An Open Letter to Bill and Melinda Gates

Self-image is, indeed, a profound component in one's ability to learn. This revelation can create an entire narrative about our American identity and the means by which so many of our children are afforded an education. I ask you to reflect on the fact that a justice of our Supreme Court posed the narrowest and most unimaginable questions this week. And once the transcripts were made available, our media lauded him for not having made any assumptions, but merely posing questions about what had been deemed a thoughtful academic critique of affirmative action. I ask any white parent to spend time reflecting on having to explain that critique to their children and attributing it to them for their whiteness. I then ask those same parents to have a moment where they can explain to their children (after having found a way to explain it to themselves) why this argument is considered thoughtful and where, in 2015, this would have a place in a Supreme Court proceeding to determine if we are giving an equal chance at education to all of our children.

I could write a book about America's history and only focus on the myriad failings of 'reconstruction' after the Civil War, but its been done. And those who are intelligent can see that it has failed repeatedly and the very least among us with the loudest voices have been those to keep us from ever having found success. Those who take a reasoned look at our history realize that the failings were deliberate and targeted. No one with the capacity for critical thought would accept the stereotypes our society has allowed to permeate our collective psyche. But they are there. As a collective. And their maintenance are an imperative for those who use them to wield power, to the destruction of us all.

I applaud and genuinely respect your global initiative and I ask you to consider the role of America in that initiative. Regardless of whether or not it is warranted, America is seen as a world leader. Possibly the world leader. As such, what progress do you expect to see in the world when its chosen (or at least self-appointed) leader negates the histories and rights of its own citizens? If we cannot bring ourselves to finally offer a sincere Reconstruction 150 years after its initial attempt, what hope does the rest of the world have? One needs only look at the present GOP Presidential campaign field to realize we are regressing. We find the media and the citizens who are given leadership roles are celebrating condemnations of those with no means of defending themselves. We are witnessing expressions of hate with an acceptance of violence and terrorism against people of a specific religion and women who visit health clinics. We are allowing all conversations to end with an insistence that we should be building personal arsenals to defend against those monsters our own society has created. I, too, believe in global citizenship. But I am living in the country that you are compelling toward that understanding which lacks civility, while demanding its exceptionalism.

As you wrote this month regarding the fixed mindset and questioning your own, I ask you to expand that question to that of our nation. What have we accepted as truths about our capacity to move ourselves forward and, thus, determined unattainable? At present, we have inner cities that are falling apart. The children growing in those cities have few opportunities for education, much less advancement. If we allow a fixed mindset to embrace that as a truth, we disavow our own capacity for growth. We have a Supreme Court Justice who does not find it remotely outlandish to question the lesser capacity of those children. If society can accept that as truth, what hope do those children have? If society will dismiss and ridicule those children who march to demand that their lives matter when they come of age, what chance does our society have? I compel you to finance the movement forward that America must have before a global initiative can ever find success. I ask you to fund and expand on the grants you have been given to build our inner cities and make them a priority. I ask you to consider how the rest of your initiative will be successful if, once they find meaningful progress, the world is still led by a backward nation celebrating those who mean to denounce its own citizens and fray the very bootstraps they're meant to be pulling themselves up by.

I have no position in this or any community. I have no agenda beyond that of offering thoughtful discussion to those who hear too many irrational conversations. I have no platform or grant for you to fund. I do, however, have a voice. And I hope that my voice will reach enough people as to raise this idea to you:

(I ask that you allow my own acknowledged naivete and the simplicity in which I offer this plea to be part of my charm and spend no more time on them. Instead, I ask you to spend quiet reflection on the truth I am offering and your own capacity to grant our nation the only chance it will ever have at reparations and genuine progress).

The only way that a society, finding itself content with ignoring its own atrocities and blaming the victims of its arrogance and ignorance, can move forward is for a profound action outside of its own will. No community is going to vote to raise taxes to an extreme so as to correct the failings of a nation blind to its own hypocrisy since its inception. Your foundation can afford to get schools built in neighborhoods with little opportunity. Your foundation can have them peopled with incredible educators and give them otherwise unattainable resources. Your foundation has the voice to compel those surrounding communities to contribute time, wealth and energy to these efforts. You have the voice to remind the country that our only chance for true exceptionalism begins with embracing and lifting up our own children. All of our children. 

Also, if you could fund an initiative to get the word out to the country about the fact that the Equal Rights Amendment was never passed, it'd be great. I feel confident that if women understood this simple truth, we could take it from there.

Thank you. Most sincerely.

Welcome to the Left

In November, I wrote a piece compelling the left to consider where they point their outrage at this moment when the Regressives give us so much fodder. My only mission in writing for you all is to offer rational, if not always dispassionate, reflections and opportunities for consideration. Having still not determined which of the Democratic nominees I will support for the primaries, it is curious that I received the backlash that I did from a few after writing that article.

Facebook has repeatedly put me on 'probation' because people are reporting me for being abusive. I was interested to find out this morning that there is literally a group of people who are reporting the voices they want silenced. Of course, they are too ignorant about my personality to understand that in doing this they're not creating limitations for me, they're creating determination. And when I am given a challenge, I persevere. Period. So, I will preface with a hefty 'fuck you' to those who determined it would be a good idea to shut me up. You are barking up the wrong bitch. I promise.

I ripped those from a NYTimes article written in May. Its a fascinating read for those of us who are always curious about why people say and do they things they do. I hope if you read it, any fascination will eventually also give way to a quiet moments pause about anyone who compels you to promise not to vote for any Democrat next fall. And then, of course, have a longer (much longer) quiet pause to reflect on what that would do to our country.

Last month I was unaware that the person who commented on my site was Victor Tiffany, a person I had naively friended on Facebook who had started a 'Bernie Or Bust' movement online and managed to get a lot of followers that were starting to creep me out. The comment was from someone who identified themselves as 'The Glenn Beck Review,' and who referred me to his own blog to learn more about myself in an article he'd written. The title graciously determined that the bulk of us on the left are sheep. I put him in his place and refused to read the article because I like to spend my time thinking for myself and seeking insight, not hate. But that's just me.

So I found out this morning (take your time there, Ang) that this guy put the word out about me in November after I wrote that piece compelling Democrats to be a united front against the Regressive Party and he told the admins of left-leaning groups that I am a troll. Anyone who knows what internet trolls are is laughing right now. No worries, I'll give you a minute ..........

Yeah. If I were a troll I would not spend all of my time writing thoughtful pieces and trying to create conversations around all of the shit that the Regressives are doing. I might, however, be creating groups and petitions to stir up shit on the left and perpetuate divisions in my own party. That would make me a troll.

With that little bit of a 'duh' out of the way, I offer you perspectives on the leader of this 'revolution' called Revolt Against Plutocracy and ask you for simple reflections:

Here he admits he was a Regressive until just recently.

Funny that this new convert to the left is calling us 'neo-liberals.' Don't you think? I've been over here on the far left for as long as I have been politically aware. Really, its been decades. There is nothing new about my mission or my passion.

Okay. Their big focus is to get 1,000,000 people to pledge to write-in a vote against Clinton next fall. So if you are a big Bernie supporter, why is your mission to focus on a write in campaign next November? Shouldn't the objective assume his viability and work for him to win the primary?

Good news! Instead of making a donation to your chosen candidate, you can give your money (and credit card information?) to this guy and he will use it to encourage Americans to vote against Democrats. I will generously assume that his motives are sincere and that is what he will be using the money for.

One of their main objectives is to get trending topics on Twitter like this one: #SheepNoMore. Since they just got here, the 'no more' is for you, not them. They are basically above it, right? They are the ones who just popped left to inform you of your ignorance and lead you to the wisdom they've determined you were living without. Backbone, please. This Is Your Party.

