You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 10, 2016, 01:14:18 AM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid  (Read 13363 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #25 on: August 21, 2012, 06:16:47 PM »
The GOP's official platform will call for a constitutional amendment completely banning abortion. No exemptions at all.

No rape.
No incest.
No 'health of the mother is endangered'

None of that.

So Akin isn't some right wing nut.. he just did the one thing that the R's couldn't stand for.. he told America the truth on what he and other R's see as true (did you see the American Family Association suggest that AKIN is the one being 'Forcibly Assaulted' because people called him on his remarks

It's sad, because one of the few Republicans I'll vote for is running for re-election this year (Scott Brown). And to his credit, he opposes some of the insane things that are in this platorm. However, I cannot and WILL not vote for anyone who associates themselves with the party. Maybe after the right of the right wing currently in control of the Republican party gets kicked in the metaphorical balls a few time, they'll let the sane people take control.

Sadly AC.. it's been something like 25 years of foolishness at this point. It won't change overnight. To get the GOP leadership to break with the moral conservative fringe that they are catering too right now, you'd have to have a COMPLETE exodus of all the moderate elements.

I figure a 20 to 30% departure of the population MIGHT get some to think.. but most of them are too far in bed,and have no qualms of doing anything needed to stay in power. Including being moral hypocrites. So I don't see anything changing short of losing control of the house AND senate as well as losing the presidential race. Only with a lost of SO much would the current leadership be booted out the door.

Offline AllieCat

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #26 on: August 21, 2012, 06:26:34 PM »
I tend to disagree.

The establishment of the GOP may agree with some of these things, but they're pragmatists. They know that a lot of this stuff isn't popular with a lot of folks. So, they go for the attitude of "Get what we can, give in where we have to, but play the long game"

The Tea Party changed all that. Starting in 2008 and cresting in 2010, they grabbed control. They would have taken the Senate to go along with the house except the Tea Party nominated some HORRIBLE candidates (such as Sharron Angle in Nevada).

They took the wrong lesson from that however. They believe that the right thing to do is to, if you'll forgive a bit of my anger to seep through, that the winning move was to double down on crazy. They don't want a functioning government. Anyone who's actually (gasp) worked with the other party is obviously a RINO and needs to be primaried out of a job. The sane people (like Olympia Snowe) have already decided to flee. The tea party is a tantrum throwing four year old, if they can't get their way, they'll blow up the game so no one else wins either,

So most of the sane people in the right wing has either walked away or been kicked out. God help us if they actually get further power. But I'm hoping that Akin and other Republican platform things mean that the R's will lose ground in this election (I think Obama is going to win comfortably, and I THINK the D's are going to retain the senate).. as I said, the GOP needs the metaphorical kick in the jimmies to loosen the crazies hold on the party to get America back to a functioning nation.

(sorry to go all ranty ravey :D)

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #27 on: August 21, 2012, 06:30:32 PM »
Personally, I see nothing wrong with voting for sane Republicans, if you can find 'em.  (Go on, call me a Blue Dog.)  'Punish' the ones that don't speak for you by voting against them, but 'reward' the ones that do.  If they're willing to work across the aisle, even better.  That's the sort of thing we need - not the angry 4-year-olds. 

Give them a 'time out'.  ;D

Offline Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #28 on: August 21, 2012, 06:35:30 PM »
That's alright, you should hear me swear at the TV some nights.  The Tea Party COULD have been a good thing but the movement was high jacked early on and works in lock step with a LOT of the folks they were screaming about in the beginning. For example, Paul Ryan claims a good share of their support. 

The problem is the party leadership is the same. The mover and shakers are still the same good old boys that help take the house in 95 and rewrote how the GOP in congress works. My brother ran into these guys when he ran for office, nothing like a bunch of entitled unelected party men to halt progress and reform. Short of a chunk of Skylab dropping on the National Convention next week, I don't see things changing soon. Too many good moderate leaders have left or been marginalized. 

And given my brother MIGHT be at the convention as a delegate, I hope that nothing bad happens there.

I vote for the people not the party. And this year there are damn few in blue I'd vote for.

And it's official, akins is going to try and bull it out.   He MIGHT be able to get evangelicals to help him pull in nough funds to stay in the running.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2012, 06:59:31 PM by Callie Del Noire »

Offline Vekseid

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #29 on: August 21, 2012, 08:18:25 PM »
It's sad, because one of the few Republicans I'll vote for is running for re-election this year (Scott Brown). And to his credit, he opposes some of the insane things that are in this platorm. However, I cannot and WILL not vote for anyone who associates themselves with the party. Maybe after the right of the right wing currently in control of the Republican party gets kicked in the metaphorical balls a few time, they'll let the sane people take control.

