ff

***** i wrote the following post earlier this week, before the whole susan g komen disaster embarrassment shame fest. (i particularly recommend that last link.) i don't even know where to begin on the rage that comes along with this story. if anyone wants to try and tell me that women's health isn't disgustingly politicized, they can go ahead and jump in a lake. and not a nice lake. a gross, really cold lake. filled with the bite-ingest fish. that is all. *****


oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooof this makes me mad. and also so glad that i do not live in the states. and also so nervous about our own canadian government's conservatism and the possibilities inherent therein...

* birth control like pork chops

let's talk about this.

first of all, how incredibly sickening that that young woman was forced into ovarian cancer despite a proper diagnosis of a treatable condition. because of policy. sick sick sick.
and potentially fatal results aside, the number of women i know who are on birth control for one million reasons aside from stopping pregnancy is crazy high. for me it stops the 3 weeks of period that i would be having cause my body is mega messed, as well as the actually unbearable pain that came along with that. (i know. cramps are lame-o and pretty much everyone has them, and blah blah. no. these weren't normal. mom can tell you. me lying on the floor in the kitchen in a ball weeping and weeping. and i'm a person who chose to have her palm-skin ripped off over and over for the love of the trapeze. i can do pain.) and there's skin issues and hormonal balance issues and so many other things which are easily and effectively treated with this entirely legal drug. and yet. NAY! STOP THE SLUTBAGS FROM SLUTTING AROUND! MAKE THE SLUTBAGS HAVE THEIR SLUTTY BABIES!

aaaallllllsssssoooo. i hope that i am, in fact, correct on the following. (if i'm not. oh god.)
there are religions that will not take blood transfusions and the like, right? it's against their religion. now. if someone in such a religion decided that for whatever reason they did want a blood transfusion, would insurance companies be all 'i don't know...... your religion is bossy pants so we better not. even though YOU are making a choice about yourself and your beliefs and your health.'

does that make sense? i feel like i'm not explaining that example well enough. i guess what i want to say is HOW HOW HOW can 'we' allow any organization to have sooo much power over its members (or people who happen into their general communities due to whatever circumstance) that they cannot go ahead with their own perfectly legal decisions about their own bodies? in a country oh so so screamey about personal freedoms. it's absurd and terrifying. is what i think. be terrified.

BUT SOME GOOD NEWS!
this week i would like to shout out joyfully to charlie williams, brother in law elect, who has been a facebook-crusader for feminism!!! you win feminist of the weeeeeeek!!!

{photo by amanda putty}

thank you thank you for first, understanding and second, defending the fact that a gender-neutral title should BE GENDER-NEUTRAL! you are the best and i'm so glad you're part of our family. rock on!