This group is literally trying to start negative trending topics about Secretary Clinton. If you don't like her and you don't want to vote for her, fine. If you are a Bernie supporter and you want to say that on Twitter or on Facebook, fine. That is what a campaign is all about: candidates have positions and their constituents either agree or dissent. But I ask you to quietly reflect on what this does to every single left-leaning candidate in any race anywhere if the Twitter feeds of all constituents who are looking for information or opinions are littered with negative information (much I have reviewed here today has actually been proven false or come directly from the right wing talking heads). Because people associate party, this is poisoning their minds. Do you want to be a part of that? Honestly!?

In the last couple of weeks the media has covered these new converts from the right who are anxious to support Sanders. This migration will be very important for the left to win down ticket and it is actually part of my personal mission to find reasonable conversations for those on the right that are presently having a rude awakening about their own party. But ask yourself: How does a Regressive determine that (s)he is going to now not just move left, but move to the FAR left and work tirelessly for a far left agenda? The far left is where we, the most passionate and ardent liberals, live. The far left is where we fight for the environment. And Black Lives Matter. And LGBT rights. And women's rights. And education. And building a middle class. And voting rights. And sensible, compassionate immigration reform. I can see a handful of people having such a profound awakening. But it is more than a little curious to consider a rapid movement of an entire subsection of the Regressive Party into that realm. No?

I ask all of you who are in these groups, again, to spend time reflecting on the message you are receiving and what in the holy fuck will be gained from spending hours a day going back and forth with people who are only telling you to hate the candidates of your own party. If you want to vote for Bernie, I'm with you 100%.  I love him, too. Vote for him! But if you are going to sign a petition to say that you will refuse to vote for Hillary if she ends up winning in the primaries, I am here to tell you that you have absolutely NO INTEREST in a revolution. Because there is nothing revolutionary about pouting on election day. Is there?

We are presently battling to have health care. And exercise our Constitutional rights to get a goddamned medical procedure at Planned Parenthood (or anywhere else, for that matter). And create meaningful legislation around gun rights. And ensure no more Regressive nominees find their way to the Supreme Court. And build an inclusive society. Jesus Christ this list can go on for hours. My point is, ask these 'revolutionaries' about these topics. If you are a true Progressive, Liberal, Socialist, Democrat (I truly don't care what you call yourself as long as you comfortably sit here on the far left with me) I guarantee an introspective moment on the things they talk about will show you that their revolution will not do anything but hinder the things you have been passionate about and fighting for as long as you have been paying attention.

This movement can only create hardships for every candidate on the left next fall. How revolutionary! Are all of the things these signatories have been passionate about for so long and changes they know the country needs to have happen less important than a single candidate? The Supreme Court is not more important? Global diplomacy is not more important?

If you are already planning your temper tantrum on election day, that's on you. Remove me from your friends list. Kick me out of your group. And get the fuck out of my way because I have a lot to do and spending time trying to compel you to understand the importance of this election cycle is obviously just a waste of my time.

For any revolution, it will be an imperative for us to graciously welcome those from the center and the right over to the left. 

It will be equally important that we do not invite them to direct our narrative. 

If you can really #FeelTheBern then read the Revolt Against Plutocracy's first FAQ answer and reflect on what you are doing to HIS movement. Bernie is too nice to point out how destructive this campaign is or how questionable their motives are. I'm not.

Kiss Kiss...
The Mean Progressive


UPDATE: Within moments of my having posted this article I received this little gem on Twitter (notice that it was also sent to @berniesanders & @senWarren). Is this the type of person you want leading your revolution and taking your credit card information?

UPDATE: 3/29/16  I feel confident that Sanders is very much aware of this type of movement and he is taking it upon himself to exploit these bullies' motives. He seems to even be taking some of their moves. I am disheartened and disgusted by his childishness and if I end up having to support him in November, it will be with the least excitement I have worked for a campaign. And I worked for Kerry.

Incomplete Revolution

Sometime in the last decade or so I graduated from being a mother of one to being the mother of all. I cannot remember the moment of the transformation, but I can tell you that my sentences now end with ', honey' when I meet people of younger generations. Regardless of how they receive it, and even if they don’t recognize it, I am their mother. When society tells my babies to accept their second-class citizenship where they are openly dismissed for the color of their skin, their gender identity, religion, country of origin or who they love, I ache. I physically ache. I get angry. I rally. I demand better of my country. There is a universal mother inside most of us. She fights for her babies, regardless of whose womb they came out of.

I honestly believe that it is our need to defend our babies that has allowed the women's movement to become all but ignored for as long as it has. We have been distracted by our need to champion, protect and lift up our children. Most women take the history of the movement for granted or don’t know about its struggles and accomplishments. Most tragically, many don't realize the battles that were never won and the rights we are presently living without because we have relegated our own needs to being a secondary cause (at best) for generations.

Its time for us all to realize that while we are making demands of a country that has refused to acknowledge our rights, we don't have the platform we need to make the changes we seek. Half of our children do not have the right to make those demands for themselves. What we leave for our daughters is an important reflection for every universal mother. They will become the mothers of the next generations. They, too, will have no platform. It is time that we all take pause and understand the profound legacy our foremothers have left us and what mantle we must carry for the mothers who follow.

Most Americans have no knowledge of the women’s movement. It has been condemned to hysteria for as long as it has existed. The history is quite important, however, to contextualize the place we find ourselves today. In 1923, exactly 75 years after the first Women’s Rights Convention, the movement went forward in compelling the country to understand that the right to vote we had finally attained a few years earlier was not enough. Alice Paul put forth the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) which was written to guarantee equal rights to women, as the Constitution had been deliberately framed to omit that half of society. Having been proposed in every session of Congress for 49 years, both houses passed the ERA in 1972. After making it through Washington, however, it had to go to the states for ratification. And that, it seems, was too much to ask.

This is the entire text of the Equal Rights Amendment:

 *Section 1. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States by any state on account of sex. 
 *Section 2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article. 
 *Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification. 

This amendment was not ratified by ¾ of the United States. After years of trying to compel those states to ratify, in 1982 the deadline expired. The right turns every discussion into a distraction about ‘states rights.’ Whenever you hear this in the future, remind yourself that we could not even get the states to grant equality to women.

The decades between its proposal and its eventual demise were filled with debates from various feminist groups. Alice Paul defined equality as having no limits. Those who opposed the ERA countered that women needed to have protections. This distraction eventually killed the ERA.

The leader of the anti-women’s movement, Phyllis Schlafly, compelled American women to believe that the ERA would create hardships for housewives. Her conflated logic offered fear to women by telling them that they would no longer be able to win custody of their children in divorces, sexual assault would no longer be a crime and that unisex public restrooms would become the norm. As absurd as these contentions were, they found a fearful audience which managed to completely revert the overwhelming support the ERA had in America at the time. The anti-women’s movement is the one that took hold, found political backing and thrives to this day. Schlafly was honored this year in a Regressive forum with the Presidential candidates in attendance. She took the stage and bragged about the fact that the very room they were standing in was the one she was in when she killed the ERA. That is the woman the Regressive Party wanted to celebrate. In 2015.

Once that revelation has found a place in our minds, it is easy to understand why the entire Regressive field of Presidential candidates struggled to find an answer to which American woman they would commemorate on the $10 bill in their second debate this year. This was an opportunity to look at American history and tell their constituents about the women we should hold in esteem. These were their answers:

Rand Paul: Susan B Anthony – the only name history seems to recall, who has already been recognized on a silver dollar.

