sitting on the edge of the sandbox, biting my tongue

March 29, 2012

A Battleship Potemkin Village

Filed under: journalism, parenting, politics — edge of the sandbox @ 4:58 pm

One of the consequences of a rush to judgement is making a total donkey out of oneself.  A very large number of people in this country heard of the Trayvon Martin shooting from the media and got outraged.  And what is there not to be outraged about: a black teenager carrying a bag of Skittles and a bottle of iced tea for his little brother was shot and killed by George Zimmerman, an overzealous white neighborhood watchman.  When the demagogues from the Black Panthers to Barack Obama whipped up the crowd, mass rallies ensured demanding “justice for Trayvon”.  I want justice for Trayvon too, and justice means weighing the evidence.

One disturbing element of the rallies was presence of kids, often in the front rows, with signs that drew a comparison between the slayed teen and the often much younger sign holder.

Who is Trayvon?

Even if the story as initially reported by the media was true, does it justify propping up your child with a sign like the ones above?

I get impression that the kids were told that they could be easily shot just for being black.  Which is a horrible thing to teach them because the great majority of white Americans pose no threat to black children.  I suspect that the kids have to know that they are unlikely to share Trayvon’s horrible fate because they have never met anyone who was killed by a “white Hispanic” neighborhood watch captain.  In fact, white on black (and black on white) crime is rare.

Although I don’t believe children belong at political rallies, I respect parents who think otherwise.  Parents might want to teach their sons and daughters about political activism or may simply end up taking their children along because they don’t have alternative childcare arrangements.  Staged pictures of kids posted online to further a political goal is something quite different.  The internet is teeming with photographs of tykes holding up Trayvon-related signage:

trayvon kid

How do you get your kid to stare at the camera this way?

Another example of the meme:

trayvon martin kid

This protege must have wrote the sign himself. Good job with drawing the squares -- way ahead of his peers in fine motor development!

Hey, kids support Trayvon too!  The internet says so.  If the quality of pictures above does not satisfy the audience, how about a professional take?

I am Trayvon photoshoot

DC photographer Eunique Jones snaps portraits of people, many of them kids, wearing a hoodie

Major media noted the result:

trayvon martin

Presumably the tot himself shared with Eunique his dream about future occupation

Not quite the Odessa Steps scene from Battleship Potemkin, but still can squeeze a tear or two from a voter.

The rationale for the kids-in-hoodies trend is to make a point that the late Mr. Martin, whose childhood pictures are used to illustrate the mainstream media stories was a minor.  These representations obscure the fact that Trayvon was not a baby or a child; he was a teenager, which puts him in a different category completely.

How about this collection of Trayvons?

who is trayvon?

Kids being kids, they smiled for the camera. They probably found ways to have fun at the somber rally, too

Now for a family  family of white (possibly a “white Hispanic” baby) Trayvon wanna-bees:

Trayvon Martin family

Feel strong enough about the Trayvon tragedy to use one's own child as a prop?

Why would any parent want to give her child “I am Trayvon” sign is beyond me.  My heart grows cold when I think that my son might grow up to be like the late Florida teen.  Unlike the candy and non-alcoholic beverage kid we met in the media accounts, the real Trayvon was suspended from school for smoking marijuana — not exactly an extraordinary occurrence, but not a portrait of innocence either.  Trayvon’s school trouble doesn’t end there; a bag of woman’s jewelry and a screwdriver were found in his school bag and passed on to the police.

Trayvon tweets

The picture Trayvon Martin had chosen for his twitter account: Still baby-faced, already thuggish

His twitter accounts exhibit teenage bravado, giving us a glimpse at behavior that probably doomed him at the end.  Police videotape shows Zimmerman’s scared head, corroborating the shooter’s account of the scuffle.  I gather from the emerging evidence that the young man’s behavior had something to do with his tragic death.  I don’t expect my kids’ teenage years to be easy, but dear G-d, please not let them be Trayvon.

