Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: WTF, O? Previous entry: Please pass me the crown and sceptre as I ascend to the throne as ‘her haughty Carolina highness’

Shocking discovery: Kids who fear sex are open to anti-sex messages

Robert McCartney wrote a puff piece celebrating organized misogyny for the WaPo, and the thing is full of unintentional comedy.  Why?  Because McCartney decided to focus on the presence of young people at the March for Life, which requires tacitly admitting that the message of the anti-choice movement is perfectly pitched for bitter old cranks lashing out at young women.  (Granted, I’ve seen some bitter old cranks in their 20s, and I’m impressed to know they’ve already decided that it’s over for them and they’re going to hate on others.)  But there is another group who is often open to hearing wack-a-doodle anti-sex hysteria: fearful virgins.  (Blah blah usual disclaimer about how no, I’m not talking about you if you’re a liberal-minded, pro-sex virgin, so please be calm.)  I think it was Susie Bright who pointed out that it’s not that hard to get a bunch of young people who are not quite ready to be sexually active to run around going, “Ew, sex!” and to take highly judgmental, ill-thought-out positions about people who are sexually active.  And of course, the anti-choice movement is going to be keenly interested in putting as many nubile virgins out front as they can find, and probably for reasons sane people would see as creepy, such as the religious right’s obsession with nubile virgins.  McCartney himself got to interview many nubile virgins, and comedy ensued.

There were numerous large groups of teenagers, many bused in by Roman Catholic schools and youth groups. They and their adult leaders said the youths were taught from an early age to oppose abortion…..

“People our age are going to be the ones to change, to be the future leaders,” said Lauren Powers, 16, who came with a group from an all-girls Catholic school in Milwaukee.

Let us all ponder for a moment that the anti-choice movement is willing to put a bunch of Catholic school girls out there to hang out with the creepy old men giving off the strong stench of pervert that hang out around women’s health clinics and scream all their bitterness at patients.  If that’s not misogyny, I don’t know what is. 

And it probably does feel that way when you’re in a group organized by adults to protest something you don’t understand yet.  But I’ll bet this young lady’s peers are already starting to drift away, starting sexual relationships with boys and beginning to realize that the abstinence-until-marriage-no-birth-control message is a tad unrealistic.  Maybe a few are realizing they don’t like boys, but like girls, and are coming around to realizing that doesn’t mean they have horns and are out to destroy the world.  Future leaders, picked off one by one by the allure of sexuality and maturity, until just a few are left to grow bitter because their own hang-ups mean they were left out of the fun. 

After I asked to interview them, a group of eighth-graders from St. Mark School, a private Catholic school in Catonsville, sang a song they wrote, based on a Miley Cyrus tune:

Hands up for saving the babies;
Bad doctors go away . . .
We’re saving the babies;
You know they’re going to be okay.

Again, I fail to see why I should be impressed that anti-choicers were able to hoodwink a few 13-year-olds into buying their childish worldview that paints doctors as fang-dripping villains and fetuses as fully-formed babies, floating free of their mothers’ bodies.  Girls that age are predisposed to think of gynecologists as unbelievably scary—-I remember gathering around with a few friends to hear the horror stories from one girl who had to go see one because she had some minor problem, and how terrifying the whole process seemed—-and they’re also predisposed to listen to fantasies about pregnancy that place them outside of their body, because when you’re 13, being pregnant seems about as weird as carrying an alien parasite that’s going to burst out of stomach at dinner.  That these girls have such a simplistic view of the situation isn’t cause to celebrate, since maturity and complexity is around the corner to chip away at that. 


Here’s the saddest quote:

Young people in the March for Life said they thought they were more opposed to abortion than people in their parents’ generation because they had more information about the issue, in part because of their education.

“We start learning early on why it’s wrong. I don’t think they got the chance to do that,” said Kelly Brennan, 17, who came here with a group from Archbishop Ryan High School in Philadelphia.

Except, of course, that their elders have explicitly decided that keeping kids ignorant is a value, thus abstinence-only education.  Being subject to mountains of hysterical religious propaganda about the evils of sexuality isn’t “information”.  Much of what she’s talking about are blatant lies: that condoms don’t work, that a 12-week-old fetus is as developed as a newborn, that abortion causes mental illness and breast cancer, that having sex with more than one person will doom you to die of cervical cancer, that being a virgin when you marry means you won’t ever get divorced, that Planned Parenthood is a for-profit institution that makes most of its money off abortion, that contraception is made not to work so that you’ll get more abortions, that doctors kill already born babies, that the birth control pill works by sloughing off fertilized eggs (it works by suppressing ovulation), and that if you have sex before marriage, men won’t find you loveable anymore. We can hope that Brennan realizes that she’s been lied to, and that if information does influence opinion, then accurate information means having better opinions.  And maybe she will learn.  Like I said, starting to discover your own desires to have sexual relationships often changes your relationship to this anti-sex hysteria. 

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 10:15 AM • (90) Comments

Something about the two figures in this picture sums up the march perfectly.

