The Democrats Have Gone Completely Nuts

Tell me I have imagined this:

House Democrats are introducing legislation that would give all mothers, regardless of income, the option to stay at home to raise their children. It’s called the Woman’s Option to Raise Kids (WORK) Act.

The WOMAN’s option? How about the man’s option to raise kids? Child-rearing is now officially to become a woman’s “job”? And that’s being proposed by the Democrats?It is now considered progressive to sponsor the idea of women dedicating themselves exclusively to raising children? And paying for this “choice” with taxpayers’ money?

This is a typo, right?  The Democrats cannot be introducing this barbaric bill.

The War on Women is being waged by the Democrats and the Republicans simultaneously, it seems.

“We will remove abortion and birth control so that all you do is procreate,” one party says.

“Because that’s all you good for anyways,” chimes in the other party.

My Childbearing Fears

I promised to explain why I’m terrified of having children, so here is the promised post.

I’m not afraid of the expense because I know that if I really want something, I’ll find money for that.

I don’t fear that it will impact my career. For one, mine isn’t the kind of a career that requires putting in endless hours at work. I’m not a lawyer or a doctor. I also have really supportive people at work. Last year, a colleague had a baby, and everybody just rallied around her and helped her out. And my female role model at my department has 4 kids, two of whom she raised as  a single mother. So I have no professional fears either.

I’m not afraid that I will find it impossible to publish with a kid around. My autistic brain thrives in an environment where there is noise, interruption, and distractions. I write with a TV on and switch constantly between writing and blogging because writing doesn’t happen otherwise. Place me in a quiet environment with no distractions, and writing stops. Put me in a rowdy sports bar, and I become insanely productive.

I’m not afraid that motherhood will spoil my figure because I’m not an idiot.

I’m not afraid that it will prevent me from going out as much as I want because I’m long past my bar-hopping days anyways.

I’m not afraid that I will not enjoy parenthood because I know for a fact that I will.

I’m not afraid that it will be a drain on my time because I can see very well what I can gladly and easily sacrifice to make quite a lot of time for parenting. (It isn;t blogging, so don’t you worry. 🙂 )

I’m not afraid of sleepless nights because I don’t need a whole lot of sleep anyways.

What I am afraid of is the following, beautifully articulated by Elisabeth Badinter in her book The Conflict:

A child can turn the parents’ connection completely upside down. There is no greater antithesis to the couple as lovers than the couple as parents. Even of they do not sleep with their child, it is hard to switch from one role to the other. . . The woman-as-mother may well obliterate the woman-as-lover and endanger the couple.

I’m not an unhinged freakazoid, so it would never occur to me to sleep with a child instead of in the arms of an adult sexual partner. But the issue remains. I’ve seen the phenomenon that Badinter describes happen too many times. And a person who fulfills all of her or his tactile needs through a relationship with the child is a horrible parent anyways. So what’s the point of sacrificing one’s sex life to become a lousy parent?

I mean just on a very basic practical level, how do you combine being an intensely romantic couple with having a  child around? If you don’t understand my question, then it is possible you were never a very sexual couple to begin with, so disregard the post.

I wish I saw couples who managed to do preserve their intense sexual connection while being parents. Observing how people actually do it would help enormously. Or, at least, reading about them. Or hearing some urban mythology on the subject. Or seeing them in a dream.

It took me a week to write this post because I’m afraid of getting comments that will say, “Yes, sex life diminishes when a child is born but that is all worth it because you get the happiness of being a parent in return.” Such comments send my blood pressure through the roof, people. It might be worth it for you but, for me, who is not you but a completely separate person, there is absolutely nothing in the world worth sacrificing my existence as a sexual woman in a sexual relationship. This is who I am and this is my system of priorities to which I am as entitled as you are to yours. Which is why I don’t find it helpful to hear how people with a completely different value system don’t find my fears to be justified. So I send you to the title of this post that says specifically “MY fears.” Not yours and your uncle’s but mine.

Would it be helpful if I told you that your fears that you won’t make partner in your law firm if you decide to have children are stupid because I chose not to be a lawyer and feel very happy about that decision? Not very much, I’d guess.

Of course, if there are people who have successfully combined the roles of a parent and a lover, I will be eternally grateful for even the tiniest comment from you. Even if you only say, “Yes, we exist.” That already will be hugely helpful.

Do you exist?