I find myself amazed by the grown ups who use Trayvon’s untimely end to get their own 15 minutes:

trayvon martin rally

She must really be cool with black people because nobody in this predominantly black crowd broke *her* nose, at least as far as we know

Something smug about her.

There is no justice in teaching kids to identify with a delinquent youth; it will not help us avoid future violent deaths:

Trayvon Martins

Democratic Underground calls it "Powerful". This picture was posted on Facebook

The parents in picture above said:

We dress our children in hoodies because we want them to grow up to share the burden we feel. [Italics are mine, -ed.]

You mean it wasn’t the kids’ idea?  Nothing wrong with teaching kids one’s values, even if parents are misinformed, but making a display of it is exploitative.  If parents get the story wrong it’s also counterproductive.

UPDATE 3/29/2012: An insightful post at Other McCain, particularly:

My bedtime reading lately has been The Future Once Happened Here, Fred Siegel’s brilliant account of how liberal social policy destroyed America’s cities. Siegel’s book was a major resource for Chapter 8 of Donkey Cons, and is full of insights on the development of our contemporary attitudes about poverty, race and crime. On page 58 of his book, Siegel writes about “a cultural shift” that occurred in the 1960s:

“[O]lder ideas about shame were starting to be replaced by a new concern for self-esteem. Christopher Lasch wrote that formerly “shame was the fate of those whose conduct fell short of cherished ideals.” But in the 1960s, the new age of moral deregulation and therapeutic ethics, shame came to refer to whatever prevents us from feeling good about ourselves.”

Am I the only one who sees the Trayvon Martin carnival in this context? Liberals have turned the case into a sort of public festival, a self-congratulatory celebration of their own moral superiority. And they have arranged the symbolic elements of the narrative so that to criticize them — the shameless media moralizers — is to become implicated in George Zimmerman’s presumed guilt.

They are using the corpse of Trayvon Martin as a human shield to conceal their ideological agenda and protect themselves against criticism.

A shift from shame to self-esteem occurred primarily in middle class families, the kind that can be seen parading their white children in hoodies holding up “I am Trayvon” signs.  They are the ones who use Trayvon’s death as a “public festival” of their “moral superiority”.  They also teach their own kids to avoid unnecessary violent confrontations.  Their culture is run on guilt.

Trayvon Martin, on the other hand, is a product of a different environment.  His tweets offer a clue:

F*** a b***.  Any b***.  who you want? take yo pick. but you gone have to take yo time.


Lol so Daisha think she a boss cause she walked in class late 2day. …. I do dat everyday

He’s very much full of pride, only he’s proud of something that should be a source of shame.  It’s probably his misguided pride that eventually led him into the confrontation with George Zimmerman.  How subversive it is that sanctimonious white families stoke the fire of wounded pride in black children!  They are working to make sure that countless young black men will lose their lives — to other blacks, to Hispanics, to whites or anyone else, really.


March 26, 2012

The VAWA Extention Battle (PARTIAL NUDITY)

Filed under: feminism, politics — Tags: , , , , — edge of the sandbox @ 2:23 pm

This one should be a no-brainier, but it’s not.  Here is Jenny Erikson on re-authorization of Violence Against Women Act, or VAWA which the Senate Democrats are trying to speed thorough, but Republicans stalling:

Republicans trying to stall VAWA are bound to come off looking like jerks. Why do you hate womyn, Mitch McConnell? Why won’t you help these poor battered ladies escape their abusers, Chuck Grassley? What is wrong with you guys?

There’s nothing wrong with Republican Senators that don’t support VAWA, there’s something wrong with the legislation. Originally passed in 1994, the act has had bipartisan support through two 6-year reauthorizations, but this time around it contains new provisions and fails to protect against potential fraud and abuse.

The new legislation, sponsored by Vermont Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy, would create 5,000 additional “U-visas,” which are awarded to both legal and illegal immigrants who aid in criminal investigations. Except that people who apply for these visas don’t actually have to ever assist law enforcement. So an immigrant facing deportation could just apply for a U-visa. What does that have to do with helping battered women?

