Surprise, I knocked you up!

Standard

I’m pregnant.

Oh, did I forget quotes there? That’s because (while you won’t hear that phrase from me) Canadian dad-wannabe Craig Hutchinson wasn’t hearing it from his girlfriend either… much to his dismay. However, she wasn’t willing to have to issue that kind of news to him – like – ever. She didn’t want to be a mom. Conundrum? Not for Craig! Their paradoxical dynamic was waning…but somehow still sexually spunky. So, naturally, he took advantage…

…and turned their condoms into Swiss cheese.

You’d think she might have caught on to his underhanded deeds when he kept insisting she “take pregnancy tests”. She didn’t; but she did take the tests. The first one showed up negative, but the second one did not. She was shocked and he was overjoyed. Before too long, however, she got this message from him: “I wanted a baby with you so bad, I sabotaged the condoms. I poked holes in them all.”

neverleave

Now here’s where it gets tricky: Is it rape?

In court, one judge claimed that it was “sneaky and underhanded, but not rape”, while several others disagreed – saying, “Only informed consent is real consent,” and “Getting consent in a deceitful way is rape.” This is a matter that’s difficult to discern and causes clashes between genders. Men will say it’s not fair because they’re locked in to a kid-commitment if a woman intentionally “forgets” to take the pill and then “forgets” to tell him that she “forgot” until it’s too late. Women will say, it’s not the same because men don’t have to carry the kid around for nine months.

I’m no liberal femi-nazi, but come on.

It’s at least a little worse for the chick in the long run. Note that I say worse “for”, not worse “of”. If you’re a dude who’s been tricked – yeah, she’s got your seed in her belly against your will, and that’s super screwed up of her. On the moral-meter, it doesn’t matter what you’ve got between your legs. You’re an asshole for doing it to someone who trusts you during an intimate act. Unfortunately, there’s a double standard right now about whether it’s “okay” for a chick to do that and I’m not justifying that. Where everything changes, however, is in what happens after that trickery’s been dealt.

arguewoman

As a dude, you can literally pack up and walk away if you want. Hell, a lot of guys do that anyway when they started out “willing” and change their minds. You didn’t sign a document agreeing to physically stay. It puts you in a poor moral position, she may end up filing for you to pay child support, and all of that’s reprehensible of her. But as a man who gets tricked, you aren’t forced to either birth or kill the thing outta your body and then face the physical, mental, and life changing ramifications either choice inevitably causes. A woman who gets tricked has to deal with the physical on top of the financial and mental elements.

A prospective mom – willing or unwilling – physically can’t just walk away from having to make that decision.

If you want to be a mom or dad, find a willing partner! Would I go so far as calling this rape? Not really. Rape is unwanted or forced sexual penetration. But I might say it’s on par with some kind of sexual assault of a different genre. I mean, this lady wanted to be penetrated; she just didn’t want to be impregnated. (Cue to hypocrite Christian choir-lecture about abstinence… because no Christians have pre-marital sex…ever.)

Anyway, they weren’t even doing so well outside of the bedroom anymore, on the verge of splitting ways, and probably just having heated hate-sex by this point. Whether you’re the garden or the gardener, deceitful conception is pretty bad; but it’s even worse when you know you’re in a screwed up relationship that’s heading nowhere. I wouldn’t want to be a product of that.

So, how’s the story end? I’m glad you asked.

Right after this chick found out she’d been knocked up, she was going to keep the kid. It wasn’t until Craig messaged her with a confession, that she called the cops, had an abortion, and subsequently got a uterine infection. Some third party commentary I’ve seen says “she did it out of spite!” and “what a bitch!”

preg-ev

Maybe… but imagine telling yourself, “You can’t have an abortion because you failed at being careful. You have to deal with this,” and then realizing that wasn’t the case – that this was done to you. Would you want to have a child with someone who had intentionally deceived you? Would you want to have his offspring at all? Personally, I’d go ballistic. Actually, “ballsectomy” would be a better term, because I wouldn’t wait for the law to intervene. I’d remove his balls myself.

And what was his motive in even admitting it?

Clearly, he had to know there was a chance she might abort the kid if he had to stoop so low in the first place to turn their condoms into a colander. So what was the point when the fetus’s chance of survival was on thin ice anyway? Other than a way of feeling superior by saying, “Aha! I tricked you!”, what other point could there be in admitting (via text message, no less) to her his sneaky seed deed?

After Canada’s Supreme Court’s ruling that it was indeed a sexual assault, Craig will have a year and a half to mull that question over in jail.

xoxo
<3~A

Ted Kennedy: no friend to women

Standard

In addition to the more well known Chappaquiddick scandal where Kennedy, allegedly driving home drunk, like his brothers, had a long record of poor treatment of women.