I don’t want this to be a one-sided discussion, however, so people who can confirm my fears (without condemning them as stupid) are also welcome to comment.

The Magnitsky Bill

Should President Obama sign the Magnitsky Bill (the bill that attempts to impose sanctions on Russia for human rights violations) in case it passes and ends up in front of him?

If his goal is to look like the planet’s laughing stock, then he surely must sign it. If his goal is in any way different, the he should not.

After Yugoslavia, Iraq, and Afghanistan, after the bombings of all and sundry for no particular reason, after Guantanamo, nobody in the world takes the US seriously as a defender of human rights on the global arena. The Russians will weep with laughter if the bill passes. I really dislike the way Russia is today, and I hope we will not give them this satisfaction.

This bill is the equivalent of me lecturing people on the importance of networking and censoring other bloggers for using strong language.

On a serious note, the Russians will take this bill as yet another step on the road to reviving the conflict for world domination of the Cold War era. And they will be right, too. If a country that has been violating human rights abroad left and right for a very long time (and happily coexisting with such huge violator of human rights as China) censors another country for doing the same within its borders, that can only be seen as a very direct statement of, “We (and those we like, or at least owe money to) are the only ones who can do this because we are the boss.”

This will only make us look ridiculous and weak and will achieve no useful goal.

Rachel Maddow Is Me

See the following exchange between Maddow and a GOP talking head Alex Castellanos:

The tussle took a more personal turn when Castellanos told Maddow, “I love how passionate you are. I wish you are as right about what you’re saying as you are passionate about it. I really do.”

“That’s really condescending,” Maddow replied. “I mean this is a stylistic issue. My passion on this issue is actually me making a factual argument.”

I get these comments all the time! Whenever one is not apologizing for one’s every idea like a timid little mouse and is not burying one’s opinion under a mountain of qualifiers and apologies, one starts to get these “passion comments.”

Well, at least I’m in brilliant company.

Ola Professora!

I’m sitting here trying to decide whether I should pretend not to notice that a certain student in my Advanced Spanish course didn’t hand in 2 of his labs which would allow me to give him a passing grade.

At that very moment, the student solved this problem for me by sending me an email starting with, “Ola professora!”

Now I’m sitting here trying to decide what bugs me more, “ola” instead of “hola” or “professora” instead of “profesora.”

Barking at Strangers Helps

And here people keep saying that going off aggressively at strangers doesn’t work.

Remember how I barked at a blogger who published nasty things about my university? So guess what? It worked. Now the blogger in question always takes care to specify that she is criticizing our sister institution and not us.

I’m still not linking to that blogger because I’m still not quite over the trauma of seeing my university referred to in negative terms. I will soon get over it completely, however, and will resume reading that blogger and linking to her normally very good blog.

I’m improving the world here, one aggressive outburst at a time. And where is the appreciation?

A Mystery

I’m passionately pro-choice and I support the following suggestion 100%:

Dispense birth control free to anyone who wants it, at any age, at any time. Of course this will be at taxpayer expense. If we are so concerned as a nation about all those poor killed fetuses, it’s time we showed it.

Question: why don’t the anti-choicers support this idea? And please don’t tell me that they are into saving the taxpayers’ money. Who do you think will pay for the efforts to capture the doctors and the women engaged in back-alley abortions if abortion is outlawed? Who will pay for the housing and care of unwanted abandoned kids whose numbers will soar? Who will fund the growing police force and expanding penitentiary system needed to house the adults who were unwanted as kids? Yes, right you are, taxpayers.

The only answer to this question I have been able to come up with is that these people don’t give a rat’s tuches about fetuses. If they really did, wouldn’t they support the only method that has been proven to reduce the number of abortions, namely, promoting the culture of contraception?

If anybody has any other answer, feel free to share.

The New Line of Attack on Elisabeth Badinter

The woman-haters who have their knickers in a twist over the new and brilliant book by the leading feminist philosopher of our times Elisabeth Badinter have now come up with a new way of discrediting her. Since they are too stupid and lazy to read her book and too intellectually impotent to argue with the points she makes, they now claim that Badinter is old and why do we need to listen to the opinions of an old woman anyways? Besides, she is rich. A rich old woman, what can she know about feminism?

Don’t believe me? Then see for yourself. One of such ageist freakazoids left a comment on my blog claiming that Badinter is too old to have opinions worth listening to. Ageism always makes me absolutely livid. Useless losers who have achieved nothing in life are the only people who hold their youth as some sort of a major qualification that makes their stupid opinions count more than anybody else’s.