Comment #1: cminus  on  01/26  at  11:37 AM

It’s really easy for people to be anti-choice when they think they’ll never have to make that choice.  When I was 14 and still a virgin, I was that wishy-washy pro-choice type that thought abortions were bad, but that they shouldn’t be illegal.  When I was 17, I was on the pill but knew the importance of using a condom.  However, I was hooking up with a boy from the local Catholic school, and he couldn’t maintain and erection with a condom on.  I felt sorry for him and didn’t want to embarrass him, so I did it without a condom.  I didn’t get pregnant (because of the pill), but I realized it was a mistake, and I realized just how easy it could be for a woman to get pregnant.  If I had gotten pregnant at that age, I almost surely would have had an abortion.  I talked about this with that boy afterward, and found out that he was anti-choice, which wasn’t that surprising considering he went to Catholic school, and because we were both young and naive.  I realized that forced-birth would basically be a punishment for being sensitive to a boy’s fragile ego.  Even though it was a mistake to not use a condom, I realized that women shouldn’t have to pay for life for such a well-intentioned but naive mistake.  I seem to have gotten through to the guy, although I haven’t talked to him since high school so he might have reverted.  It’s just so easy to be “idealistic” about abortion until reality kicks in.

I know that religion gets a bad rap, but not all religious people are terrible.  I went to a fairly liberal church, but there was a wide range of beliefs in the congregation (on of my best friends wouldn’t even date boys).  However, one of the things that pushed me along the way to becoming truly pro-choice was actually a male youth pastor.  During one of our classes, we talked about the subject, and he said that since an unwanted or dangerous pregnancy is not something he’ll ever have to face, he felt that it wasn’t his place to judge women who have to make that choice, and I’m positive that he was being genuine.  Now, I’m not gonna say that men shouldn’t be allowed to have an opinion, but his viewpoint definitely made me realize that it’s really easy to ignore reality when judging people about anything.

Comment #2: bananacat  on  01/26  at  11:37 AM

good post, amanda, but i think you misread the part of the post story about amanda pelletier. it says she is a supporter of abortion rights and her fellow supporters are complacent.

Comment #3: headcheeez  on  01/26  at  11:40 AM

Ugh, you’re right.  Dammit, I’ll fix it.

Comment #4: Amanda Marcotte  on  01/26  at  11:45 AM

Yeah, he was just trying to prove that young people don’t support abortion rights.  They do, generally speaking.  It’s just that they don’t necessarily realize how hard it is to get an abortion.

Comment #5: Amanda Marcotte  on  01/26  at  11:46 AM

cminus: Just ‘wow’ on that pic.  I can see the pro-life draining out of that young woman, even in the still photo.

Comment #6: NBarnes  on  01/26  at  11:47 AM

Per cat’s comment—-yeah, I think a lot of people are one pregnancy scare away from getting a firm opinion on the subject.

Comment #7: Amanda Marcotte  on  01/26  at  11:52 AM

Being subject to mountains of hysterical religious propaganda about the evils of sexuality isn’t “information”.  Much of what she’s talking about are blatant lies:

A local PBS station has been running a documentary about teen pregnancy and motherhood in Memphis, which focuses on the megachurch’s “outreach” missions to teen women below the poverty line. Because Memphis is still one of the nation’s most segregated cities, this essentially entails clueless, middle-aged white women visiting black neighborhoods like they’re going on safari, and paternalistically “mentoring” pregnant young african-american women. All of the white ladies have the teens refer to them as “Miss Lily”, or whatever their first name happens to be, which just grates on me.

The filmmakers talk to one young woman who had been thinking of having an abortion and ask her why she decided to keep the baby. She tells them how “Miss Julie” and “Miss Anne” came over and read her Bible verses explaining how abortion is murder (despite the fact that abortion isn’t even mentioned in the Bible), and that they told her how women who have abortions are mentally damaged by it, and how it can increase your risk of cancer, and that if you have an abortion, you won’t be able to have any more babies (which, at least in this one case answers the stupid/evil question, since you couldn’t make that claim while also complaining about women who have multiple abortions).

The best part (for ironic definitions of “best”) was when one woman held a baby shower for the girl she was mentoring, but wouldn’t hold it in the church because the kid wasn’t married.

The whole thing is built on lies and deception, and I would argue, a strong dose of racism* (don’t see a lot of faces that aren’t white in that picture up there). They depend on ignorance, which is why they’ve worked so hard to discredit and underfund education for the last few decades.

*Interestingly, I’ve been reading Republican Gomorrah, which spends the first few chapters briefly going over the history of the early Christian Right and it’s ties to Reconstructionism and other insane fringe groups. It talks about a man named Francis Schaeffer who ran a hippie-jesus commune until he flipped his shit over abortion being legalized. He started trying really hard to get American evangelicals to start focusing on anti-abortion efforts, but couldn’t get much interest going at the time because they were all so focused on being pro-segregation (see: Jerry Falwell and the rise of white’s only “christian” schools).

Comment #8: Egnu Cledge  on  01/26  at  12:16 PM

” . . it’s not that hard to get a bunch of young people who are not quite ready to be sexually active to run around going, “Ew, sex!” and to take highly judgmental, ill-thought-out positions about people who are sexually active.”

