If you needed a reminder of why Cindy Sheehan is an awesomeschmaltz human being and why Glenn Beck is a douchnozzled asshole, there it is. What the fuck have you done with your life?

At least she wasn’t a loli.

PHILADELPHIA — The old tactic of dragging out an opponent’s sexual skeletons for political gain is being turned on its head in the City of Brotherly Love.

In a left-leaning district anchored by a roughly three-square-block area known as the Gayborhood, where gay pride rainbows grace even the street signs, a state representative accuses her foe of pretending to be bisexual to win votes.

Rep. Babette Josephs says Gregg Kravitz, her challenger in the May 18 Democratic primary for the 182nd District House seat, told her he was gay, then appeared at a campaign event with a woman who introduced herself as his girlfriend.

“I outed him as a straight person, and now he goes around telling people, quote, ‘I swing both ways,’” Josephs told supporters April 15 in recorded comments at a fundraiser at a downtown pub. “That’s quite a respectful way to talk about sexuality.”

I’ve met Babette before.  We hosted her for a forum on Women in Politics at Temple.  She struck me as a giant fag hag and I really enjoyed having her wacky self come speak to us.  I honestly do think that she envisions herself as a great LGBT pioneer, and I certainly acknowledge her years of service to the Commonwealth of PA.

With all that being said, kindly fuck off.  Don’t tell me – or any other queer – what ways are appropriate to describe or discuss my sexuality.  And don’t you dare try to use bi-phobia as a way to campaign while trying to tell the community that you zomg! care about us!

The Democratic apologists have already started piling onto Kravitz…ignoring, of course, that he’s a DEMOCRAT as well.  My favorite bit of stupidity is brought to you by one of the HuffPost commenters, OBroadhurst:

In this story, it is made clear that Josephs is not accusing Kravitz of lying when he states that he’s a bisexual, but rather is accusing him of having lied when he previously told her he was gay – and then was later seen dating a woman (assuming he told her anything). Josephs, meanwhile, appears to be confused about those of us who may be described as “bisexual” – in somehow presuming that this necessarily means we “swing both ways”. Sexual identity does not always imply behavior.

Frankly, if I cared enough to create a HuffPost account, my response would be: “If sexual identity does not always imply behavior, maybe you’re just doing it wrong.”  I’m just sayin.

I bet that Matthew Roberts, birthson of Charles Manson, is so thrilled that he looked into his family tree!

So, apparently the State of NJ is looking to open up sealed adoption records.

I love shit like this.  You entered a contract that stipulates you will have no contact with your birthson/daughter after he/she is born.  Period.  End of story.  These arguments are always couched in the context of adoptees wanting to know their medical history, despite the fact that this information is often available to them.  The problem with this legislation is two-fold.  First, it “would give adult adoptees, adoptive parents of a minor or descendants of a deceased adoptee access to their original birth certificates” and secondly, “it would provide birth parents a one-time 12-month period to ask the state to remove their names and addresses from the documents.”

What what what?

If you don’t know already, I am a birthmother.  (And in the interest of full disclosure: because of the way adoptions are set up now, you’re often pressured into an open adoption, meaning you can hang out with your birthchild after they have been adopted and be a part of their life.  I’m not too hep on that, in part because I can see it confusing the living shit out of a kid.  This law would not apply to me because I agreed to allow contact with my birthson should he want it at any point in time.)  I’m not going to bore you to tears with all the background, but I will leave it at this: I gave birth when I was 20, the whole process really sucked ass (to put it mildly), I had a lot of personal reasons for doing so (including, but not limited to the fact that I was forced into the decision by my [then] boyfriend), and adoption is an issue that pisses me off because the voices of the birthmothers are so rarely heard.  Hearing the crap of “omg! you’re so strong!” enrages me to no end.  There is no strength in making difficult decisions and living your life the best you can after making those decisions.  It’s just what you do.  What other option do you have?  To curl up in a ball, refuse to make a decision, and deal with the much worse consequences?  Yeah, try that and let me know how that works out for you.

