#you cannot rally against the oppressor and side with them at the same time because “muh fanfic site”

[hyp3rfixation-h3ll]

not to get into discourse mode on here but the recent shit w/ ao3 being once again called out for being run by racists/genocide supporters and seeing so many fucking Absolute Gormless Shitheads blindly defend OTW and going " dOn'T bRiNg FiCtIoNaL PoLiTicS iNtO tHis!!!111!1 " as if they are not immune to propaganda is wild . my siblings in sin , ao3 is literally The Racism Fetish Fanfiction site , and propaganda via fictional work is exactly how racism perpetuates. ao3 and the otw are a part of the problem whether you choose to acknowledge it or not because they contribute to the cycle of violence , fetishisation and colonisation of marginalised groups via complacency (and sometimes even blatant PASSIVE ENCOURAGEMENT) , and then they cover it up by using soft cutesy buzzwords like " anti-censorship " and " free speech " and their dumb ass complex tagging system to appeal to white people , so when Actual Minorities and people affected by the shit they put on there speak up about it they're met with all kinds of bullcrap about "jUsT bLoCk ThE tAg If It'S a PrObLem1111!111" or "YoU'rE jUsT bEiNg a fAnDoM cOp!11!!"

You're a part of the problem if you support ao3 and actively continue to use it & donate to them , especially in the wake of the OTW being actively chockful of zionists who will , ironically , silence those who speak up and rally with Palestine for liberation . And If you decide to take this as me being hostile towards you or trying to " bring fiction into real world issues " , remember that at Any point in time you can go on ao3 for yourself and find thousands and thousands of raceplay fics and other various works that glorify and condone racism , and that the otw and their large userbase (primarily composed of white people!) has a track record of trying to shut up POC when this issue is brought to light .

Idgaf if ao3 is for " anti-censorship " , because there's a difference between anti-censorship and HIDING BEHIND the concept of free speech and the 1st amendment to do and say awful , horrendous things and believe you're above critique , punishment or consequences for it .

tl;dr: fuck ao3, fuck the otw, free palestine, and most importantly: you are NOT and will NEVER be immune to propaganda if you choose to ignore it because it benefits you.

[thebrightestwitchofherage]

Replying to more frequent unhinged comments

If you’re supporting Hamas, you’re not supporting freedom, fighting or liberation. You’re simply supporting a terror organisation.

following the logic of why Israel isn��t a legitimate state some that most of the users here believe,

Most of the western world shouldn’t exist.

WHY IS FROM “THE RIVER TO THE SEA” A PROBLEMATIC PHRASE?

You *are* being antisemitic when you say Israelis should all just be transferred out of Israel or killed as “from the river to the sea “ is a genocidal call for the wiping of Jews from the Jewish state.

It’s literally a less extreme translation of Hamas’ chant:

“Some of those sources said that in the context most people at ceasefire rallies are using it today, it likely indicates a desire for Palestinian liberation and dignity — as well as a vision for the future in which Palestinians have equal rights in their homeland. But to many Jewish people, it’s a mortal threat to the continued existence of Israel as a Jewish state.”

(“The controversial phrase”from the river to the sea” , explained , Vox)

To many Jews and Israelis, this phrase comes with context of genocide. It means that there shouldn’t be any Jews in the land of Israel. How do you think that will be achieved?

(Spoiler alert: massacres like the October 7th massacre).

is it also such a foolish and dangerous thing to suggest because:

-It completely ignores the vast history of the Jewish people with this land. Saying we all immigrated to Israel from Europe is also wrong since a) most of us aren’t white/ European b) We have always been here (yes even before 1948🤦‍♀️).

* for further reading about the Jewish people’s connection the land:

We Cannot just pack our bags and go: the people are the safest we can be in Israel , and that’s a fact.

Once again, I keep having to explain this:

-The many other ethnic groups living peacefully in Israel: Druze , Bahai’s , Christian Arabs, Muslim Arabs…. All live equally in Israel. There are still prejudices between cultures- it is not a “systematically racist and apartheid country”.

We’re also not terrorist state- retaliating to terror attacks and arresting the Palestinians behind them isn’t an act of terrorism.

Having blockades and barricades between Israel’s territory and the West Bank or Gaza , which aren’t controlled by Israel and have many terrorist threats inside- isn’t an act of terrorism either.

I don’t see you condemning Egypt or Jordan for doing the exact same thing.

This conflict started before 1948, and cannot be summarised in “Israel as the white oppressor”.

unfortunately, nowadays, it involves many terror proxies from Iran, funded by Iran, Qatar and Saudi Arabia: Hamas in Gaza and the West Bank, Hezballah from Lebanon, the Houthis from Yemen and many more.

I’ve said Most of this and previous posts, but people here, seem to ignore all parts that don’t fit their agenda. Me and my Druze/ Arabic friends and colleagues exist side by side peacefully,

And we will not be forced into this false image of apartheid you project upon us (because you feel guilty about your own country’s history).

“Stop pink washing Israel🤡”

Every single time, I post something about being queer in Israel, I get this comment.

Do you think queer people in Israel just don’t exist?

We do, and we deserve to be happy about positive change in our community.

“But you’re supporting your government/ Bibi”

As Israelis, We are also the first ones to protest any injustices from within. Most of us are against the current government. We have been protesting against it for years now! Don’t assume we all support it.

*****

[quakerjoe]

I thought white people were evil. I was wrong.

Whenever anyone mentions the historical atrocity of chattel slavery, white people will emerge from the dark crevices of humanity to gnaw away at the assertion like roaches on a discarded Cheeto. They will explain how most white people didn’t own slaves. They will offer a convoluted explanation about the Confederacy and Southern heritage. They will introduce the concept of “presentism”—the idea that we shouldn’t judge the actions of people in the past using modern-day standards—as if the white people of the past couldn’t quite grasp the idea of inhumanity and brutality until 1861.

Everyone knew that slavery was evil. Everyone knew that Jim Crow was evil. Everyone knew that lynching was evil. Everyone knows that any kind of injustice or inequality is evil. These things persist because most white people don’t actively fight to eradicate them.

And most white people don’t actively fight to eradicate inequality and injustice because they usually benefit in some small way. The Southern economy was built on evil slavery. Jim Crow laws maintained a national order with white people firmly planted atop the social hierarchy. Systematic injustice keeps black people in their place, but it also comforts white people to know that the big black bogeymen are being kept behind bars.

Inequality and racism exist not because of evil but because the unaffected majority put their interests above all others, and their inaction allows inequality to flourish. That is why I believe that silence in the presence of injustice is as bad as injustice itself. White people who are quiet about racism might not plant the seed, but their silence is sunlight.

