Being Viewed as a Person Vessel Instead of a Person

I'm currently reading Jessica Valenti's fabulous new book, "Why Have Kids?: A New Mom Explores the Truth About Parenting and Happiness." It's really wonderful and I'll post a review when I'm finished.

In the meantime, I wanted to talk for a moment about an excerpt from the book which really stood out to me. Valenti discusses the enormous pressure put on women to be perfect moms. She talks about how we are told that the absolute most important thing we can do is be moms and adds:

And really, how insulting is it to suggest that the best thing women can do is raise other people to do incredible things? I’m betting some of those women would like to do great things of their own.

I think about this culture message from time to time. I have certainly heard it and have the same reaction as Valenti. As I wrote recently, ciswomen are forever viewed as pre-pregnant and with that comes a cultural narrative which prioritizes the potential of said offspring over who the women currently are.

This observation stood out to me in particular because of Rian Johnson's new time travel movie, Looper, surprisingly. (This will get semi-spoilery.) I saw Looper this past weekend and I thoroughly enjoyed it from a purely entertainment perspective. However, from a feminist perspective, I was a bit troubled. In it, Emily Blunt plays the only noteworthy female character. She is a woman whose primary role is to be a mom to really important little boy. It reminded me all too much of Sarah Connor from the Terminator movies (Blunt's character is also named Sarah. I suspect that's no coincidence.)

In both cases, the Sarahs matter because they will mother guys who will go on to change the world.

Now I'm not saying that either of these female characters are weak. Rather--they both actually display at least some level of bad assery. But their ultimate importance, in the context of their worlds, is to be a mom to a super significant boy.  It all affirms what Valenti is talking about in her book.

Every time I write about motherhood, I hope to make it clear that I absolutely respect it. I'd like to repeat that again here. (In fact, I think that our society plays a lot of lip service to the importance of mothering but doesn't back it with any real action--like paid parental leave--that's a huge problem that I don't have time to do justice right now.) So I am in no way saying that mothering is insignificant. But my main point remains that we shouldn't be teaching our boys that they should aspire to greatness while teaching our girls to aspire to mother a great man.

Being Viewed as Pre-Pregnant

Apparently, pregnancy testing in bars is a discussion that is being had. Personally--I find that whole thing to be a whole lot of "Huh? What?" But reading the commentary over at Feministe did get my wheels turning about something that I interact with on an almost daily basis.

You see, there's a law here in Texas that requires "establishments selling alcohol for onpremise consumption, such as restaurants and bars, to post signs on men’s and women’s bathroom doors that remind the public of the health risks posed to unborn children when pregnant women drink alcohol." Here's the sign I'm talking about:

The DNC, Gay Rights, and Trailblazer Madeline Davis

I'll be honest...I'm still coming down off of a fan girl high from Bill Clinton's speech at the DNC last night. If you didn't catch it, I'm sure you at least heard about it. (And watch it here. Seriously...do it.) My Twitter, Tumblr, and Facebook were all blowing up. Clinton said a lot of really important things--stuff that needed to be said and what Obama can't necessarily say as the actual candidate. (Have I mentioned you should watch it?!)

Overall, I've been fairly pleased with the events I've watched and heard about at the DNC. The party, while never as left leaning as I'd like, is clearly much more representative of my interests than the Republicans. And to be really blunt, I don't feel there's a lack of sincerity on our side. I do agree with many people on my Twitter feed last night who stated that there needs to new faces of reproductive rights. Sandra Fluke was amazing yesterday and had important messages--but why is the person who speaks on this issue always white, cis, able bodied, middle class, etc? It's certainly time that some reproductive justice activists take the stage. I'd like to hear from them.

I am, however, ecstatic that the DNC has added marriage equality to the national platform. When I think about the possibility of that happening even just 4 years ago, I can't imagine it. There is clearly progress in the works.

