Tuesday, February 03, 2015

NEW MEME: LESBIAN MOTHERS HATE WOMEN, STEAL BABIES!

Children-of-gay-marriage-against-gay-marriage really may actually be a thing. In addition to Katy Faust, whose case we examined yesterday, we have The Federalist's Rivka Edelman. Unlike Faust, Edelman doesn't describe her gay-mommy childhood positively ("My mother, you know, she had some of that pornography around and the books and stuff..."), so from her we don't get the absurdity of a happily-raised child of gays arguing no one else should be raised that way. We do, however, get a heapin' helping of bad faith and bile:
LBGT Demands For Other People’s Children Are Misogynistic
The misogyny of the LGBT movement flings women backward to a dark era, when the rule was prejudice against single mothers and unintended pregnancy... 
The “marriage equality” arguments leverage children, often claiming that if gay adults can marry the children they are raising will benefit from broader “protections.” This is doublespeak. The “protections” consist of the gay adults’ access to and control of children as commodities.
Edelman engages the Supreme Court case in which two lesbians adopted a child who had been given up by his homeless birth mother:
Daughtrey is sure to note of the biological mother, “She surrendered her legal rights.” How did the birth mother do this if she was “impaired”? The unstable and impoverished mother is a useful trope in misogynistic and classist discourse. I wonder what was done to find this biological mother housing so she could in fact leave the hospital with her son. It is likely that few if any good-faith attempts were made to keep “N” with his mother, let alone find his father and enforce child support or at least compel some kind of connection so “N” could know his origins...
That's some gooood trolling: You libtards say you care about homeless people, well how come you let the State steal their children and give them to dykes?
The new social justice dictum is that society owes LBGT people the flesh and blood of other people’s children because they are “married” now. Let’s be honest. Love does not make a family in this case. Human trafficking does.
It's like, look, she's gay -- now will you listen to our gay baby-stealing stories? I hope some conservative movement types are grooming Edelman for a larger role in the gay-marriage fight; I'd love to see what Mr. and Mrs. America make of her argument. I guess the ones who are willing to countenance baby-stealing stories about Jews and Gypsies might go for it.

150 comments:

  1. Dean Golden2:43 PM

    Tis a great week for property rights! Between this, Rand Paul owning children and Texas telling teachers to protect school property with shootin' arns, Fuzzy Lumpkins is ready to run for President.

    ReplyDelete
  2. satch3:09 PM

    "According to Brittany Newmark, because she is unhappy with her
    upbringing, *no* gay adult should be able to marry another gay adult,
    whether they have children or not."

    Well, you know who else was unhappy with his upbringing?

    http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007430

    ReplyDelete
  3. Don't fergit Big Gubbermint makin' us wash our hands just cause we work in a resty-rant.
    ~

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hey, that's serious stuff, covering up the Chief Justice's sexuality. Don't mess w/ his property rights, he bought those children fair & square!!


    See also G.W. Bush & in vitro fertilization. Those two are both real men who ain't getting near one of those icky lady things. Saps the vital fluids, you know.

    ReplyDelete
  5. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6a/The_Grinch_%28That_Stole_Christmas%29.jpg
    ~

    ReplyDelete
  6. You libtards say you care about homeless people, well how come you let the State steal their children and give them to dykes?Indeed, if we truly loved bay-beees like conservatives do, we'd do our best to leave them with those that conservatives consider filthy parasites who should receive no assistance whatsoever, so they could starve or die from lack of health care.

    ReplyDelete
  7. redoubtagain3:26 PM

    Edelman: All of this will destabilize the family by turning women into breeding stock and infants into commodities.
    Nowhere were the words "abortion", "reproductive rights" or, for that matter, "sperm donation" mentioned (the assumption being, of course, that two lesbians can't find some way to get pregnant); I imagine she had to rush this one to her editors so she could go picket a Planned Parenthood office.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Rivka Edelman? Real name Brittany Newmark-Klein? Disciple of this asshole?

    No thanks. To even mock this woman is to think about her more than she deserves.

    ReplyDelete
  9. All of this will destabilize the family by turning women into breeding stock and infants into commodities.Apropos of nothing, aren't Chief Justice Roberts' adopted Irish children imported by way of Latin America adorable?

    ReplyDelete
  10. dmsilev3:42 PM

    Lesbian women steal babies from their cradles, leaving changelings in place of the babies to be raised by unwitting parents. The changelings will mature into new lesbians. It's how they reproduce.


    It's science, folks.

    ReplyDelete
  11. montag24:26 PM

    Oh, I think I know what Edelman's preferred policy is for the proper apportionment of children. It's what all racially superior authoritarians want....