Which I think led to my whole disenchantment with organized Christianity as teen - this pervasive peer pressure or groupthink that I was constantly exposed to, that ‘we’re going to be celibate until marriage, and abortions are icky’ that was espoused in youth groups.

And then seeing the same individuals macking in back rooms at school or at parties, usually in various states of undress.

It’s not that they’re always immature for sexual activity, but that there is rank and early hypocrisy by teens of their own actions and desires in religious settings.  Organizers and leaders encourage it for all the reasons mentioned previously.  Everyone involved gets a first class ticket on the boat De Nile.

Comment #9: idiosynchronic  on  01/26  at  12:26 PM

As a friend of mine who grew up Pentacostal put it, “There’s only one reason teenagers get involved in a church—-trust me, it’s not a sudden interest in theology.”

Comment #10: Dark Avenger Guardian Chow Mein  on  01/26  at  12:37 PM

As pro-choice as I am now, when I was in middle school and even high school I was very uncomfortable with the idea of abortion—in spite of the fact that my parents are generally pro-choice and that my parish church was not nearly as fervently anti-abortion as most.  In retrospect, so much of this had to do with my adolescent anxiety about sexuality and how women should behave. I vividly remember having a conversation about abortion with a friend when I was maybe 13, and telling her that I thought that girls who had sex should have to “take responsibility” for that decision and essentially would get what they deserved by having a baby.  Thinking back to myself saying the same kind of anti-choice things then that I argue against now makes me cringe and reminds me how scared I was about having to navigate the world of sex and relationships—I just desperately wanted there to be black-and-white rules that could tell me what and who was good or bad and to be able to separate myself from those “bad” girls. 
What changed towards the end of high school was exactly what you said in this piece, Amanda.  My friends and I started having sexual relationships and seeing how real life works, and I came to understand that women like me did deserve say over their sexuality, bodies, and futures.

Comment #11: Caro13  on  01/26  at  12:40 PM

As a friend of mine who grew up Pentacostal put it, “There’s only one reason teenagers get involved in a church—-trust me, it’s not a sudden interest in theology.”

I can’t tell you how many of my friend’s tales of their first time begin with “I was at this church retreat…”

Comment #12: Egnu Cledge  on  01/26  at  12:47 PM

Wow…pretty much sums up my whole childhood. Catholic K-10, bussed trip to the state capitol for abortion protest thingies (I live in an “F” state according to NARAL, hugely anti-choice, and our state senate just passed one of those clockwork orange ultrasound bills)...and yet here I am, a big ole slutty mcslut slut pro-choice feminist. Nice try, church!

Comment #13: SweetT  on  01/26  at  12:56 PM

It was easy for me as a teenage virgin to be pro-life.  I didn’t have to think about the mess that is life, and how most things are not black and white, and how different people may make different choices and want different things.  I was a virgin - it was easy to condemn choices I didn’t have to make.

Once I had started reading Pandagon, and had the intellectual inconsistencies of the forced birthers pointed out, and actually had sex and faced the possibility of making these choices for myself and my body - I am now rabidly in favor of reproductive justice.

Comment #14: syfr  on  01/26  at  01:14 PM

Yeah, adolescent self-centeredness (“my experience defines everyone!”) combines really easily with “Having sex right now is not a good idea for me personally” to make for a retrospectively humorous mix of sanctimony and stupidity. I mean, at age 17 I was personally going to Smash Capitalism Single-Handedly and Never Give In To The Man, so I feel like I’ve got a good idea of how easy it is to take yourself way too seriously in high school and not take the experiences of actual adults making complex decisions into account.

I know this has been said before, but it bears restating: I think it’s pretty normal in our culture for sex to seem like the biggest deal in the world, up until you actually have sex. The longer you put off getting it on, the huger a deal you seem to make it in your head. I remember having conversations about this with a friend of mine freshman year who was an extremely hardcore Christian - she kept trying to insist that she was putting off something that would be instantly awesome-feeling no matter what because she loved Jesus more, and I kept trying to explain about the reality of depressing collegiate one-night stands with guys who watch too much porn as well as awesome sex with people you actually like. I wasn’t trying to be sex-negative, it’s just that I felt like she was making sex out to be a much bigger (and more fun, right out of the gate) deal than it actually was, when in reality it’s like any other human activity, with a learning curve and a lot of personal variation. I really feel like blowing the whole thing out of proportion into the Biggest Deal Ever is a big part of the abstinence-education, every-fetus-is-einstein mentality.

Comment #15: purpleshoes  on  01/26  at  01:19 PM

I’m in complete agreeance with the posters stating that it’s easy to be pro-life when you’re a sheltered teenage virgin being spoonfed strict religious dogma. I was raised in a very Mormon household and thought for all of my formative years that I was against abortion and sex outside of marriage in general. I never had to consider any other options or ways of life, because I wasn’t allowed to. Thankfully neither my parents nor the Church ever shipped me to an anti-choice march, but everything I heard at church and at home labeled even the most vanilla, PinV sex acts as evil if they were performed outside of marriage (and forget about anything “deviant”). College gave me the very cliched but true “whole new world” experience: I met people, particularly men, who treated me respectfully and listened to my opinions; I took political science and anthropology classes and FINALLY learned about the human reproductive systems and evolutionary theory; and basically I ended up a raging pro-choice feminist who loves to fuck.