Many of those people don’t speak out because they fear alienation more than they hate racism. For them, the fear of having someone furrow their brow in their direction outweighs their hatred of sending children to an underfunded school knowing that they don’t have an equal chance at success because of the color of their skin.

They know the reality of disproportionate police brutality, but they don’t have to worry about their children being shot in the face. Their kids receive good educations. Their kids can wear hoodies whenever they please. Little Amber and Connor’s résumés don’t get tossed in the trash because of their black-sounding names. Their children’s futures are determined only by work ethic and ability. Therefore, they stay silent on the sidelines.

That’s not evil.

That is cowardice.

“All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.”

—THOMAS JEFFERSON (MAYBE)

On Thursday, while visiting San Antonio, I was approached by a gentleman who heard my name and wanted to know if I was the Michael Harriot from The Root. He said that he was a paralegal who works with one of the noted immigration attorneys who were all over the news that day (I don’t know which one because I had been traveling and ... Crown Royal). He began to explain how the Trump administration was literally putting children in concentration camps.

Hold up ... before that previous sentence causes Caucasian heads to explode, allow me to offer this definition from Dictionary.com:

Now back to our previous conversation.

Just before he shook my hand and said it was nice meeting me, he explained that it was entirely possible that those children might never see their parents again. Then he said something that I still cannot erase from my brain. He paused, his hand still gripping mine, and looked past me as if he were recalling something, and said, “This is some Gestapo shit, man.”

I know that sentence gave liberals heart palpitations. There is always pushback anytime someone compares anything or anyone to the führer. Even though there is a literal Nazi movement rising in this country, Hitler is the third rail of every conversation, no matter how apt the comparison.

Despite the similarities between 1933 Germany and 2018 America (a rise in nationalism, a government-sponsored ethnic-cleansing movement, a racist strongman in power, that whole concentration camp thing ... ), the most obvious parallel between the Third Reich and the Trump administration is the willing silence of the majority.

Trump chief of staff John Kelly, Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan and many others refuse to publicly stand up to this insane administration even though they disagree with the policies. Ryan would rather quit. Kelly has reportedly given up. Sanders is reportedly leaving the White House. But none have publicly broken up with Donald Trump.

But it is not just the politicians in the Republican Party who are afraid to speak out against their base; the spineless cowardice of the Democrats has also become increasingly apparent. We expect Republicans to stand with their fearless leader and maintain their grip on power, but Democrats have been so silent that Rep. Maxine Waters’ defiance makes her look like a crazy woman in a tinfoil hat by comparison.

A CBS survey revealed that most Americans disagree with Trump’s “both sides” equivocation regarding the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Va., last year. According to a CNN/ORC poll, a majority of Americans opposed the white-nationalist-inspired travel ban. Two-thirds of Americans say that separating children from their parents at the border is unacceptable, according to a CBS poll.

Still, most white people won’t do shit.

The crisis at the border is the latest addition to a long list of instances when white people have chosen silence over what is right. Most of the white people who supported civil and voting rights still did not march, boycott or sit in. The white people who shed tears over police videos won’t attend a Black Lives Matter meeting.

Cowards. All of them.

“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”

—DESMOND TUTU

At least once a week, I will receive an email from a well-meaning white person who wants to know what they can do to fight injustice and inequality. The answer to that is simple. Whenever and wherever you spot racism or inequality, say something. Do something.

Every. Single. Time.

If a white person spoke up every time a fellow Caucasian used the word “nigger” in the safe space of whiteness, they would stop doing it. If a white person advocated for diversity and equality behind the closed doors of power, where black faces are seldom present, people in power wouldn’t dismiss the reality of the tilted playing field.

And maybe I should go back and add the word “some” before every mention of “white people” in this article because I’d bet every penny I have that at least one white person with good intentions is reading this while murmuring, “Not all white people ... ”

Which is exactly my point.

“Some” is not enough.

Some white people will speak out sometimes, just like some fish can fly and somebears can ride bicycles. But if a biologist were lecturing on the mobility of aquatic animals or grizzlies, it would be idiotic to interrupt with the rare cases of flying fish or bears that ride Huffys.

Fish swim. Bears walk.

And white people are cowards.

“I always wondered why somebody doesn’t do something about that. Then I realized I was somebody.”

—LILY TOMLIN

There is a quote in the Holocaust Museum by Martin Niemöller, who was imprisoned in a Nazi concentration camp for speaking out against Adolf Hitler. The quote reads:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Initially, Niemöller supported the Nazi Party for years because he “felt that reparations, democracy, and foreign influence” had damaged his country and “believed that Germany needed a strong leader to promote national unity and honor.”

Sound familiar?

When they came for black people, white people, like Neimöller, did nothing because they were not black. When they came for the Muslims, white people did not speak out because they were not Muslims. When they came for the immigrants, white people remained quiet because they were not immigrants.

The most disheartening part of all this is that black people and other people of color alone cannot abolish discrimination and hate. It is a problem created by white America and maintained by the silence of the majority. Every form of inequality would disappear by next Friday if every white person in America used his or her privilege to eliminate it.

It is useless to speculate on the exact reasons why they don’t. Sure, some of them are racists who benefit from the current social order. But many are just unmotivated because they don’t want to upset the apple cart. They will weep at the sight of children being ripped from their parents’ arms and shipped to internment camps. They will say Philando Castile’s death was a cruel injustice. They will tell you they “have a good heart.”

But they will only whisper these feelings? Who gives a fuck about hearts when their mouths are quiet and their hands are idle?

Republicans who disagree with the Trump administration remain silent. Instead of screaming at the top of their lungs, Democrats are calmly suggesting the same electoral solution that put Trump in power in the first place. Moderate whites say nothing behind closed doors. White women still have not confronted the 53 percent of their population who supported Trump.

And that is why racism persists. That is how Trump maintains his power. Injustice is evil. The cowardice of silence perpetuates injustice, and anything that perpetuates evil is, by definition, also evil.

Therefore, silence is evil.

As Leonardo da Vinci once said (I could not find the exact source. I think he said it when he painted the Mona Lisa, fought injustice as a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle or starred in Inception): “He who does not oppose evil commands it to be done.”

This is some Gestapo shit.

Until all white people do and say something, people in power will always be able to point to the silent majority and say that no one cares about racism or inequality. Ultimately, whiteness affords them the right to remain silent.

I thought white people were evil.

I was right.

- Michael Harriot

[thegiftedoneishere]

I thought white people were evil. I was wrong.