It's interesting that Scott Brown is running against an ex-republican who, when confronted with solid evidence that she was actually wrong... changed her position on an issue. Brown, like anyone else, is just as bought and paid for as the rest of them - he's just forced to take a more liberal stand in MA.

Offline Beguile's Mistress

  • Time flies like an arrow ~ Fruit flies like a banana ~ Elliquiy's Fair-E Godmother
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Jul 2009
  • Location: Faeleacanvald ~ The Steeler Nation ~ Home of Lord Stanley's Cup 2016 ~ She won't stay throwed! ~ 48\22-5\1\11-5\7
  • Gender: Female
  • Perpetual Notion Machine ~ 'What if...?'
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #30 on: August 21, 2012, 08:44:43 PM »
Maybe Akin is the sacrificial penguin.

Offline AllieCat

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #31 on: August 21, 2012, 08:48:47 PM »
He says he's going to stay in, but contrary to public reports, he still has five weeks to exit the race.. providing that A) He gets a court order to do so (which is usually granted barring special circumstances) and B) he pays for the reprinting of the ballots (which I'm sure the RNC/Rove groups would gladly pay for if it meant Akin was out.

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #32 on: August 21, 2012, 09:21:51 PM »
He says he's going to stay in, but contrary to public reports, he still has five weeks to exit the race.. providing that A) He gets a court order to do so (which is usually granted barring special circumstances) and B) he pays for the reprinting of the ballots (which I'm sure the RNC/Rove groups would gladly pay for if it meant Akin was out.

You mean the GOP actually has means of striking him from the senate election, even after tomorrow, if they are able to get a court order on it? I was wondering if they had that option or if he could ultimately stay in, no matter what, simply because he *is* on the books as a candidate and approved by the party beforehand. Reckon that in some places in Europe it would be easier than it seems to be in the US for a party to formally rid themselves of a candidate they feel is badly damaging their confidence with the voters. Over here, you wouldn't have to go to court for it, but then politicians in Europe don't often have personal funds that would last them throiugh an entire campaign if their party cuts the pipeline on them after a scandal.

Offline AllieCat

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #33 on: August 21, 2012, 09:31:18 PM »
*HE* has to request it. the GOP can't make him do it, but I'm sure they'll continue to pressure him over the five weeks to "do the right thing"

Offline gaggedLouise

  • Quim Queen | Collaborative juicy writer
  • Champion
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Location: Scandinavia
  • Gender: Female
  • Bound, gagged and unarmed but still dangerous.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 0
Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #34 on: August 21, 2012, 09:42:53 PM »
*HE* has to request it. the GOP can't make him do it, but I'm sure they'll continue to pressure him over the five weeks to "do the right thing"

Okay, thanks for explaining this. Of course if it drags out into the main campaign it's the last thing they want - going to court in September over this might become a case of "the operation was successful but the patient died".

Technically I guess an English , German or Swedish MP candidate can stick onto his place on the ballots after he's been embroiled in something very embarrasing if he really 100% decides to, even though his friends want him out, but it's ultra rare because their parties often have means of lethally crippling their career and their ability to function as a day-to-day MP if they have made everyone shit in their pants, so the party has more leverage. And candidates here identify more firmly with their parties.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2012, 09:44:58 PM by gaggedLouise »

Offline Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #35 on: August 21, 2012, 09:47:26 PM »
Okay, thanks for explaining this. Of course if it drags out into the main campaign it's the last thing they want - going to court in September over this might become a case of "the operation was successful but the patient died".

Technically I guess an English , German or Swedish MP candidate can stick onto his place on the ballots after he's been embroiled in something very embarrasing if he really 100% decides to, even though his friends want him out, but it's ultra rare because their parties often have means of lethally crippling their career and their ability to function as a day-to-day MP if they have made everyone shit in their pants, so the party has more leverage. And candidates here identify more firmly with their parties.


So can Akin.. question is.. does he want to face the publicity machine that folks like Karl Rove can unleash on him to pressure him out. And more importantly, can his still loyal backers?

Offline Serephino

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #36 on: August 21, 2012, 09:48:44 PM »
I'm really hoping the GOP gets kicked in the metaphorical balls this year.  Then maybe the more sane people in power will pull their heads out of their asses and realize pandering to the fringe wasn't such a good idea after all.  Until then, if a few giant meteors happen to take out a few Tea Party people, I won't be all that upset.

Offline Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #37 on: August 21, 2012, 09:52:02 PM »
I'm really hoping the GOP gets kicked in the metaphorical balls this year.  Then maybe the more sane people in power will pull their heads out of their asses and realize pandering to the fringe wasn't such a good idea after all.  Until then, if a few giant meteors happen to take out a few Tea Party people, I won't be all that upset.