Once the world opens up like that, I think it’s very difficult to remain stuck in a previous mindset. You really have to TRY to not change at all in a college setting, which I guess is why so many fundamenalist sects love to make their kids go to church schools (hai BYU!).

Comment #16: Menshevixen  on  01/26  at  01:22 PM

All of the white ladies have the teens refer to them as “Miss Lily”, or whatever their first name happens to be, which just grates on me.

I agree; this is so condescending.  When I was a teenager and heavily involved in baby-sitting and other child-related organized activities, this was the most common way that children were told to address their caregivers.  I actually told the children to just call me by regular name, because I thought this practice was condescending even for 4 year-olds.  It’s just plain ridiculous for teenagers.

She tells them how “Miss Julie” and “Miss Anne” came over and read her Bible verses explaining how abortion is murder (despite the fact that abortion isn’t even mentioned in the Bible)

You know, I’ve been asking anti-choicers for years how they justify their stance by using the Bible, and I can’t get an answer out of any of them.  I’m just so curious which verses they use, because I’ve looked closely and haven’t found any that even suggest that abortion is murder (actually, I’ve found the complete opposite).  Maybe I should pretend to be pregnant and considering abortion just to finally get this answer out of them.

Which I think led to my whole disenchantment with organized Christianity as teen - this pervasive peer pressure or groupthink that I was constantly exposed to,

You know, it’s funny.  When I was in high school, the only “bad” thing I did was hooking up.  I had plenty of friends who smoke, drank, and did drugs, and I just wanted into those things, and they were cool with that.  None of my friends ever pressured to me do drugs, or even suggested it.  They respected my choice.  I had another group of friends who were super-duper religious, and they pressured me constantly into attending an after school Christian club.  I went to church with these friends, but I didn’t really like the idea of the club for various, non-religious reasons.  Anyway, they pressured me enough and I went.  On time I pointed out to them in a joking way that they only “peer pressure” I ever go was from them, to go to the club.  In complete seriousness, they explained that peer pressure is actually a good thing if it makes you do something good.  I think that’s their attitude behind social shaming.

I vividly remember having a conversation about abortion with a friend when I was maybe 13, and telling her that I thought that girls who had sex should have to “take responsibility” for that decision and essentially would get what they deserved by having a baby.

I felt sort of similarly when I was 13.  That’s exactly why I don’t believe that anti-choicers are arguing in good faith when they pretend that they only care about the precious embryos.  They’re basically overgrown middle-schoolers who think that babies are a punishment, which is exactly why they tend to support rape exceptions.  If they really cared about embryos, they wouldn’t care what caused it.  Babies should not be punishment.  That shouldn’t be a controversial idea.

Comment #17: bananacat  on  01/26  at  01:30 PM

If that’s the Miley Cyrus song I’m thinking of, those kids have the rhythm all wrong.

Comment #18: Emily  on  01/26  at  01:33 PM

I had not really thought about how church dogma takes advantage of a teenager’s fear of Teh Sex (especially girls, who if they read romance novels (cough) are taught that The First Time Hurts) to make them anti-abortion crusaders.

Plus, if you’re raised in a super-patriarchal atmosphere and you’re a girl, you really get the feeling that sex is not so hot—aside from all the sexxy marriage-night-talk, you look around at the older women in your church and they don’t particularly look like they and their husbands are having lots of sexxy fun times. They mostly look tired, or annoyed. Usually with something stupid their husbands said or did.

Comment #19: emjaybee  on  01/26  at  01:33 PM

Ah, the solipsism of youth.  My mother was slut-shamed by her father in the 1950s, and it made her a fervently pro-choice feminist.  The slut-shaming and victim-blaming that surrounds discussions of abortion definitely prevents people from looking at it and researching it honestly.

I’ve known too many “good pure girls” who would never dream of an abortion get one and keep it secret to view the forced birthers as anything but rank hypocrites using ill-informed and brainwashed children to advance their woman-hating agenda.  Those children will be utterly bewildered by how quickly the nice old men will turn on them as soon as they discover that the world isn’t black and white and that sex isn’t icky.

I really, really would like to not have yet another discussion with a teenager about how to buy and use condoms *after* a pregnancy scare.

Comment #20: attack_laurel  on  01/26  at  01:36 PM

Hmmm, I had never thought of this - the naivete yes, but not the fear.  My fear of sex/pregnancy/gynecology led me to be extremely pro-choice from very early on; in fact, it was the thing that got me interested in politics in the first place.  I can sort of see how some people would have the opposite reaction, though.