Whenever anyone mentions the historical atrocity of chattel slavery, white people will emerge from the dark crevices of humanity to gnaw away at the assertion like roaches on a discarded Cheeto. They will explain how most white people didn’t own slaves. They will offer a convoluted explanation about the Confederacy and Southern heritage. They will introduce the concept of “presentism”—the idea that we shouldn’t judge the actions of people in the past using modern-day standards—as if the white people of the past couldn’t quite grasp the idea of inhumanity and brutality until 1861.

Everyone knew that slavery was evil. 

Everyone knew that Jim Crow was evil. 

Everyone knew that lynching was evil.

 Everyone knows that any kind of injustice or inequality is evil. These things persist because most white people don’t actively fight to eradicate them.

And most white people don’t actively fight to eradicate inequality and injustice because they usually benefit in some small way. The Southern economy was built on evil slavery. Jim Crow laws maintained a national order with white people firmly planted atop the social hierarchy. Systematic injustice keeps black people in their place, but it also comforts white people to know that the big black bogeymen are being kept behind bars.

Inequality and racism exist not because of evil but because the unaffected majority put their interests above all others, and their inaction allows inequality to flourish. That is why I believe that silence in the presence of injustice is as bad as injustice itself. White people who are quiet about racism might not plant the seed, but their silence is sunlight.

Many of those people don’t speak out because they fear alienation more than they hate racism. For them, the fear of having someone furrow their brow in their direction outweighs their hatred of sending children to an underfunded school knowing that they don’t have an equal chance at success because of the color of their skin.

They know the reality of disproportionate police brutality, but they don’t have to worry about their children being shot in the face. Their kids receive good educations. Their kids can wear hoodies whenever they please. Little Amber and Connor’s résumés don’t get tossed in the trash because of their black-sounding names. Their children’s futures are determined only by work ethic and ability. Therefore, they stay silent on the sidelines.

That’s not evil.

That is cowardice.

“All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.”

—THOMAS JEFFERSON (MAYBE)

On Thursday, while visiting San Antonio, I was approached by a gentleman who heard my name and wanted to know if I was the Michael Harriot from The Root. He said that he was a paralegal who works with one of the noted immigration attorneys who were all over the news that day (I don’t know which one because I had been traveling and ... Crown Royal). He began to explain how the Trump administration was literally putting children in concentration camps.

Hold up ... before that previous sentence causes Caucasian heads to explode, allow me to offer this definition from Dictionary.com:

Concentration Camp: a guarded compound for the detention or imprisonment of aliens, members of ethnic minorities, political opponents, etc., especially any of the camps established by the Nazis prior to and during World War II for the confinement and persecution of prisoners.

Now back to our previous conversation.

Just before he shook my hand and said it was nice meeting me, he explained that it was entirely possible that those children might never see their parents again. Then he said something that I still cannot erase from my brain. He paused, his hand still gripping mine, and looked past me as if he were recalling something, and said, “This is some Gestapo shit, man.”

I know that sentence gave liberals heart palpitations. There is always pushback anytime someone compares anything or anyone to the führer. Even though there is a literal Nazi movement rising in this country, Hitler is the third rail of every conversation, no matter how apt the comparison.

Despite the similarities between 1933 Germany and 2018 America (a rise in nationalism, a government-sponsored ethnic-cleansing movement, a racist strongman in power, that whole concentration camp thing ... ), the most obvious parallel between the Third Reich and the Trump administration is the willing silence of the majority.

Trump chief of staff John Kelly, Secretary of Homeland Security Kirstjen Nielsen, White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan and many others refuse to publicly stand up to this insane administration even though they disagree with the policies. Ryan would rather quit. Kelly has reportedly given up. Sanders is reportedly leaving the White House. But none have publicly broken up with Donald Trump.

But it is not just the politicians in the Republican Party who are afraid to speak out against their base; the spineless cowardice of the Democrats has also become increasingly apparent. We expect Republicans to stand with their fearless leader and maintain their grip on power, but Democrats have been so silent that Rep. Maxine Waters’ defiance makes her look like a crazy woman in a tinfoil hat by comparison.

A CBS survey revealed that most Americans disagree with Trump’s “both sides” equivocation regarding the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Va., last year. According to a CNN/ORC poll, a majority of Americans opposed the white-nationalist-inspired travel ban. Two-thirds of Americans say that separating children from their parents at the border is unacceptable, according to a CBS poll.

Still, most white people won’t do shit.

The crisis at the border is the latest addition to a long list of instances when white people have chosen silence over what is right. Most of the white people who supported civil and voting rights still did not march, boycott or sit in. The white people who shed tears over police videos won’t attend a Black Lives Matter meeting.

Cowards. All of them.

“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor.”

—DESMOND TUTU

At least once a week, I will receive an email from a well-meaning white person who wants to know what they can do to fight injustice and inequality. The answer to that is simple. Whenever and wherever you spot racism or inequality, say something. Do something.

Every. Single. Time.

If a white person spoke up every time a fellow Caucasian used the word “nigger” in the safe space of whiteness, they would stop doing it. If a white person advocated for diversity and equality behind the closed doors of power, where black faces are seldom present, people in power wouldn’t dismiss the reality of the tilted playing field.

And maybe I should go back and add the word “some” before every mention of “white people” in this article because I’d bet every penny I have that at least one white person with good intentions is reading this while murmuring, “Not all white people ... ”

Which is exactly my point.

“Some” is not enough.

Some white people will speak out sometimes, just like some fish can fly and somebears can ride bicycles. But if a biologist were lecturing on the mobility of aquatic animals or grizzlies, it would be idiotic to interrupt with the rare cases of flying fish or bears that ride Huffys.

Fish swim. Bears walk.

And white people are cowards.

“I always wondered why somebody doesn’t do something about that. Then I realized I was somebody.”

—LILY TOMLIN

There is a quote in the Holocaust Museum by Martin Niemöller, who was imprisoned in a Nazi concentration camp for speaking out against Adolf Hitler. The quote reads:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Initially, Niemöller supported the Nazi Party for years because he “felt that reparations, democracy, and foreign influence” had damaged his country and “believed that Germany needed a strong leader to promote national unity and honor.”

Sound familiar?

When they came for black people, white people, like Neimöller, did nothing because they were not black. When they came for the Muslims, white people did not speak out because they were not Muslims. When they came for the immigrants, white people remained quiet because they were not immigrants.

The most disheartening part of all this is that black people and other people of color alone cannot abolish discrimination and hate. It is a problem created by white America and maintained by the silence of the majority. Every form of inequality would disappear by next Friday if every white person in America used his or her privilege to eliminate it.