    ReplyDelete
  12. montag24:27 PM

    And yet, the right wing of this country wants to turn even unwilling women into breeding stock through draconian laws against anything resembling gender autonomy, including against contraception.

    This is as confused an argument as I've read in quite a while.

    ReplyDelete
  13. montag24:27 PM

    Ah, yes, sophistry, thy name is Federalist Society.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Gromet4:27 PM

    Ugh. Follow the link to the Edelman interview in Catholic World and find "Frenchman Jean-Marc Ayrault" quoted a bunch:

    Jean-Marc Ayrault who has lived with a man for 20 years,
    insists: “The LGBT movement that speaks out in the media . . . doesn’t
    speak for me. As a society we should not be encouraging [same-sex
    marriage]. It’s not biologically natural.


    There is a citation for that: ”Robert Oscar Lopez, “Gay French Mayor Explains Why He’s Against Gay Marriage” (January 6, 2013) (http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/01/gay_french_mayor_explains_why_hes_against_gay_marriage.html#ixzz3QiTuhPQt)



    But if you read THAT, Lopez describes Ayraut as "the gay mayor of a small urb in France." Lopez does not name the urb. He also doesn't actually name Ayraut -- calling him only "Jean-Marc" throughout. There is, however, a link to a video of him speaking -- where it immediately becomes obvious he is not the same Jean-Marc as Ayraut. Jean-Marc Ayraut was mayor of Nantes (pop 900k) and then Prime Minister of France.

    As Prime Minister -- well, take it away, BBC article dated 3 July 2012:

    "Gay couples in France will be allowed to get married and to adopt
    children as of 2013, Prime Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault has announced in
    parliament... 'Our society is evolving, lifestyles and mentalities are changing. The government will respond to that.'"


    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-18690348


    So are there two different Jean-Marcs, both mayors -- but one of Les Fritteres, France, who makes dumb YouTubes, and the other a prominent dude real-world leader may have heard of. Did Catholic World mix them up honestly? Or go misleading on purpose? Hoping some people might google "Jean Marc Ayraut" and then smugly grin: "Ha! The Prime Minister of France is ON MY SIDE"?


    Either way -- lying or sloppy -- ugh.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Tom M4:27 PM

    claiming that if gay adults can marry the children they are raising

    Actually, I'm kinda shocked the wing nuts haven't glommed onto this one.

    ReplyDelete
  16. That was actually gay marriage back in the day. An older man would "adopt" an 18 or 19 year old.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Hitler often washed his hands, just saying.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Silly liberal, rights attach at conception, stop at birth, and then resume again when you vote Republican.

    ReplyDelete
  19. LookWhosInTheFreezer5:37 PM

    The “marriage equality” arguments leverage children



    As Dr. Rand Paul will tell you: children should be seen used as weapons of biological warfare by refusing to vaccinate them and not heard leveraged.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Marion in Savannah6:24 PM

    Woody Allen is gay? Who knew...

    ReplyDelete
  21. I wonder what was done to find this biological mother housing so she could in fact leave the hospital with her son. It is likely that few if any good-faith attempts were made to keep “N” with his mother, let alone find his father and enforce child support or at least compel some kind of connection so “N” could know his origins..
    Is she making an argument for the state to provide this woman a safe, affordable place to live so poverty wouldn't force her give up her child? 'Cuz yeah, let's make that argument together...

    ReplyDelete
  22. Ebil Lebanese ... Didn't he use to work with Dr. Hikita on overthruster development? It figures that liberals would endorse adoption by someone locked up in the Trenton Home for the Criminally Insane.

    ReplyDelete
  23. M. Krebs7:19 PM

    ... society owes LBGT people the flesh and blood of other people’s children


    TRANSGENDER CANNIBAL ZOMBIES

    ReplyDelete
  24. ColBatGuano7:25 PM

    Right? She couldn't care less about the biological mother's situation except to use it for her hateful, bigoted argument. She wouldn't deign to spit on that poor woman if she was on fire if she passed her in the street.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Here's the thing: The whole "baby-stealing dykes" bit is only the first half or so of the article. Once she decides to talk about IVF, she starts talking about gay men so that she can build bridges to the feminists with some talk about bioethics and surrogacy. Without getting into that tangle, I'll just note that Edelman refers to IVF as "evil" as it amounts to creating dysfunction. That's a classic bit of "intellectual" gay-bashing, suggesting that the laudable desire for straight couples to have families suddenly becomes a selfish desire when it's a gay couple.