I’ve always wondered how/why people get over those fears, though.  At 28, married and having lost my virginity 9 years ago, I still feel just as panicked at the thought of pregnancy and gynecology as I did at 15, and I’ve never gotten over a general distaste for sex.  No religion, shaming, or abuse involved - just lifelong fear and loathing that no amount of therapy can help, apparently.  I hope that doesn’t happen to these girls…

Comment #21: Kirjava  on  01/26  at  01:47 PM

catgirl,

On your first comment, I hadn’t heard the youth pastor’s take from very many others, but it’s been my reasoning for my ardent pro-choice stance from Day 1.  If I live to be a billion years old, I will never get pregnant.  It’s physically impossible.  What right do I have to tell another human being what they can and cannot do with their body, even if I contributed half of the DNA to the potential child.

And it seems like most of the people I know who were super hung-up about sex and abortion and all of that during our teenage years finally decided to pull the stick out of their collective asses and matured, men and women alike.  I hope the teenagers being hoodwinked by fear and misinformation in the article wake up sooner rather than later.

Comment #22: bouj  on  01/26  at  01:47 PM

I know this has been said before, but it bears restating: I think it’s pretty normal in our culture for sex to seem like the biggest deal in the world, up until you actually have sex.

Yeah, didn’t this happen recently when one of the purity-ring Jonas brothers got married and said that sex wasn’t as huge as he expected it to be?

Comment #23: bananacat  on  01/26  at  01:48 PM

I can’t tell you how many of my friend’s tales of their first time begin with “I was at this church retreat…”
Comment #12: Egnu Cledge on 01/26 at 10:47 AM

Yeah, and that seems to be a mainstay of church recruiting - to hold events that allow teens a shitload more privacy/freedom than uptight religious parents ever would allow them elsewhere.

Going rollerskating with a member of the opposite sex at a public rink,driven there by parents of one or the other - not until you’re 16 Missy/Mister.
Going on a weekend camping trip supervised at a 10-1 ratio by college student “adults” barely two years older than you?  ANd a token priest or minister (the former often a hebephile himself)  - sure, honey, let me help you pack.

Comment #24: phylosopher  on  01/26  at  02:09 PM

I was raised in a Catholic “Pro-Life” household, and now I’m a feminist and volunteer with Planned Parenthood and NOW, so there’s hope for Brennan.  Although I was never told I wouldn’t get divorced if I was a virgin at marriage, I was just told that I’d go to hell- even if I submitted to sex forced upon me… see St. Maria Goretti.  I could buy the argument that life begins at conception (believing in a soul and not understanding a thing about reproduction or even hearing of miscarriage, amongst other things), but interestingly enough it was something so simple as women not able to become priests that led to their worldview unraveling.

Comment #25: hz  on  01/26  at  02:09 PM

Caro13 and Catgirl, I too was ignorantly pro-life as a teen, mostly because I identified with the fetus rather than the pregnant woman.  “What if my mother had aborted ME???” was my line of thinking, because a 14 year old can’t believe that the world could possibly exist without them.  A few years later I had my first pregnancy scare, and I realized what a self-centred little shit I’d been.

Comment #26: KristinMH  on  01/26  at  02:13 PM

Yes, and also, it’s easy to not have that clear of a concept of bodily autonomy when you’re a kid.  You really don’t have the freedom to make your own choices, in a lot of cases, so it might just not register what a violation it is to make use of someone’s own personal organs against their will.  I can remember being anti-choice-ish as a young teenager, and the dawning realization that my body is mine is definitely what knocked me out of that mindset.  Although becoming sexually active can definitely hurry that realization along, so maybe it’s all part of the same bundle.

Comment #27: bookbat  on  01/26  at  02:14 PM

I agree; this is so condescending.  When I was a teenager and heavily involved in baby-sitting and other child-related organized activities, this was the most common way that children were told to address their caregivers.  I actually told the children to just call me by regular name, because I thought this practice was condescending even for 4 year-olds.  It’s just plain ridiculous for teenagers.

Sorry catgirl, but it isn’t any matter of condescension, it’s a parenting tool in some cases.  My kids are taught to address adults that way (or the honorary “aunt” “uncle” for closer friends).  With a child who needs reinforcement of proper behavior based on child-child or child-adult relationships, it works.  It’s boundary setting for some of us and I’ll thank you not to interfere in that parenting. 

The same goes when my child does something rude, like allow a door to hit the person behind him.  Please don’t say “OH, he doesn’t have to do that” when I make him apologize.

Comment #28: phylosopher  on  01/26  at  02:16 PM

One thing I don’t understand is why the pro-choicers don’t organize a larger counter-march to resist these anti-choice nuts? Why can’t NARAL, NOW, Emily’s List, Planned Parenthood, etc gather thousands more counter-protesters to meet these people on the streets?  The anniversary of Roe vs Wade should be a sacred day, allowing thousands of anti-choicers to march unanswered on that day is equivalent to allowing the KKK march on Martin Luther King Day unanswered.

Comment #29: Albert Cirrus  on  01/26  at  02:23 PM

catgirl, I think I did hear that. I think “... that was it?” is a pretty common post-virginity response. It’s not until a while later that a lot of people figure out what the big deal is.