Adoption is a decision that is focused less on the woman and more on the child, especially as you go on further with the process.  It was used as a way to shame young, unmarried pregnant girls as recently as 40 years ago.  (If you don’t believe me on that one, pick up a copy of The Girls Who Went Away: The Hidden History of Women Who Surrendered Children for Adoption in the Decades Before Roe v. Wade by Ann Fessler.  I try to read it every year or so, but haven’t gotten past halfway through it because I can’t stop crying.  It’s a seriously powerful book that gives a nice chunk of insight on adoption from women who have actually experienced it.)

In addition to that background, I’ve also known a few adoptees, even fewer birthparents, and I’m sure I’ve encountered an adoptive parent or two in my time.  Needless to say, I consider myself pretty knowledgeable about the process.

With all that being said, there is absolutely no reason to need your original birth certificate with information such as your birth parent’s name(s) unless you are seeking contact with them.  None.  The fatal flaw with adoptees’ rights movements is that they tend to play into the same rhetoric that controls women.

I understand wanting to know about your medical history.  This will probably get me in trouble with my parents if they should ever stumble upon my blog, but fuck it, I’m disclosing it anyway.  We (meaning my family, including my father) have never known my paternal grandfather.  My dad has a name, a SSN, and minimal information at best.  For all I know, I could be a carrier for some incredibly rare genetic disorder.  (And given that Libertarian Boyfriend is Jewish, that could potentially pose a problem.)  Even more likely, there could be a family history of, say, heart disease that we aren’t aware of.  The only thing I can do is keep up on medical screenings (once I get health insurance again) and just hope for the best.

Additionally, my shitbag ex never signed our biological son’s birth certificate.  All my birthson has to go by is the minimal information he filled out on the paperwork, and no legal acknowledgment of his being a biological parent.  (My memory is a little fuzzy, but I am not so certain that he ever even signed away his parental rights.)  So, let’s say my birthson wanted medical history and decided to track me down via the adoption agency’s paperwork.  I haven’t had contact with my ex-boyfriend in about 8 years.  Aside from directing him to my ex’s parents’ house, I wouldn’t have a clue as to how to contact him, and frankly, given that his parents continue to baby him at 31 years old, he’d probably be lucky if he got the door slammed in his face.

Using me as an example, if my birthson were to contact me, all I could tell him is “sorry dude, I’ve got no clue!”  Unfortunately for him, the same level of accountability isn’t thrust upon birthfathers.  It was more crucial that I sign away my parental rights, in part due to sexism (because women are so much more emotional and prone to fits of hysteria than men) and also in part due to the fact that it’s hard to deny sharing DNA when you had six people peering into your cooz a few days beforehand.  He didn’t have to have the same level of accountability, so when he didn’t sign my birthson’s birth certificate, it was more of a commentary of the sad plight of the unwed mother.  It just solidified the idea that I was some sad, pathetic girl who would be throwing her life away if I raised the baby on my own.  Things were just better this way.

It was the hardest decision I ever made, and the language that adoptee rights groups use always makes women like me seem like selfish bitches unless they relent.  Let’s forget that this might be a painful memory for them.  Let’s forget that they might regret their decision.  Let’s forget that they may have rape victims (as was the case with Matthew Roberts’ birthmother, Terri).  Let’s forget everything.  A despicable human being who would give up her own child instead of just deal with the consequences has also given up all rights to move on.  This whole time, that stupid bitch thought she was giving her child a better life, one that she wasn’t able to give him or her.  This whole time, that stupid, selfish bitch thought that every night she cried herself to sleep, it was because the whole experience was so painful and damaging, but clearly it was because she was just a selfish whore who wanted to have her cake and eat it, too.

Thinking about how difficult it must have been for the woman certainly puts a different spin on things, doesn’t it?