Another section of the bill invites marriage fraud. Most everyone knows that the quickest route to American citizenship is to marry an American citizen … heck, they’ve made movies based on this “marriage of convenience” premise. Normally, the foreign spouse has to rely on their American partner to file the paperwork, but in cases of abuse, the petitioner may file for themselves with a VAWA Self-Petition. I’d like to think that no one would ever falsely claim to be abused in order to get a visa, but it’s a well-documented fact that sometimes people suck.

VAWA is an example, albeit a small one, of the irrationality of our immigration policy.  When women who marry American citizens are admitted to this country and processed for residency, they are given interviews and asked to prove that their relationship is real.  In other words, we already suspect that some of the women are here for the green cards, and we want to make sure they are not.

American citizenship is part of the appeal in great many of the cases.  Still, most women, including the notorious mail order brides, enjoy good relationships with their American spouses.  They make home and start families in this country, and even if their marriage did not begin with earth-shattering romance, they live happy, fulfilling lives together with their American husbands and children.

Unfortunately, things can go South, as they often do, whether or not the American man is married to a foreign woman.  VAWA assumes that it’s the promise of American citizenship is what keeps the woman in an abusive relationship, but real life is more complicated.

Take, for instance, the recent high profile case of Ross Mirkarimi and Eliana Lopez.  It turned out that Mirkarimi, a California Green Party co-founder, who for some reason was elected San Francisco sheriff, was violent with his Venezuela-born wife on at least one occasion.  Eliana refused to cooperate with authorities, blaming dirty politics and — imagine that! — comparing America to Venezuela.  In the video recorded by her neighbor, however, Eliana showed her bruised arm.  The two are no longer together — because judge barred Mirkarimi from visiting his wife.

family violence SF

Eliana Lopez shows off her bruised arm in a video recorded by her neighbor

When I worked in immigration, I heard some very liberal attorneys opine against VAWA not only because of the possibilities of abuse (fraud and abuse was our major concern) but also because they disagree with the underlying presumption that a foreign woman is entitled to American citizenship simply for marrying a rotten man.  Yes, she hoped for a better life, but sometimes when things just don’t work out it’s time to move back.  Work with asylum seekers who, unlike the battered foreign women, have nowhere to go tends to put things in perspective.

It’s interesting that VAWA is such a feminist issue, considering that some of the women in question entered the United States in arranged marriages, which some feminists oppose.  I have to command American feminist establishment for welcoming foreign competition.  Presumably, there is a demographic of men look for foreign wives precisely because they are not feminists.

femen protest

Ukrainian feminists protest arranged marriages -- in this case through a reality TV show

Snark aside, it’s not surprising that VAWA enjoys bi-partisan support.  It’s a highly charged political matter, and that’s the end of it.  Or it should be the end, anyways.  I don’t think Senate Republicans should pick this battle.  When it comes to immigration reform, they should take on bigger issues, like border security.  What’s another 5000 U-visas when we have 12 million illegal immigrants in this country?

March 23, 2012

Free Speech Bay Area

Last night DH was looking over one of the two free local papers we still get delivered to our door.

“Is there anything I need to read?” I asked.

“Meh.  If you want to, you can check out the letter here about a “free speech” event for Jew-bashers.”

Under the heading Breaking Down Barriers I read the following:

For more than a year, visitors to the Saturday Alameda Farmer’s Market encounter bright orange traffic cones with notices proclaiming one small place at the very end of the vendor area a “Free Speech Zone” — all this fuss with signage and color that shouts “caution,” for one citizen’s effort to talk about matters of peace in Palestine and peace in the Middle East.

For those who desire to know more about the situation in Palestine, non-violent efforts to resist the military occupation and the international boycott; divestment and sanctions movement that is gaining steam around the world, I would like to extend an invitation to the Sabeel Conference tomorrow and Saturday, March 23 and 24, at Sunnyvale Presbyterian Church, 732 West Fremont Ave.