It is useless to speculate on the exact reasons why they don’t. Sure, some of them are racists who benefit from the current social order. But many are just unmotivated because they don’t want to upset the apple cart. They will weep at the sight of children being ripped from their parents’ arms and shipped to internment camps. They will say Philando Castile’s death was a cruel injustice. They will tell you they “have a good heart.”

But they will only whisper these feelings? Who gives a fuck about hearts when their mouths are quiet and their hands are idle?

Republicans who disagree with the Trump administration remain silent. Instead of screaming at the top of their lungs, Democrats are calmly suggesting the same electoral solution that put Trump in power in the first place. Moderate whites say nothing behind closed doors. White women still have not confronted the 53 percent of their population who supported Trump.

And that is why racism persists. That is how Trump maintains his power. Injustice is evil. The cowardice of silence perpetuates injustice, and anything that perpetuates evil is, by definition, also evil.

Therefore, silence is evil.

As Leonardo da Vinci once said (I could not find the exact source. I think he said it when he painted the Mona Lisa, fought injustice as a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle or starred in Inception): “He who does not oppose evil commands it to be done.”

This is some Gestapo shit.

Until all white people do and say something, people in power will always be able to point to the silent majority and say that no one cares about racism or inequality. Ultimately, whiteness affords them the right to remain silent.

I thought white people were evil.

I was right.

[americanlibertypac]

Martin Luther King condemned the violence on both sides, too

Image Credit: National Archives CC by SA 4.0

Someone has to be the adult in the room.

Whenever President Donald Trump — or any political leader — stands up to condemn all of the violence at a national tragedy such as Charlottesville, Va. regardless of the causes, political or otherwise, those calls should be embraced, lest the result be that some forms of political violence be justified — and perpetuated as a consequence.

That was what Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. preached. He said, “Hate begets hate; violence begets violence; toughness begets a greater toughness. We must meet the forces of hate with the power of love… Our aim must never be to defeat or humiliate the white man, but to win his friendship and understanding.”

King deplored the violence on all sides of the national pursuit of racial equality. In his book, “Where do we go from here: Chaos or community?” King condemned the “terror of extremist white violence” and at the same time gave an equal share of the blame for violence to those who resorted to riots to end racial oppression and segregation: “in several Northern and Western cities, most tragically in Watts, young Negroes had exploded in violence. In an irrational burst of rage they had sought to say something, but the flames had blackened both themselves and their oppressors.”

While King understood why the riots occurred — he called them the “language of the unheard” — and yet he did not justify them, instead saying, “riots are socially destructive and self-defeating” and “there’s no practical or moral answer in the realm of violence” and “there is no violent solution” to social injustices.

Was King morally equating those who perpetuated racial injustice and those who opposed it, as Trump is now accused? No. But he was saying resorting to violence to achieve political ends, regardless of the motive, was unquestionably immoral, even in the pursuit of racial justice. That is all.

But it was not simply a message of non-violence as its own end. King never lost sight of his goals: “it is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society.” He urged legislation via our political institutions, not physical confrontation, to resolve the evils of segregation.

King was being the adult in the room. He was right. While the nation was tearing itself apart over a true injustice, government-forced racial segregation, he pursued non-violent, political means to achieve the changes he sought. In the face of racial violence, he preached a non-violent response. He kept the moral high ground. His view was that violence would only lead to more violence, and so brokered no quarter for those who resorted to it — whether they were fighting for or against racial injustice.

At question today is whether President Trump should have condemned not only the violence in Charlottesville, Va. perpetrated by hateful white supremacists attending the rally opposing the removal of a statue of Confederate general Robert E. Lee — including the tragic murder of Heather Heyer by James Fields — but also the anti-fascists (“Antifa”) counter-protesters who attended and engaged in street fights with the protesters.

On Twitter on Aug. 12, Trump deplored the violence, writing in his first response to the tragedy at 1:19 p.m., “We ALL must be united [and] condemn all that hate stands for. There is no place for this kind of violence in America. [Let’s] come together as one!”

Later in the day, he said at a speech in Bedminster, N.J. at 3:33 p.m., “we’re closely following the terrible events unfolding in Charlottesville, Virginia. We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence, on many sides. On many sides. It’s been going on for a long time in our country. Not Donald Trump, not Barack Obama. This has been going on for a long, long time. It has no place in America. What is vital now is a swift restoration of law and order and the protection of innocent lives. No citizen should ever fear for their safety and security in our society, and no child should ever be afraid to go outside and play, or be with their parents, and have a good time.”

Here, Trump had condemned all of the violence that occurred at the event including the murder by Fields and the violence between the protesters and the counter-protesters — and was roundly condemned, apparently by those who prefer some forms of violence over others.

To be clear, based on Charlottesville court records, attendees from both sides of the protest were arrested for assault and other charges, including Fields. For example, Troy Dunigan, was arrested for throwing objects at the Nazi protesters. Jacob Leigh Smith was arrested for attacking a journalist.

Journalist Sheryl Gay Stolberg reported violence on both sides on Twitter on Aug. 12, “The hard left seemed as hate-filled as alt-right. I saw club-wielding ‘Antifa’ beating white nationalists being led out of the park.”

So, indisputably, there was violence on both sides, neither of which can be justified, and Trump condemned it all. So too would have King, who lived through far worse, and through it all condemned all of the violence, even the violence that was committed on his cause’s behalf.

That is not to paint Trump as some sort of pacifist or advocate of non-violent resistance. He’s not. Not at all. But neither is he irresponsible to abhor the violence of Charlottesville — all of it — and urge all sides to stand down. He has a responsibility to restore civil order.

That is a demonstration of leadership at an extremely difficult moment. That is not always the popular path, the expedient one. King too was criticized in his lifetime by those who thought violence was warranted. But sometimes leadership means doing what others are afraid to do. King stood above it all, saying, “Violence as a way of achieving racial justice is both impractical and immoral… Violence is impractical because it is a descending spiral ending in destruction for all. It is immoral because it seeks to humiliate the opponent rather than win his understanding: it seeks to annihilate rather than convert. Violence is immoral because it thrives on hatred rather than love. It destroys community and makes brotherhood impossible. It leaves society in monologue rather than dialogue. Violence ends up defeating itself. It creates bitterness in the survivors and brutality in the destroyers.”