    I could spend a few thousands of words pulling apart all the reasons this is a horrible argument, including the many ways it insults me personally (Again, there's no way to rail about gay adoption being kidnapping without applying the same thing to all adoption; this whole thing is basically a Pound Puppies argument), not to mention all the ways it's false as it ignores the real challenges in our adoption and foster system. But it seems pointless, as no part of this argument is coming from a place of good faith.

    ReplyDelete
  26. DocAmazing7:26 PM

    So now we know we can count on Rivka Edelman to support a new AFDC program, rent vouchers for pregnant women, S-CHIP and EBT, right? 'Cuz we really want to make sure that these homeless biological mothers can find housing and assistance in caring for their babies, so that they don't have to hand them over to Ebil Lebanese or something...

    ReplyDelete
  27. DocAmazing7:27 PM

    I think it's a pretty funny reversal when "Brittany Newmark" takes "Rivka Edelman" as a nom de plume. WASP abatement? Argumentum ad pseudohebrewium?

    ReplyDelete
  28. tigrismus7:27 PM

    She's misrepresenting DeBoer v. Snyder to try make it about first adoption from the birth mother, it's about second parent adoption: in Michigan second parent adoption is only allowed for married couples, and gay folks can't get married, which is clearly unfair. Nothing about this case would do anything to remove the 3 children from their mother and return them to their birth mothers, no matter how misogynistic that may or may not be.

    ReplyDelete
  29. ". . and how they leave their pornography around.
    RIVKA: My
    mother, you know, she had some of that pornography around and the books
    and stuff."

    Thank god no heterosexual parents ever left their pornography around.

    ReplyDelete
  30. LookWhosInTheFreezer7:43 PM

    Of course it's all good when Aerosmith does it!

    I remember my surprise when Steven told me she had signed the papers and trying to take this in mentally. A sense of vulnerability came over me, knowing that I was his ward, but we were not married. He had not expressed his intentions of a long-term relationship with me. He had mentioned that he wanted guardianship papers so I could travel across state lines when he was on tour. I had told him my mother would not sign me over to him. I asked him how he had got her to do it. He said, "I told her I needed them for you to enroll in school." I felt abandoned by my mother as well as my father and stepfather. Steven was really my only hope at that point.

    http://jezebel.com/5805190/steven-tylers-teenage-girlfriend-tells-her-side-of-the-abortion-story

    ReplyDelete
  31. https://twitter.com/CenLamar/status/562714774287695873/photo/1

    ReplyDelete
  32. tigrismus9:27 PM

    My mother, you know, she had some of that pornography around and the books and stuff.

    "and if I looked reeeeally hard I could occasionally find it"

    ReplyDelete
  33. tigrismus9:27 PM

    She couldn't care less about the biological mother's situation except to use it for her hateful, bigoted argument.

    She couldn't even bother trying to find out, it's all "I wonder" this and "it's likely" that.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Did Bobby Jindal have a race change operation?

    ReplyDelete
  35. Meanie-meanie, tickle a person10:26 PM

    I hope some conservative movement types are grooming Edelman for a
    larger role in the gay-marriage fight; I'd love to see what Mr. and Mrs.
    America make of her argument.


    Indeed. As I always say sometimes, this is why I'm against censorship of the Right, batshit pooflingers though they be. Let the people hear this shite, and, if we're lucky, enough will see it for what it is. And if we're not lucky, well,we were fucked anyway, weren't we...

    ReplyDelete
  36. mgmonklewis10:41 PM

    Bonus points for getting into the muck for that research. Kudos.

    ReplyDelete
  37. mgmonklewis10:42 PM

    New Zealand? We'll be lucky if Angola is accepting refugees from the USA when conservatives are done with it.

    ReplyDelete
  38. mgmonklewis10:46 PM

    That and Snap-Tite™ hair.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Since he's usually bilious with indigestion, how could you tell the green tinges was from envy?

    ReplyDelete
  40. They're still focused on box turtles and other forms of bestiality. Besides, with all the daddy-pledge stuff, they've shown they're very comfortable with incest.

    ReplyDelete
  41. AGoodQuestion10:59 PM

    Equally disturbing is the fact that this is expressed with no regard to the child’s future feelings, only as it serves to make the couple appear worthy and deserving.


    Edelman sounds like she's claiming to have spoken to the child's future self, a neat trick if true. Beyond that, yee-ow! is there a lot of scarifying in here, especially when she talks of gays having "access to and control of children as commodities". Okay, you don't have to draw us a picture. But if you did it would have candy and a windowless van.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Meanie-meanie, tickle a person11:04 PM

    I'll admit I have a hard time applying the "Stupid v Evil" rule to these people. As D Johnston says above, there is no good faith here.