The conference will offer an opportunity to hear many voices of conscience — American, Israeli, Palestinian, Jewish, Christian and Muslim.

You won’t be put off by seeing “caution” cones or feel yourself restricted to talk “freely” in a small designated area. Instead you will be greeted with invitations to talk with people who live and work in Israel and in the Palestinian territories You will have the opportunity to learn to challenge the status quo, and act to promote freedom, justice and equality.

You might even find yourself challenged to hold onto this issue and join the ever growing call for peace in the Middle East here in the streets of Alameda! Additional information can be found at

— Paula Rainey

I’m curious about these orange cones: did I missed something entertaining a year ago?  Ms. Rainey is a local proponent of the boycott, divest, sanction effort currently in vogue with Israel’s enemies, and she did have an event planned at the Farmer’s Market at some point.

Not sure what boycott of and divestment from a besieged tiny nation has to do with  “peace in the Middle East” or “breaking down barriers,” if by barriers we mean barriers towards peace or at least  security, and not the defensive wall Israel had erected to protect her citizens from terrorists attacks in 2004.  Most of the said barrier is actually a fence, and it did effectively end the “Second Intifada”, or the wave of terror that swept Israel in the second half of the last decade following Yasser Arafat’s rejection of a generous Israeli land offer.  Those opposed to the Jewish state have been railing against Israel’s non-violent defense (which is what the said wall/fence has been since it was built).  The wall part of the construction is prominently pictured on the conference’s website.

The conference will feature a variety of speakers with consistent anti-Israel bias.  Who else signs on to promote the boycott of the sole democracy in the Middle East?  This event is being billed as some sort of an open mike.  Interesting that they feel censored, scary orange cones and what not, because there is another free speech twist.

In May 2010, the Turkish Islamist government sent a ship called Mavi Marmara, loaded with weapons and unusable medical supplies, to break the legal blockade Israel imposed on Gaza Strip in lieu of Hamas terrorists regularly firing rockets on Israel.  The IDF boarded the ship, were attacked and killed several armed crew members.  International outrage ensured as the media outlets the world over had the public convinced that Mavi Marmara was carrying peace activist with humanitarian aid.  Since it is Friday, here is the terrific Caroline Glick and Latma TV with “We Con the World,” a parody inspired by the incident:

Paula Rainy, who at least at one point was a member of the ultra-left Green Party, has long been obsessed with the Jewish State.  She was signing anti-Israel petitions as far back as 2001.  When, following the Mavi Marmara incident, lefties everywhere called for retaliatory boycotts of Israeli ships, Ms. Rainy participated in the East Bay Area efforts.  She wrote letters to local papers about the “historic achievement” of hers: together with her buddies she picketed a ship of Israeli Zim line, preventing it from docking in the Port of Oakland for 24 hours.

We read her letter in the Alameda Journal, another free local paper delivered unsolicited to virtually every household, and DH was pissed enough to write a response.  He did express some doubt before hitting that “send” button (“Basically, I am giving my name and address to every leftist organization in the country”), but mailed the letter.  Not surprisingly, Alameda Journal didn’t print it.

A week later we stopped receiving the paper at our door.  It is still delivered to all our neighbors as well as the empty, abandoned and foreclosed property in the vicinity.  Evidently, defense of Israel around here is beyond the Pale (pun intended).  Needles to say, the local papers and people writing letters to editors had no problem with Assad slaughtering his own people or the Muslim Brotherhood seizing power in Egypt.

Oh well, it could have been worse, we could be living in a real life people’s republic.

March 19, 2012

The Feminist War on Obstetrics

Filed under: feminism, parenting, politics — Tags: , , , , , , — edge of the sandbox @ 2:42 pm

I first heard the feminist narrative about midwifery from my History of Science professor, a tall, gaunt gentlemen in his late fifties-early sixties.  It went as follows: in the 18th century or thereabout, male obstetricians displaced female midwives as service providers to bourgeois and upper class families.  Although the physicians were believed to be safer, the death rate among laboring women attended to by doctors was higher because at that time medical professionals often came from straight cadaver theaters into the women’s bedrooms — without washing their hands.  That was before the germ theory of disease was formulated.  Despite the poor results, men usurped the power of women in a traditionally female-dominated field.