As much as I want to laugh my ass off at the Manson birthson news in some “wow, isn’t that a wacky news story?” sort of way, I can’t help but feel horribly for his poor birthmother.  (Whose rape I’ve seen labeled as a “claim” in at least one news article.  Yeah, because it’s a shocker that Charles Manson might have actually raped a woman.)  Can you imagine being raped by a man, getting pregnant by him, going through the pain of an adoption, and then later finding out that this man was responsible for one of the most infamous murders of the 20th century?  This isn’t meant to take away from Roberts’ shock, but for the love of God, could we please acknowledge that this probably wasn’t terribly easy for his birthmother to live with for over 40 years?

On top of these medical health issues (that, again, adoptee rights’ groups always hide behind), the stipulation that birthparents will have a year to get their info pulled off of the birth certificate is ridiculous.  How widely is this information decimated?  Seriously?  Considering that most women who surrender babies for adoption are likely not rich, is it that implausible that they might not have access to this information?  Furthermore, what if they moved out of state and aren’t keeping up on NJ adoption news?  Maybe they’ve blocked it out because it was so painful?  To be honest, I don’t remember what day my birthson was born.  I just remember that it was sometime in July 1999.  I think it was in the beginning of the month, but I honestly don’t know.  And shit, though my adoption was painful, traumatic, and not something would wish on anyone, there are certainly birthmothers out there who had a much more painful experience than I did.  What’s to say that they’ve blocked the whole thing out until their birthchild knocks on their door demanding to know “medical information”?

This law is a horrible breach of contract and trust for these women.  (Though some would argue that the first mistake was trusting the state initially.)  If adoptees want to know their medical history, the way they treat their bodies now is far more important.  Keep up on your medical screenings, get every test you can afford, and be thankful that you were raised by loving people who cared about you and were able to provide you with a decent life.  If my birthson comes knocking on my door and tries to lay some crap on me about feeling an emotional connection, the first words out of my mouth will likely be to tell him that the people who raised him and cared for him for all these years are his parents, not me.  I supplied the egg and the prenatal housing.  They are the ones who did the actual work.

I have a problem with most adoption legislation because it is a great example of throwing a blanket solution onto a series of individual situations.  What’s often missing in these laws and in adoption narratives is the voice of the women involved.  Women are not a homogeneous group.  We do not all feel the same damn way, and too often, our personal stories, reactions, etc., are removed from the discussion.  The second you decide to go through with an adoption, everything becomes about the child.  You are pretty much a vessel, a broodmare, a breeder.  People think they’re doing you a favor when they refer to you as omg!strong! or when they use you to promote a pro-life agenda or, better yet, they’re so uncomfortable with the situation that they can’t do anything but avoid any conversations that too close to your expanding belly and hormonal mood swings.

No matter how you slice it, your voice is no longer heard.  And that’s one of the biggest problems surrounding the general topic of adoption.

—-

If you’re reading this from my Facebook notes, please go to the original blog post (located here) to comment.

Let’s be clear about a few things:

1. The majority of the bicyclists I have seen drive like dickheads.
2. The majority of car drivers I have seen drive like dickheads.
3. The bicyclists are kind of screwed because they risk a $250 fine* for biking on the pavement or risk getting planted into parked cars for biking on most of the roads here.

With all that being said, I think it’s pretty obvious that this is another way to screw the poor in this city.  Yeah, a lot of dickheaded bike riders, especially down in South Philly, are asshole yuppie fucks who think they are enlightening the city dwellers by showing them omg! new green initiatives! instead of taking poor people transportation (aka Septa).

But you know, there are a lot of places that Septa either doesn’t run, or is unreliable at best.  And, honestly, given how sucky the job market is within city limits, a lot of people are being forced to cut costs.  That $2.90 round trip might not seem like much, but that adds up to $58 a month if you’re lucky enough to be working 5 days a week, which could translate into 7 hours of work if you’re unlucky enough to only be making $8 an hour.**  I totally understand why someone might not want to shell out that much money a month just to get to work.  (Of course, this does not account for things like going to the grocery store, or God forbid, going out to grab something quick for dinner or possibly even – gasp! – an overpriced six pack to drown away your sorrows about only making $8/hour.  I know, I know, the working poor should never ever ever spend their money on anything frivolous.  They should be forever punished and never allowed to spend a little bit of their hard earned cash on something that isn’t a necessity.)