    ReplyDelete
  43. AGoodQuestion11:05 PM

    But the Cocoa Puffs are all gone. :(

    ReplyDelete
  44. AGoodQuestion11:26 PM

    EdelNewmark's great accomplishment is to go on at such lengths about the case while leaving out so many relevant details.

    ReplyDelete
  45. mgmonklewis11:27 PM

    "...and the books and stuff."

    Now that is good writing of a caliber to make Jonah green with envy.

    ReplyDelete
  46. It's cuckoos all the way down!

    ReplyDelete
  47. mgmonklewis11:27 PM

    "Brittany Newmark" sounds like a crappy made-up pseudonym itself, like she named herself after random porcelain and silver hallmarks.

    ReplyDelete
  48. DocAmazing12:20 AM

    Laugh while-a you can, monkey boy!

    ReplyDelete
  49. Magatha12:25 AM

    Are we sure this portrait wasn't done by one GWB, aka Shrub? I'm imagining it turned on its side, with a Photoshopped bathtub and some bubbles.

    ReplyDelete
  50. The artist stopped one shade shy of Clown-face White.

    ReplyDelete
  51. montag212:27 AM

    Umm, never saw a dingo wearing a sidearm and gaudy epaulets....

    ReplyDelete
  52. DocAmazing12:27 AM

    Is that what people mean when they say "denigrate"?

    ReplyDelete
  53. Funny thing: the anti-marriage-equality arguments leverage children.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Rivka, honey, if we're going to be legislating based on how much we didn't like our upbringing, GET IN LINE.

    ReplyDelete
  55. I like Luvvie Ajayi's take on it:http://www.awesomelyluvvie.com/2015/02/bobby-jindal-official-portrait.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Luvvie+%28Awesomely+Luvvie%29

    "Was Brown Paint Busy When They Created This Bobby Jindal Portrait?"

    ReplyDelete
  56. Magatha12:41 AM

    Oh, that is good.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Wrangler1:08 AM

    Cannibal Holocaust Redux: an exploitation film set in New York City about a gang of gay, cross-dressing Jews who prey and feast on Christian babies and torture the wingnuts who try to save them.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Not mine, certainly. Never did I run across any in my dad's desk drawer while looking for a pad of paper.

    ReplyDelete
  59. I really liked the first one better. Redux was so commercial.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Contractual obligation

    ReplyDelete
  61. This is not a well-painted portrait, but it's certainly beyond the technical ability of George W. Bush.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Unrecognizable, which is the one thing a portrait should never be.

    ReplyDelete
  63. redoubtagain8:15 AM

    "The white sheep of the Bush family, Pete, breaks his years-long silence."

    ReplyDelete
  64. In all fairness, the artist was all out of... well, never mind.

    ReplyDelete
  65. BigHank539:18 AM

    Well, you're trying to apply the wrong conjunction. They're not stupid or evil; they're stupid and evil.

    The only reason they're advancing this argument at all is that they got that lousy "brother's keeper" argument drummed into them at an impressionable age, and they think that persecuting the homos is the quickest way to brown-nose God.

    ReplyDelete
  66. GeniusLemur9:26 AM

    "My mother, you know, she had some of that pornography around and the books and stuff..."
    And no straight father in the history of the world left a Penthouse around where his kids could find it.

    ReplyDelete
  67. GeniusLemur9:26 AM

    "I wonder what was done to find this biological mother housing so she
    could in fact leave the hospital with her son. It is likely that few if
    any good-faith attempts were made to keep “N” with his mother, let alone
    find his father and enforce child support or at least compel some kind
    of connection so “N” could know his origins..."
    So what does any of this have to do with the people who did the adopting? If the child was adopted by a straight couple, how would that change the biological mother's situation?

    ReplyDelete
  68. No, it only picks up again when you get your concealed carry permit. Anyone can SAY they voted Republican; the CCW is PROOF.

    ReplyDelete
  69. The worst part about these "children-of-gay-marriage-against-gay-marriage" stories is that their parents WERE NOT MARRIED. Their LGBT parents raised them at a time when LGBT marriage was illegal. So bans on gay marriage did not, and could not, change their upbringing. What they're really arguing for is government intervention to prevent LGBT people from having children at all, which is far more sinister than simply preventing them from marrying.

    ReplyDelete
  70. satch9:39 AM

    "So what does any of this have to do with the people who did the adopting?"


    Nothing... why do you ask?