You asked, so I’m linking: the Bible on Abortion. The particular example from Exodus I would take as a Biblical argument against fetal personhood, myself, since causing a miscarriage is not punished as murder. Most of the Biblical justification I’ve heard comes down to those lines from the Psalm about God knowing you in your mother’s womb. Since in theory Catholic pro-lifers in particular are worried about whether there’s a soul, not a forebrain, this is taken as justification that there’s a soul that’s getting smooshed (no word on whether the problem is that the soul goes into Limbo, but I suspect that the theological differences between pro-lifers from sects that believe in infant baptism and sects that don’t are huge on this issue.)

Of course, the stunning arrogance of assuming that these problems are completely independent of the fact that an embryo can only live inside a human who is a person and has a right to full and free use of their own internal organs goes whoosh right over people’s heads. Catholic schools were firing teachers who got pregnant until - oh wow, there was a case in 2006. So the fact that fetuses can only survive inside of people’s often-unwilling abdomens may be an extremely abstract one to some people.

Comment #30: purpleshoes  on  01/26  at  02:24 PM

I think what this reflects, mostly, is how popular it is now for kids - especially suburban ones - to be active with their church and to wear their passionate faith on their sleeve like a badge.

I think it’s mostly good.  For most of them, their political views will mature, but the passion for being politically active will remain and it will get directed towards something more positive.  I don’t think these young women are going to be sophomores in college and still participating in anti-choice rallies.

Comment #31: Wallace  on  01/26  at  02:44 PM

People have evolved so we tend to imitate others (so a toddler who figures out how to do something in one way, but is then shown a different way to do it will almost always do it this other way afterwards). So you can get young people to believe almost anything if you really push it (think Hitler Youth). I’m not sure why a group would want to proud of indoctrinating their kids, but there you go.

Comment #32: JohnL  on  01/26  at  02:46 PM

Sorry catgirl, but it isn’t any matter of condescension, it’s a parenting tool in some cases.  My kids are taught to address adults that way (or the honorary “aunt” “uncle” for closer friends).  With a child who needs reinforcement of proper behavior based on child-child or child-adult relationships, it works.  It’s boundary setting for some of us and I’ll thank you not to interfere in that parenting.

Well, you can be condescending to your kids all you want, but I have the right to be called whatever I choose, and if I don’t want kids to call me “Miss Megan”, then they shouldn’t call me that.  I called me babysitters by their first names when I was a kid, and I turned out just fine.  I never even imagined using a title to just family friends who weren’t acting as my guardian.  I was taught that respect is something that people must earn, rather than demand, and using an extra title doesn’t equal respect anyway.  You might have figured out that I’m not big on defering to authority just for the sake of deference, and I wouldn’t demand that a child either.

Comment #33: bananacat  on  01/26  at  02:53 PM

catgirl, I think I did hear that. I think “… that was it?” is a pretty common post-virginity response. It’s not until a while later that a lot of people figure out what the big deal is.

Indeed.  I doubt many just-initiated virgins would say “That was it?” if their experience was anything like sex can be at its best - i.e. after a bit of practice.  Even so, real-world sex is hard-put to match the symphonies, fireworks, and lifelong-eternal-true-love-soul-bond creating experience you see in fiction produced by writers this age.

The particular example from Exodus I would take as a Biblical argument against fetal personhood, myself, since causing a miscarriage is not punished as murder.

You’d be right.  As the passage itself states, in the (extremely likely) event that injury beyond the miscarriage itself was caused to the pregnant woman , that injury would be repaid an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life.  That was the punishment for injuring a person, even a second-class citizen like a woman.  The person who causes an (unwanted) miscarriage is merely fined, not executed - therefore, Exodus doesn’t consider abortion to be murder.

Most of the Biblical justification I’ve heard comes down to those lines from the Psalm about God knowing you in your mother’s womb.

1) The Psalms are songs of praise.  The poet was thanking God for his life, not making any statement of law or doctrine.

2) God is supposedly omniscient.  He’s “known” you since the beginning of time.

Comment #34: Seraph  on  01/26  at  02:55 PM

because when you’re 13, being pregnant seems about as weird as carrying an alien parasite that’s going to burst out of stomach at dinner.

Casual survey of my friends (in their 20s-30s) suggests that this actually never changes. Even when you in fact become pregnant.

Comment #35: Well, what?  on  01/26  at  03:28 PM

The particular example from Exodus I would take as a Biblical argument against fetal personhood, myself, since causing a miscarriage is not punished as murder.

Yeah, I agree.  If an embryo were a person, then killing one would require the death penalty.  Some people might be able to wiggle around and say that the Bible says abortion is wrong, but not necessarily murder, although I could just as easily argue that it’s the involuntary nature of it that’s wrong, and not the act of ending a pregnancy per se.

2) God is supposedly omniscient.  He’s “known” you since the beginning of time.

Yep.  If he knew you before he “knitted you in your mother’s womb”, then he would have known about you before conception, before your parents met, and certainly before your mother was in a position to choose an abortion or not.

Comment #36: bananacat  on  01/26  at  03:30 PM

I understood the line in the psalm about god knowing me in my mother’s womb to have been in reference to the specific prophet who is said to have authored the verse. Obviously an omniscient deity would ‘know’ all of us at all times, but not all of us are singled out for said deity’s particular notice like the psalmist.