I always thought it was a bit problematic to treat this story of early modern childbirth as anything other than an illustration of sorry state of nascent obstetrics.  Because the modern practice of medicine is grounded in scientific method, it eventually reduced maternal and infant mortality dramatically.  In part it has to do with improvements in hygiene, but our advanced understanding of anatomy and physiology as well as technological breakthroughs played a considerable role.

Midwifery, on the other hand, is based in superstition.  Sure, the method employed by traditional healers can not be so counterproductive as to completely wipe out a population.  Midwives might know a few tricks that help to verse the baby or induce labor (or not), but midwifery was but folk healing.  Historically, midwives performed such important medical functions as closing all doors and windows and opening the stove upon entering the house of laboring woman and blowing tobacco into a woman’s face during protracted labor.  One might appreciate the wicked humor and folk poetry on display, but has to admit that neither prescription will offer much help with, say, an umbilical cord problem.  And how about such necessary course of action as putting a string around the father’s penis and tightening it with every contraction?

Although most feminists choose the safety of a hospital birth, the second and the third waves embraced midwifery as a re-emerging social phenomena and made “natural” childbirth an article of female empowerment.  See, for instance, Our Bodies Our Selves , and Feministing celebrating Ina May Gaskin, pioneering feminist midwife who urged women to “take our birth back”.  Gaskin authored “Spiritual Midwifery”, a book that must had seemed dated by the time it came out in 1977.  When traditional midwives ran around the house opening and closing orifices, the late 20th century brought psychedelia.  “Spiritual Midwifery”  describes life on a hippie commune (some say cult) called the Farm, and before then on a caravan of buses, where women delivered each other’s babies.  Gaskin’s female acquaintances and their male partners smoked pot and enjoy sex while in labor.  Some ladies claimed to have orgasmic births, which would be disturbing if true.  Gaskin was an inspiration to Direct Entry Midwives and founded the Midwives Alliance of North America, which claims that home birth is safe but won’t release it’s statistics.  We do know, however, that home birth, as practiced in the United States, is 3 times more dangerous for babies.

The Farm

Stephen Gaskin, Ina May's husband, talks to the followers on the Farm in 1970. Second on the left in the front row looks like Ina May. The Gaskins were once in "six marriage"

I don’t think there exists a Mills College student who doesn’t want to be a midwife, or at least a doula.  Again, not saying that every feminist is a homebirther or all homebirthers are feminists, but there is this particular branch of feminist nuttiness.  Well organized proponents of “natural” childbirth penetrated our best hospitals.  Women attend childbirth prep classes and assigned books that teach us that vaginal unmedicated birth is empowering, and is an achievement.  Even those arranging to give birth in hospitals are advised to refuse continuous fetal monitoring and pain relief in favor of the old feminist favorite — to get off our backs.  Stirrups are viewed as a symbol of oppression.   To make sure that we stick with feminist agenda we compose utterly useless birth plans.  A woman supposing is not very different from the proverbial man supposing.  I must add that “natural” childbirth types bring along various other sketchy individuals, like anti-vaxers and militant breastfeeding activists.

Radical feminists are known for general vilification of OBs, especially male OBs; their profession equated to rape.  The latest outburst of medical rape accusations was in relation to Virginia trans-vaginal ultrasound requirement for abortions.  A few months ago The Other McCain had a thread about liberal women ignoring indisputable scientific evidence that female fertility declines with age.  Rejection of modern obstetrical help in labor, prenatal care and beyond is another way many liberal women are not on good footing when it comes to lady parts and science.