Support for gay rights and marriage equality (while certainly not totally widespread) do finally seem to be mainstream opinions. It can be very easy to take this current situation for granted so it's important to remember that people have been gay activists for a very long time. In listening to "Tell Me More" on NPR this morning, I heard a segment about Madeline Davis. I wasn't aware of Davis, because the American history I grew up learning was very stale, male, pale, and straight. As according to the program:

At the 1972 Democratic National Convention, Madeline Davis asked for something that had never been proposed at a major party convention. In a floor speech, the New York delegate asked her fellow Democrats to endorse platform language defending the civil rights of gay people. And now, 40 years later, marriage equality has been adopted as a plank in the 2012 Democratic Party platform.

In the segment, Davis talks with Michele Martin in detail about what it was like being the first out gay person to stand before a national party and talk about civil rights for homosexuals and how her party received her. You can read or listen to the segment here. I highly suggest you check it out. It's a great reflection of 1) how far we've come 2) how far we have to go and 3) that social change isn't easy or quick but so long as there's people working on it, progress can and will be made.

Unfortunately, I won't be home tonight to watch Obama accept the nomination for his second term. I will however be sure to catch a replay. I have no doubt that he will deliver.

It's a Big Day in Mississippi

Edited to add: the decision has come down and the law continues to be blocked! YAAAAAY! Keep reading to see why I think that the judge has made the right decision.

An anti-abortion law is going before judges in Mississippi today. I'm really crossing my fingers on this one and hoping that anti-choice extremists are again put at bay by the more reasonable individuals in MS.

The law in question would require all abortion providers to be board certified OB-GYNs who have admitting privileges to a local hospital. If you don't know much about medical systems, this sounds pretty reasonable. If you dig a bit deeper you learn that this act would strategically result in the closure of MS's only abortion clinic, Jackson Women's Health Organization.

Quick Thought: Asking About Kids

Sometimes I feel like I got a different social rule book than other people. I just can't, for the life of me, understand why asking someone about their future plans to have kids is a seemingly acceptable --nay an expected--question to ask a married woman in her late 20's.

I mean, I understand if you are close friends with the person and you are discussing general life plans/whatever, but people I have just met quite often inquire about my interest in procreation. And older people will sometimes even remind me that I'm in my "best years" for that stuff right now.

How did such a deeply personal inquiry become publicly acceptable? I'm genuinely curious!

This subject is one which could invoke any number of really uncomfortable things for the askee. For example, what if that person is already trying to have kids and is struggling with fertility issues? What if they just miscarried? What if they have never and will never want kids in the first place? With that latter situation, if the woman asserts that she doesn't want kids, you can bet that someone will tell her that she'll change her mind or that she's too young to know now or that her "clock will go off"--blah, blah, blah. As if this stranger knows her better than she knows herself! And even if she does change her mind later, what business is it of yours, as a random person, to undermine the opinion she just shared with you?

It's all so odd to me. Even though I do plan to have kids (a kid?) someday and the actual answering of this question is relatively painless for me, I can't help but think of what a shitty situation it is that people just ask this willy-nilly.

Prometheus: We Miss You, Ripley!

I've decided I'm making this a series on the gender portrayed in all of the 2012 summer/spring blockbusters. You can check out my other ones here; The Avengers, the Hunger Games, Snow White and the Huntsman, MIB3, Ted/Abraham Lincoln Vampire Hunter, Brave, Magic Mike.

So I caught a midnight screening of Prometheus last night. Although it was made 33 years later, Prometheus is a prequel to the popular sci-fi/horror flick Alien, directed by Ridley Scott. Of course, prior to last night, Mr. Nerdy Feminist made sure that I backed up and had actually seen Alien. (I thought I had before but I think that was actually Aliens and I know for sure I have definitely seen Alien Vs. Predator. Oh how proud I am of that...either way I'm all good and caught up now.)

Without spoiling anything, I can say that the amazing character of Ellen Ripley, as portrayed by Sigourney Weaver in Alien does NOT have a match in Prometheus. In fact, I'm very disappointed that at least in this series, it appears we've quite regressed in the last 33 years. I was so disappointed and concerned that I actually started to jot down the following notes in the theater. (Thank goodness it was the Alamo Drafthouse so I had a paper, pen, and table all at hand.)