Anyway, I’m digressing.  The point is that these additional proposed laws are completely idiotic.  The proposed fines will jump to $300 for riding on the sidewalk, $300 for riding with headphones, $1000 (!!!) for riding without brakes, and will introduce a new licensing system for bicycles which will include a $20 fee for registering your bike.  (I’m willing to bet that, like with car registration, this fee will be an annual fee and not a one-time shot.)  Does anyone really think it’s going to function as more than just a money making ploy for City Hall?  I mean seriously.  I doubt I will notice an appreciable difference in the number of bicyclists on the sidewalk after these proposed laws go through, nor will I notice an appreciable increase in the number of bicyclists who actually observe traffic laws.  Maybe I’m cynical, but I’m not wrong as often as some seem to think I am.

The reality is that the laws won’t do much besides encourage the ever confrontational relationship that bicyclists and motorists have with one another here.  You won’t see anything actually change until there is a little bit more courtesy extended on the road by both bicyclists and drivers.  Yeah, there are plenty of holier than thou, self-righteous assholes riding bikes in this city, many of whom are fitting squarely into the camp of “heh heh, dumb cunt deserved to get hit by a bicyclist who couldn’t be bothered to slow down when approaching a stop sign.”  Those guys are assholes.

But at the same time, it’s an attitude that’s born from frustration.  This city is scary as shit to walk in some areas (like right around 9th and Wharton, at Pat’s & Geno’s, where I’ve almost been hit by tourists in mini vans on multiple occasions), let alone trying to ride a bike.  I get the feeling that most of these bicyclists, no matter how dickheaded they ride, have developed this attitude because they have been almost killed while riding their bikes around here.

Regardless of your opinion on bicyclists in Philly, just because some, many, or even most might personally be assholes, it doesn’t mean that the proposed laws are decent ones and it doesn’t make it right to milk money out of a seemingly citywide hated group.

* According to the first link, “cyclists riding on the pavement or wearing headphones while riding would each face a fine of $300. Currently, the fines are, respectively, $10 and $3.”  I’m not sure certain that this is correct.  I see signs all over 9th street claiming that the fine is $250.   If I’m wrong, I stand corrected.

** Whoops!  I flaked out and forgot that tokens cost $1.45 each.  All of the numbers in red were edited when I realized my mistake.

—-

If you’re reading this from my Facebook notes, please go to the original blog post (located here) to comment.

As I have mentioned on my blog previously (see here), I was a victim of backstabbing by a college arm of the Democratic Party.  I don’t know the exact reasons, but judging from the little bit I do know, I have always felt that I was targeted for my refusal to blindly submit to the party.  For God’s sake, as far as Dems go, I’m Team Kucinich all the way.  (Btdubs, the only way I’d vote for Ron Paul is if it were a Kucinich-Paul [or, sigh, even Paul-Kucinich] ticket.)

I have never really meshed up with the Democrats on a lot of issues.  I could enumerate them at length here, but if you’ve been reading my blog, then you’re really well aware of my political beliefs.  (Although perhaps I should post an “in a nutshell” list.  Maybe another day.)  Given that I held a position that was a clusterfuck, did a great deal of work, cleaning up messes, and putting out fires for the president of the organization, and also doubled to tripled membership, I thought I was a shoe-in for the position of president.  As it turned out, there was a drawn out, concerted effort to oust me and destroy any of my credibility whatsoever within that group.  The position went to another woman (one whose political positions and opinions were not terribly well known before she was handed the position) and I essentially washed my hands of the organization.

For the past year and a half, I’ve just always dismissed that incident as something that one particularly scummy friend and several scummy acquaintances had cooked up together; I always chalked up to a one-time thing, and used it as a learning opportunity to realize that I wasn’t cut out for major party politics.  Politically, I began to map out my own path, really think about how I felt on various issues, read more, etc., before deciding to slap on some Docs and let loose with some feminist rage within the Libertarian Party.