    ReplyDelete
  71. lawguy9:52 AM

    OK, that's weird my virus protection blocked me from going to that web page as being unsafe. I wonder who controls my virus protection?

    ReplyDelete
  72. Stormfront hackers are on the job!

    ReplyDelete
  73. When we bought our first house we found a stash of porn magazines and an empty bottle of whisky in a crawlspace in the attic. To look at the guy who sold us the house and his wife you'd never think it was necessary for him to crawl up there to get either of his jollies on.

    ReplyDelete
  74. This is a very important point.

    ReplyDelete
  75. What a horrifying story.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Halloween_Jack10:27 AM

    That "Catholic World Report" thing is all kinds of disingenuous. Conflating the desire for people of the same sex to have the right to marry with the personal desire to marry, and conflating (the very minimal) opposition among LGBTs to SSM with an older, more radical stance against marriage as an institution for anyone is among them; also, they cite the discredited Regnerus study in opposition to the APA's position. And now you've got the likes of Edelman basically accusing gay and lesbian couples of baby-stealing, using arguments that could be used against straight couples that adopt, but never mind that.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Halloween_Jack10:27 AM

    Much of my teenage collection of porn came from a friend whose divorced father gave him tons of magazines.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Actually, her article is correct. I saw a documentary called Pink Flamingos in which (from Wikipedia):
    Underground criminal Divine lives under the pseudonym "Babs Johnson" with her mentally ill, egg-loving mother Edie, delinquent son Crackers, and traveling companion Cotton. They all live together in a pink trailer on the outskirts of Phoenix, Maryland, in front of which can be found a pair of eponymous plastic pink flamingos. After learning that Divine has been named "the filthiest person alive" by a tabloid paper, jealous rivals Connie and Raymond Marble set out to destroy her career but come undone in the process.
    The Marbles run an "adoption clinic", which is actually a black market baby ring. They kidnap young women, have them impregnated by their manservant, Channing (who ejaculates off-camera), and sell the babies to lesbian couples."
    I mean, come on, that is some sick shit.

    ReplyDelete
  79. protocols of the elders of k.d. lang

    ReplyDelete
  80. Gromet11:21 AM

    She also writes under the names T. Wedgewood Pfaltzgraff and Dinera Hummel.

    ReplyDelete
  81. You're lucky. I was so, so traumatized that I had to keep going back for another look.

    ReplyDelete
  82. JennOfArk11:26 AM

    One of my construction jobs involved remodel of bathrooms in an apartment building put up c. 1970. When the plumbers broke into the plumbing wall to replumb, they found the original plumber's c. 1970 porn stash (not to be confused w/the ever popular pornstache) which really threw them. I never saw the vintage porn; to their credit, they didn't try to show it to me but they did tell me about it...one of them kept describing it as "weird" to which I asked, "weird how? bad production values? what exactly?" He mentioned that the guys all had hilarious hairstyles, then he said "the women's breasts didn't look right...all the women's breasts looked strange." I said "well, yeah, that's because they were REAL! There haven't been any REAL tits in porn since the early 80s!" I suppose he could have added, but didn't, that they all had pubic hair.

    ReplyDelete
  83. You should always say that more often, IMHO.

    People DO need to see the Right for what it is, and hear what they have to say.

    ReplyDelete
  84. When I was young watching episodes of Batman on television, I sometimes wondered what it meant for Bruce Wayne to adopt a "ward."

    ReplyDelete
  85. Sometimes I think I should have a Stupid/Evil coin made, so that I could flip it in situations like this.


    Although, as BigHank53 points out, sometimes they're both.

    ReplyDelete
  86. StringOnAStick11:37 AM

    Incredibly horrifying. I've always found that guy misogynist and creepy; glad to see my creepdar was working fine.

    ReplyDelete
  87. I think its especially horrifying in the light of all the retrospective sexualization of young girls in the 60's. This girl was in a dysfunctional family, in crisis, and a predator took advantage of her and her mother (or her mother sold her to the predator). How many other kids were fleeing abusive family situations, or poverty and hopelessness, while seeming to pursue glamor and drugs? I can't find the article I wanted to link to but I recently read a bunch of things in the british press about this issue because it comes up around the pedophile sex scandal with the kinds of people who were the dominant/older side saying, basically "it is we who were seduced by younger people" rather than "it is we who took advantage of our social/economic/political power to take advantage of children from broken homes."

    ReplyDelete
  88. M. Krebs12:19 PM

    No way. Really? I thought Salo was unique in its depravity.

    ReplyDelete
  89. And your beverage of choice would be?
    :-)
    ...