Comment #37: tikitik  on  01/26  at  03:34 PM

Oh my god, less pathetic trolls please.

Comment #38: Well, what?  on  01/26  at  03:42 PM

is it just me, or is the new troll unusually out of touch with reality?

Comment #39: tikitik  on  01/26  at  03:43 PM

Yeah, I agree.  If an embryo were a person, then killing one would require the death penalty.  Some people might be able to wiggle around and say that the Bible says abortion is wrong, but not necessarily murder, although I could just as easily argue that it’s the involuntary nature of it that’s wrong, and not the act of ending a pregnancy per se.

You and the wigglers may both be right.  As far as that passage is concerned, the man who causes the miscarriage is being punished for destroying someone else’s property through criminal negligence - kinda like crashing your car into someone’s house.  In the same way, a deliberate abortion might not be criminal for the same reason that a person you hire to demolish your house isn’t guilty of vandalism.

Comment #40: Seraph  on  01/26  at  03:45 PM

In the same way, a deliberate abortion might not be criminal for the same reason that a person you hire to demolish your house isn’t guilty of vandalism.

This is exactly my point.  Using this analogy, the “wrigglers” would essentially be saying that it’s wrong to demolish someone’s house even if they hired you to do it.

Comment #41: bananacat  on  01/26  at  03:52 PM

Using this analogy, the “wrigglers” would essentially be saying that it’s wrong to demolish someone’s house even if they hired you to do it.

Well duh. If god wanted that house demolished he’d have demolished it HIMSELF, through a tornado or something. WHY ARE CONTRACTORS ALWAYS PLAYING GOD?

Comment #42: Well, what?  on  01/26  at  04:03 PM

Engu- kids, even teens, addressing adults only by first names is less common here in Memphis than in other places. But my real interest is- what was the name of that documentary?

Comment #43: shannon  on  01/26  at  04:08 PM

Catgirl @ #42 -

You’re right, of course.  I got so caught up in explaining the law itself, that I forgot the specifics of who was arguing what.

Comment #44: Seraph  on  01/26  at  04:16 PM

All of the white ladies have the teens refer to them as “Miss Lily”, or whatever their first name happens to be, which just grates on me.

Oh god that has creepy overtones.

Sorry catgirl, but it isn’t any matter of condescension, it’s a parenting tool in some cases.  My kids are taught to address adults that way (or the honorary “aunt” “uncle” for closer friends).  With a child who needs reinforcement of proper behavior based on child-child or child-adult relationships, it works.  It’s boundary setting for some of us and I’ll thank you not to interfere in that parenting.

Wouldn’t it make more sense to use the last name?

Re: Bible - People also use the line from Jeremiah, where it’s God speaking about wombs instead of the human - but that actually belies their point, because in context it’s saying that God knew Jeremiah in the womb because Jeremiah is special and different from everyone else.

Comment #45: Rebecca  on  01/26  at  04:20 PM

Well, you can be condescending to your kids all you want, but I have the right to be called whatever I choose, and if I don’t want kids to call me “Miss Megan”, then they shouldn’t call me that.  I called me babysitters by their first names when I was a kid, and I turned out just fine.  I never even imagined using a title to just family friends who weren’t acting as my guardian.  I was taught that respect is something that people must earn, rather than demand, and using an extra title doesn’t equal respect anyway.  You might have figured out that I’m not big on defering to authority just for the sake of deference, and I wouldn’t demand that a child either.
Comment #33: catgirl on 01/26 at 12:53 PM

Project much?  We’re not talking about deferring to authority for the sake of it, at all. AS I said, it is a parenting tool that is useful for parents with children who need more well-defined boundaries.    It is especially useful when introducing a youngish babysitter.  SHould that babysitter insist on being called by a first name, and then complaining when my kid treated her as another kid, not an in charge adult - I’d have to tell her “she asked for it.”  Perhaps you will understand when you yourself are a parent - until then, I suggest you learn to respect the wishes of the parents regarding their children.

Comment #46: phylosopher  on  01/26  at  04:26 PM

Until then, I suggest you learn to respect the wishes of the parents regarding their children.

Fine, whatever, but the women in the documentary ARE NOT these girls’ parents. If you really don’t see the squickiness of young (mostly) black women being told to call older (mostly) white, non-related women “Miss [firstname]” while they get lectured about the correct way to live…may I suggest you add “Gone With the Wind” to your Netflix queue?

Comment #47: Well, what?  on  01/26  at  04:33 PM

Wouldn’t it make more sense to use the last name?

Comment #46: Rebecca on 01/26 at 02:20 PM

In cases where the person is an acquaintance, yes. From a practical standpoint, no.  While my kids are quite articulate and have no problems with pronunciation, many kids do - so having some kids (teams, classrooms) call an adult by their hard to pronounce last name and title and others not is confusing (Coach Szczypulinski versus Coach Andy.)  IN addition, since my spouse and I would be calling a friend by their first name, it’s easier for the kid to associate using the same first name.

Comment #48: phylosopher  on  01/26  at  04:34 PM

Young people in the March for Life said they thought they were more opposed to abortion than people in their parents’ generation because they had more information about the issue, in part because of their education.