It also happens to be the law, where regardless of motive, physical violence cannot be tolerated except in self-defense. What if Trump had done the opposite and condemned the criminal violence of some while condoning the violence of others? Surely, the easy path would be to ignore those who attacked attendees of the Charlottesville protest, and simply focus on Fields’ murder.

But as the nation’s foremost law enforcement officer, Trump, the head of the executive branch, the President is obligated to apply the law equally. A police officer would have to behave no differently. White supremacist or Antifa, if you get violent, you’re going to jail. That is the law, and the President is supposed to enforce the law and set an example for all Americans — those with whom he agrees and disagrees. It would be irresponsible and wrong to condone instigating violence, taking matters into one’s own hands, whether against an anti-fascist or a Nazi.

At a very horrible moment in our history, on Aug. 12, the President demonstrated moral clarity. He wrote on Twitter at 5:19 p.m., “We must remember this truth: No matter our color, creed, religion or political party, we are ALL AMERICANS FIRST.” He later expressed condolences to the family of Heyer, and also of the officers who were killed in the line of duty in Charlottesville.

On Aug. 14, at the White House, Trump made an additional speech announcing a Justice Department civil rights investigation into the violence, stating, “No matter the color of our skin, we all live under the same laws, we all salute the same great flag, and we are all made by the same almighty God. We must love each other, show affection for each other, and unite together in condemnation of hatred, bigotry, and violence. We must rediscover the bonds of love and loyalty that bring us together as Americans. Racism is evil. And those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans. We are a nation founded on the truth that all of us are created equal. We are equal in the eyes of our Creator. We are equal under the law. And we are equal under our Constitution. Those who spread violence in the name of bigotry strike at the very core of America.”

Then on Aug. 15, at Trump Tower in New York City, Trump again blamed “both sides” for the violence, saying, “You had a group on one side and you had a group on the other and they came at each other with clubs and it was vicious…”

These messages are all consistent. They speak of restoring law and order, rejecting hatred and bigotry and nationally uniting against what is becoming a scourge of political violence. It could get worse from here. Much worse. And through it all, the only way it will stop is when those resorting to violence — all sides — lay down their arms.

The issue of what to do with Confederate statues can be dealt with at the local, state and federal levels depending on where they are located by institutions that we all can participate in. That is the proper venue for resolving these disputes, not violence.

Trump, like King, was intoning emphatically against political violence in all of its forms, working within the framework of our political institutions to achieve change and standing up for the civil society.

What are you standing for?

This is a guest post by Robert Romano Vice President of Public Policy of Americans for Limited Government.

[tishacp]

OK,  after several weeks with no posts I am finally writing my weekly rant! I’ve been collecting snippets of edited diatribes in responses to Facebook and Twitter posts, intending to formulate them into some sort of cohesive singular “rant” each week, but out of context, they are hard to follow and often change course midstream-such is the way of the Tisha-rant! Still, I think it’s better I post these things here than bombarding unsuspecting FB friends with repetitive, vitriolic ranting.

Oh, and while you are here, please stick around to check out the article my 17-yr-old budding-feminist daughter wrote on activism and reproductive rights, or better still, post a comment yourself or submit a piece of your own if you like. I’ll  happily post it for you, and probably ask you for a few more!!

On to the article:

If every woman who’s had an abortion took tomorrow off in protest, America would grind to a halt. And that would be symbolic: because women grind to a halt if they are not in control of their fertility. —Caitlin Moran

  I started responding to the plethora of posts and comments about Hillary Clinton and sexism recently without realizing the context of the day- the rueful legislation passed by Congress marginalizing women and the LGBT community. Awareness of this was quickly followed by the typical onslaught of attacks on progressives and Bernie Sanders by Hillary supporters and centrist Democrats still upset over mythical sexism and divisiveness caused by Bernie and all us angry “Bernie Bro’s” that no one can ever find. We simply disappear into the ethereal mist of hot air coming from their vehement attacks while ignoring (at least for the moment) the real sexists and gender-oppressors of the day sitting in Congress and our misogynistic, sexist, racist, TRULY divisive president, the orange-man Mr. T who instigated this attack against  our right to govern our own bodies.

I suppose it would be too much to ask that this strong opposition to sexism be aimed at the actual sexists who passed the unconstitutional legislation rather than the people who are fighting the hardest for gender equality protections and reproductive rights with Medicare-for-all coverage that includes ALL women’s health and reproductive needs, not just the ones a bunch of non-medical doctor in Congress decides is important.

Or, maybe at least for the moment, you can lay off the attacks against someone as they stand up for our healthcare rights and strong opposition against this kind of horrible legislation ( not to mention who hold a consistent 100% rating on the support of women’s rights issues as a legislater). It’s rather ironic seeing all these Bernie Sanders posts and tweets today condemning the utterly disappointing legislation congress just passed, championing the importance of protecting women’s rights, and  access to adequate, affordable health care coverage that actually includes abortions, gynecological exams, and contraception alongside these erroneous claims from neo-liberal centrists attacking  Bernie for his sexism and divisiveness. Bernie has never once, to my knowledge, responded to any of these inflammatory remarks, but rather continues to focus his and our attention on vital issues like these instead.

I know many of us, (myself included) from all sides of the issues can get caught up in arguments and reactionary responses to each other over our various forms of social media, but I got to say, Bernie Sanders is the least incendiary politician around when it comes to personal attacks or smearing. But if it makes you feel better to rail against the person leading the fight for Medicare for all, and promoting equal pay and opportunity for  women, affordable access to childcare for working families, and extended paid leave during illness or after giving birth-for both parents, rather than the sexist racist a-holes in congress and the white house who passed legislation that violates our civil liberties and protections and risks both the health and well-being of many  women around the country, especially the already marginalized, low-income women underserved in rural areas, as well as members of the LGBT community, well, then knock yourself out, I guess.

You’ll understand,  of course, if I and thousand of others think your machinations are ridiculous.

    Onto Hillary and sexism:

The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman’s life, to her well-being and dignity. When the government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a full adult human responsiblefor her own choices.

~ Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

  I started the day rebuking the idea that sexism was the main reason Hillary lost the election. Why we are still debating this or why I continue to get caught up in the debate are beyond me. Still, in light of recent events I’ve had to rethink my position a little. While I do not think it a prudent idea to marginalize gender-inequality in any way I do think there was more than sexism involved in why she lost the election. I also think fake feminism claims that hold Hillary Clinton up as the poster child for women’s rights and gender-equality issues is a bit of a stretch and maybe even harmful. Any sane person knows Hillary has never been exemplary on ANY issue, nor has she been consistent.