    ReplyDelete
  90. Brian Schlosser12:26 PM

    Divine also eats da poopoo.

    ReplyDelete
  91. "....the books and stuff."


    I don't know why, but this bit gets funnier the more I look at it. I like the "I'm just tossing it out there 'cause it needed more salt" delivery.


    And the "stuff", we can only imagine what the "stuff" was...


    ...

    ReplyDelete
  92. I'm sure Ms Edelman will now turn her attention to the economic system which forces people to make heartrending choices to give up their children.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Don't worry. i have no doubt that this is where it begins and that we will be hearing plenty about that possibility from now on. Woody Allen anyone?
    ...

    ReplyDelete
  94. Ted Nugent became the legal guardian of a 17 year old girl, with her parent's permission, so he could frolic. That he's gone on to be a spokesshrieker for the right should hardly surprise.

    ReplyDelete
  95. I would always argue Evil first, whether or not it is decorated in differing shades of Stupid is a secondary concern.
    ....

    ReplyDelete
  96. If only I had sufficient time with the Gimp and a proper shot of a dingo, you would, I swear.
    ...

    ReplyDelete
  97. Huh, you'd think Sonic the Hedgehog would have managed it at some point, but Helmut von Stryker tends to have more utilitarian garb, and Antoine is a coyote.

    ReplyDelete
  98. Brian Schlosser1:02 PM

    Yep. Dog poo at that. Its... something.

    ReplyDelete
  99. scottclevenger1:14 PM

    Robert Oscar Lopez, is an English Professor at Cal State Northridge, and part of the "Quartet of Truth" -- four adults who make bank bitching about their gay parents (the others are Rivka Edelman, Katy Faust, and Dawn Stefanowicz). And according to Robert's blog, "there are two more adult children of same-sex couples who will be joining us for the next round of advocacy for children's rights. So we will soon be a sextet!" I'm not personally into the group scene, but he seems excited about it.

    Anyway, Bob's particular slant is that being raised by two loving lesbians turned him gay, but the power of his hatred made him strong, and he was able to use the Dark Side of the Force to turn himself straight. So where once he was a sis, now he is a Sith

    ReplyDelete
  100. TGuerrant2:19 PM

    Dear Sir or Madam:

    I wish to file a user complaint about a certain heterosexual mother and her many nosy heterosexual female friends who believe they are entitled to know what boys are doing alone in their rooms. I have many painful experiences to convey and many thoughts about why these things have destroyed America. May I submit my brief electronically? I don't have enough paper to print it all out.

    ReplyDelete
  101. StringOnAStick2:24 PM

    Funny how this pedophile self-excusing behavior has a lot in common with the multi-religion fundamentalist requirement that women cover themselves because they are the cause of male lust and misbehavior. Because it is always the person with the least power in the situation who is at fault.

    ReplyDelete
  102. DocAmazing2:26 PM

    Poodle, s'il vous plait.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Marion in Savannah2:26 PM

    Pretty much anything involving good bourbon!

    ReplyDelete
  104. DocAmazing2:27 PM

    Next on Fox and Friends: was your upbringing a bringdown?

    ReplyDelete
  105. sigyn2:27 PM

    I'm telling you, it was right there under the lining at the bottom of his sock drawer! *sob*

    ReplyDelete
  106. Or, having run out of socks..."The paper that I do have has jammed the printer."

    ...

    ReplyDelete
  107. Gromet3:02 PM

    Wow. Amazing. The Sith link... oof. May I paraphrase the points he makes there? (1) "Once, a black singer wasn't allowed to sing at an Arts &
    Humanities concert because he said gayness was evil, which means LGBT
    activists are racist." (2) "It costs money to adopt... it cost money to buy slaves... therefore black people hate adoption -- which is how gays get kids, so gays are naturally offensive to blacks." And (3) "segregation was wrong because it said people should marry their own kind/color... thus gay marriage is wrong because it says people should marry their own kind/gender."

    He might as well explain which shapes of cloud hide deadly aliens and which shapes hold angels, as a very serious lady once did while handing me a hand-drawn leaflet.

    ReplyDelete
  108. satch3:37 PM

    Wait...so Thom Einstein Tillis objects to requiring restaurant employees to wash their hands, but is in FAVOR of requiring restaurants to post a sign saying that employees are NOT required to wash their hands? I hope he didn't pull a hamstring doing those mental gymnastics.

