 |
| "Women and Dog," by Marisol (Whitney Museum of Art) |
Women are human, right?
I’m fairly certain they are. They’ve got all the telltale signs. Complex thought processes. Self-motivation — and by that, I mean they can move, physically, although the other meaning, doing things of their own volition, is also a factor.
Now that I’m trying to define what being human means, I’m sorry for starting this way. It is fraught.
Next I almost suggested “bilateral symmetry” — meaning if you draw a line down the middle, we’re the same on both sides — then thoughtlessly elaborated with “two arms, two legs” but realized, in the nick of time, I’d end up getting chewed out by amputees who are, of course, still human despise their losses. A big tent, people.
Honestly, I feel like tossing the question to AI, after having looked askance at it last week. Contradictory, we humans ... oh heck, why not? Everybody else does. Hey AI. what does being human mean?
“Being human means living as a blend of biological existence, conscious self-awareness and emotional connection to the world and others.”
Sounds right to me. And I did I hit the first two, physical and consciousness, on my own. As far as emotional connection... well, I’m not so sure about that. Could be more AI fantasy. Emotional disconnection seems all the rage nowadays — in fact, tossing people over the side of the humanity boat might be a defining mark of humanity. Everybody’s doing it.
Immigration papers not in order? You can be guiltlessly shipped to some hellhole in Texas or Uganda.
On the other side of the Israeli-Palestinian struggle? Why you and everyone like you can just... magically vanish. In fact, that’s the plan.
To continue reading, click here.
Re your description of Indiana as "the Mississippi of the Midwest," I just finished "A Fever in the Heartland," (Timothy Egan). Riveting story, excellent book; your characterization is so true. And scary.
ReplyDeleteI saw a comment last week calling Indiana the South's middle finger to the country!
Delete100 years ago, the KKK actually ran it, they were so ignorant they attempted to pass a law declaring the value of pi to be exactly 3, not 3.1415. 3 will give you a very rough estimate, I do that all the time if I have coils of rope or wire & I'm trying to get a rough estimate of how much I have, but not if you're actually using pi to calculate the actual diameter of something!
100 years ago, Plainfield, Il was a gathering hub for the KKK. Illinois has never been what we pretend it is.
DeleteIf Indiana (West Missitucky) is the South's middle finger, then Ohio (North Missitucky) has become the index finger. It's definitely going down the same road that Indiana has. For 34 years now, I've watched it change for the worse. Ohio voted for Trump all three times...and by an 11% margin in 2024.
DeleteA century ago, Indiana was the biggest Klan state in the country. They ran it. State and local politicians were either members or allies. One third of all white males in the state were members.
The governor of Indiana was in the pocket of the Grand Dragon, who went to prison in 1925 for rape and murder, and began naming names immediately, hoping that ratting out state corruption would earn him a pardon. It did not. Finally got out in 1950, violated his parole, and did another five years. And was then banned from Indiana for life. (That's a punishment?)
Quite a few Indiana klansfolk eventually went to prison for criminal activity, and after the rape/murder, Klan membership fell quickly. Not just in Indiana, but also in the rest of the country.
At one point, the KKK claimed a national membership of five million. They also made some of their Imperial Lizards and Grand Draggins very wealthy, when they skimmed millions of dollars from the membership dues that were paid by the robed and hooded masses.
The Lincoln Highway, Rt.30, runs through Plainfield and provided easy access to the area for Klan gatherings in the 1920's.
DeleteLater, Rt.66 was run through Plainfield (nothing to do with the KKK) and actually shares a three block stretch with Rt.30. Two major cross-country roads intersecting in what once was a small farm-town, is kind of a big deal. The old downtown Plainfield is a very cool place.
Joliet is a real highway town...it has three of the big ones...the Lincoln Highway (U.S.30), Route 66, and U.S. 6, also called the Grand Army of the Republic Highway, At one time, Route 6 was the longest highway in the country. It stretches some 3,200 miles...through 14 states...from Cape Cod to the Mojave Desert. In northern Ohio, it skirts Lake Erie, about four miles north of where I'm typing this.