Women hold up signs during an International Women’s Day rally in Lahore, March 8, 2015. REUTERS/Mohsin Raza (PAKISTAN – Tags: SOCIETY) – RTR4SI82

  While she’s offered some important gains for women over equal pay and support of Planned Parenthood, when it comes to women’s rights and LGBT issues, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act notwithstanding,   Hillary has otherwise flipflopped. She’s changed her views more than once over LGBT protections and even waffled on reproductive health and pro-choice, at times. She supported significant policies like DOMA  and Doesn’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and waited until 2014 to come out in support of same-sex marriage and has been open to negotiations with rightwing Republicans when (and if)  they propose “reasonable”  changes to abortion rights.

Still, she isn’t  the reason Republicans are attacking our reproductive rights so that’s enough about Clinton on this issue, and instead, let’s start pushing back on what Congress and Trump are doing to our rights and civil liberties.

You cannot have maternal health without reproductive health. And reproductive health includes contraception and family planning and access to legal, safe abortion. —Hillary Rodham Clinton

  Forgetting, for a moment that this is a women’s health issue and not one that politicians without medical degrees or a vagina are qualified to make decisions on, it’s also, at least for the present, a protected right and not up for negotiation. We have to stop allowing legislators, especially sexist, out-of-touch male Republicans with anti-abortion crusader oppressive agenda’s to continue to think that what, who, how, when, where, if or why I do anything with my own body is any of their damn business.

How about, just for a day, we regulated the choices those 25 republican men decided for us without including a single woman in their negotiations on what THEY can do with their penises, or how about we pass  some legislation of our own  to control their reproductive and sexual health, and let’s face it, our basic human rights to decide if or when we become mothers and what decisions, if any,  we have about preventing pregnancies. What they’ve done hasn’t just taken away our health coverage, it’s taken our choices as well about what we can do with our bodies sexually and given those choices to sexist men intent on oppressing women. So if turn around is fair play, how about we set the limits for them on what they can or can’t decide about their reproductive and sexual organ and if they’re allowed to have sex outside of marriage without risking pregnancy or being fired for trying to prevent one without insurance for birth control. How about we take away their access to the plethora of health issues related to their sexual and reproductive organs and system, starting with viagra which is still covered by their healthcare plans, and condoms, while we’re at it. How about we prevent them from being treated for any of the sexually-transmitted diseases that Planned Parenthood offers that make up more than half their annual budget every year,  and lets throw in some other issues similar to what hospital maternity costs will be without any insurance and the restrictions to our access and ability to treat some of the other reproductive/sexual conditions now limited to us from.  Here are a few suggestions:

Inflammation of the penis.  redness, itching, swelling, and pain in the foreskin, usually due to a yeast or bacterial infection.

Paraphimosis, The foreskin becomes lodged behind the head and can’t contract, causing a medical emergency that can cause serious complications if not treated.

Penile cancer, a rare type of cancer that starts in the skin cells of the penis.

Papillomavirus,  An easily transmitted virus that causes genital warts and raises risks for penile cancer.

Testicular cancer

An inguinal hernia 

Hypospadias 

Peyronie’s disease

Low Testosterone/Sex Drive

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Epididymitis: inflammation of the coiled tubes that connect the testes usually caused by an infection, such as the sexually transmitted disease chlamydia, and results in pain and swelling next to one of the testicles.

Gonorrhea

Syphilis

Genital Herpes

Hepatitis B

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

~ Feel free to add your own additions to the list.

Tishacp.

  Sexism, Donald Trump & Hillary Clinton

OK,  after several weeks with no posts I am finally writing my weekly rant! I’ve been collecting snippets of edited diatribes in responses to Facebook and Twitter posts, intending to formulate them into some sort of cohesive singular “rant” each week, but out of context, they are hard to follow and often change course midstream-such is the way of the Tisha-rant!

Sexism, Donald Trump & Hillary Clinton OK,  after several weeks with no posts I am finally writing my weekly rant! I've been collecting snippets of edited diatribes in responses to Facebook and Twitter posts, intending to formulate them into some sort of cohesive singular "rant" each week, but out of context, they are hard to follow and often change course midstream-such is the way of the Tisha-rant!

[stopkingobama]

Martin Luther King condemned the violence on both sides, too

Image Credit: National Archives CC by SA 4.0

Someone has to be the adult in the room.

Whenever President Donald Trump — or any political leader — stands up to condemn all of the violence at a national tragedy such as Charlottesville, Va. regardless of the causes, political or otherwise, those calls should be embraced, lest the result be that some forms of political violence be justified — and perpetuated as a consequence.

That was what Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. preached. He said, “Hate begets hate; violence begets violence; toughness begets a greater toughness. We must meet the forces of hate with the power of love… Our aim must never be to defeat or humiliate the white man, but to win his friendship and understanding.”

King deplored the violence on all sides of the national pursuit of racial equality. In his book, “Where do we go from here: Chaos or community?” King condemned the “terror of extremist white violence” and at the same time gave an equal share of the blame for violence to those who resorted to riots to end racial oppression and segregation: “in several Northern and Western cities, most tragically in Watts, young Negroes had exploded in violence. In an irrational burst of rage they had sought to say something, but the flames had blackened both themselves and their oppressors.”

While King understood why the riots occurred — he called them the “language of the unheard” — and yet he did not justify them, instead saying, “riots are socially destructive and self-defeating” and “there’s no practical or moral answer in the realm of violence” and “there is no violent solution” to social injustices.

Was King morally equating those who perpetuated racial injustice and those who opposed it, as Trump is now accused? No. But he was saying resorting to violence to achieve political ends, regardless of the motive, was unquestionably immoral, even in the pursuit of racial justice. That is all.

But it was not simply a message of non-violence as its own end. King never lost sight of his goals: “it is not enough for me to stand before you tonight and condemn riots. It would be morally irresponsible for me to do that without, at the same time, condemning the contingent, intolerable conditions that exist in our society.” He urged legislation via our political institutions, not physical confrontation, to resolve the evils of segregation.

King was being the adult in the room. He was right. While the nation was tearing itself apart over a true injustice, government-forced racial segregation, he pursued non-violent, political means to achieve the changes he sought. In the face of racial violence, he preached a non-violent response. He kept the moral high ground. His view was that violence would only lead to more violence, and so brokered no quarter for those who resorted to it — whether they were fighting for or against racial injustice.

At question today is whether President Trump should have condemned not only the violence in Charlottesville, Va. perpetrated by hateful white supremacists attending the rally opposing the removal of a statue of Confederate general Robert E. Lee — including the tragic murder of Heather Heyer by James Fields — but also the anti-fascists (“Antifa”) counter-protesters who attended and engaged in street fights with the protesters.