However, this all changed within the past few days.  A friend of mine (whom I’ve referenced before) was running the LGBT group on campus.  He, for a lot of reasons, recently broke with the DNC.  His reasons for this break are irrelevant.  He remained a dedicated LGBT activist; as a gay man, it’s not shocking that he would still be active in the community and in its activism circles.  The problem is that he was beginning to criticize the God-King’s Administration.

I think we see where this is going.

The problem with the major party system is that there is such a huge fear that someone who has rejected it might actually make some headway.  No, scratch that.  Democrats in my state (Pennsylvania) worked to keep Carl Romanelli (Green) off the ballot during the 2006 Senatorial race.  (Mr. Romanelli was later fined $80,000 to reimburse Democrats who had challenged petitions. Or, if you’re third party, you know the real reason he was fined: because he had the fucking audacity to run for public office.  What an asshole!)  They claimed he would siphon votes from Bob Casey Jr. and would be a huge threat to the Democratic Party ticket.  Given that third party candidates rarely, if ever, get enough of the vote to actually make a difference in an election (and there has been speculation as to whether third party voters would even bother voting in elections that were limited to only Democratic and Republican candidates), it seems to me that there is one logical conclusion.

Really?  Do I need to spell it out for you?

Okay, fine: the obvious conclusion is that major parties simply want to throw anyone off the ballot as a means of asserting their own power and maintaining the status quo.

Now, I’m guessing you can probably see the connections here between state and national level politics, and the political bullshit that goes on in a student group at a third rate state university.  These various individuals who want to make their big splash in politics after they complete their worthless Political Science degrees look at college not only as a place where many of us learned to take wicked bong rips, or do kegstands, or the miracle of Plan B, but also as their first introduction to making alliances, building your following, and squashing dissidence the first time it rears its ugly head.

And you wonder why libertarians hate the system and hate the state so much.  Neither of the major parties care about your rights or your freedoms, and if you can’t see that, the you probably wonder why libertarians are such confrontational assholes.  If given the choice, I’d much rather be the confrontational asshole who tries to promote an alternate perspective over allowing former friends and “colleagues” the ability to use non-partisan organizations as thinly veiled shills for major party politics.

—-

If you’re reading this from my Facebook notes, please go to the original blog post (located here) to comment.

Zombama (\ˈzäm-ˈbä-mə\): noun, one who blindly follows President Barack Obama’s every wish and supports every piece of legislation he supports/signs, no matter how un-Democratic the policy is. See also: redneck and homophobe.  Antonym: Paultard, Truther, and freedom fighter.

There, now I think I’ve managed to offend everyone who could possibly be reading!  Happy Halloween, and God Bless us EVERYONE!

—-

If you’re reading this from my Facebook notes, please go to the original blog post (located here) to comment.

Here is my response to him and to anyone who thinks I should regard the hate crime legislation as wonderful:

Well gee, that’s certainly consolation for when someone beats me (or [name removed] or any other LGBT person I know) to death. I’m so happy that they’ll get another year in jail as opposed to me being able to concealed carry into another state and spatter homophobe brains down the street.

I’m just assuming that’s how I should feel given that federal interstate concealed carry reciprocity was stripped from the bill. Gobama! He’s doing great things for the gays!

It also doesn’t actually force the cops to take your assault or murder seriously, as was the case with Erica Keel right in North Philly in 2007. Gee, I’m so glad that Micheal Nutter didn’t have to get rid of any ineffective homophobic police officers and I’m even happier that I get to pay an extra 2% in sales tax every time I buy something in this godawful, Detroit-light, second class city.

Oh yippee for a pointless, pretty much ineffective piece of legislation that makes all the queers feel like Obama cares so much and hasn’t turned his back on one of the largest demographics that turned out for him last November. I’ll gladly vote third party or not vote at all instead of support this garbage.

To the assholes who screwed me out of the president position with College Democrats, thank you! I’m clearly not cut out to place a cookie on the floor every week and praise Barack Obama, who provides us with great symbolism of friendship of nations of the USS…err, USA instead of delivering a nuanced critique that really looks at the issues with various pieces of legislation.