The Debt still

Your male obstetrician is probably not Josef Mengele

Somehow somewhere in a Women’s Studies Department it was decided that men use their tools and cold reasons to subjugate women, but we, women, have the inner wisdom of our bodies as revealed in birth.  What misogynist wouldn’t agree?  Unfortunately women’s bodies are frequently wrong, and historically childbirth was the leading cause of death of young women and children.  Women’s Studies Departments also decided that female bodies are an arena on which power struggles are played out.  (As a side note, feminists borrowed many ideas about power from Michel Foucault who in his late middle age became a cheerleader of the ayatollahs.  We know how that worked out for Iranian women.)  Women’s movement’s obsession with power and the body tells us more about the feminists than the history they attempt to interpret.

Midwife toolbox

Late 19th century English midwife's toolbox. I suspect some of the instruments were invented and improved by male physicians

So when Nancy Pelosi dragged Sandra Fluke to spin tall tales about contraception at Georgetown in front of the federal legislature, the ladies were consolidating power over the bodies of American women.  Pelosi, of course, is working to strengthen government’s grip of the health industry, and Fluke is buffing up her feminist credentials.  She is laughing all the way to the Target pharmacy where she pays $5 to buy a month’s worth of contraception.  And you thought it was about women’s health.

While modern obstetrics are excellent, and perinatal death in the US is the lowest in the world, the c-section rate might be high.  We can probably benefit from tort reform and other market-driven solutions that would turn childbirth into a more honest business.  If it were up to me, I’d shop for a policy with high deductibles, one that would allow me to pay upfront for my stay in the hospital while taking insurance against complications.  Hospitals should be able to sell additional amenities and services (bigger rooms, professional photographers, bottles of campaign).  And why not?  If a woman wants a home-like suite, she should have an opportunity to rent one.  Instead of throwing freebies like that in a prepaid plan, which we already do by the way, make her pay for it directly.  It will lower premiums for everyone while enabling families to have the ambiance they want — if they are willing to pay, that is.  On the other hand, I hear that there is no reason why a Certified Nurse Midwife cannot deliver a baby when no intervention is indicated.

FULL DISCLOSURE: I gave birth twice lying comfortably on my back.  Like other women in my family I had an easy time coping with labor pain.  I actually hired a doula for my first birth.  When I was in transition and moaning gently every now and then, she turned to DH and said: “This is not what 9-10 usually looks like.”  The second time around I did request Demerol to deal with a potentially lethal post-partum complication.  I can’t say I was empowered by childbirth sans anesthetics, I was tired, happy to be safe and hold a healthy baby in my arms.  The nurses at Kaiser, however, were acting like me giving birth was some sort of act of Gaia worship. But enough about my uterus.

I had a lactation consultant scream at me a few hours after giving birth to my first, which lead me to briefly consider giving up the whole ready-made milk idea.  I didn’t.  I breastfed both of my children to 11 and 10 months until I dried up and I highly recommend it.

March 17, 2012

The S-word Resurfaces in the West Bank

Filed under: feminism, Middle East, politics — Tags: , , — edge of the sandbox @ 9:37 am

Sandra Fluke is in Europe.  Does she want to swing by the West Bank?

“Hi everyone, I’m writing this here because I’m not really sure when the next meeting will be. At the demonstration today (February 10, 2012) in Kfar a-Dik, I noticed looks and finger pointing from the shabab (nickname for young Palestinians) that made me feel some discomfort. They talked amongst themselves, and not with me, but the word that came up quite a lot was ‘slut,’ with glances directed toward me. When I met A. and H. (two men), I told them about this, and H. stayed by my side. Despite this, there was some ‘accidental’ touching, and some incidents in which people called me a ‘slut.’ In the end of the day, it was a very unpleasant experience.”

This letter, written by an Israeli leftist activist, is only one of the causes for the stormy debate that has been taking place online among leftist and human rights activists in Israel.

Divest from Students for Justice in Palestine and Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement!  Also, stop US aid to West Bank and Gaza.