I have honestly tried to figure out how the party could 'return to rationality' on the national level. I don't think the 2nd coming of every sainted president they've mentioned every year could do it. Short of a leadership die off of all the 'nixon era' gang.. I don't see it happening.

Offline Saria

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #38 on: August 21, 2012, 09:57:53 PM »
It seems to me that the main reason that the 'legitimate rape' phrase is getting most of the attention is because that's the sort of phrasing that Akin and his ilk want to put into the laws they're itching to pass.  Well, that and it's so easy to make fun of.  :P  However, certainly not every American is focusing on only that, and as Moirae points out, not every American woman can (or should) be expected to vote in lock-step with every other.  That's basically one of the things that bothers me most about the "new" Republican party -- anyone who doesn't vote the party line 100% of the time suffers for it.
Obviously I wasn't saying that every American woman can (or should) vote the same way as every other American woman. That's just absurd. But when you make up 50% of the population, you should have a stronger voice in politics. And the excuses given for why they don't just don't fly; for example, pointing out that women don't have equal standing in society as men. Other groups who don't have equal standing don't get the same political dismissal. African Americans for example; the Voting Rights Act was only passed in 1965, and it seems they only make up 12% of the population. What do you think would be the political consequences if a white Congressman made the kinds of statements about African Americans that people like Akin have made about women?

So why is it that a group that was disenfranchised until the 1960s and that only makes up 12% of the population gets more political respect than a group that was disenfranchised only up until the 1920s and makes up 50% of the population? You see what I'm saying? Something is very wrong. I don't know what, but clearly something is very, very wrong in the political discourse. There are plenty of other examples, too, like the case a few months back where a Congressional committee got together to discuss women's health issues... with a committee made up of only men, and no doctors. Do you think it would be possible for a Congressional committee to form to discuss what to do about African American social issues without a single African American on the panel, or even a single expert in social issues? Unlikely. So why? What's the difference? These are the questions that someone should be asking.

But when I watch your news, I don't see anyone asking them. I see your news people focusing only on this "legitimate rape" nonsense. (And, by the way, what's with this thing about taking every general statement I make and turning it into a universal absolute? I say "Americans aren't talking about this issue", and you turn it into "not one single American anywhere is talking about this issue". Really?) I don't see any of the news programs or discussion programs asking the hard questions, like whether Akin believes that women who get pregnant during rape secretly "wanted it". Or who these "doctors" are that are passing this nonsense off, and why isn't someone putting their licences up for review. Or any number of women's issues related to this flap. And now the talk has shifted to whether or not Akin should quit (or be kicked out of) the race. But that's irrelevant. Someone should be asking whether the things he believes (such as that women shouldn't get abortions even when raped) are actually legitimate political platforms. Someone should be asking other political candidates to take a position for or against those things. This should be a big stink in the news, not a limited scandal for one politician; over the next week or two, every single politician above the level of the school board should have a microphone put in their face and asked to denounce denying rape victims abortions... or go on the record saying they support denying abortions to rape victims.

It's distasteful. It's stupid. The 'Legitimate Rape' comment was bad enough, but could be an honest verbal gaff, but this thought that a woman won't get pregnant unless she wants too.. that's stupid. Willfully and resolutely refusing to accept the facts stupid.
And dangerously stupid, too, eh? Because that's just victim-blaming in disguise. That's from the same bullshit "just world" school of thought that also gives us gems like that women who dress sexy are asking to be assaulted. (Another thing someone should ask politicians like Akin about!!!) Because think about where this leaves a woman who did get pregnant from a rape: it means that she was secretly "in" to it. That's just a recipe for slut-shaming. And even though there's the concession that, "okay, sometimes the 'mechanism' that prevents pregnancy from a rape fails", there's still the statement that it's "really rare", which means that a pregnant rape victim will always have that doubt hanging over her.

It's actually a little bit worse than that. Technically, Akin's statement could be interpreted as saying that not enjoying or wanting the sex is irrelevant, that as long as you unconsciously are compliant via subsequent pregnancy it's still an "illegitimate" rape claim.

He doesn't care if you hated every second of it if it was what you "needed" on a genetic/procreative level.
Yes, that's exactly what I think, too. I don't mean to imply that he thinks you are consciously "wanting it"; I've been wording it as "secretly wanting it" to try and get that across, but I didn't know how to put it properly. I think he believes that if you get pregnant from a rape, it means that you wanted it... on some level... not necessarily consciously.

But that, ultimately, is still just saying that you wanted it "deep down inside". It's still victim-blaming, right?