    ReplyDelete
  109. Meanie-meanie, tickle a person3:39 PM

    Once upon a midnight Drehery
    As I pondered, weak and wehery
    O'er the quaint and curious rolling of some foreign R
    Spirit napping, flesh unwilling, obnoxiously there came a trilling

    ReplyDelete
  110. satch3:41 PM

    "...you'd never think it was necessary for him to crawl up there to get either of his jollies on."

    Hah! And you Libtards mock Ross Cardinal Douthat and David Brooks when they tout the value of shame in enforcing moral norms!

    ReplyDelete
  111. satch3:44 PM

    And didn't Bobby's mother ever tell him not to slouch?

    ReplyDelete
  112. "Under a not particularly well-disguised false panel! In a case with a deliberately low-quality lock!"

    ReplyDelete
  113. May I submit my brief electronically?IYKWIMAITYD.

    ReplyDelete
  114. M. Krebs4:26 PM

    Thanks for reminding me of this.http://youtu.be/c6FFnwplE7c

    ReplyDelete
  115. my stash of fabricIYKWIMAITYD.
    Big asses, if you're interested.So ... old copies of National Review?

    ReplyDelete
  116. And (3) "segregation was wrong because it said people should marry their own kind/color... thus gay marriage is wrong because it says people should marry their own kind/gender."Somewhere, Aristotle is screaming, and doesn't know why.

    ReplyDelete
  117. Only if you're white, though. If you're black, it'll just get you tackled by some yahoo at Walmart.

    ReplyDelete
  118. Halloween_Jack5:30 PM

    Unfortunately, I've seen this as a rationalization for Roman Polanski's raping a teenager; the "things were different in the seventies" gambit.

    ReplyDelete
  119. I like big Quarters and Eighths, if you know what I mean.

    ReplyDelete
  120. Gabriel Ratchet7:32 PM

    "Books and stuff" is an interesting turn of phrase. Given the general tenor of Ms. Edelman's writing, I'm inclined to think it means any books at all.

    ReplyDelete
  121. DocAmazing7:38 PM

    How Vonnegut of you.

    ReplyDelete
  122. DocAmazing7:41 PM

    Yet still no Yetis?

    ReplyDelete
  123. JennOfArk7:48 PM

    In 70's porn, everyone looked like a yeti.

    ReplyDelete
  124. DocAmazing7:49 PM

    Or Big..er..foot.

    ReplyDelete
  125. John Wesley Hardin8:05 PM

    No accompanying odor.

    ReplyDelete
  126. John Wesley Hardin8:22 PM

    Forgive me for being all looksist and shit, but I followed that link and, if I had to look at "Rivka's" face in the mirror every morning, I'd be really unhappy too. They say you get the face you deserve by the time you're 50, and there goes your proof.


    Her English 102 students don't like her very much either: "If you want to stress out a lot over your English class, take this class. Professor Newmark-Klein does not actually read your papers, she skims them and gives you a grade off of what she picked up on. She will tell you what you did wrong but not how to fix it."

    "Demeaning and humiliating professor. Makes it difficult to speak up in class for fear of embarrassment. Shows little respect for students and their opinions. Would not recommend taking any of this professor's classes."

    "She has to be the most useless English Professor I have ever encountered in my life. Nothing you will ever do will ever please her. She doesn't give out legitimate constructive criticism. Her class is just her pretty much reading back the stories you've read the night before and her asking, "Is this making any sense?"

    "The absolute worst professor I have ever had. She is extremely rude and disrespectful to students and embarrasses them in front of the class. Not very clear with instructions either."

    ReplyDelete
  127. John Wesley Hardin8:25 PM

    I hear ya

    ReplyDelete
  128. John Wesley Hardin8:26 PM

    See, I always thought lesbians hated babies and stole women from God-fearing, heterosexual men. Had it backwards, apparently.

    ReplyDelete
  129. John Wesley Hardin8:27 PM

    "...the books and magazines and DVDs and VHS tapes and laserdiscs and vibrators and nipple clamps and fuzzy handcuffs and riding crop and ball gag and duct tape and tranquilizer gun. You know, the usual."

    ReplyDelete
  130. StringOnAStick9:11 PM

    'Round these parts we 'em "fat quarters"; is it a regional thing?
    #quilterlingo

    ReplyDelete
  131. StringOnAStick9:26 PM

    I recall a professor I reviewed in a similar fashion. Funny, that prof was a right wing asshole too.

    ReplyDelete
  132. Behold the conservative mind at work. Requiring employees to wash their hands is just too much regulation, so we need to repeal that and replace it with another regulation.

    Of course, the new regulation about posting the sign will never get formulated or passed. But the bill eliminating liability for food poisoning or hepatitis outbreaks WILL get passed. And thus will the magic of the market allow you and your loved ones to become terminally ill from the dinner celebrating your child's birthday.