And now I'm going to get very spoilery under the cut, so considered yourself warned. 

Don't Mess With Texas Women!

Tonight, a few friends and I went to Planned Parenthood's Don't Mess With Texas Women event at the state capital building. God, was it ever powerful to stand there with so many other people who are sick as hell of women's health paying the price for anti-choice extremeist views.

The Joke of "Small Government" Republicans

Keep Your Bohner Out of My Uterus shared this image today and it got me thinking again about the utter lie we are told that the republican party is the party of small government.

I know the point of this image is that they always talk about jobs creation and don't make it happen in favor of other stuff, but frankly I was distracted. I couldn't help but notice the sheer number of "big government" stuff the right is dealing with. Look through that list. What could be more emblematic of a big government than one which is in your uterus, your personal relationships, and tries to regulate religion or family?

COME ON.

I very much feel like I am beating a dead horse with how much I talk about this extremely obvious concept, but here's the thing: I keep interacting with people who say, "I don't like much of what the Republican party does, but I am in favor of a small government." So I just keep coming back to the fact that even the one thing that Republicans are supposed to have right, they are wrong.

How is anyone even taking them seriously as a national party anymore? It's mind boggling to me. And while we're talking about super big, overreaching, in your uterus government I'd like to take another page from KYBOOMU's book and remind y'all of two things:

1. In nine days, Texas has plans to take action which will cut off 130,000 poor Texas women from access to cancer screenings, exams, and contraception. Unconscionable.

2. It is day 28 that Texas has had mandatory transvaginal ultrasounds in order to obtain an abortion. Horrific.

The War on Women (and Anyone Who Needs or Cares About Reproductive Health)

I was going to write a happy blog today about family of choice. I'll get to that another day, because today I found out Texas is banning the participation of Planned Parenthood from the Texas Women's Health Program. According to Emily Ramshaw at The Texas Tribune:

A Picture Worth a Thousand Tears

A coworker had warned me that this was going on today...but it wasn't until I saw this photo on Shakesville that it really hit me. This image is from a hearing against the Obama administration's requirement for employers to provide birth control to their employees.

President Obama, a Genuine Thanks

Dear Mr. President,

All too often we forget to give thanks where thanks is due. But today, I'd like to give you a heartfelt thanks for the fact that preventative services are now covered under the Affordable Care Act. In the contentious political climate, the voices complaining about "Obamacare" are getting a lot of attention and I'd like to bring a little perspective to the situation.

I went to the doctor today for my annual exam. Because of the coverage of preventative care, I didn't have to pay a bill when I left.

WTF, Texas?

Trigger warning.

So Texas is in the business of rape. I know that's a pretty bold claim, so let me clarify.

Recently, in a HUGE win, the FBI decided to acknowledge what we all already knew and updated their definition of rape. It is now:

The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.

(Emphasis mine.) THEN, I see this shit from Hay Ladies:

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court Of Appeals is totally down with forcing doctors to tell women needless and harmful lies about consequences of abortion that don’t exist and have not been scientifically proven. They’ve ruled that Texas can enforce its forced trans-vaginal sonogram bill while it’s being challenged in court.

So what does that really mean? Well according to MedlinePlus, here is exactly what a transvaginal ultrasound (sonogram) is:

You will lie down on a table with your knees bent and feet in holders called stirrups. The health care provider will place a probe, called a transducer, into the vagina. The probe is covered with a condom and a gel. The probe sends out sound waves, which reflect off body structures. A computer receives these waves and uses them to create a picture. The doctor can immediately see the picture on a nearby TV monitor.

In other words, as Jessica Valenti said, "[People] seeking abortions in Texas can be legally vaginally penetrated against their wills." Because how are you truly consenting if you are coerced into having this done in order to obtain an abortion? By the very definition now accepted by the FBI, people in Texas who want an abortion but not a transvaginal sonogram can be raped.