The idea that women lose all value once they are past the age of fertility has been one of the biggest weapons of women-haters anywhere. This is precisely why the woman-hating commenter who dared to promote her vile hateful rantings on my blog claims that since Badinter is too old to have children, she cannot possibly be capable of writing a book of feminist analysis.

I just visited the Amazon’s page of Badinter’s The Conflict and the ratings are very low. There is no doubt in my mind that most of those reviews have been left by brainless idiots who haven’t read the book and who are alarmed by the rumors spread by naturalists who promote women’s enslavement. I think it’s a good sign that the book is provoking so much rage. It means that Badinter is right and that the woman-haters are threatened by her message.

Sunday Link Encyclopedia and Self-Promotion

The British solution to all problems. It’s the Russian solution, too.

Is email becoming dysfunctional?

What getting an abortion used to be like when this country was still civilized about the issue.

Dr. Amy Tuteur ridicules the idiots who are so threatened by Elisabeth Badinter’s feminism that they spread lies about her.

Really complex, difficult works of literature exercise the human intelligence in a way that almost nothing else can.” Yes.

Freedom Day in South Africa from the person who was there in 1994 and has recorded his experiences in a diary.

“Interest in how men’s bodies prepare themselves for fatherhood only seems to matter to the extent it sheds light on mothers. Meanwhile, the ways in which dads screw up their kids is a thriving area of research.”

Look I don’t know how else to say this, but if you are a woman who supports the Republican party in 2012 you are an idiot! I mean what more do they need to do to convince you? Forcibly remove your ovaries until you swear to them that you will only use them to create more Republicans?” How can you argue with that?

A scholar from Princeton explains that the paranoia about crowds of illegal Mexicans flooding this country was invented to serve political goals and has no basis in reality: “We are not being flooded with illegal Mexican migrants. The total number of migrants from Mexico has varied very little since the 1950s. The massive influx many have written about never happened. ”

A post on crosses and condoms at the WKU by a former student of the university. As good as my post on the subject was :-), the perspective of somebody who actually knows what the environment at the WKU campus is like is priceless. Do read! Whatever you think you know about that story, your knowledge is not complete without this account.

So far, the human race has used pregnancy and children to punish women for having sex. That’s basically it, really — the idea that we think of pregnancy as the “price” women are supposed to pay for having a good time explains so much about what is dysfunctional in humanity.” I was shocked when a commenter on my own blog referred to pregnancy as a price women should be prepared to pay for sex. I’ve never met such bizarre and ignorant people in real life but now I know they exist, which is why the linked post is a must read.

A new type of phishing scam: beware!

And the post of the week is: “It seems to me that in popular discourse, education is uniquely susceptible to instrumentalization as compared with other quality of life issues. Getting a job is seemingly the sole horizon within which education can be discussed — even humanities scholars continually exhort each other to “make the case” that their graduates actually have the most valuable job skills of all, etc., etc. There are more “idealistic” visions of education that tend to place it within the context of democratic citizenship, but that is just a larger-scale vision of practical instrumentalization. There just doesn’t seem to be room in mainstream discourse for someone to say, “Being educated improves and enriches every part of life, not just your work life.” I’m so tired of having to explain how the education I provide leads to employment. It leads to many other things, too. Work is important but it isn’t like we only exist to work.

Father Sues to Defend a Cheating Son

This is the most hilarious piece of news that I’ve read in a while. In LA, a student cheated and has been caught doing it. So now his father is suing the school for not celebrating his stupid cheater of a son:

At a high school school . . . a father is going to court to keep his son from facing the school’s discipline for cheating. No one is denying that the boy broke the rules, copying essay homework from another student, but the father’s argument is that the punishment — throwing the sophomore out of the English honors course — is too harsh because a regular English course doesn’t impress colleges as much as the more rigorous class.

“Cause we totally need this kind of a cheating fool among our college student. Some values this idiot family has.

I feel very sorry for the kid whose unprincipled loser of a father is teaching him that cheating is an acceptable way to go through life because there will always be a helicoptering adult who’ll defend your right to be as stupid and dishonest as you want. The boy is in for a very rude awakening.

Seriously, what are such parents thinking? Don’t they understand that they will be the first in line to sample the dishonesty they fostered in their own kid?