Mike Huckabee: his wife.

Sen. Marco Rubio: Rosa Parks

Ted Cruz: Rosa Parks (because that was a good answer Rubio!)

Ben Carson: his mother.

Donald Trump: his daughter.

Jeb Bush: Margaret Thatcher (apparently he couldn’t think of an American woman)

Scott Walker: Clara Barton

Carly Fiorina: Nobody – ‘We need to realize that women are not a special interest group’

John Kasich: Mother Theresa (again, not an American)

Chris Christie: Abigail Adams

They have either been well conditioned to believe that the question of celebrating women is irrelevant to everyone, or they think it is more important to project attitudes of the universal white man to make their brethren comfortable. Either way, the fact that only 3 of the 11 answers (no credit for repeats) were serious contenders speaks volumes about how diminished our voices and our movement are.

It is important to understand that Chris Christie determined Abigail Adams was a notable choice because, as he used that moment to point out, of the indebtedness America owes to her husband, John. Abigail Adams is an easy name to conjure in an instant. She is sometimes recognized in obligatory historical remembrances because of her letter to John in 1776 when the Declaration of Independence was being authored where she compelled him to ‘remember the ladies’ in whatever codes of laws our new country would dictate. She wrote:

I long to hear that you have declared an independency. And, by the way, in the new code of laws which I suppose it will be necessary for you to make, I desire you would remember the ladies and be more generous and favorable to them than your ancestors. Do not put such unlimited power into the hands of the husbands. Remember, all men would be tyrants if they could. If particular care and attention is not paid to the ladies, we are determined to foment a rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any laws in which we have no voice or representation. 

However, history seems to have all but forgotten John Adams’ rather poignant reply which clearly encapsulates the reason we find ourselves in this place nearly 250 years later:

As to your extraordinary Code of Laws, I cannot but laugh. We have been told that our Struggle has loosened the bands of Government every where. That Children and Apprentices were disobedient -- that schools and Colledges were grown turbulent -- that Indians slighted their Guardians and Negroes grew insolent to their Masters. But your Letter was the first Intimation that another Tribe more numerous and powerfull than all the rest were grown discontented. -- This is rather too coarse a Compliment but you are so saucy, I wont blot it out. Depend upon it, We know better than to repeal our Masculine systems. Altho they are in full Force, you know they are little more than Theory. We dare not exert our Power in its full Latitude. We are obliged to go fair, and softly, and in Practice you know We are the subjects. We have only the Name of Masters, and rather than give up this, which would compleatly subject Us to the Despotism of the Peticoat, I hope General Washington, and all our brave Heroes would fight. I am sure every good Politician would plot, as long as he would against Despotism, Empire, Monarchy, Aristocracy, Oligarchy, or Ochlocracy. 

Indeed. They knew better than to repeal their masculine systems. They have not unlearned that lesson.

Women won the right to vote in 1920 with the 19th Amendment to the Constitution removing the word "male" from the 15th Amendment, which offered voting rights to former slaves. This is its entire text:

The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex.  

Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. 

That fight, alone, took 50 years.

Many give thoughtless dismissals to discussions of the ERA by saying that the Constitution was written for all Americans and condemn conversations about its intent to semantics. That could open thoughtful discourse, I suppose, if that were the way the Constitution was written. I have already evidenced the obvious exclusion of women’s rights by the framers of the Constitution and offered text to prove that exclusion when the 15th Amendment was enacted, but, lest anyone be confused about how that would be interpreted by our leaders in 2015, I offer you a stunning example of its application this year. In April, the States Attorney of South Carolina filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court which stated:

The Amendment’s framers certainly did not intend to dismantle, but fought to preserve, state marriage laws. Indeed, skeptical congressmen insisted that these remain unaffected by the Amendment. Many feared that state disabilities placed upon married women, such as property ownership, would be undermined by an earlier Amendment draft. 

This was ‘in support of respondents’: Bill Haslam, Governor of TN, Rick Snyder, Governor of MI, Steve Beshear, Governor of KY. The male Regressive leaders of the states of South Carolina, Tennessee, Michigan and Kentucky, in their attempts to disavow marriage equality, used the fact that women still had not found equality, per the Constitution, to denounce our children. And ourselves.

The truth of the adage, No one can love you until you truly love yourself lifts many upon revelation. Similarly, no one will respect us until we respect ourselves. At present, we are not demanding equality. We are allowing words like ‘feminazi’ to shut down important conversations. We are still trying to compel others to believe we are worthy of equal pay. That was part of the basis of the women’s movement over 150 years ago. Honestly, if we cannot demand more of ourselves and our movement, we can hardly expect anyone else to. They dismiss us because we allow them to. They condemn us with tired stereotypes because we don’t expose those who mean to counter our truths.

Every March, America congratulates itself for having allowed women to exist within its borders and designates a handful of our foremothers to levels of prominence. It would be lovely, I suppose, if it were sincere. We all know about Susan B. Anthony. Or we know her name, anyway, right? American history has maintained her name, if not her complete story. She was a tireless champion for women and deserves unending esteem. She was, however, half of a set. And history has forgotten her sister-in-arms, Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Although they were best friends and united in the cause for over 50 years, they had very different personalities and approaches to their audiences. Cady Stanton, basically, had no use for diplomacy. She was the more outlandish of the two, she would not bend to the ideals of the more conservative voices of the movement, and she did not attempt to find a more delicate tone for a more needy audience. I assume that this is why her memory has been lost. She was a radical.

“Well-behaved women seldom make history.” Although its attribution has been given to several women, its truth is undeniable. Most accomplishments of the women’s movement were made by those history, itself, has determined unseemly and a society quite content with its male dominance has determined forgettable. Regardless of whether or not their stories are well-known, their efforts cannot be forgotten. And we cannot leave our movement in a stagnant state of disregard. Our universal willingness to behave has left us here in a place where we don’t even acknowledge an all-but ignored Equal Rights Amendment, nearly 100 years after its proposal. As long as we quietly submit to that truth, we are foolish to demand better of the society which has grown quite comfortable with our place in it.

I compel all universal mothers who are genuinely interested in the legacy we leave our daughters and the tools we leave them to win the myriad fights to come for our children’s children, to reflect on which rights we were meant to have. And I ask all to then take the only right we presently have, the vote, more seriously from now on. Elizabeth Cady Stanton once said of the vote, "The right is ours. Have it we must, use it we will." She was half right, at least. Thanks to the decades of relentless efforts by she, Susan B. Anthony and countless names all but lost to history, we have the right to vote. And within a century of having attained that right, we show as much regard for that right as we do for the right to participate in casual Fridays.

No woman who loves her country or her children can take her solitary right to vote for granted. And no woman who loves her country or her children can continue to accept their undefined rights to equal citizenship. We must now champion our own movement so that we can have a meaningful voice in our own futures and those of our daughters. It is an imperative. Do not allow yourself to believe otherwise.

You Say You want a Revolution?

When we wake up tomorrow it will be November 8, 2015. The date means little to me. It is the day before my mom's birthday. Its a Sunday so I will want to catch John Oliver. And its the day the weather channel said I will finally have to shut my windows and begin my annual self-imposed (near) hibernation. Its really just another day in another week where I have little going on and little to do.

Tomorrow is, however, exactly one year before our next big election. I guess for those of us who are paying attention and passionate about our political landscape, the date will offer a marker by which we will measure our accomplishments. We have a year. For those of us who have been at this for a while, a year is not a lot of time. For those of us on the left, a year might as well be a decade for as much as we need to accomplish. But I can hardly tell that when I listen to some of my brothers and sisters in the party. I hear a lot about revolution these days. It might be written as an exciting time for future generations to learn about in history books. Or it might very well be another year where what could have been simply wasn't. Again.