Don’t Cry for Me, Pat Buchanan

Filed under: History, the Holocaust — Tags: , — edge of the sandbox @ 9:13 am

John Demjanjuk is dead of natural causes:

Convicted Nazi death camp guard John Demjanjuk, 91, has died in a retirement home in southern Germany, police said Saturday.

Last year, a German found the retired Ohio autoworker guilty of aiding the murder of 27,900 Jews at Sobibor, a Nazi extermination camp in occupied Poland, over several months of 1943.

Rot in hell.

March 14, 2012

What Is Reproductive Justice Anyway?

I first heard the term from Sandra Fluke, a one time President of Georgetown chapter of Law Students for Reproductive Justice, who, of course, wanted Catholics to buy her a condom.  I didn’t understand what justice has to do with it.  Sexual activity has consequences, one of which is pregnancy.  Although law and social norms dictate that fathers provide for their families, women shoulder most physical demands of childbearing and sacrifice our professional lives (at least in part) to raise families.  This is the way of nature, and, it seems to me, asking nature for justice is useless.  Like birth, death is the way of nature, and yet we do not ask for justice for kids who die of leukemia.

On the other hands, scientific advances make it possible to cure leukemia, or at least delay death.  Similarly, new technologies and free markets brought us the $5 Pill.  So what is Sandra Fluck complaining about?

I looked up “reproductive justice”.  Proponents taut it as a subset of social justice, but I have trouble distinguishing between the two.  The concept of reproductive justice was developed in 1994 by a black feminist Loretta J. Ross after attending International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo, Egypt where she got to hang out with other black feminists.  According to a sympathetic profile, Ross got involved in radical politics (black nationalists, Marxists and the like) while attending Howard College in the early 1970s.  Tragically, Dalkon Shield left her infertile at 23 years of age.  In 1997 Ross founded SisterSong, a collective that offers reproductive justice seminars that cost 2K minimum to attend — 2/3 of Fluke’s yearly contraception budget.

While the pro-abortion movement is primarily an upper middle class white phenomena, reproductive justice is lead by minority women.  To be sure, reproductive justice champions embrace abortions and on their wiki entry sing praises to noted racist and eugenicist Margaret Sanger.  They move beyond abortion, however, formulating a more holistic approach to women’s health, with more holistic demands (NOW has the wish list — from maternity leaves to illegal immigration) within the acceptable lefty causes, excluding, of course, pleas that lower class men of all colors stay with the families they started.  In other words, social justice by other name.

According to SisterSong website, reproductive justice moves discussion not just beyond abortion, but also beyond the Constitution:

Human rights provide more possibilities for our struggles than the privacy concepts the pro-choice movement claims only using the U.S. Constitution. Reproductive justice emerged as an intersectional theory highlighting the lived experience of reproductive oppression in communities of color.

How about another quote:

Reproductive Justice is important for women of color because it provides an exciting, intersectional framework that allows us to include all the social justice and human rights issues that affect our lives. This can be done without segmenting, isolating, and pitting one priority against another.

They certainly love the word “intersectional” over at SisterSong.  I suppose I love cheap shots.  But really, what do we say about people who refuse to prioritize?  We say that they want it all, right?

When I went to college I was taught that “segmenting” and “isolating” is supposed to be alienating, but I found it empowering.  When we segment and isolate we analyze, use reason.  Reason doesn’t alienate us from the community, it makes us a better member of it.  But not according to SisterSong who, with this quote, invite us to move beyond Western Civilization and the Enlightenment.  Reproductive justice advocates reject individual liberty, which for them means “choice,” in favor of group rights.  This makes perfect sense, considering that feminism started out as a bourgeois movement that asked for equal treatment under law and morphed into a group rights political establishment.

One reproductive justice blogger suggests that if Sandra Fluke were black nobody would blink an eye if Rush said she’s a slut.  I have to chuckle at this hypothetical.  Many conservative women, most of them white, were called worse names, and no national outrage followed.  Still, it’s interesting that Sandra Fluke, a privileged white college girl, who is evidently dating a son of a major Democrat donor, became the face of free contraception.

Older Posts »

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: