Paying the Penalty

There's a Looney Tunes short called "The Ducksters" that satirizes radio quiz shows. The contestant must answer a question within a certain period of time or they must "pay the penalty" - usually a VERY harsh one.

In many places, women are being made to pay the penalty for their reproductive choices.  Although it's true that women are the gatekeepers of their own bodies, they shouldn't be forced to bear the responsibility for what happens to their bodies through the actions of irresponsible men.  More and more states are trying to legislate the kind of health care that women can access, particularly pregnancy-related care.  What's worse is that women who have a miscarriage or have babies that are stillborn, are sometimes still considered to have "aborted" and might face jail time for it.

Men seem to forget that they bear 50% of the responsibility of creating a pregnancy in the first place.  One man could impregnate multiple women in the time that it takes one woman to bear a baby to term.  The simple solution?  If you don't want a woman to get pregnant, then use a contraceptive method.

Not so simple.

Far too many men still cling to the idea of sowing their wild oats.  Having sex as often as possible without consequence.  Such has been used as a weapon of war for centuries: if you want to effectively wipe out another tribe, slaughter all the menfolk and force their women to have your babies instead.  Even the Bible justifies rape by saying that a man who despoils a virgin can marry her if he pays restitution to her father.

It's time this barbarism stopped.  Ideas making the rounds of the internet suggest turning the tables.

1. Mandatory vasectomy of all men above the age of 13, and only reversing it when that man can prove that he is prepared and has the means to be a father.  

2. Make men who want a scrip for Viagra or other similar ED drug must go through the same gauntlet of invasive scans and questioning that women who are seeking abortion do.

3 Sterilize or imprison people who refuse to pay child support, or who are convicted child abusers.

Either that, or perhaps we go back to the use of the Victorian "pollution ring" that was a jagged metal ring that fit around the base of the penis. It was to prevent the man from becoming aroused for any reason, mainly in an effort to curb masturbation and the waste of sperm.

What?  You don't want other people controlling your body?  Well, about that...

Sadly, the "pro-birth" people believe that the male responsibility for babies ends at ejaculation.  I call them "pro-birth" because they are not truly "pro-life".  They only want the child to be born.  They don't care about the mother and they don't want to pay for that child's medical care, food, education, and well-being.

Here's another suggestion.  Women can withhold sex until their partners wise up.

That might get men thinking with their brains instead of their genitals.

Autocratic Movement

The following is from a Twitter thread by Steve Schmidt, an American public affairs strategist.

America tonight. 40% of the population has $400 cash in savings. Huge swaths of the country lack broadband and our national infrastructure is decrepit. Billionaires who fund their own space programs pay no taxes while the country's senior political leaders who incited an insurrection remain protected by their own coverup.

The concept of truth has been obliterated by a toxic combination of algorithms, misinformation, and greed.  There is an autocratic movement that is large, rich, powerful and on the march. It is maneuvering yet somehow it remains invisible to the people who are nearest it and have the power to do something about it. Perhaps there is a lesson to be learned about this through the story of Neville Chamberlain. The story is more complicated than most people have been taught. He was an honorable man.

The 1st World War was a human catastrophe that killed 20 million people and one million Britons. In fact, it can be argued that the British Empire never recovered from that war. A generation of upper class sons was wiped out in the rush to glory that ended in muddy trenches, plumes of poison gas, and vast killing fields. It was unimaginable in the 1930’s that there could be another war. It was unthinkable. It was wished away. Chamberlain wasn’t a bad man or a weak man. He just couldn’t imagine that it could all happen again so he pretended that it couldn’t.

He reached for peace with noble intent. In the end it was the avoidance of the obvious and inevitable that led to a disaster so great that it obliterated the memory of the bloodiest war in human history fought just 25 years earlier. The next war killed 100 million.

Is there not a lesson from this in our moment? History offers lessons. Some people could see the threat clearly and some could not. Some saw it very early while for others it was the last thing they saw. It’s hard to imagine that Trump could come back. It’s hard to conceive that he remains the far and away front runner for the 2024 nomination. Where I live, there is no shortage of TRUMP 24 flags.  It’s hard to fathom that one of America’s two political parties has abandoned its faith in democracy, yet it has.

The Senate is a small club and maybe that’s the problem. Maybe it’s hard to look at someone and comprehend their bad faith. We are in for a long season of fighting over some really big and important things in this country. Orienting towards the ugly truth of what it is we are fighting is profoundly important.

We are fighting an autocratic movement that includes an eclectic multitude of extremist groups; among them fascists, theocrats, white supremacists, and conspiracy loons. They are dangerous and they want political power again. This movement teems with menace and violence. It has killed and it will kill again.

The pro democracy coalition must win the 24, 28 and 32 elections to break this. It will not be easy.

The Insanity of it All

Not being a U.S. citizen, I've frequently been told by people online that I have no way of understanding what their holy Second Amendment means to them.

It's true. I don't.

I can't understand why so many believe that 2A is seen to be more important than the First, or even the entire Constitution.  I can't understand why so many insist that they have the right to bear any firearm of their choice despite the risks that go along with them.  I can't understand why so many shrug their shoulders and accept the increasing annual tally of gun deaths as acceptable losses for their "rights".

"What if the government turns tyrannical and comes to take our guns away?!" they cry.

Remember what happened in Waco TX in 1993?  A few guns can't stop a tank.

Over the past year, there has been a mass shooting in the United States almost EVERY SINGLE DAY.

The overall death toll from gun violence has been more than what would be expected of a war zone.

Perhaps the U.S. is at still at war, but it's at war with itself.  Too many people are needlessly afraid of having their guns taken, their rights abridged, their families endangered... Where have we heard this before?

A quick perusal of recent news:

- A Texas woman shoots at a puppy running loose and accidentally hits her son.
- An Alabama man had his gun taken away after a domestic abuse incident.  The gun is returned to him, and he promptly shoots and kills his wife.
- A toddler grabs a loaded pistol from his mother's purse and accidentally shoots his sister.
- Two runaway teens break into a home, grab some improperly secured guns, and get into a shootout with police.

When will it stop?

It could have been mitigated after twenty kindergarteners were massacred in 2012.  But it wasn't.

At least Canada learned its lesson when fourteen young women were murdered in their university classroom in 1989.

The United States hasn't learned that lesson because it's not willing to learn it.  I doubt it ever will.  Even after an armed mob crashed its democratically elected seat of government, still there are those who insist that it was business as usual.

None of it seems to matter.  What's the definition of insanity again?