Why has Anne Coulter gone on national television and said in an interview she agrees women shouldn't have the right to vote?  That one has me scratching my head too.  I can't understand how even a conservative woman can support this crap, but they do.  Also, as I've said before, most candidates aren't stupid enough to say something like that publicly.  They just co sponsor and vote for the bills, and hope no one notices.  Sadly, most people don't.  At a family event a few weeks ago, when politics inevitably came up, I told them about congress.org.  My aunts and uncles, who are even more informed than the average citizen, didn't know you could go look at the voting record of your rep.  They listened to what that candidate said during the campaign (usually a load of crap) and never thought much about it after the election. 

It's only been recently that political activists have been making people aware.  My email inbox is full of petitions and candidates asking for money.  Before I signed up for these things, my reps could've all voted yes on a bill the redefined rape, and as long as that bill didn't pass, I would've never known such a thing was even on the floor unless it was reported on the news.  Even then, the news usually only tells you if it passed, not how the reps voted.

I do try to stay on top of things, and I do vote.

That - that "congress.org" - is precisely the kind of tool that should be used more often (here in Canada, too, but that's another story). I have to believe that American women just aren't aware of how bad they're being treated by their representatives - I can't really bring myself to believe that they're okay with this, crackpots like Coulter aside. (All I really know of Coulter is that a few years back she came to Canada to ask why we didn't join the Iraq war when we were always BFFs with the US before, such as when we joined the US in Vietnam. Canada, of course, went: "uhh... Annie?... we not only didn't join you in Vietnam... we harboured your draft dodgers.")

I don't really know what's going on that this kind of misogyny is allowed to continue to exist, but I do believe that it really boils down to ignorance - either ignorance about how bad it really is, or ignorance about how much better it could be (by comparing the situation in the US to other countries), or both, or neither, with other possibilities, too. I believe that the situation could be vastly improved... just by talking about it. And that's really what I was asking: if the problem is that no-one is talking about it... then why is no-one talking about it? (And if the problem is something else... what is it?)

The GOP's official platform will call for a constitutional amendment completely banning abortion. No exemptions at all.

No rape.
No incest.
No 'health of the mother is endangered'

None of that.
See, I didn't even know that! Granted, I'm not really all that interested in American politics, but still, this is the kind of thing I would have expected to have heard dozens of times if it were common knowledge.

If that's the actual, official policy, then when someone like Mitt Romney dismisses what Akin said, reporters should be all over him asking him to explain what Akin should have said. Because... if Romney stands behind that platform... and if he doesn't believe that rape victims don't get pregnant... then Romney must believe that rape victims must be forced to carry rape babies to term. Someone should corner him and either force him to say this, or to denounce his party's platform on abortion, or something.

And Barack Obama doesn't get off the hook either, because this really isn't an issue that should be partisan. Someone should corner Obama and ask him why he's not making an issue of the Republican position on abortion. Do women's votes just not matter that much to him?

There are so many questions that need to be asked.

I tend to disagree.

The establishment of the GOP may agree with some of these things, but they're pragmatists. They know that a lot of this stuff isn't popular with a lot of folks. So, they go for the attitude of "Get what we can, give in where we have to, but play the long game"

The Tea Party changed all that. Starting in 2008 and cresting in 2010, they grabbed control. They would have taken the Senate to go along with the house except the Tea Party nominated some HORRIBLE candidates (such as Sharron Angle in Nevada).

They took the wrong lesson from that however. They believe that the right thing to do is to, if you'll forgive a bit of my anger to seep through, that the winning move was to double down on crazy. They don't want a functioning government. Anyone who's actually (gasp) worked with the other party is obviously a RINO and needs to be primaried out of a job. The sane people (like Olympia Snowe) have already decided to flee. The tea party is a tantrum throwing four year old, if they can't get their way, they'll blow up the game so no one else wins either,

So most of the sane people in the right wing has either walked away or been kicked out. God help us if they actually get further power. But I'm hoping that Akin and other Republican platform things mean that the R's will lose ground in this election (I think Obama is going to win comfortably, and I THINK the D's are going to retain the senate).. as I said, the GOP needs the metaphorical kick in the jimmies to loosen the crazies hold on the party to get America back to a functioning nation.
I actually agree with all of this. I don't think the Republican party is all crazy. I think they're toeing a crazy platform to get the crazy votes, but I do believe that it's being done with a degree of cynicism. Oh, for sure there are some crazies among the Republican candidates - Akin, for example - but not all of the party's platform is nuts.

But what got me off on my rant is that even for the sake of sucking up to a lunatic fringe, things should not be as bad as they are. Let me use a race example again. There are probably a lot of racists in America; hardly a majority, but at least in the teens, percentage wise. (I would make similar estimates for Canada, so I'm just assuming both countries are roughly the same in that regard.) I would also bet that there are probably more racists than there are African Americans - certainly if you add up racists and people who just don't care, you're probably going to have far more people than there are African American people. So, mathematically speaking, it would make sense for one of the political parties to go for the racist vote. At least, it makes a whole lot more sense, numerically, than alienating women.

But I think we all know... that just won't work. If any party even appears to be courting racist voters, they're going to be pilloried in the public square. If one party even sounds a little bit racist, they are going to be flooded with condemnation from both the African Americans that support other parties and their own African American supporters. It would be political suicide to sound racist, regardless of the voting numbers.

So why isn't the same true for sounding misogynist?

See, no one - not even the most jaded and cynical political strategist - would dare court the racist vote, even though the numbers make it attractive. It would be political suicide. But no one seems to find anything problematic with courting the misogynist vote, even though women make up around 50% of the population (and that's not even counting the men who are feminists, or at least not misogynists, too).

Why? How can that be? Why is any appearance of racism political suicide, but open and shameless misogyny perfectly acceptable? Why is it totally unacceptable in American politics for white politicians to dictate how African Americans should live... but just fine for male politicians to assert control over women's bodies? I just keep coming up with more and more questions that someone should be asking, and more and more amazement that these questions aren't being asked already.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #39 on: August 21, 2012, 10:03:34 PM »
Honestly, I think it's going to take the moderates saying 'to hell with this' and pulling a Bull Moose.  It's too late in the game for it to happen this election, but with the way that the extremists are pissing off the saner portion of the party, I think it's close to inevitable.

Oh, and Saria?  President Obama has spoken out about this.  Complete with video

Offline AllieCat

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #40 on: August 21, 2012, 10:30:23 PM »
Saria: The "no abortion even in rape/incest/health" thing is new today, see this story: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79945.html?hp=l3

Offline Saria

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #41 on: August 21, 2012, 11:02:51 PM »
Oh, and Saria?  President Obama has spoken out about this.  Complete with video
My goodness, he's a clever one. I'd heard about the "rape is rape" comment... but that's all I heard from the news. Which is exactly the problem I was talking about originally - all the focus is on the "legitimate rape" thing, not the deeper issues.

This is the first I've heard that Obama went farther, and actually drew a line in the sand over women's issues. None of the news shows mentioned it; all they quoted was what's in that second paragraph. But that's the uninteresting stuff - the real interesting stuff is what's buried down in that last paragraph. Obama obviously realizes that there's an opportunity to make this issue big (obviously with him and his team on the right side of the issue); he even explicitly points out that there are deeper issues to the whole thing. I would like to hope that he's going to stick that line, and really make a lot of noise about it.

And I'd like to hope that the news media and everyone else talking about the Akin thing catches on to the fact that there are deeper issues, and starts talking about them rather than the verbal slip.

Saria: The "no abortion even in rape/incest/health" thing is new today, see this story: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79945.html?hp=l3
I'm not clear on what that article is saying. Is it really a new thing, or was it in their platform all along? Because it says no new amendments were added to the platform and that the language was identical to 2004 and 2008.

Offline AidaLily

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #42 on: August 22, 2012, 01:38:58 AM »
Let's look at Akin's statement line-by-line. The first line is: "From what I understand from doctors, that's really rare." Now one of two things is true. Either:
  • Akin lied about getting his information from doctors, and he really just pulled it out of his ass; or....
  • There are doctors (plural!!!) in the US that believe that a woman can spontaneously abort a pregnancy when she doesn't want it.
What we could hope for is that Akin just made that shit up... because if he didn't, that means there are medical doctors (plural!!!!!!) in the US who subscribe to beliefs about women's bodies from the Dark Ages. Sadly, that happens to be the case. There really are doctors in the US who really do believe that a woman automagically turns on her internal birth control when she gets raped. Are you seeing that, Americans? I think the fact that you have a bunch of medical practitioners believing medical myths that were out of vogue when the Magna Carta was signed would be something more worth discussing than the "legitimate rape" verbal flub. Isn't anyone concerned with how incredibly stupid a doctor can be and still keep their medical licence?

I didn't mean to give you the impression that I didn't understand what he said.  I agree that that his wording is very poor and I do know what he meant, but the fact of the matter it was a stupid comment.  People in this country cling to stupid comments and while I know what he was trying to say that part was just like "wow... what?"

The fact that there are doctors that agree with it is mind boggling.  Someone on another site showed me an article about how a woman, who is a self proclaimed fertility expert, claims that a male's sperm is likely to fail at impregnating a woman unless she has been exposed to that male's sperm for three months! At least six people I talked to agree with her and believe no one gets pregnant by rape and some believe if a woman does then she deserves it.


Quote
The second line - "If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down." - is the one everyone's tittering about. I'm not. I don't think most people realize how horribly evil this statement is. Stop laughing and acting bewildered about "what is a 'legitimate rape'?" for a moment and look seriously at what Akin meant, and what that means about what he believes. To put it clearly: Akin is saying that he (and doctors, plural!!!) believe that when a woman is raped - for reals - that she shouldn't get pregnant. He's saying that it is "really rare". Stop and think for a moment about what that really means. It means that Akin and his nutjob doctors believe that if a woman gets pregnant during a rape, that most likely means she secretly wanted the sex.

As I stated already, I know exactly what he meant.  The fact of the matter is some people reflect on it to get some humor out of a terribly sad thing. I already know this party has a lot of issues against women, but they try to say that they don't. Not too many women actually vote for them because what woman wants to be told what to do with her body.

Quote
Did your brain explode when you read that? Did it make you furious? Good. It should make you furious. This is what that man - that man who wants to be in charge of around three million women - actually believes. More terrifyingly, this is also what others like him believe, and there are probably several of them in power right now.

No not really. I've listened to enough of these idiots to take what they say with a grain of salt and then wonder why they never took a basic biology or sex education class.

Quote
Take a moment to let that sink in. Callie Del Noire mentioned seeing a lot of attacks on the reproductive rights of women, and asked if that was really a "thing"... well there it is, in stark relief: that is how some of the people in your government look at women. And everyone has to take a long, hard look at themselves and ask... how could it have possibly gotten to that point. How in the hell is it possible for someone who believes that women who get pregnant from rape secretly enjoyed it to get elected to Congress? You have to figure that around 50% of the people who voted him in (over and over!) are women. (And it's highly unlikely that all of the other 50% - men - consider that kind of attitude toward women to be acceptable.) How could that happen? What is going on? These are the questions you guys should be asking yourselves. How is it possible that a person that misogynist can be elected to Congress? What on Earth does that man bring to the table that is so important that it made it acceptable to overlook his hatred of women? (And no, this misogyny isn't something he's never demonstrated before, because he was preventing women from getting abortions from at least 1995.) I don't care what his economic platform is; is there seriously no-one in Missouri with a more-or-less similar platform that isn't that ignorant and hateful?

Not 50% of the people who voted him into office were women most likely, however there were women who had most likely voted him in. This party is very anti-women's rights, but they pretend to say they care though they don't.  Just earlier this year they were talking about how bad contraception was and I wrote a paper for school that spoke on Abstinence-Only education. The government was funding schools for this program as long as they didn't teach about contraception! If the school taught contraception they couldn't get funding.

Quote
American women, what the hell is going on? Are you all sleeping in on Election Day? Seriously, what the hell? You don't seriously mean to tell me that every other potential candidate for the seat was worse, do you? You don't seriously mean to tell me that your only options, through all the primaries right up to the election proper, were either "rape pregnancies mean the victim had fun!" candidates... or worse, do you? So what's happening? Why has this man been allowed to get as far in politics as he has? Who the fuck is he running against? Hitler McStalin?

People in this country are easily swayed by pretty words. If you ask me, all politicians are fantastic at lying in this country and horrible at figuring out the issues. I don't live in Missouri though and therefore I can not vote in their senate elections, but I can vote against Romney and I plan to.

Quote
Let me point out something that you should chew on: everybody's chuckling about this "legitimate rape" thing, but Akin can - and apparently did - just point out that it was just a verbal misstep. And it was. People trip up on words in live interviews all the time, choosing the wrong word and all, and not saying what they really meant. It's no big deal. Akin can just honestly say that he didn't mean to say "legitimate rape" (because it sure looks like he really, honestly, didn't mean to say that)... aaaaaaand he's done. Because, really, all he did was trip over his tongue in a live interview, and no one can reasonably justify destroying someone's political career because of a tongue slip. He gets off with little more than a few days worth of public humiliation in the media, and then life goes on. The next story comes along and the media runs after it like dogs chasing a car, and Akin fades into the background and ultimately once again wins his election - for whatever reasons he's won the last five times. What? How did that happen? I'll tell you how it happened: it happened because everyone was too busy giggle-snorting about the "legitimate rape" thing to notice the real problems in what he said - problems that I'll bet he's hinted at before - that he buys into 15th century medical myths, and thinks that rape babies mean the rape was good times for the mother.

There is a vast difference between tongue slipping and literally opening his mouth and inserting his foot.  He won the last five times most likely because he hadn't done or said anything too controversial.  In fact, only bad things in this country are sensationalized. You rarely ever hear about the good things that happen any more. The country is divided in more ways than one, but people will swear it is not.

Quote
Why is there any tolerance for a politician like Akin? Let me put it another way: would you accept electing a shameless racist? Even if their economic or foreign policies were brilliant? If you wouldn't tolerate a shameless racist in government, why would tolerate a shameless misogynist?

People tolerate him because some people believe him. Some people refuse to vote outside of their party because they are easily brainwashed by a party.  As long as they can appeal to a majority no matter how racist, shameless, sexist, etc they seem... they will get elected and the rest of us have to suffer since we can only vote in our state and then only vote for president every four years. In fact some states restrict who you can vote for.

Quote
~sigh~ Oh yeah, there was one last sentence to look at: "But let's assume that maybe that didn't work or something, I think there should be some punishment, but the punishment ought to be of the rapist, and not attacking the child." And there you have it, ladies... when talking about the case of a woman who was raped and got pregnant, Mr. Akin cares about justice for the rapist... he cares about justice for the foetus...

... but there's not... one... fucking... word... about... the woman.

They only care for the fetus until it is born. After that, they don't seem to care how the woman may treat the child once it is born, if the child looks like their rapist.  Even if this woman abuses the child or neglects the child it seems like the motto is "as long as the child was born, then it doesn't matter."  It is sickening, but people agree with this stance on things.  The don't want women to have a choice and don't care about orphanages or homeless children otherwise they would make adoption cheaper and easier, so these children can have the chance at a loving home. 

Quote
In fact, the only thing you can even deduce about the woman's role in all of this, indirectly, is that the woman is evil... because she's "attacking the child". Yeah, that's right, ladies. That man - representative in Congress for the state of Missouri - just slammed a rape victim by implying she hates babies and wants to hurt them.

American women... seriously... what the hell? You've had the vote since 1920. You make up roughly 50% of the population (and with male supporters, that clearly makes women and their supporters a huge voting demographic). Politicians should be terrified of saying crap like what Akin said in public, let alone taking away control of your bodies from. What's going on?

What is going on in this country is the media? Not to mention some places will close voting polls to early. You do have older women who may not have the same issues as younger women and decide he isn't wrong because at their age they can't get pregnant.  A lot of people are selfish here and as long as it is not going to hurt them, they don't mind taking rights away from others.  Women make close to 50% of the population give or take and even then there are ways to "silence" some of the women.  In fact, they are trying to pass stricter voter I.D. laws and more. Sometimes these politicians hold special conferences just for women or just for men. Like a woman's group and spew their lies, they don't get caught unless they are dumb enough to say it live. 

Offline Saria

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #43 on: August 22, 2012, 05:30:14 PM »
I heard some interesting information updates that I thought would add to the discussion.

First the horrifying part: apparently Todd Akin is on the science committee of the Congress. Let that sink in... the guy who thinks women's reproductive systems shut off when the woman is raped is on the science committee.

But then there's this: we've been mostly speculating on what Todd Akin really meant when he talked about "legitimate rape". I figured the logical answer is that he meant real rape, as opposed to falsely reported rapes. Turns out that's close to what he says he actually meant... but I underestimated just how skeevy the guy is.

Akin apparently actually meant falsely reported rapes specifically to get an abortion, like what Norma McCorvey did. If that name's not familiar, you might know her better as "Jane Roe", as in "Roe v. Wade". For those who don't know her story, McCorvey got pregnant in Texas where abortions were illegal except in cases of rape, so she tried to claim rape in order to get an abortion. (It didn't work, because she hadn't reported the "rape" when it happened.)

(As a horrifying side note, what happened next was that McCorvey tried to get an illegal abortion in a back alley clinic. But when she went to the site, it had already been raided by police. Still, she saw that it was filthy and there was blood on the floor, so she panicked and fled, and eventually sought out lawyers to work on getting a legal abortion.)

So the reason Akin mentioned "legitimate rape" was to specifically exclude people who would claim rape just to get an abortion, knowing that that was what happened in the case of Roe v. Wade. Seriously.

Do I even need to comment on how messed up this logic is?

Offline kylie

  • Bratty Princess of Twisty, Creeping Secrets. Frilly | Fussy | Framed | Dreamy | Glam | Risky | Sporty | Rapt | Tease | Ironic | Shadowed | Struggling | Whispery | Bespelled
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: Somewhere in the future.
  • Darkly sweet femme for rich & insidious scenarios.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #44 on: August 22, 2012, 06:39:47 PM »
What got me about it was "legitimate rape".  Excuse me. What exactly is a "legitimate" rape?  Not every rape victim goes through super violent almost deadly rape. There are many ways that people get raped, so what on earth did they mean by "legitimate" rape?

     Seems Rachel Maddow had a hunch that they only let you consider abortion if the woman was visually brutalized on other parts of her body.  Or something like that.  It's a guess?

Offline Serephino

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #45 on: August 22, 2012, 09:06:11 PM »
You also have to think about personal values.  Older women can't get pregnant, and they're usually big on old fashioned family values, which is what the GOP claims to be for.  Women shouldn't have sex before marriage, and if they do they're tramps.  My grandma once voiced the opinion that my boyfriend and I shouldn't have kids before we get married.  She said it was because there would be confusion on what last name to give a child, but I bet that wasn't all she was thinking.  The GOP will push old fashioned family values and a squeaky clean image till I wanna puke.

