In a recently released paper, Andrew J. Oswald and Nattavudh Powdthavee examine the work of sociologist Rebecca Warner and the economist Ebonya Washington.

Warner and Washington, through a series of studies, have noted a strong correlation between having children and voting records.  In short, those who vote for traditionally feminist/left wing causes are much more likely to have daughters, while those who vote along a conservative line are more likely to have sons.

This line is particularly apparent among fathers.

read more »

Now available to 17 year olds, without a prescription

When I heard the news that Plan B is now available to 17 year olds (who are, legally, old enough to consent to sex), I rejoiced.  Then braced myself for the far-right vitirol that was surely to follow.

Sadly, I didn’t brace myself well enough:

What next? Over-the-counter roofies?

Plan B — the drug that allows guys to breathe a sigh of relief the morning after using some chick for selfish pleasure — will now be available to 17-year-olds without a prescription.

Who cares that she’s not even old enough to buy a pack of cigarettes legally? Get her drunk on wine coolers, get what you want, then the next morning, take her to CVS to get Plan B and make sure there’s no chance the slut will show up in a few months talking child support payments and DNA tests.

So guys, if you screw a 17-year-old and “forget” to use a condom, remember: Nothing says “thanks a lot, you cheap whore” like the gift of Plan B!

That would be uber conservative Robert Stacy McCain.  Whom I can only assume was unable to catch that rant’s blatant look at his psyche (it scares me that he didn’t pick up on that).  And to whom I can only say: WHAT THE FUCK, DUDE?

read more »

You may recall that the Pope made some remarks last month about condoms making the AIDS epidemic in Africa worse?  The Femmeinistes were apparently not the only people who had trouble swallowing the Pope’s foray into public health issues.  France, Germany, UNAIDS, and the respected medical journal The Lancet have all called the Pope’s remarks irresponsible and dangerous, and the Belgian parliament even went so far as to pass a resolution calling the remarks “unacceptable” and calling for a formal protect by the Belgian government.  Belgium’s ambassador to the Vatican lodged said protest on Wednesday, spurring the Vatican to issue a formal statement on Friday.  From the Associated Press:

The Vatican deplored “the fact that a parliamentary assembly should have thought it appropriate to criticize the Holy Father on the basis of an isolated extract from an interview, separated from its context.”

It said Benedict’s remarks to reporters had been “used by some groups with a clear intent to intimidate, as if to dissuade the pope from expressing himself on certain themes of obvious moral relevance and from teaching the church’s doctrine.”

I have to say I’m unconvinced.  I’m a little unclear on how anyone could reasonably intimidate the Pope short of direct threats of physical violence.  He’s the Pope.  The Vatican is a sovereign state, if possibly the smallest in the world.  He’s not subject to Belgian rule.  What are they going to do, impose a trade embargo?  March the Belgian army into St. Peter’s over idiotic public health remarks?  If a formal protest lodged through diplomatic channels with no associated action or threat of action is intimidating to the Seat of Peter these days, I have to wonder how the Crusades ever happened.

I suppose the real issue is someone daring not only to disagree with the Pope’s statements but to have the temerity to say so through formal channels.  I can imagine that if you are the Pope, argument is not something you’re used to.  (Would that I could invoke infallibility when I start arguing with my father!)  But frankly, if he’s not going to confine himself to speaking on purely religious matters (an area in which he can reasonably argue to be if not the ultimate then at least the penultimate authority), then he needs to realize that he is as vulnerable to criticism as anyone else with an opinion.

The full story from the Associated Press here.

Look, I realize that the Republican party is a bit of a mess right now (the understatement of the year, perhaps), and that a number of conservative office holders are jockeying to get into the national spotlight – similar to what Pres. Obama managed to pull off with his DNC speech from years ago – but are how is this helping anything?

Gov. Rick Perry: Texas might have to secede.

Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX) was one of the dozens of Republican lawmakers who are addressing the anti-Obama tea parties today. He told the crowd he didn’t believe they were all “right-wing extremists,” as others had sought to portray them. “But if you are, I’m with you!” he shouted. After, he told reporters that Texas might have to secede from the union: read more »

Well, no one can argue that the Obama administration is not a resounding success in at least one area: pirate killing.  Check it out:

Take that, Taft!

Source.

At the risk of my mother never being able to make eye contact again, I will admit that I am thoroughly a third-wave feminist: I am pro-sex and pro-porn.  In short, I believe that consenting adults over the age of 18 have the right to do whatever they want behind a locked bedroom door.  Even if that includes exchanging money for (I’m going to say it again) consensual sex acts.

The following rant has been inspired not just by the New York Times’ upcoming article on “Keeping Up With Being Kept” (about “sugar daddies” and “sugar babies;” the article is not yet online), but also by the news that Nevada has declined to up the tax on prostitution.

While this post started as actual support of the whole “sugar baby/daddy” dynamic (so long as it’s consensual), it quickly morphed into a rant on the state of prostitution in the US.  (While I’ve edited all support for kept souls out of this post, I stand by my support of them and may post more on the subject in the future.)  The following is a bit of a free flowing thought train, so please skip if you’re faint of heart, easily bored by the subject or just don’t care.

read more »

"The body of U.S. Air Force Staff Sergeant Phillip A. Myers, of Hopewell, Virginia is transferred upon arrival at Dover Air Force Base, Delaware late on April 5, 2009."

I hate to begin the week on a somber note, but I think this is too important not to mention. For the first time in 18 years, the media was allowed to capture the “dignified transfer” of a solider killed in combat as his or her remains are returned the family.  According to the Washington Post:

Air Force Staff Sgt. Phillip A. Myers, 30, of Hopewell, Va., who was killed in Afghanistan on Saturday in the explosion of a makeshift bomb, became the first service member welcomed home publicly in 18 years. Myers, who was attached to the 48th Civil Engineer Squadron based in England, was awarded a Bronze Star last year for his service in Iraq, according to the Air Force.

Myers’s wife and other relatives attended the 17-minute ceremony, which began shortly after 11 last night at the Air Force base. Except for the command “Present Arms,” it was conducted in silence.

“It doesn’t matter what the conditions are like — cold, wet, sunny,” said Sgt. James Rhett of the Army’s Old Guard. “They’re a fallen soldier, and they deserve the highest respect and honor we can give.”

The images are simply incredible.  Alternately beautiful in its pageantry and unbearably heartbreaking, I would argue it is the duty of every American to view these photographs and spend a few moments reflecting on the ideas of duty, honor and service to one’s country.

Living in the Northeast, I find I am largely insulated from the those serving in the Armed Forces and thus have very little sense of the sacrafice these men and woman and their families have made.  This really brought it home, if only for a brief moment.

View the Washington Post album here.

It’s dreary and rainy here in New York, and boy do I need a pick-me-up.  Luckily I came across this image, which instantly brightened my day:

C'est Magnifique!

Two beautiful, independent, no-nonsense, fashion-forward women and the men who adore them.  I get tingly just looking at this picture.

Oh, to be Michelle or Carla!  I will just have to admire from afar.

*le sigh*

Clearly an April Fools Day joke, no?

The above story, published in yesterday’s Car And Driver, claimed that President Obama has ordered General Motors and Chrysler to cease participation in NASCAR at the end of the ’09 season, deeming the associated costs an “unnecessary expenditure.”

Now, most people would read this and have the following reaction:

“No way.  This has to be an April Fools Day joke, right?”

Ann Coulter, on the other hand, not only didn’t give the article a second thought, she actually REFERENCED it in one of her racist tirades:

If Obama can tell GM and Chrysler that their participation in NASCAR is an “unnecessary expenditure,” isn’t having public schools force students to follow Muslim rituals, recite Islamic prayers and plan “jihads” also an “unnecessary expenditure”? Are all those school condom purchases considered “necessary expenditures”?

Leaving me yet again to wonder … Who in the world is buying this woman’s books??  She clearly has absolutely no grasp of logic.  Where does she get fans?