On Twitter on Aug. 12, Trump deplored the violence, writing in his first response to the tragedy at 1:19 p.m., “We ALL must be united [and] condemn all that hate stands for. There is no place for this kind of violence in America. [Let’s] come together as one!”

Later in the day, he said at a speech in Bedminster, N.J. at 3:33 p.m., “we’re closely following the terrible events unfolding in Charlottesville, Virginia. We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence, on many sides. On many sides. It’s been going on for a long time in our country. Not Donald Trump, not Barack Obama. This has been going on for a long, long time. It has no place in America. What is vital now is a swift restoration of law and order and the protection of innocent lives. No citizen should ever fear for their safety and security in our society, and no child should ever be afraid to go outside and play, or be with their parents, and have a good time.”

Here, Trump had condemned all of the violence that occurred at the event including the murder by Fields and the violence between the protesters and the counter-protesters — and was roundly condemned, apparently by those who prefer some forms of violence over others.

To be clear, based on Charlottesville court records, attendees from both sides of the protest were arrested for assault and other charges, including Fields. For example, Troy Dunigan, was arrested for throwing objects at the Nazi protesters. Jacob Leigh Smith was arrested for attacking a journalist.

Journalist Sheryl Gay Stolberg reported violence on both sides on Twitter on Aug. 12, “The hard left seemed as hate-filled as alt-right. I saw club-wielding ‘Antifa’ beating white nationalists being led out of the park.”

So, indisputably, there was violence on both sides, neither of which can be justified, and Trump condemned it all. So too would have King, who lived through far worse, and through it all condemned all of the violence, even the violence that was committed on his cause’s behalf.

That is not to paint Trump as some sort of pacifist or advocate of non-violent resistance. He’s not. Not at all. But neither is he irresponsible to abhor the violence of Charlottesville — all of it — and urge all sides to stand down. He has a responsibility to restore civil order.

That is a demonstration of leadership at an extremely difficult moment. That is not always the popular path, the expedient one. King too was criticized in his lifetime by those who thought violence was warranted. But sometimes leadership means doing what others are afraid to do. King stood above it all, saying, “Violence as a way of achieving racial justice is both impractical and immoral… Violence is impractical because it is a descending spiral ending in destruction for all. It is immoral because it seeks to humiliate the opponent rather than win his understanding: it seeks to annihilate rather than convert. Violence is immoral because it thrives on hatred rather than love. It destroys community and makes brotherhood impossible. It leaves society in monologue rather than dialogue. Violence ends up defeating itself. It creates bitterness in the survivors and brutality in the destroyers.”

It also happens to be the law, where regardless of motive, physical violence cannot be tolerated except in self-defense. What if Trump had done the opposite and condemned the criminal violence of some while condoning the violence of others? Surely, the easy path would be to ignore those who attacked attendees of the Charlottesville protest, and simply focus on Fields’ murder.

But as the nation’s foremost law enforcement officer, Trump, the head of the executive branch, the President is obligated to apply the law equally. A police officer would have to behave no differently. White supremacist or Antifa, if you get violent, you’re going to jail. That is the law, and the President is supposed to enforce the law and set an example for all Americans — those with whom he agrees and disagrees. It would be irresponsible and wrong to condone instigating violence, taking matters into one’s own hands, whether against an anti-fascist or a Nazi.

At a very horrible moment in our history, on Aug. 12, the President demonstrated moral clarity. He wrote on Twitter at 5:19 p.m., “We must remember this truth: No matter our color, creed, religion or political party, we are ALL AMERICANS FIRST.” He later expressed condolences to the family of Heyer, and also of the officers who were killed in the line of duty in Charlottesville.

On Aug. 14, at the White House, Trump made an additional speech announcing a Justice Department civil rights investigation into the violence, stating, “No matter the color of our skin, we all live under the same laws, we all salute the same great flag, and we are all made by the same almighty God. We must love each other, show affection for each other, and unite together in condemnation of hatred, bigotry, and violence. We must rediscover the bonds of love and loyalty that bring us together as Americans. Racism is evil. And those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the KKK, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans. We are a nation founded on the truth that all of us are created equal. We are equal in the eyes of our Creator. We are equal under the law. And we are equal under our Constitution. Those who spread violence in the name of bigotry strike at the very core of America.”

Then on Aug. 15, at Trump Tower in New York City, Trump again blamed “both sides” for the violence, saying, “You had a group on one side and you had a group on the other and they came at each other with clubs and it was vicious…”

These messages are all consistent. They speak of restoring law and order, rejecting hatred and bigotry and nationally uniting against what is becoming a scourge of political violence. It could get worse from here. Much worse. And through it all, the only way it will stop is when those resorting to violence — all sides — lay down their arms.

The issue of what to do with Confederate statues can be dealt with at the local, state and federal levels depending on where they are located by institutions that we all can participate in. That is the proper venue for resolving these disputes, not violence.

Trump, like King, was intoning emphatically against political violence in all of its forms, working within the framework of our political institutions to achieve change and standing up for the civil society.

What are you standing for?

This is a guest post by Robert Romano Vice President of Public Policy of Americans for Limited Government.

[tishacp]

OK,  after several weeks with no posts I am finally writing my weekly rant! I’ve been collecting snippets of edited diatribes in responses to Facebook and Twitter posts, intending to formulate them into some sort of cohesive singular “rant” each week, but out of context, they are hard to follow and often change course midstream-such is the way of the Tisha-rant! Still, I think it’s better I post these things here than bombarding unsuspecting FB friends with repetitive, vitriolic ranting.

Oh, and while you are here, please stick around to check out the article my 17-yr-old budding-feminist daughter wrote on activism and reproductive rights, or better still, post a comment yourself or submit a piece of your own if you like. I’ll  happily post it for you, and probably ask you for a few more!!

On to the article:

If every woman who’s had an abortion took tomorrow off in protest, America would grind to a halt. And that would be symbolic: because women grind to a halt if they are not in control of their fertility. —Caitlin Moran

  I started responding to the plethora of posts and comments about Hillary Clinton and sexism recently without realizing the context of the day- the rueful legislation passed by Congress marginalizing women and the LGBT community. Awareness of this was quickly followed by the typical onslaught of attacks on progressives and Bernie Sanders by Hillary supporters and centrist Democrats still upset over mythical sexism and divisiveness caused by Bernie and all us angry “Bernie Bro’s” that no one can ever find. We simply disappear into the ethereal mist of hot air coming from their vehement attacks while ignoring (at least for the moment) the real sexists and gender-oppressors of the day sitting in Congress and our misogynistic, sexist, racist, TRULY divisive president, the orange-man Mr. T who instigated this attack against  our right to govern our own bodies.