Hope change my fucking ass. It’s two sides of the same fucking coin. You know what might help gays more? Fostering an environment that actually encourages cops to be honest. Weeding out bad cops right away. Encouraging people with bachelors degrees in less conventional subjects (i.e., African-American studies, Women’s Studies, Anthro, etc.) to join law enforcement…and also making an environment that would encourage those people to seek out law enforcement careers. Headhunt people who are less inclined to pull “respect mah authoritah” bullshit. Take the crimes seriously in the first fucking place and stop giving cops special privileges for their line of work.

And before I forget: Seriously, neo-cons? When you find this post, keep your railing about how the niggers and the faggots and the bitches and the spics are fucking you over with their special privileges while ignoring how many the “boys in blue” get handed to them on a regular basis to yourself. You guys have no leg to stand on with this shit. That garbage encourages a mentality and fosters an environment in which cops think they can do no wrong because, well, they rarely get punished (unless it’s for actually doing their jobs. Funny how the only ones who actually get penalized are the ones who actually seem like honest, decent human beings who think they’re doing good).

And notice, I’m not even touching DADT or the DOMA or the fact that these policies would apply to universal health care. But what do I care? Obama threw us a bone. Oh yippee. Hope and change, my friends. Hope and change.

—-

If you’re reading this from my Facebook notes, please go to the original blog post (located here) to comment.

This is, of course, all under the guise of restoring her autonomy to her. This, certainly, could have nothing to do with the state essentially getting all butthurt about Polanski’s flight, and is all about restoring law and order!

Isn’t it ironic?

Also in “omg, are you living under a rock news”: Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize despite his authorizing his own troop surge in Afghanistan. It’s because, as I’ve sarcastically noted before, Bush was an asshole, but Obama has reasons for continuing Bush’s war-mongering, civil liberties disrespecting, homophobic, oppressive policies.

It’s like a no smoking sign on your cigarette break, my friends.

—-

If you’re reading this from my Facebook notes, please go to the original blog post (located here) to comment.

1. Let’s start with the depressing: Afghanistan General Stanley McCrystal sees no indication of an al-Qaeda presence in Afghanistan.  So, could we maybe, GTFO or is killing brown people too much fun?
2. Sheldon Richman of the Foundation for Economic Education discusses some of the problems with raising tariffs on cheap Chinese tires.  I liked this quick synopsis a little bit better than Reason’s.
3. Here is some information about why Philadelphia is broke.  Most of the commenters are fucking brain donors, so don’t bother reading.  Note, there are no confirmed cop firings in that article.
4. Can Rihanna even remember the World Trade Center collapse?
5. In neato news: the New York Times does a small writeup on bento boxes.  Despite the fact that it makes me sound like a Wapanese asshole, I fucking love the things.  They are so cute!
6. In fucking “duh” news: Rob Miller isn’t the only one who has raised $1M for his congressional bid.
7. Abortion is a medical procedure, therefore, I expect it to be covered under my health care plan.  Instead, Obama is not going to cover it, presumably because pro-lifers don’t want their tax money going towards abortion.  Too bad that morality doesn’t extend to elective procedures like surgical starvation, which I’m assuming will be covered.
8. Apparently, Tila Tequila was assaulted, allegedly by her boyfriend.  I won’t be following the story too closely, because I’m sure the interwebz have been buzzing with “she was asking for it”esque statements because she’s Tila Tequila.
9. In much less irritating news: enjoy this short blurb from Chow.com about the “lobster boom.”
10. In “at least it involves a cockface getting pummeled news”: Main Line Animal Rescue (based out of DC), will be donating 5 bags of dog food to a DC based animal shelter for every time Michael Vick is tackled during the Eagles’ October 26th game.
11. It’s getting chilly out, so have my favorite knitting tutorial site.
12. If you’re wondering why I don’t support the whole Tea Party thing, CNN can hand you a ton of reasons.
13. In a similar vein to link #11, it’s getting chilly out, which means it is almost my favorite season ever: PUMPKIN SEASON!  SHAZZAM!

—-

If you’re reading this from my Facebook notes, please go to the original blog post (located here) to comment.