With our gerrymandered maps and questionable annual election returns, it feels as if a revolution will be our only hope. Last week our national elections set us back even further because we on the left can hardly be bothered to go out every time. (I mean really). To be honest, its not evident that we all want a revolution. It appears that the radical among us are more interested in arguing the finer points of our objectives than actually doing anything that would be revolutionary.

The left loves to argue. Its one of the downsides of being the intellectuals. We have a lot of opinions and historical references and love to hear ourselves talk about them (I'm not pretending that no one is reading this and I am not one of those people). We do, however, create our very own obstacles when we do this; especially when the arguments we seek or create are within our own party.

Several months ago I wrote a piece condemning the Regressive Party for thinking women would flock to Fiorina (read here) because she was born with the same parts as we were. I was chastised by a woman who kicked me out of her feminist group for having been so closed-minded as to ignore transgendered people who were not born with the same parts. If her condemnation wasn't enough, she spent what must have taken a full hour to type me a book about how ashamed of myself I should have been. I wonder how much of that time she could have directed toward someone who wasn't already fighting for women's issues to make them aware of the movement and its necessity.

A couple of weeks ago I was, again, berated by people calling themselves feminists because I was excitedly promoting the then-unreleased movie, Suffragette. Within minutes I was determined to have not only been a detriment to the feminist movement, but also, a racist. I wrote a piece about it (read here) because it was beyond my comprehension how people could be so misguided and I received many replies about my own determined narrow-mindedness. The majority of my replies came from people who read my article down to the point where I talked about my having been called a racist and they stopped there to interject having never (quite obviously) made it to the end of the piece where I imagine most people capable of both reason and introspection would realize I am, in fact, a feminist and hardly racist. That piece had people who demand they are feminists coming at me for two days to argue with me. Again I wonder, how much of that time could have been focused on arguing with someone who needed to hear your argument?

I stopped arguing with RWNJs many months ago. They are exhausting and although they will probably be a lifelong curiosity of mine, I do realize they have no capacity for critical thinking so I will never have an opportunity to offer them revelation. My only mission now is to offer rationale to those who are capable of understanding it. I find that those conversations are growing harder and harder with many on the left now, too. Last month I was sent a private message from a young (very young) man who was inviting me to join his FB group where the actual objective was to talk shit about one of the two main candidates for the Democratic ticket next year. Initially I replied respectfully (believe it or not) and said that I had not yet determined which of the candidates I was going to vote for but that even when I do, I would not want to participate in destructive conversations about the one I had not chosen. He promptly told me that I was an idiot and that I obviously don't understand politics or how important this upcoming election is. [Sigh...] Of course, I then took it upon myself to educate him about the history of the Democratic party and our myriad failures and before I was done telling him what an arrogant little snot he was, he blocked me from FB. okay...

I have had to put messages up in my groups telling people that if they want to create dialogue only meant to disparage one of our candidates I would block them. People are not even thoughtful enough to realize that if the meme they are posting has attribution on it from a right-wing group, they are literally perpetuating the Regressive Party narrative. There is nothing more discouraging than looking at our uphill climb and realizing how many of our fellow Dems we are going to have to drag up that fucking hill to get to the top.

I am a Democrat. I will support the Democrat who ends up with the nomination. I will bust my ass for whomever gets the nod like I do every 4 years. If you cannot say the same, then you do not want a revolution. You are literally creating the exact path the sick hateful sonsofbitches on the right need to wiggle any one of their beyond-crazy (some I comfortably call evil) candidates into the White House. And do not be mistaken. This is not just a fight for the White House. 2016 is our chance to get back the Senate. If we can convince enough people that the left is the only alternative when they go into the voting booth next year, we actually can make a change. No change will be made, however, if we all spend our time fighting with ourselves and demanding that the rest of the left see every candidate and issue through an identical narrow prism. That is POISON. Period.

We will get a national down-ticket revolution next year if we join together and continue to remind those around us of the shit that is coming out of the right. Daily I have people tell me, "Oh they know. Americans know what is going on." No. They Don't. They don't want to know. They are ignoring what is going on because the in-fighting is exhausting to them so they choose not to listen. When we perpetuate the nastiness we are just as unbearable as the RWNJs. Pause with that for a minute, because I am right (from over here on the far-left). When we behave like radicals we will be ignored like radicals. If we can manage to rally like champions, that is what we will be. You decide. But fucking unfriend me or leave my page if you don't want to hear about what it takes to actually have a revolution because I can't imagine I will have anything else to say for the next 365 days.

It's called R-E-S-P-E-C-T. Follow their lead. K?

Kiss Kiss.
Mean Progressive

(White) Boys Will Be Boys

Back in the day, growing up in Northeast Ohio, my brother had the same pellet gun that Tamir Rice had. One day, when we were 12, he was playing with my cousins in the parking lot between our family home and family business. They were creating a cops and robbers scene so perfect that, even if Scorsese had filmed it, no one would have believed. It ended with my brother running into the garage and hitting the button for the garage door to come down. As he rounded back to the front of the garage and the door was almost to the ground, he rolled on his back and fired at my cousin. Before the door hit the cement there was a scream from the parking lot. He'd shot my cousin. In the nuts.

My family were well off. My father and grandfather held prominent positions in our small town and were well respected. Even though the neighbor called the police, no charges were filed and no one was held accountable. No one pointed fingers at my parents and blamed them for having raised a child who would play with a toy gun. This was simply a case of boys being boys. My cousin wasn't badly injured and he has his own children now (I feel certain that more than one person has to be asking that question).

While remaining in NE Ohio, fast forward 30 years: We are now an open-carry state where the law requires neither a license nor a registration for firearms. Ohio does, however, have a duty to inform law which requires gun owners to inform law enforcement that they are carrying a weapon immediately upon confrontation. That law, of course, would mean that the person in question would have to be actually carrying a weapon and they would have an opportunity to speak a single word before the officers decided to open fire on them.

We have all seen the video. We saw where a kid was playing with a toy gun and pretending it was real. We have been told that the officers thought he looked older than 12. That is meant to offer absolution to the officer who shot Tamir Rice because his being older would make him a threat. Why? They didn't even talk to him. Not only did they not take the time to determine if he was actually carrying a weapon or how old he was (where if he were the grown man they said he seemed, he may have been legally open carrying a gun), but there was never a determination that he had broken any laws. Ohio allows people to open carry their weapons. He was not in conflict with anyone. He was literally standing there doing NOTHING. And to some, apparently, that is quite enough:

This bullshit comment showed up on my Facebook page today in reaction to the shirt I designed for Black Lives Matter showing dozens of names of people of color murdered. I've heard it all before. This is the shit some white people tell themselves to remain in their little happy world where everything is right and their white supremacy is the standard. I realize that a lot of people don't understand that this is what their subconscious is doing, but I can't allow them that freedom, either. You don't get to rewrite histories or biographies to make yourself feel better. How many people are presently feeling good about themselves saying, "Yeah. Well they were killed because they were criminals or ran their mouth"? How can you not then allow a revelation that neither of those things warrant being murdered?

In America, if you commit a crime you are arrested, given a court hearing and a judge or jury determines your guilt. If found guilty, you are then sentenced. Few crimes warrant death. Asshole.

Running your mouth? Really? Anyone who knows me will tell you that all of my life I have 'run my mouth' giving no consideration to the power or position of its recipient. Fortunately, however, I was white while I was doing it.