In 1990, GQ magazine ran a devastating profile of Kennedy. Two 16-year-old girls near the Capitol startled by a limo rolling up, the door opening, Ted sitting in the back with a bottle of wine, asking one, then the other, to join. A former aide who acted as Ted’s “pimp.” His penchant for dating women so young that one did not know he was the subject of many books. Kennedy, at a swank DC restaurant with his drinking buddy Chris Dodd, throwing a petite waitress on his dinner table with such force that glass and flatware shatters and goes flying. Then Ted throws her on to Dodd’s lap and grinds against her. He is interrupted by other waitstaff. He is later caught in the same restaurant, in a semi-private area, having sex on the floor with a lobbyist.

In 1991, Kennedy’s nephew William Kennedy Smith is charged with rape. Kennedy Smith had been out drinking with Ted and Ted’s son Patrick at Au Bar in Palm Beach. Kennedy Smith is eventually acquitted, and it’s never proved that Ted had any knowledge of what happened on the Kennedy grounds that night. He remarried, in 1992, and very publicly domesticated himself.

But the tawdriness — the ostensible elder statesmen getting s – – t-faced and picking up women with his son and his nephew; the acquittal won, in part, by shredding the accuser on the stand and in the press; privilege winning out, always — is in such stark contrast to Kennedy’s politics that you have to wonder: Is this really what Kennedy thought of women?

So how is it exactly that so many women, and feminist minded women no less, were able to support and admire someone who engaged in grossly inappropriate, occasionally criminal behavior with younger women while binge drinking?

Ignorance of this record could play a major part at least to young citizens. “I didn’t know about Chappaquiddick and the rape case until yesterday,” Miriam Perez, a 25-year-old editor at Feministing.com, told the NY Post. She said that she admires Kennedy’s accomplishments, but is perplexed. “Like every person, he’s human and there are lots of flaws involved,” she says. “But a big feminist tenet is: The personal is political. So I don’t feel it’s fair to fully ignore it in this case.”

As is largely suspected is the reason so many feminists turned a similar blind eye to Bill Clintons many sex scandals which included allegations of harassment and rape, it is Kennedys 100% consistent record in championing abortion law that could shed light on why Teddy got a pass from women.

Ted Kennedy and abortion

Standard

Was Kennedy really “Committed to changing the world one life at a time“?

Kennedy wrote in a letter to a voter in 1971 that “wanted or unwanted, I believe that human life, even at its earliest stages, has certain rights which must be recognized — the right to be born, the right to love, the right to grow old.” But like many other Catholic liberals, from Joseph Biden to Dennis Kucinich, he moved leftward with his party, becoming a down-the-line supporter of abortion rights, with a voting record that brooked no compromise on the issue.

A review of Kennedy’s unwavering pro-abortion record:

  • Voted NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP.
  • Voted NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion.
  • Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines.
  • Voted NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions.
  • Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime.
  • Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions except for maternal life.
  • Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions.
  • Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions.
  • Voted NO on banning human cloning.
  • Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record.

Ted Kennedys sister Eunice remained against abortion later in her life, so what made Teddy change? Along with her husband, Sargent Shriver, Eunice belonged to America’s dwindling population of outspoken pro-life liberals. “Like her church, she saw a continuity, rather than a contradiction, between championing the poor, the marginalized and the oppressed and protecting unborn human life.” notes Ross Douthat in a NY Times column asking What if Teddy had opposed abortion?

At times, Ted Kennedy’s fervor on abortion felt like an extended apology to his party’s feminists for the way the men of his dynasty behaved in private. Eunice, by contrast, had nothing to apologize for. She knew what patriarchy meant: she was born into a household out of “Mad Men,” where the father paraded his mistress around his family, the sons were groomed for high office, and the daughters were expected to marry well, rear children and suffer silently. And she transcended that stifling milieu, doing more than most men to change the world, and earning the right to disagree with her fellow liberals about what true feminism required.

It’s worth pondering how the politics of abortion might have been different had Ted shared even some of his sister’s qualms about the practice. One could imagine a world in which America’s leading liberal Catholic had found a way to make liberalism less absolutist on the issue, and a world where a man who became famous for reaching across the aisle had reached across, even occasionally, in search of compromise on the country’s most divisive issue.

Joy vs Ann on Waterboarding vs Abortion

Standard

If you support an action on another body remaining legal, should you be obligated to undergo that action yourself? Thus was the question comedian and co-host of The View, Joy Behar asked best selling author and conservative pundit Ann Coulter on CNN’s Larry King show while Behar was filling in as host.

Joy challenged Ann on her support for the practice known as “waterboarding” which is a harsh interrogation technique used by US forces on captured terrorists and Al Queda suspects which gives the target the sensation of drowning as water is poured onto their covered face at an angle. Ann fired back on Joys support for abortion, bringing Joy’s waterboarding question into a new light on the obligation a pro-choice advocate has in choosing the action for themselves.

The exchange went something like this:

Behar To Coulter: “You Support Waterboarding… Get Waterboarded!”
Coulter: “You Support Abortion… Abort yourself”