I suppose it would be too much to ask that this strong opposition to sexism be aimed at the actual sexists who passed the unconstitutional legislation rather than the people who are fighting the hardest for gender equality protections and reproductive rights with Medicare-for-all coverage that includes ALL women’s health and reproductive needs, not just the ones a bunch of non-medical doctor in Congress decides is important.

Or, maybe at least for the moment, you can lay off the attacks against someone as they stand up for our healthcare rights and strong opposition against this kind of horrible legislation ( not to mention who hold a consistent 100% rating on the support of women’s rights issues as a legislater). It’s rather ironic seeing all these Bernie Sanders posts and tweets today condemning the utterly disappointing legislation congress just passed, championing the importance of protecting women’s rights, and  access to adequate, affordable health care coverage that actually includes abortions, gynecological exams, and contraception alongside these erroneous claims from neo-liberal centrists attacking  Bernie for his sexism and divisiveness. Bernie has never once, to my knowledge, responded to any of these inflammatory remarks, but rather continues to focus his and our attention on vital issues like these instead.

I know many of us, (myself included) from all sides of the issues can get caught up in arguments and reactionary responses to each other over our various forms of social media, but I got to say, Bernie Sanders is the least incendiary politician around when it comes to personal attacks or smearing. But if it makes you feel better to rail against the person leading the fight for Medicare for all, and promoting equal pay and opportunity for  women, affordable access to childcare for working families, and extended paid leave during illness or after giving birth-for both parents, rather than the sexist racist a-holes in congress and the white house who passed legislation that violates our civil liberties and protections and risks both the health and well-being of many  women around the country, especially the already marginalized, low-income women underserved in rural areas, as well as members of the LGBT community, well, then knock yourself out, I guess.

You’ll understand,  of course, if I and thousand of others think your machinations are ridiculous.

    Onto Hillary and sexism:

The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman’s life, to her well-being and dignity. When the government controls that decision for her, she is being treated as less than a full adult human responsiblefor her own choices.

~ Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg

  I started the day rebuking the idea that sexism was the main reason Hillary lost the election. Why we are still debating this or why I continue to get caught up in the debate are beyond me. Still, in light of recent events I’ve had to rethink my position a little. While I do not think it a prudent idea to marginalize gender-inequality in any way I do think there was more than sexism involved in why she lost the election. I also think fake feminism claims that hold Hillary Clinton up as the poster child for women’s rights and gender-equality issues is a bit of a stretch and maybe even harmful. Any sane person knows Hillary has never been exemplary on ANY issue, nor has she been consistent.

Women hold up signs during an International Women’s Day rally in Lahore, March 8, 2015. REUTERS/Mohsin Raza (PAKISTAN – Tags: SOCIETY) – RTR4SI82

  While she’s offered some important gains for women over equal pay and support of Planned Parenthood, when it comes to women’s rights and LGBT issues, the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act notwithstanding,   Hillary has otherwise flipflopped. She’s changed her views more than once over LGBT protections and even waffled on reproductive health and pro-choice, at times. She supported significant policies like DOMA  and Doesn’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and waited until 2014 to come out in support of same-sex marriage and has been open to negotiations with rightwing Republicans when (and if)  they propose “reasonable”  changes to abortion rights.

Still, she isn’t  the reason Republicans are attacking our reproductive rights so that’s enough about Clinton on this issue, and instead, let’s start pushing back on what Congress and Trump are doing to our rights and civil liberties.

You cannot have maternal health without reproductive health. And reproductive health includes contraception and family planning and access to legal, safe abortion. —Hillary Rodham Clinton

  Forgetting, for a moment that this is a women’s health issue and not one that politicians without medical degrees or a vagina are qualified to make decisions on, it’s also, at least for the present, a protected right and not up for negotiation. We have to stop allowing legislators, especially sexist, out-of-touch male Republicans with anti-abortion crusader oppressive agenda’s to continue to think that what, who, how, when, where, if or why I do anything with my own body is any of their damn business.

How about, just for a day, we regulated the choices those 25 republican men decided for us without including a single woman in their negotiations on what THEY can do with their penises, or how about we pass  some legislation of our own  to control their reproductive and sexual health, and let’s face it, our basic human rights to decide if or when we become mothers and what decisions, if any,  we have about preventing pregnancies. What they’ve done hasn’t just taken away our health coverage, it’s taken our choices as well about what we can do with our bodies sexually and given those choices to sexist men intent on oppressing women. So if turn around is fair play, how about we set the limits for them on what they can or can’t decide about their reproductive and sexual organ and if they’re allowed to have sex outside of marriage without risking pregnancy or being fired for trying to prevent one without insurance for birth control. How about we take away their access to the plethora of health issues related to their sexual and reproductive organs and system, starting with viagra which is still covered by their healthcare plans, and condoms, while we’re at it. How about we prevent them from being treated for any of the sexually-transmitted diseases that Planned Parenthood offers that make up more than half their annual budget every year,  and lets throw in some other issues similar to what hospital maternity costs will be without any insurance and the restrictions to our access and ability to treat some of the other reproductive/sexual conditions now limited to us from.  Here are a few suggestions:

Inflammation of the penis.  redness, itching, swelling, and pain in the foreskin, usually due to a yeast or bacterial infection.

Paraphimosis, The foreskin becomes lodged behind the head and can’t contract, causing a medical emergency that can cause serious complications if not treated.

Penile cancer, a rare type of cancer that starts in the skin cells of the penis.

Papillomavirus,  An easily transmitted virus that causes genital warts and raises risks for penile cancer.

Testicular cancer

An inguinal hernia 

Hypospadias 

Peyronie’s disease

Low Testosterone/Sex Drive

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Epididymitis: inflammation of the coiled tubes that connect the testes usually caused by an infection, such as the sexually transmitted disease chlamydia, and results in pain and swelling next to one of the testicles.

Gonorrhea

Syphilis

Genital Herpes

Hepatitis B

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

~ Feel free to add your own additions to the list.

Tishacp.

  Sexism, Donald Trump & Hillary Clinton OK,  after several weeks with no posts I am finally writing my weekly rant! I've been collecting snippets of edited diatribes in responses to Facebook and Twitter posts, intending to formulate them into some sort of cohesive singular "rant" each week, but out of context, they are hard to follow and often change course midstream-such is the way of the Tisha-rant!