She concludes her nonsensical list of reasons to murder people with Tamir Rice and his fake gun. She doesn't expand on her thought process (I generously attribute one to her, which is probably unnecessary) but it seems to tell me that children with fake guns should be murdered without question or due process. Thank goodness my brother had that white skin or who knows what might have happened to him. Cunt.

Apparently, unless a police officer screams the words, "I'm killing you for your blackness," while shooting, there will never be a way to make some people understand. I honestly don't want to share the planet with people who are this shallow, selfish and willfully ignorant. If you have thought things similar to the comment pictured above or nodded your head when someone else was saying these things, I compel you to take this test. If you get to the end of it and do not see the problem with your thinking, you are hopelessly devoid of humanity. But that means my words are of no consequence to you. So I offer you the most abject shame and hope you have little time left in this word with no influence over the next generation.

Honestly, we are settling for this society. Until every rational voice demands coherence out of those who embrace hate and ignorance while completely dismissing lives lost to people of color, we will remain right here. Until our 'leadership' believes that the majority of Americans see the truths behind these killings, they will not do anything. They don't have to. A very precious few of them do anything unless it helps them get reelected. Please stand up. Please shout for justice. Please don't wait for the next innocent child to end up dead for engaging in his childhood. PLEASE.


Finally, please READ AND SIGN THIS PETITION.

Thank you.

1985

There are memories from childhood which are so vivid that when I recount them and find my audience is unable to remember, it pisses me off. It is strange, probably, but it is almost as if that was such a poignant moment in my life, it feels either wasted or less relevant if I cannot share it with someone who was there. Of the many memories from decades ago which seem to live in my mind as a near perfect reel, the one that not only continues to haunt me but seems to have most defined me as a person was in May of 1985. The memory is only mine. My whole family was there and none of them seemed to have experienced it so profoundly as to even remember it with me.

I have relayed this story a lot lately. I was only diagnosed with a panic disorder last year. The fact that it took 41 years to find that diagnosis is, to say the very least, peculiar. My first memory of an attack, of sort, was when I was 12. I was in the living room waiting for the Disney movie to come on (we didn't have on-demand back in the day and were offered a single helping of Disney once a week). I went in to the living room after dinner and whatever was on the television when I turned it on was so upsetting to me that by the time the rest of the family came in to sit down for our Sunday evening entertainment, I was bawling. My dad was angry, as I recall (although I now realize that a lot of his emotions seemed like anger to me then and he was probably frustrated by this child he could not understand), and demanded, "What are you crying about?" I pointed to the black and white footage on the television of a large pit with naked skin-and-bone bodies being bulldozed on top of one another into it.

I had no idea what I was looking at. My fathers curt reply to my response, "What is that?" was a quick, "That is from the Holocaust." I had no idea what the Holocaust was and my plea for him to explain it warranted a, "If you don't want to look at it turn it off." I could not stop crying and as my father was then angry with me for having been upset, my sob turned into that mess where you can't even catch your breath. I set myself off to bed rather than ruin the family's evening with Disney.

I did not sleep that entire night.

The few minutes of footage that I had seen of this film terrified me. It had a name. My father gave it a name. It is called a Holocaust. That means it is a thing that exists in the world. Those people who had families and friends had somehow come to a place in their lives where this was their end. And it had a name. And it existed.

My father checked on me several times that night to see if I had settled down. I was eventually able to stop crying but I had not been able to stop thinking about it and worrying about those people and wondering what you have to do to end up in a place like that. I wanted to protect all of my loved ones from having to die like that. I simply could not grasp the fact that this Holocaust existed. And it must have been a common event or my father wouldn't have explained it to me so casually. The world was terrifying to me in a way that it had never been before (and I had also recently had similar, but not as overwhelming revelations about slavery in history class and children being kidnapped by the movie Adam).

Of course, my fathers quick dismissal didn't mean that the Holocaust was a common occurrence in the world. It only meant that my father saw everything as a matter of fact and had no capacity to deliver information in a way that would be specific to this very sensitive audience. I have been 30 years now on this path to understand the Holocaust. I watch every documentary that I ever learn about. I have read many books. I can now rationalize that neither the next movie nor book will offer me the light bulb to make it all make sense to me. But I can also understand with age and historical context that this was a very specific moment in a very ugly time in World history which is quite singular in its evil and circumstance.

Today I spent the day watching documentaries on Amazon. I happened upon a Frontline video of a documentary they had released about the Holocaust in 1985. I started the movie and thought, 'this could be it.' That would certainly be the year that the memory of my first anxiety attack happened. And I have never been able to tell the story completely because even my own mind always struggled to remember what exactly I had seen. I can now say, without a doubt, that I must have turned the television on after dinner and it would have already been set on PBS.

In 1985, Frontline aired a documentary which had been a project started 40 years prior by a coalition of US and British Army filmmakers. Alfred Hitchcock even participated and refused to take pay for it because of its importance. For reasons unknown (I've found several speculations but nothing seems to have been settled), the film was never finished. In 1985 PBS put the unfinished reels together and left many minutes of completely unnarrated film. It sounds like an unprofessional piece to have not had it completed until many who had been involved were gone and so much was unknown about why the project had been abandoned in the first place. The fact that there are many minutes with no narration certainly seem strange, but that is the strength of the piece. You don't need the words. The entire point of this piece is to document the moment and place in history where humanity had been forfeit.

I can now tell you, having finished this documentary, that the footage at the end is the exact memory I have seen as I retold this story throughout my life. This is the moment in my life where my heart broke and my mind raced and my soul reached out for something to give me understanding of the world. It has haunted me ever since.

After having seen this film in its entirety as an adult, my constant demands that the sonsofbitches on the right who like to compare every aspect of the political world which might not happen to be going their way to the Holocaust must stop is now something more of an insistence. I literally can not abide their hate and conflation of history and propaganda. I can not let it exist.

I beg you to save this on your computer and watch it. It is an hour long and it is probably the most painful thing you can imagine ever seeing. But it is an imperative. We must allow our outrage to equal and exceed their disregard. We must allow our voices to be louder than theirs. There are no words powerful enough to ever explain this film. I feel confident that it would have the same affect if you watched it on mute. Our humanity dissipates a little bit more when we allow this memory to be negated by their drawing unfounded parallels.

Please watch this and shout at the top of your lungs every time Carson, Cruz or Huckabee determine that any perceived slight to their rigid societal standards should be compared to the Holocaust. Every time they get away with this shit, the impact of these truths dissipates a little more. And it creates an environment where we won't see it coming if we ever do find ourselves heading down a similar path.



CLICK HERE TO SEE THE MOVIE OR SAVE IT TO SEE SOON

Well Done! Sister Suffragette

Today I posted a link to the trailer of the movie Suffragette in a 'feminist' group on Facebook. The group calls itself "This is What a Feminist Looks Like." I was immediately attacked by 4 people who told me that this was a terrible movie because it didn't depict the movement correctly for black women. I was removed from the group (apparently this is NOT what a feminist looks like) when I asked them to even tell me why they were all saying this and was shocked at the new language I was hearing about my supposed white privilege (from here in the trailer park) and that I was a believer in 'white feminism,' a term I didn't even realize existed.

Once I was blocked from the group, I used my other account to go in and see the discussion that followed. Apparently, one young 'feminist' who wanted to condemn me as a racist posted a picture of one of the hoodies I've designed for my shop. I guess reading its message and considering the context was too much to ask of someone who can't be bothered to have mature dialogue with a human being who respectfully asked for their side of the argument and received only trash talk in response.

Are there complexities in this message that I cannot see?