DeleteThe Lincoln Highway also extends through 14 states, and is about as long as U.S. 6. The road begins in Times Square and ends in San Francisco's Lincoln Park. It follows Illinois 38 through DeKalb. Lived no more than a block or two away from it for almost six years. It was called Alt. 30 then, and the points of interest located in the DeKalb stretch are included in a 2007 coffee table book about the Lincoln Highway.
One of them is a fully-restored Art Deco palace, the Egyptian Theater. There are only a handful of such theaters left in the country, and it's the only one in the Midwest. Used to walk there regularly, in the late 60s and early 70s.
Note that it's taken that jerk of a governor three weeks to show up in Lake County after it was slammed by the derecho, Nipsco's utter incompetence 7 the state ignoring the problems there for the entire time!
DeletePure racism on the state's part!
ERA
ReplyDeleteYep
DeleteOne of the most important arguments Abraham Lincoln used to make the argument for freeing the slaves was the idea that anyone who had lighter skin or was smarter than one person could enslave that very person.
ReplyDeleteWhile there are almost endless reasons why slavery is bad, for some strange reason the individuals who argue for it never seem to comprehend the idea that the shoe could be on the other foot... in a sense. Some will argue that the very act of enslavement is because you fear being in that very same position.
We seem to lack the ability to state such things anymore. The right's positions hinge on the idea that someone else has been given not only something that you deserve but that that very person is not good enough to achieve such success on their own. I've always found that laughable. It's the argument from the playground the loser makes to try and win. "no you didn't. you cheated. I won."
In fact, the right has "over corrected" so much that their arguments against anything is so fundamentally wrong devoid of facts that it is impossible to argue against. I blame a lot of this on the media. We platform liars and let them have the last word without recourse. The fact that donald trump was allowed to speak in public following his lies about President Obama not being American born is the problem. The fact that we allow any senator who voted for RFK Jr. to make an argument for or against anything is absolutely insane. Making an argument for MAHA while being ok with the dotard eating mcdonalds for his five meals a day should erase every last shred of respect from anyone who demands they be given it.
No republican deserves to be given a chance to speak (or really serve) given their complete disregard for first, third, fourth, fifth, 5th, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth, twelfth, fifteenth, and twenty fourth amendments on a literal daily basis.
If one person can be stripped of their constitutional rights for no reason, then none of us have constitutional rights. And it shocks me that we can't seem to stand up to the right and say that.
Double b
DeleteI'm struggling with your comments
It seems like you're advocating stripping Republicans and maggas from their constitutional rights while saying no one should be stripped of their constitutional rights..
You're saying there was a time when Donald Trump should not have been allowed to speak because something that he spoke about was inaccurate and you didn't like it.
My brain hurts
I would challenge "because something...was inaccurate..."
DeleteIt was not just inaccurate, it was a knowingly blatant lie. Repeated blatantly and knowingly by self-serving liars.
FME, Thanks for your comment.
DeleteFreedom of speech does not grantee platforming of that speech. Mr. trump and every republican can keep spewing their lies and hate whenever they please. Their constitutional rights are not infringed if (for instance) cnn, msnbc, pbs, or any other news organization refuses to air their comments and rantings.
In fact, fox News rarely has anyone with an opposing opinion on their shows and when they do they insult, demean, and prevent that person from being able to have not only the last word but any fair and balanced conversation. I've never heard anyone complain about their constitutional rights being abused.
FME, please, reading is a skill that i know you've practiced.DB's was just a mild screed touched with a shot of irony. chill
DeleteI'm right there with you Neil women deserve bodily autonomy and the right to choose without being punished in any way.
ReplyDeleteBut I asked myself is my support theoretical or actual? If I received a bill each month for say $500 and that money was used to pay for other people's abortions how would I feel about that?
Am I a good socialist? In most ways I suppose so but I'm not sure I could be a party to abortion. Nearly 70 years on the planet and I only had one circumstance in my life where I directly paid for an abortion. A young family member in dire straits when I was in high school came to me and said can I get $250 and then proceeded to say that that was the reason.
I was able to help them out but like I say if I got a bill every month to pay for other people's abortions that would be a tough one.
That is part of this discussion whether government insurance programs should include reproductive care or if the person needing to terminate a pregnancy should be responsible for the bill. It's a libertarian argument and I'm not a libertarian I'm all for contributing to the fire department and building the roads and whatever it is that our taxes are used for.
