investors so they can say “40% sold” before they even break ground, they’re lying too. And the like.

    And, it is a little bit kept in check by the forum itself – see all those hilarious reviews for the pens made special for women:
    http://www.amazon.co.uk/product-reviews/B004FTGJUW/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

    and

    http://www.amazon.com/BIC-Retractable-Medium-Point-FHAP21-Black/product-reviews/B005PFESMG/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

  9. Oh, Professor, thank you for that! These are possibly the best reviews I’ve read since Epicurious published that recipe for boiling water.

    My favorite review of the pens in the UK packaging: They also stained my knickers blue for some reason. I’m still laughing.

  10. I’m writing about the Gannett problem for Pith, because I don’t think it’s just a matter of “both sides” or trying to appear objective. If I were anti-abortion, I’d be just as weirded out by it. It’s as if the reporters don’t understand what anti-abortion advocates object to.

    Or else they think that you get pregnant the second a man ejaculates. Ugh, I hadn’t considered that part. I’m going to leave that wondering out.

  11. Pingback: Now We’re Just Haggling Over Price « Just Another Pretty Farce

Comments are closed.