The young ladies who didn't realize I had been blocked went on to educate me about all of the black people who had been left out of the movie. Of course, they were all Americans. I researched all of them before posting this and the people did not have anything to do with the suffrage movement across the pond. You see, as I was attempting to inform these young women before I was so graciously dismissed from the conversation, the movie is about the movement in London. The movement, itself, is what I wanted to celebrate and encourage us to show excitement about because OUR MOVEMENT is repeatedly accosted and given more negative connotations than positive in our society. Regardless of where the movie is located, if we dismiss the accomplishments of those who came before us because we don't like the manner in which they were achieved, we also have to dismiss the progress that they made. Frankly, I'd rather not.

The media and social media are the resources most used in order to get the messages out about anything in our national discourse. The media, itself, can hardly be expected to direct the narrative to the conscience of the country, they don't have a conscience themselves. And what does the left do when they are given an opportunity to celebrate or educate about some facet of its movement? Well, we take a shit on it. Every single time.

Its funny (in the way that its not remotely funny), but I actually researched the beginnings of a recent Battle Royale held between ourselves earlier this summer to see if my suspicions were accurate and that they were started by someone on the right. The attack was against the Black Widow character in the latest Avengers movie. The attack was specifically against the writer/director Joss Whedon by saying he hated women and the character wasn't quite feminist enough for them and she offered a negative stereotype against women. All of these people determined that he hated women. I literally shut down that conversation on Twitter by passing this meme around. I had it saved in my personal happy place file because I have been a huge fan of his since back in the Buffy days.

I was convinced that this entire controversy came out of some place on the right and I determined I would trace it. Wanna know where I traced the beginnings of this nonsensical frenzy to? A guy who lives in London and is an editor for Breitbart. Yep. He decided it was something radical feminists would jump all over and talk about without having actually seen the movie or having had a single idea what they were talking about. And, sadly, he was right. Nice work, ladies.

Because I had missed previous discussions surrounding the new movie, I researched our latest feminist attack on feminism (Goddamn ... any wonder why we can't get anything done in 100 years?). Apparently it all started when the female leads of the movie were all wearing this shirt for a photo shoot and people found it offensive. I will not research it, but I would not be surprised if someone else wants to, they will find that the right injected just one little well-placed nugget into the Twittersphere and allowed us to take it from there. Let me be quite clear: If we ask the RWNJs to direct our narrative, they will be happy to oblige. If we give them an opportunity to perpetuate divisions within our varied movements, they will gladly take it upon themselves to do that, too.

Please breathe here for a moment and then hear all of the things that no one could have said in 140 characters:

The movie is set in London. The quote on the t-shirts was from Emmaline Pankhurst, played by Meryl Streep in the movie. That quote was her response to how she felt at that time. This isn't about Americas history with slavery. By acknowledging that white women have been oppressed, no one is discounting the fact women of color have been, as well. And by celebrating the accomplishments of those women, we are not dismissing those who were not included in that struggle.

Having been enslaved means more than being black. That is the first thing that comes to mind when you hear the word, especially in America, and for good reason. But slavery did, like it or not, offer the same legal freedoms to all blacks as it did to all women. We were not allowed to vote or allowed to own property and we, too, were property. (I am only speaking in legalities, again, obviously the treatment of these human beings was quite different). We were not mentioned in the Constitution until we were given the vote (1920). Because we were not able to pass the rest of the Equal Rights Amendment, that is still the only right that women have, per the Constitution.

For various reasons, throughout the last century the ERA has had its ass kicked by feminists. There were always divisions among those who argued about which rights they wanted and how they wanted to have them enacted. Historically, we have fucked ourselves out of meeting our own goals. Fabulous, huh?

Maybe we could all unite, not fall for dog whistles and look for reasons to disagree with one another? Maybe when opportunities come up for us to celebrate womanhood and those who preceeded us in this fight we could do that instead of looking for reasons to dismiss their accomplishments?

God Damn. The right has it so easy, don't they? They can just all agree to rewrite history or ignore it altogether because they don't really have anything to be proud of. Instead of throwing that in their faces and cheering ourselves on to victory, we are demanding more of our history. Reflect quietly on that sentence, please. We cannot rewrite our history, either. But by denouncing it as if every element of it had to meet today's standards, we condemn ourselves to having had no accomplishments.

If this movement is to get anywhere, it really is time to be more thoughtful about where you project your angst. Pissing off and alienating those who are literally fighting along side you on our journey to move (or drag, if need be) Americans forward is only going to do two things: #1 Give the Regressive Party just the tools they need to ensure NOTHING is accomplished (and did you notice how many of them were anxious to jump into your fight and confuse the argument even further on social media?) #2 Scare more people from joining our movements in the first place.

I leave you with a quote from Sophia: Princess, Suffragette, Revolutionary by Anita Anand. This regarded Princess Sophia, of India, who battled prominently in the London movement and was celebrated, regardless of her skin color:

“The empire took everything from her father but she spent her life fighting for women’s rights in this country. She believed there was something stronger than racial hatred and it was the sisterhood.

Please, my feminist sisters, pause and reflect. We want to move forward WITH you, not IN SPITE of you.

My most sincere Love,
Mean Progressive

It's Hard Out There For a Trump

As with everything in his world, I suppose, Donald Trump is very adamant about his right to demand the terms of the next debate. He and Dr. Ben Carson have decided that they are going to boycott the CNBC event on October 28th if it is not condensed to 2 hours, including commercials.

The last debate was three hours long and it was a tortured event, I have to admit that. But the torture was for the audience, not the candidates as they would have you understand it. Directly following that event when Trump was interviewed, he repeatedly complained about how long it had been and that he was impressed with himself for having been able to stand the entire three hours. Take pause and imagine ANYONE you know having a proud revelation that they were able to stand up for three hours in a row. While talking. Its not even like he was doing manual labor. He was talking. Jesus Christ.

That evening he also said that he was proud of his daughter, Ivanka, for having endured the long evening. I went to bed that night focused on what kind of a life that woman was afforded when her father gives her accolades for having sat in an audience for three hours. You know that show Wife Swap? I'd like to see a show called Life Swap where she has to switch places with any average American do a week in the life of maybe a single mother who works full time and tries to juggle all responsibilities of the work and home life without losing her mind. And more than that, I'd love to see that single mother get the vacation Ivanka's life surely must be where hardships come from having to sit still for three hours in a row.

The last debates were, absolutely, too long. I cannot come up with a reasonable alternative, though. If CNBC is meant to take their responsibility seriously (as FOX and CNN refused to do), they should have a lot of questions for a lot of candidates, right? With ten or more attention-grabbing, rhetoric spewing, subject changing jackasses to wrangle, it seems nearly impossible to get it done in less time. But on the other hand, none of the candidates have anything of substance to say anyway, so maybe just let them have their two hours. After the record-breaking audience numbers of the Democratic debates the other night which far exceeded any expectations going into it, I would say America has finally realized the difference between the two parties is profound and the defined platforms of 'Hate & Fear' coming from the right are not conducive to the progress any single American is looking for from a leader.

Maybe the media could even start to report on those proposals coming from the left by those who are taking the idea of leading our country seriously. A girl can dream ...

Oregonian Pride

Do you know what? In July I pretty much wanted to lose my shit when my President was in Oklahoma and his welcome committee was a white trash parade carrying hateful signs and waving that fucking flag. I wrote a piece I am very proud of and hoped that we, as a society, could unite and find it in ourselves to lift the country and find the voices necessary to dim those that scream hate and create division.

I suppose three months was not enough time to expect for the country to have had any substantive revelation. So today, in Oregon, the least among us went out in droves to get in front of television cameras and find themselves celebrated on the Internet for perpetuating the disgraceful treatment we have come to expect from them. They will find the attention they are looking for. I, however, have decided to celebrate something beautiful. 