Your body your choice your bank account is how I feel about it and I know that's not going to be popular here in this comment section.
If a woman is a victim of a crime it's an entirely different matter. If there are medical complications in a pregnancy an entirely different matter.
Congress needs to pass a law that can make it through the courts to protect women's rights in this regard. Thankfully many states have done just that. But until the feds it passed the hurdles involved we're stuck with this situation where abortion is only legal in some states.
It's s***** but that's the law. If we don't like certain laws we have to work to change them. That's why I donate to the ACLU and to planned Parenthood.
Those donations are voluntary not codified
Even if the government were to pay the full cost of every abortion, do you think the cost per taxpayer would be in the $500/month range? Why did you choose that figure?
DeleteDo you also object to contributing to pregnancy care and childbirth costs, which are significantly higher than the cost of an abortion?
I would rather pay for every woman in America's abortion with my tax dollars than a single dollar supporting employees who work for Walmart that aren't payed properly by walmart, as they rake in record profits.
DeleteI believe it was Jimmy Carter who said life is not fair while denying the use of federal monies to fund abortions for women in poverty. I don't think you have to worry about paying $500 a month to fund abortion. It would be nice for our taxes to fund child care for all those women for whom we are denying abortion, but we aren't doing that either. Life isn't fair, doncha know.
DeleteCorey,
Delete$500 was a completely random figure as you can see from my post. It could be $500 a year or $50 a month I'm just saying to myself to myself that I think people should take responsibility for themselves and their choices.
I make a voluntary donation to planned Parenthood as you can see if you read my entire post.
I did read your entire post. I'm just not sure why you seem to believe women should pay for their abortions themselves, but it's fine for government-funded insurance to pay for prenatal care and childbirth. In many, perhaps most, cases, terminating a pregnancy is the more responsible choice, and obviously the lower-cost option. And what about the men involved? What are their responsibilities?
DeleteAll our taxes pay for things we don't support. I don't want to pay for the war in Iran or for many other things the government is doing, but that's a pill we all swallow. What makes abortion different, in your view?
As a man I understand my responsibilities surrounding reproduction. A very astute young woman explained it to me in high school. I have never unintentionally impregnated someone.
DeleteWhen I did we didn't have insurance that covered pregnancy so I paid the hospital bill. We had our second child at home with a midwife.
I then paid the expenses of child rearing. I had two sons and a stepson. I paid for the expenses of raising him as well. His irresponsible mother and father couldn't figure out how that worked. I taught them the things that my high school girlfriend taught me.
They have acted responsibly though I'm ready to be a grandfather they're all in their mid to late twenties. I've got my fingers crossed that before I'm gone that might happen it would be a great Joy.
In my post I asked myself a lot of questions about how I feel about this.
If someone's house burns down I feel an obligation to our community through my taxes and my insurance premiums to contribute to their loss
If somebody Burns their own house down not so much
I pay every month for these same jackasses' blue pills. Direct that money into an abortion coverage insurance fund instead.
ReplyDeleteabortions are health care. i don't have cancer, but my health insurance (past), medicare and blue cross supplemental does pay out cancer payments to cancer patients. i don't complain because it's the cost of being in a civilized society, tho i'm not so sure about the civilized part these days.
DeleteAssuming the "blue pills" you're referring to are sildenafil, they are only covered by insurance plans when prescribed for medically necessary reasons (pulmonary hypertension and prostate enlargement being the most common). The idea that insurance plans are covering them so that fossilized old men can lay pipe all night is a myth, albeit one that has been repeated so often that it has been accepted as indisputable fact.
DeleteBruno McG: When Viagra first became available (long before sildenafil could be prescribed generically) , it was indeed covered by medicaid, yet NOT by the insurance plan of my employer, which included our medical clinic. I remember 1) lots of jokes about the discrepancy, 2) a drug rep leaving 'drug samples' for prescribers at the clinic, followed by the discovery that ALL the samples had 'disappeared' and couldn't be accounted for. At least twice, if not three times! 3) having a discussion with other care providers re: how many pills should equal a month's supply/Rx. That was a tough one because the drug was being prescribed (and covered) for "sexual dysfunction". So how many pills, and who decides?