There are no words.

Who The Hell You Calling Pregnance'?

Not funny.

So, in the past I've written about Beyonce. I've written about Jezebel. And I've written about how we treat pregnant women...so let me take a moment to write about all three. I promise this will be quick!

Basically, I've noticed how Jezebel likes to call Beyonce "Pregnance'" lately. Like a lot. Like too much. They probably think it's funny and cute, but I find it all around annoying. Don't we already have enough problematic treatment of pregnant women? I guess what really pisses me off about it is that it totally reduces this amazing woman to her pregnancy. And while she is obviously very happy to be pregnant, it's not all she is.

Plus it's hard how to figure out how to say it in your head when you're reading. UCK.

Ah well, I'm still joining the masses who are pretty excited to see the progeny of Beyonce and Shawn Knowles-Cater!

All "Pro Life" Arguments Suck...Some are Worse Than Others

Seeing my recent spike in troll activity, it should be interesting to see what comments I have to filter out on this post. If you even think a pro choice thought, you're bound to get trolls. But, regardless, here goes...

I recently learned that Siri is anti choice (which is particularly sad to me because I just became an iPhone convert.) On Jezebel, I was linked through to a discussion about abortion on Gizmodo related to Siri's political stance. Of course I forgot to follow Internet rules 1-5: DON'T READ THE COMMENTS. The whole thing is, predictably, a cluster of anti choice nonsense, with some solidly logical pro choice comments thrown in to temper it.

There was one anti choice comment in particular, which I'd like to debunk in a moment. But before I do, for anyone interested in my general perspectives on abortion, you can check out my number of other posts on the subject. Ok, back to the comment that got under my skin. In the context of replying to some of the pro choice comments, one person said:

I have a couple of kids (7 months and 2 years old) and I will say that raising kids has been the most difficult and inconvenient thing I've ever done in my life. That said, I would give my life for my kids. They are so precious, and I would punch anyone who called them a parasite or uterus intruder.

Here are other anti choice statements which hit at this same point:

1) I'm a mom! I have no idea how anyone could pass up the opportunity to have this experience!
2) Now that I'm a parent, I could never be pro choice!
3) Being pregnant has totally change my stance on abortion. Once you feel that baby kick you just know that there's a little person growing in there.
4) What if your mom had aborted you?
5) How could anyone look at their own beautiful kids and support abortion?

This is one of those cases where I just get so sad that I have to explain why this line of "logic" is flawed. There is so, so much fail going on here. The biggest thing is what I keep coming back to over and over: if you are morally opposed to abortion, DON'T HAVE ONE. It is such a personal choice, that if pregnancy or parenting has changed how you feel about life and you now want to keep every child you conceive, then by all means, please do! If you consider the 3 week pregnancy in your uterus to be your baby, than GREAT, it is so! But the fact that you feel this was has literally no bearing on the life, feelings, and decisions of other women.

I cringe almost every time someone brings up their children as having ANY relevance on the abortion debate. Of course, people who have chosen to bring a child into this world love them and can't imagine their lives without them now! (I'm very sad for children who live in conditions which are anything less.)

So many kids are planned and even when they are not they often become "welcome surprises." Because we do have legal abortion, births that result from pregnancies in non-ideal situations usually have two situations 1) the mothers decide they do want to have the baby despite the obstacles or 2) the babies are put up for adoption and placed with families that very much want them. Whatever the case, more often than not, children grow up with parents who love them and don't say, "I should have aborted him/her."

All of this is grand, but it still has no relevance on the situations where the mother truly does not want or cannot carry a pregnancy to term. What about the implications of forcing a woman to carry a child to term? Or, to speak in "pro life" terms (since they don't seem to care about the life of the woman involved) what are the implications for a child born into that situation?