Ms. Dulcie Bagley took it upon herself to make a pretty pink sign to welcome the President and fan it in front of those who wanted to make a mockery of the visit to families of those who had been lost just a week ago to the gun violence they are so desperate to maintain in our society. She explains her commitment here and believes that she is a member of a silent majority of people who wouldn't want to come out and contend with those who display such destructive behaviors (while being armed). I ask us all to consider similar peaceful displays in the future to allow Americans to see that they are not alone in hoping for a healthy counter narrative to what we are continually offered. Maybe if enough people are out in front that story can be told next time.

Thank you, ma'am. You are a badass!

Thank you, babies. America's mothers are proud of you and share the pain in your eyes.

Abortion Party!

In less than a month I am going to turn 43. With every year that passes I assess the things I have yet to achieve in my life. When I was turning 40 my daughter treated me to a Buckeye game and that took care of the #1 item on my bucket list. Last year I was focused on the length of my bucket list and determined to narrow it a bit and put the Louvre at the top. Thanks to Marco Rubio, this year it occurs to me that the Louvre should not be at the top of my list. There will be time for travel later.

As much as I have always really wanted to have an abortion, I have never had the chance. I realize now what a missed opportunity I had when I was 19 and decided to give birth to my daughter. But who would have figured that would be my last chance in life? I was young and it seemed I had my whole life ahead of me. (Besides, I would have missed that Buckeye game). But now my time is surely running out. Sooner or later my parts are going to stop working and I won't even be able to get pregnant.

Help Me Get My Shirt!!!

The immediacy of my situation leaves me with only one solution: Abortion Party!

I am going to start really keeping track of my cycle and have men come visit me every day of the weeks I am fertile until I get the plus sign on that stick! Please sign up below. My requirements are few: able bodied men (at least able where it counts - wink), must provide your own transportation, must offer written doctor's proof of being disease-free, must be willing to leave immediately upon completion. That's it! If you are interested please let me know. I will begin inviting suitors next month. I look forward to meeting you all!!!

Party On!!!

As Marco Rubio was good enough to point out for us this week, abortions are something we all look forward to in life. There are some dreams that all little girls hold on to well into adulthood and, obviously, having an abortion is one of them. I have been with a loved one when she got to have an abortion. It seemed to be a terrible time for her because she was making herself sick over her it. I couldn't understand why she was torturing herself over something all women should celebrate, but she was very emotional and I made it my responsibility to care for her as best as I could. I figured it must have been the hormones pregnant women often experience.

When we went into the clinic to have the procedure there were a lot of very angry people outside screaming the most vile things at her. I am defensive of absolute strangers when they are being harassed, one can only imagine the rage that came over me as I was trying to understand and comfort her and protect her from their words, but my body and mind were compelled to commit violence in a way that was, frankly, foreign to me. I couldn't understand. Why were these people so angry? I could only conclude that these people are the ones who stand outside of weddings and harry the brides and grooms when they come out of their houses of worship after having been married. Some people will not allow the rest of us to enjoy anything in our lives!

Once we were inside, the waiting room was filled with women who were also having abortions because the clinic only performed them on Mondays. (I think on Tuesdays they do face lifts). Again, the joy one would expect to find on their faces and the excitement of being able to get this procedure in their lives seemed to be lost on them. Those women all seemed to be in a silent state of solemn contemplation that looked like sadness. Some of them were crying. It must've been a reflection only a woman can have if she has been able to be in their shoes and what I was seeing was really pride. Or euphoria. The tears must have been tears of joy. I suppose that since I have never had such a fulfilling experience it looked foreign to me and what I assumed was sadness or pain had to have been a misunderstanding on my part. Obviously.

Every woman there was accompanied by a loved one: a friend, sister, mother, husband, boyfriend. None of them seemed to be happy to be there, either. It was as if they were sad or lost. I wondered if I looked that way, too. I wondered if anyone looking at me would misunderstand me to seem distressed when what I was feeling was pure jealousy. Now that I look back at it, I'll bet that is what all of the loved ones in the waiting room were feeling. They were jealous, too. They had never been able to get this procedure done and go back to their daily lives to brag to all of their friends and co-workers or classmates about their big accomplishment.

Although it really was a somber morning with very few words spoken in the room beyond the nurse coming out to get a patient and take them to see the doctor, it felt like we all had an unspoken bond together in the silence. We were all there because we loved someone who found themselves in a situation they could not face alone. Of course, they could not face it alone because they couldn't drive afterward due to the anesthesia. So we all faced it together and prepared for the next phase in our lives where we would get in our cars and drive home. And then we would all continue this random Monday watching Ellen at 4pm, making dinner and playing a little Candy Crush before bed.

That was a really beautiful day for the both of us, I believe. We both grew and became stronger women for having had the experience. She is now a complete woman after reaching a milestone most of us strive toward. And I was offered genuine reflection about my own life's ambitions.

I need to get back to that time and put my priorities in order. I hope many of you will sign up and come visit me soon or refer friends to this site who might want to help me reach my goals.

Thank you in advance.

Kiss Kiss.
Mean Progressive



** My most sincere thanks to Bram from the show Social Spitball with Bram Sarkowski and Barbara Dee for helping me get the video of Rubio's latest folly cut for this piece. Please check out their show and their Facebook community People for the Ethical Treatment of Voters. Great lefties need great support!!! ***

Please support Planned Parenthood by donating here so more women can meet their goals in life:

DONATE HERE

There Is A War On Women! And We Are Losing!

The right goes out of its way to make a mockery of the phrase 'War on Women.' They are desperate to spread the word that the real war is being waged by the left because by claiming there is a movement against us we are creating victims out of women, instead of heroes. In their conflated logic, either we can promote all women to equality or just celebrate those who have already made it there. This makes as much sense as the rest of their rhetoric so I will just leave it right there. In their desperate attempt to protect American women in this war, the Regressive Party is presently attempting to pass a law that is literally unconstitutional. Although the Supreme Court held in its Roe V Wade decision that abortions were legal and the states could not decide until the time that the fetus could be deemed 'viable,' it offered no specificity on the term. Six years later, in Colautti V Franklin the court told the states (and has not since changed its opinion):  

“[N]either the legislature nor the courts may proclaim one of the elements entering into the ascertainment of viability—be it weeks of gestation or fetal weight or any other single factor—as the determinant of when the State has a compelling interest in the life or health of the fetus.

Abortions after 20 weeks make up 1% of those performed annually. They are done out of necessity, not on a whim. Women have these procedures because they have been determined necessary by the doctor and the patient after having discussed health concerns. Many birth defects cannot even be detected until 20 weeks with an ultrasound. And most insurance companies will not even pay for ultrasounds until 20 weeks so the line is drawn right there, isn't it? What if you can't have a doctors appointment until the very day of your 20 weeks? What if you cannot get in until the following week? What if the doctor tells you on the day of your 20th week that your child has a birth defect and you have to decide immediately? Do you have time to go home and discuss options with your family? Will the doctor perform the surgery that very day? The obvious answer is: NO. Of course, no intelligent person is having this discussion and only irrational people are screaming about nonsense meant to distract anyone from having  meaningful reflection on the human beings (those which are already actually alive) who are left in these situations and what we would be allowing them to go through if this bullshit passes Congress.