DeleteGranted, this was ages ago (1998) , but when the drug was first marketed, it took some time for medicine and the public to adjust and respond.
Great column and spot on!
ReplyDeletePlease allow me to make one correction. Regarding the restrictive abortion law in Indiana, you say " ... her choice in the matter had been plucked out of her hands by men in Indianapolis ... " That is true. But it was not only men. State Senator Sue Glick sponsored the Senate bill, and State Representative Wendy McNamara sponsored and championed the House version. Out of 35 female legislators serving in the Indiana legislature at the time, 14 women voted in favor of passing the restrictive abortion legislation. It's easy to smirk and say they are brainwashed Stepford Wives or Kapos, but honestly, these are people who are advocating what they believe is moral, not the suppression of women.
ReplyDeleteI've always been puzzled by the insistence that anti-abortion fanaticism is the domain of men. Every person that's ever excoriated me for supporting abortion rights has been a woman, and the majority of people who are active in the pro-life movement are women
DeletePerhaps because men know they are automatically disadvantaged by the assumption that they are acting out of lack of sympathy.
DeleteAfter writing my comment above, I was thinking that Norman Finkelstein, Chomsky, and Soros put the lie to my point. So your remark made me feel better.
Most importantly, thank you again, Neil, for vetting the comments and encouraging intelligent dialogue.
Interesting point, Mr. Eisenberg.
DeleteYeah, there oughta be a law .. it's called THE ERA! But until patriarchal religions are obliterated, women will continue to be seen as "other" and "less than human" by the men who invented religion to codify their supposed superiority and god-given right to rule. And as long as men give priority to a fertilized egg over a fully functioning woman, there will never be equality. (Yes, I know it isn't "just" or "all" men.)
ReplyDeleteyou said it right, Lynne
DeleteMedicaid does not cover Viagra or its generic equivalent because it is generally considered to be a lifestyle enhancer
ReplyDeleteIf one believes that a fertilized egg should actually be counted as a "person" from the moment of conception, then every menstrual period should be monitored, and every miscarriage investigated. And perhaps negligent prenatal/natal care could be charged as negligent homicide; every intentional violation (that glass of wine?) could be first degree. Hello Margaret Atwood.
ReplyDeleteObama should have passed a federal law. Why didn't he?
ReplyDeletecount the votes
DeleteBiden should have passed a federal law.
ReplyDeleteWhy didn't he?
Senator Clinton could have passed a law.
ReplyDeleteWhy didn't she?
The opponents worked hard to pass laws in red States for decades the proponents clung to roe v Wade
ReplyDeleteThere had always been discussion about how roe v Wade was flawed but the rebuttal was it was established law.
It takes a lot to pass a law presidents can't do it on their own though we have one who thinks he can the Congress can't do it on their own and politically it's always been kryptonite nobody wants to get behind it or against it half of their constituents are obsessed
This column and the subsequent comments have been tough to read. It makes me sad to acknowledge how draconian our country's laws have become in such a short period of time. Abortion laws now endanger the future fertility and lives of would-be mothers in our country. Maternal deaths have risen. Women in some states now question whether to pursue a wanted pregnancy or not, knowing that if something goes wrong (as in ectopic pregnancy), the pregnant woman loses all agency and may die as a result, despite the fact that a fetus from an ectopic pregnancy cannot survive.
ReplyDeleteThis is not hyperbole. The scenario has happened. Not because intervention in ectopic pregnancy is expressly forbidden by law, but because the penalties to physicians treating such patients may result in loss of their medical license or criminal prosecution. No one wants to take the chance on vague and poorly written laws, and pregnant women suffer as a result.
Apart from medical necessity, no one, not even the women seeking abortion, regard abortion as a first line intervention. No one views it as a preferred method of birth control. As a society, we need to address the underlying reasons for this.
I would have far more respect for "pro-life" advocates if they also valued the life of the mother as well as the fetus and endorsed programs that support new mothers. Until they do, I will remain pro-choice.
right you are, Jill
DeleteIf you love Jesus, whatever gets you through the night. But don't push him on me,
ReplyDeleteIf you don't like abortion, don't have one. But don't tell me what to do... or not do.