So when the commenter says they would give their life for their kids, that's FANTASTIC! That's their choice as a parent, but it, again, means nothing in the wider context of the abortion debate. It's a personal opinion, not an analysis of the policy. And for the record, no one is calling your kids parasites or uterus intruders. Those kids came from wanted pregnancies and they grew into the people they are today. It was never about whether or not those kids should exist. But what happens inside another woman's body really isn't up for us to mandate. Besides, frequently, women seek abortions because they have other children that they love and want to provide a full life to. That's a point which can also not be overlooked.

YAY Mississippi!

There's something I never thought I'd say...

It's looking good! I'm sitting here, watching a real time election results and it's too early to call it as I'm writing this. BUT should this post see the light of day, it means that the personhood amendment was defeated in Mississippi. That means that a (small?) majority of people in Mississippi understand at least one of the following things:

1. A fertilized egg is not a human being. It is a grouping of cells with the potential to become one. 
2. A fertilized egg should not have the same rights as actually born citizens.
3. Forcing a woman to carry a child robs her of 9 months of her life and produces yet another child into the world that the right wing wants born, but immediately ceases to care about once they are here. 
4. A small government stays out of uteruses. 
5. There are not many things more heinous than forcing a woman to carry her rapists' child. 
6. This amendment is misogynist.
7. There would be an EXTREMELY chilling affect of a law of this nature. Extremely.
8. Choice is a deeply personal thing that should be up to individual women, discussed under sound medical advice, and not legislated by the government. 

And by the time I finished writing this not even exhaustive list of things wrong with the personhood amendment, the site I was watching officially called it! YAY indeed!

Yeah...

Anyone who tells you that we live in a post-feminist society needs to read a few things.

1) The GOP is trying to kill women. No I'm not kidding. Thankfully, it looks like Obama will have our backs, but that's still incredibly terrifying.

2) And as everyone is talking about, intimate partner violence is now legal in Topeka. WTF.

I don't have a lot to say about these things. I feel I can let them speak for themselves. Besides, I'm super stressed out of my mind lately with about 100 troubling things going on in my personal/professional life. So, call this a half assed attempt at staying up to date.

In trying to remember to take care of myself first, I probably won't be writing as much in general until mid November, and then maybe even through the new year. Of course, as the occasional discussion/anger/question/laugh pops up, I'll be sure to share.

Until then, at least follow the advice given at Feministing, and contact your representative against the legislation in point #1:

Here’s how: Call (202) 224-3121 and ask for your Representative–you can call 24 hours a day and leave a message if the staff is not in the office. You can also email them here. If you’re not sure who your Rep is, click here to find out.

Feeding the Trolls: an Anti-Choice Douche

If you know almost anything about feminist blogging, you know that it attracts some of the worst trolls. Even small time virtually unread bloggers like me get them. That's why I've gone to comment moderation. I mean, seriously, I get all of 1 or 2 comments a month, and I had to go to moderation because of haters. How dumb!

On my recent "Choice Matters" post at the other blog I write for, I attracted a troll. (As I knew I would. Trolls love talking about abortion. They love it oh so much.) Here's what "anon" said:

You left wingers LOVE abortion. Jesus christ! Obsessing over it so much. It wont go anywhere, so let people have their opinions. Why should I be okay with a woman being a careless slut and waltzing into an abortion clinic on MY tax dollars. Not going to happen. No friggen way. I would rather be called a "narrowminded asshole Republican", which I have before, than support something that seems SO wrong.

A good policy when dealing with trolls on your blog is to ignore, delete if necessary, and move on. Engaging them them only makes matters worse. More mature bloggers than myself follow this policy. I'm not sure what their comment moderation policies are over at The Progressive Playbook, so I'm not going to remove it or draw much attention to it. On my own blog, I can do what I want. So, I've decided to take this battle to where I feel safe--right here. If any hater comments come through, trust me, they will be deleted, not published, unless in a manner similar than this (to mock and deconstruct them.)

Without further ado, I will now break down why every single thing this person has said is wrong.