These are the women who have 20+ week abortions

All rational discussions can only begin right here: Abortions are a legal medical procedure. Once you begin in the correct frame of mind, a thoughtful human being has a lot of questions to ask themselves and, more importantly, their society:

Why is it that in America we have had legal and safe abortions for over 40 years and have had to fight so hard to maintain that right? Why are our 'representatives' allowed to create laws to limit and restrict our rights? Why are they allowed to go on a witch hunt and determine Planned Parenthood is the purveyor of all evil in the country and attack them so blatantly? None of the funding for abortions is paid for by federal funds. That reminder comes up every time that we have the Planned Parenthood argument. Although it is an important aside to this specific argument, it also begs the question: Why? It is a legal right. Why are they allowed to deny funding of a legally legitimate health care procedure?

Why are states allowed to pass laws to create a waiting period? and consent? and limit where a procedure can be performed? and dictate the policies of the hospitals/clinics performing the surgeries? and force women to listen to an ultrasound or read specific literature? 

The answers are simple. And tragic. 

Roe V Wade was decided by the Supreme Court in 1973. The objective of the anti-choice activists and politicians has been very singular ever since: Have it overturned. They take every opportunity they can find to challenge any aspect of the ruling they think there is a precedent for (or they can have a state create for them) and their steadfast objective has been successful. The Supreme Court has repeatedly allowed the cases to come before it and each time they have the verbiage and the meanings behind those rulings have made the statues more hazy. The Regressives, if nothing else, are masters of word play and repeatedly concoct ways to dismantle the ruling one piece at a time.

In 1992, the Supreme Court ruled on Planned Parenthood of SE Pennsylvania V Casey, where three centrist judges (Kennedy, O'Connor and Souter) wrote a joint opinion which remind us of something that will be true for as long as radicals try to limit women's rights:

"The Constitution serves human values and while the effect of reliance on Roe cannot be exactly measured, neither can the certain costs of overruling Roe for people who have ordered their thinking and living around that case be dismissed.

Although reflection of the opinion quote above can give us all pause and remind us of the truths about objectives, ultimately the Supreme Court decision in Casey created so many holes in the language of Roe V Wade that the entire 23 years since have offered voice to every radical who wanted to find a way to let semantics dictate our rights.

Those presently running for President are falling all over themselves trying to prove that they are the most ardent supporter of the anti-choice movement. This hearing on Congress, no doubt, is a great opportunity for three of them in the Senate to take the spotlight off of Trump for a minute. And the governors can use this time to boast about their own records.

Jeb Bush was able pass a law in Florida where women seeking abortions needed to get consent. Described here, he even went out of his way to stop abortions by women who had been raped (yes, she needed consent from her rapist):

"... involving a 22-year-old rape victim who was both pregnant and developmentally disabled, Bush asked a court to appoint a guardian to represent the woman's fetus. The woman had been raped while living in state-supervised facilities, but did not have the mental capacity to identify her attacker.

And for a child whose parental consent would come from the State ... In 2005, Bush fought to prevent a pregnant 13-year-old girl, who was a ward of the state, from having an abortion. He was overruled by a judge, and CNN later reported that Bush's "abortion activism shocked some state officials who believed he was reaching beyond the powers of his office." 

Jeb Bush, I feel it is important to point out, is a perfect example of why this rhetoric around abortion rights is, indeed, a part of a War on Women. In 1995 he wrote, Profiles in Character, a book meant to explain that society's ills are due to our neglecting our own responsibilities by giving them to the government (its quite contrived but this begins their discussion about why we should have small government so the rich can pay fewer taxes - the latter part, of course, is always omitted from the argument). Society was failing because of the number of unwed pregnancies and the offense here was, quite clearly, society's tolerance of female promiscuity. There is a place for women and in his dark world, it is clear that he thinks its his job to get us back there:

"One of the reasons more young women are giving birth out of wedlock and more young men are walking away from their paternal obligations is that there is no longer a stigma attached to this behavior, no reason to feel shame. Many of these young women and young men look around and see their friends engaged in the same irresponsible conduct. Their parents and neighbors have become ineffective at attaching some sense of ridicule to this behavior. There was a time when neighbors and communities would frown on out of wedlock births and when public condemnation was enough of a stimulus for one to be careful.

Yep. This prefaced his signing a law requiring women to put an ad in the local newspaper listing all of the men she had slept with before being allowed to put her child up for adoption. The notice had to contain a physical description, including, but not limited to age, race, hair and eye color, and approximate height and weight of the mother and of any person the mother reasonably believes may be the father; the child's date of birth; and any date and city, including county and state in which the city is located, in which the conception may have occurred. This had to run every week for a month. No War on Women here. Not from a man who wants to deny funding for your abortions and embarrass you out of even having an adoption. Nothing here but good old fashioned care for unborn 'children.'

In last weeks debate Chris Christie beamed over his own record of having defunded Planned Parenthood and voting against it each of the 8 years since. Glorious! Although this account is actually misleading (I know, you are shocked), it is telling of his role in the War on Women. He eliminated $7.5 million for women's health care funding, none of which went to abortions. 

I live in Ohio. 74% of Ohioans are opposed to shutting down Planned Parenthood. That won't stop our governor and current Presidential candidate, John Kasich, from sticking anti-choice legislation in bills that have nothing to do with health care so no one notices. He has already cut half of the states clinics. This fall he is expected to sign a new bill which will ban women from choosing to terminate because of a prenatal diagnosis of Down's Syndrome. PAUSE. This bill is actually trying to tell women what their reasoning can be for an abortion. If that is not offensive enough for you, consider what precedent that sets. Remember, that is what all of the states have been trying all along: set a precedent to take to the Supreme Court.

Kasich obviously doesn't care about representing 74% of his constituents. This is pervasive with candidates on the right. Even though only the radicals on the right support anti-choice legislation, the candidates will continue to fight. If it is something their electorate does not support then why do they overwhelmingly vote against women's issues? 

BECAUSE THERE IS A FUCKING WAR ON WOMEN. God. Damn. 

Don't allow people to confuse the discussion by throwing a word like 'feminazi' in a sentence or pretending to give a shit about 'life.' We live in a society where the women's movement hasn't moved much at all. We live in a society that accepts condemnation for those who fight for our rights. We live in a society that tells itself the rights guaranteed by the 14th Amendment aren't necessarily attributable to women. Does that sound like bullshit? Is this Mean Progressive being dramatic?Then why have we still not passed the Equal Rights Amendment in nearly 100 years?

Every opportunity that we have had to make a stand and ignored it while hoping others will step up and do their part brought us to this moment. And do not be mistaken, THIS MOMENT is crucial. The House has managed to get enough votes to defund Planned Parenthood. This is a lot more than their usual antics. It is an imperative that this be stopped. Please go to this site and fill in the blanks. It takes only a moment.

Click Here

Go to this site and sign up. I get emails whenever anything big is going on and that is how I know to inform you all. If you ever miss one of my posts (why would anyone ever do that? wink) you will still be able to get information on what is going on.

Click Here

Please donate to them if you can. They have been fighting too hard for too long just for the fucking right to care for our nation's women. They deserve all of the support they can get. 

Donate Here

There are a number of things we can all do to protect this sacred women's health institution which take no time at all. They are outlined here. The most important, however, is to make more women (and men) aware of the movement and the truths behind the stories the media has managed to either mangle or ignore altogether. We Are Losing This War. And that is unacceptable. 

Finally, make it your mission to find 5 (or more) women and make sure they understand how important this is. Make them understand this is not just another rhetorical gesture. Their rights are seriously on the line. And, if you can keep their attention long enough, explain to them the rights they think they have that they really don't. We have to begin moving this conversation along. I can bitch about it to you all every day, but you already know. Ranting isn't going to be enough. We need to make all women as angry as we are. Let's go!


Did you make it all the way to the bottom? I love you :)

Kiss Kiss.
Mean Progressive