    ReplyDelete
  133. No, thank you for making my joke for me. I'm really suffering from some-zeimers.

    ReplyDelete
  134. AGoodQuestion10:33 PM

    And as with that lady, you can take the leaflet in order to avoid a scene, but you'd be well advised to keep one eye on the nearest exit.

    ReplyDelete
  135. DocAmazing11:26 PM

    Are people (especially the woo types) making the argument that unready women should be forced to raise children against their will? That's going to result in some really nasty "acute and lasting trauma to both mother and child".

    EDIT: Upon re-reading the above, I couldn't help but think of an earlier generation's attempt to maintain that mother-baby dyad: the Lebenborn homes. Or the Magdalen laundries, for that matter.

    ReplyDelete
  136. AGoodQuestion11:26 PM

    Yeah, it seems like around 2000 they decided they needed a spokesman who could bring them into the early seventies. His titanic hypocrisy on just about everything was more of a feature than a bug.

    ReplyDelete
  137. whetstone11:27 PM

    Edelman's seems to be fighting this battle because she is the product of a very bad gay marriage. And I would sign up to be part of her project if she extended that logic, found a comparable or worse straight marriage--the news section of any daily paper should do, or simply walking outside--and concluded that no one should have children and we should just declare all this a failed experiment and let the match burn itself out. That's the kind of Old Testament morality I can get behind.

    ReplyDelete
  138. realinterrobang11:27 PM

    Let's not beat around the unshaven bush: "Society owes ... people the flesh and blood of other people’s children" is straight-up anti-adoption rhetoric, no matter who it's aimed at. Yes, there are people out there who ideologically oppose adoption, and unfortunately they seem to cluster on both ends of the political spectrum: You've got your basic patriarchal "nuclear family or bust" right-wing natalists, who basically figure it's cheating somehow to adopt, and then you've got your crunchy-granola leftist woo-woos who claim that all adoption is systemic oppression of women and adoptees, and that it does bad things to adoptees' infant souls or something.

    (Actual quotes, from various sources: "We know that much of who we are today was created in the womb. We know that mother and child are a single entity, profoundly connected physiologically, emotionally and spiritually -- even through early infancy. A baby does not understand that he or she is an individual until at least 9 months after birth. Through their research, authorities have determined that, when the mother/child entity is split, it causes an acute and lasting trauma in both mother and child." "I think people who adopt do by and large think they are doing a good
    thing for society, it isn’t their fault that they live in a society that tells them this, and there are ways of making clear this is not true without woman blaming.")

    As an adoptee, I think all these people (but especially the woo types) need to DIAF.

    ReplyDelete
  139. AGoodQuestion11:27 PM

    Urgh. Acid redux is the worst.

    ReplyDelete
  140. Phat quarters.

    ReplyDelete
  141. smut clyde5:01 AM

    As an adoptee, I think all these people (but especially the woo types) need to DIAF.
    It is not so personal for me so I'll skip the 'fire' part, but it is my considered professional opinion -- speaking as a qualified expert in human attachment theory -- that if these people were any more full of shit, their eyes would turn brown.

    ReplyDelete
  142. smut clyde5:27 AM

    Did it come out on the Blood Label?

    ReplyDelete
  143. tigrismus8:27 AM

    And jelly rolls

    ReplyDelete
  144. Still, you completed the joke which should have been "fat [hind] quarters." I am not a quilter and can't use a sewing machine to save my life but I do make tiny doll sized quilts, kind of a kaffe Fasset style, appliquéing small squares on top of squares. I can do it standing up. I can do it in PTA meetings. And some of them are rather good. At any rate my daughters and their dolls like them. I find it helps me think to keep my hands busy.

    ReplyDelete
  145. StringOnAStick10:27 AM

    I should have said "they" instead of "we" since I'm not a quilter, I just know the jargon. My first job was as a seamstress for what is a now a huge technical outerwear company that started in the town where I grew up and has now moved to China mostly, HQ in the Sonoma area. I can make an industrial machine fly and sew pretty much anything, but the slowness of home machines and something I can't complete quickly still frustrates me to no end, so I leave quilting to others. I just donated 95% of my fabric stash to a program that supports women-owned businesses in LDC's, and felt free, free, free! I've moved on to music instead of sewing since there's only so many hours in a day.

    ReplyDelete
  146. StringOnAStick10:57 AM

    That's excellent use of understanding of self, and your daughters get cool stuff out of it!

    ReplyDelete