• "anon"--Lord knows I can agree that it is often unwise to tie your "IRL" identity to your online persona, but to be completely anonymous is cowardly. If you truly believe something enough to come at the author like this, have the guts to at least represent your online persona.
• "You left wingers LOVE abortion. Jesus christ [sic]!" See, right here, I know you didn't even read what I wrote, so it's no wonder it's all downhill from here. I specifically tackled the myth that feminists love abortion. You just saw "choice" and went off the deep end, or perhaps your reading comprehension skills are lacking. Also, isn't it your type who gets really mad when the Lord's name is taken in vain?
• "Obsessing over it so much. It wont [sic] go anywhere, so let people have their opinions." OK with this line, I'm literally chuckling at my desk. ARE YOU KIDDING ME? We're the ones who won't let people have their opinions? This must, again, be attributed to a lack of basic reading skills and comprehension. We are the side of CHOICE. Like I said in my original peice, if you're against abortions don't have one. On the other hand, "anti-choicers" quite literally want to pass legislation which disallows women who want to have an abortion from exercising their free will.
• "Why should I be okay with a woman being a careless slut and waltzing into an abortion clinic on MY tax dollars. Not going to happen. No friggen way." There is so much wrong here that I'm afraid my head might blow up trying to even re-read that ignorance. It all rests on the huge misconception that anyone who accesses abortion services must be a "slut." Seriously? You believe that? Every pregnancy is the result of promiscuity? Even if they were, why the need for slut shaming? I thought the right was all about personal liberties and freedoms. If someone wants to be slutty, isn't that her right? I guess I've stumbled on yet another conservative hypocrisy. And, back to your reading comprehension...my piece in no way tackled the funding issues surrounding abortion (while I DO hold an opinion on this topic, I was simply advocating for there to still be a choice, not how it's paid for). But while we're going there--fact check, please. Not that I suspect you will be able to adequately grasp the content of those links either.
• "I would rather be called a 'narrowminded [sic] asshole Republican', which I have before, than support something that seems SO wrong." Well, while it sounds like people are calling you an accurate title, where did those quotes come from? Did I say that? Huh...weird. And a bit paranoid? Anyway, you know what? You can TOTALLY think that abortion "seems SO wrong." That's cool. Let me make this as clear as I possibly can: You can be opposed to abortion. That's your prerogative. I only have a problem when you try to use this belief to control the actions of others. Hence CHOICE. Do you get it yet? I'm not sure what else I can say. I mean, there are tons of stuff that I think "seem SO wrong" but would never try to totally outlaw. Some examples include: Gun ownership, female oppressive religions, irresponsible food production, driving an SUV, voting Republican, listening to Glenn Beck. How am I able to understand that ALL of my personal convictions aren't meant to be law, but you aren't?

Oh trolls--you say so much without saying anything. That's the real problem, isn't it? You don't actually represent any real viewpoints. You just spew myths and venom. If you did respectfully disagree with me and bring some substance, we'd be able to have an actual discussion, free from sexism and hate. I'll just be over here waiting for that to happen. And getting old in the process. And having 30 million abortions, because I just LOVE EM.

Choice Matters

This post is a part of my “Out of the Kitchen” weekly column at The Progressive Playbook in which various news and pop culture items will be examined through a feminist lens.

You’ll have to excuse my brief absence. First I was sick and then I took a trip for my birthday weekend which had me driving from my current home in Austin, TX to my childhood home in Indianapolis, IN. The good news is that this jaunt gave me quite a bit of inspiration, although not in a pleasant way.

If you’ve been keeping track lately, you are aware that Indiana has the most restrictions against abortion. And Texas ain’t doing so hot either. So it should be no surprise that the drive between these two cities was littered with billboards, bumper stickers, and other advertisements all telling me how extremely terrible abortion is.

When you make the same 18 hour drive twice in five days, you have a lot of time to think. My mental wheels were turning as the physical wheels also spun, and I couldn’t help but mull over my thoughts on choice. Read more...

Everything's Bigger in Texas, Including My Disappointments

I truly have no idea, but somehow, this news slipped through the cracks and didn't make it to me until today, when a friend posted the story on Facebook.