Offline Callie Del NoireTopic starter

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #46 on: August 22, 2012, 09:12:32 PM »
You also have to think about personal values.  Older women can't get pregnant, and they're usually big on old fashioned family values, which is what the GOP claims to be for.  Women shouldn't have sex before marriage, and if they do they're tramps.  My grandma once voiced the opinion that my boyfriend and I shouldn't have kids before we get married.  She said it was because there would be confusion on what last name to give a child, but I bet that wasn't all she was thinking.  The GOP will push old fashioned family values and a squeaky clean image till I wanna puke.


Not all.. My mom bluntly told me what it was like before Roe v. Wade.. she recalls what 'friends of friends' had happen to them. She has been a nurse a long time.. and my aunt even longer. Both of them believe in 'traditonal' values.. but also think the best thing that came out of the 2nd half of the 20th century was a woman's ability to control her own body. Birth control has changed the world, and empowered women. A LOT of the tools behind the GoP's leadership don't like that.

Offline Will

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #47 on: August 22, 2012, 09:35:02 PM »
So why is it that a group that was disenfranchised until the 1960s and that only makes up 12% of the population gets more political respect than a group that was disenfranchised only up until the 1920s and makes up 50% of the population? You see what I'm saying? Something is very wrong. I don't know what, but clearly something is very, very wrong in the political discourse. There are plenty of other examples, too, like the case a few months back where a Congressional committee got together to discuss women's health issues... with a committee made up of only men, and no doctors. Do you think it would be possible for a Congressional committee to form to discuss what to do about African American social issues without a single African American on the panel, or even a single expert in social issues? Unlikely. So why? What's the difference? These are the questions that someone should be asking.

I think it's a bit simplistic to look at it that way.  Here's another factor: women have been oppressed and marginalized in various ways for a very long time, since long before "disenfranchisement" was even a word.  Long before white people and black people lived together or interacted in a meaningful way.  I'm not trying to say which is better or worse, but it's easy to see how women as a group might have internalized the oppression in a VERY deep way.  You seem to assume that all women disagree with Akin, and that if they would just get out and vote, everything would be great.  Is that a fair assumption?  I doubt it.  Maybe if more women voted, you'd see a swing toward the liberal side of things, but that's a pretty big maybe, and there's no way of knowing how big or small the swing would be.  Maybe we should ask Ann Coulter. ::)
« Last Edit: August 22, 2012, 09:36:04 PM by Will »

Offline Beorning

Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #48 on: August 23, 2012, 09:13:20 AM »
Akin apparently actually meant falsely reported rapes specifically to get an abortion, like what Norma McCorvey did. If that name's not familiar, you might know her better as "Jane Roe", as in "Roe v. Wade". For those who don't know her story, McCorvey got pregnant in Texas where abortions were illegal except in cases of rape, so she tried to claim rape in order to get an abortion. (It didn't work, because she hadn't reported the "rape" when it happened.)

So the reason Akin mentioned "legitimate rape" was to specifically exclude people who would claim rape just to get an abortion, knowing that that was what happened in the case of Roe v. Wade. Seriously.

Do I even need to comment on how messed up this logic is?

Actually, I'd like to hear some comment on this, yes. I might be experiencing a brain freeze at the moment, but I don't see what is "messed up" about this part of Akin's reasoning. If a woman wasn't raped, but claims so in order to get an abortion, then... it is kind of wrong, right?

Offline kylie

  • Bratty Princess of Twisty, Creeping Secrets. Frilly | Fussy | Framed | Dreamy | Glam | Risky | Sporty | Rapt | Tease | Ironic | Shadowed | Struggling | Whispery | Bespelled
  • Liege
  • Enchanter
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: Somewhere in the future.
  • Darkly sweet femme for rich & insidious scenarios.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 1
Re: GOP drinking the 'No such thing as Rape' Kool Aid
« Reply #49 on: August 23, 2012, 10:05:55 AM »
Actually, I'd like to hear some comment on this, yes. I might be experiencing a brain freeze at the moment, but I don't see what is "messed up" about this part of Akin's reasoning. If a woman wasn't raped, but claims so in order to get an abortion, then... it is kind of wrong, right?

     I'm not sure if the "wrong" you're concerned about here has to do with abortion policy, simply deceit, or the idea that a report of rape might imply there should be a perpetrator to be found and police resources to be dedicated. 

     Yet back on the issue of what to do about abortion policy itself...  If he's to be taken seriously there, are we supposed to wait for a full police investigation before any woman who reports a rape is allowed an abortion?  Sounds like a plan to force a delay (and lots of institutional scrutiny) on proposed abortions.