After nearly 40 years of partnership, the state has cut its ties to Planned Parenthood of Austin, defunding its East Seventh Street clinic, which provides basic reproductive health care and family planning services to low-income and uninsured women. The clinic last year received $474,000 to provide services to approximately 3,700 women; now it will get nothing, and neither will its clients. Notice of the cuts came just four days before the beginning of the new fiscal year, leaving area providers scrambling. "We didn't expect zero funding with four days' notice," Sarah Wheat, interim co-CEO of Planned Parenthood of the Texas Capital Region, said at a press conference last week.

My sadness and anger at this situation is...well, I'm not sure there are words for it. I work in the nonprofit sector, closely with Planned Parenthood. I know most everyone in their Health Education department, personally and professionally. They are a team of dedicated, compassionate, intelligent educators who care deeply about spreading good information to young people and their parents. I have had meetings to discuss sexual health programming for Central Texan teens in the offices of that very clinic on East 7th Street--where they house not only the standard clinic, but also their teen center.

Thinking about the implications of a loss of almost $500,000 to their organization is heart-breaking.

However, this situation has ramifications well beyond the employees (even though they are at the forefront of my mind since I know them.) Like Ms. Wheat said later in the article, "The impact is going to be even bigger than we can even calculate at this point." Yes, the impact is incalculable, but for anyone who has access Planned Parenthood's vital services when they needed them the most, knows personally about the cost.

Let me give my personal anecdote, from when I regularly accessed Planned Parenthoods in Indiana (another story of disappointment!) I was 22, and I had discovered a lump in my breast. I was petrified of the possibilities and I didn't seek medical treatment for quite some time. Finally, at my annual exam with the nurse practitioner at Planned Parenthood, I felt comfortable enough to ask her about it. She checked me out and calmed me saying that it seemed to be a hormonal cyst, with the kindest words and soothing care. She referred me to the Indiana Breast Center where they confirmed with an ultrasound that it was nothing serious. It was because of accessing affordable, compassionate care that I finally confronted my biggest fears and was examined.

I am so lucky. My story turned out to have a very positive ending. But somewhere out there, there was a nerdy feminist who didn't have an affordable, trustworthy health provider to turn to, who continues to fear the abomination growing in her breast, and has no idea if it will someday kill her. Nowhere to turn.

Women who need to access low cost, reliable health care have so very few options. Unfortunately, they are often caught in a highly politicized environment, which sways to the whims of zealots over continuing to grant them life saving services. I am pro-choice, there is no question about that. But the greater purpose of an organization like Planned Parenthood is to actually prevent the need for abortions in the first place by not only making birth control accessible to a much wider audience, but also with good, solid information provided by those community health educators. It amazes me that this fact is almost always overlooked.

If you are able, please consider donating to the downtown clinic to continue to provide a litany of life saving reproductive and health services to Austin's neediest individuals. And if you are not in Austin and you prefer to support your local Planned Parenthood, you can do so here.

Crisis Pregnancy Centers: Scary Stuff

This post is a part of my “Out of the Kitchen” weekly column at The Progressive Playbook in which various news and pop culture items will be examined through a feminist lens.

News broke yesterday that San Francisco is launching an attack on “Crisis Pregnancy Centers” in the form of proposed legislation and legal action against their false advertising. In case you don’t know; this is really, really, REALLY good stuff for those of us who simply believe that women matter.

I’m going to take this breaking news as an opportunity to remind everyone why “Crisis Pregnancy Centers” (CPCs) are hugely problematic and widely discredited. The truth is that CPCs are biased. They are typically run by vehemently anti-abortion activists who have a singular purpose: prey on women who are scared, pregnant, and alone. They capitalize on this vulnerability for their own agenda and coerce them into delivering a baby, sometimes by any means necessary. They are “anti-choice” in the strictest sense of the word; they literally deprive women of the information needed to make a choice or even understand that there are choices. Read more...