Uh…yeah.  Right.  “Information” and “education”...I do not think those words mean what you think they mean.

Comment #49: Icewyche  on  01/26  at  04:45 PM

ine, whatever, but the women in the documentary ARE NOT these girls’ parents. If you really don’t see the squickiness of young (mostly) black women being told to call older (mostly) white, non-related women “Miss [firstname]” while they get lectured about the correct way to live…may I suggest you add “Gone With the Wind” to your Netflix queue?
Comment #48: Well, what?  on 01/26 at 02:33 PM

I agree 100% in this case - plantation nostalgia all the way, and find it equally “icky.”  But it isn’t the parents setting this up, it sounds like it’s the white women/outsiders.

But my response was to catgirl who cited the example of her own babysitting experiences and undermining the parents of her charges.  I’m trying to point out - as many of you have done in the past,  that it is presumption on her part to project her own upbringing on others, and that she should respect this difference as it may be for very good reasons that she either is not privy to or that have eluded her thinking.  Kids on the Aspbergers spectrum (which my kid has a few tendencies of, but who failed the Aspie test) benefit from more defined social boundaries, personal space rituals, etc.  Verbal cues are one way of doing that.

Comment #50: phylosopher  on  01/26  at  04:45 PM

Ok, seriously, if the babysitter not wanting to be called “Miss Whatever” undermines your parenting, you have a WAY larger problem than labels.

Comment #51: GeekGirlsRule  on  01/26  at  04:48 PM

I had to delurk to pipe up here. I recall having the “if you play you pay” mentality in regards to abortion when I was a young teen. I definitely viewed childbearing as some sort of just punishment for sex. Sick, no? Oddly I recall becoming adamantly pro-choice later on in my teens and I honestly don’t remember when/how/why I switched.

I do think a lot of anti-choice fervor is fueled by an ignorant sense of superiority.

Comment #52: Vacuumslayer  on  01/26  at  04:52 PM

Those stupid protestors got in my way again this year, just like they did last year. I had to park the car and carry my daughter through them to get to the daycare centre. Just like last year, a crowd of giggly teenage girls came running over to check out the baby, who was very pleased to make their acquaintance since they had apple slices.

One of them said sth to the effect of “She’s so beautiful: aren’t you glad you chose life?” I explained to them that my wife had got pregnant twice before but we hadn’t been in a position where we felt comfortable going for it, and that there were two miscarriages before this one stuck, so we were really only batting .200 in that respect. The girls mainly found this curious and started asking a lot of questions, mostly revolving around what “feeling comfortable going for it” was all about, and we had a really rather nice colloquium on how people who make their choices in life before they make lifetime commitments are usually happier in the long run than people who do it the other way round.

At this point, cue spotty hebephile “youth minister,” who starts trying to herd the girls away and shouts at me how I’m a terrible person for lying to these girls and corrupting them. He soon regretted this.

Comment #53: felagund  on  01/26  at  04:56 PM

And at the end of the op-ed Amanda references at the beginning of her post, a woman admits to “strongly encouraging” kids to come to the rally because of her mother’s experience in the pre-Roe days. She said her mom still shudders at the “sound of a vacuum cleaner”. Makes me wonder why she isn’t committed to keeping Roe legal so that no one has to have ptsd from an illegal abortion like she claims her mother has.

I love that these folks celebrate the innocence of fetuses but not the innocence of the kids they are corrupting. I made it to 12 years old without knowing what an abortion was and that makes me feel like I must have lived in a bubble. I learned age appropriate truths about sex from my mom and from the health teacher at school. But no one felt the need to inform me about abortion until I reached puberty and when I read things like this I am grateful for that.

Comment #54: DC Fem  on  01/26  at  05:09 PM

Until then, I suggest you learn to respect the wishes of the parents regarding their children.

True respect means calling people what they wish to be called.  If I don’t want to be called “Miss Megan”, then it’s disrespectful to call me that, no matter your parents say.  Why should I let people call me a name I don’t like just out of some sense of false respect?  Maybe you should teach your kids about truly respecting people, and not putting on a show.

Comment #55: bananacat  on  01/26  at  05:10 PM

Oh please.  “Miss Lilly” is a SOUTHERN way of addressing adults.  I, too, find it grating to my northern ears, I find it reminiscent of the old south and how slaves and servants were told to address white women (“Miss Lilly, will you be needing me to do your ironing today?”) and at best it sounds like what a preschool teacher gets called.  No thanks.

Comment #56: Susanne  on  01/26  at  05:13 PM

52: The same can be said about just about any individual rule parents have for their children.  The point is that it’s the parents role to decide what the rules are for the kids, and the babysitter either gets to follow them or find another job.  If someone wants to raise their kids extra-polite that’s no skin of anyone’s back.  Really, is there anything more you need to know than that it’s not your kid?  We aren’t talking child abuse here, just maintaining a consistent set of expectations for the kid, and any such set is going to be arbitrary.  The fact that it’s not the exact same set of arbitrary expectations you would choose for your kid is irrelevant since it’s not your kid.

And Catgirl - your objections are sounding more and more like “it’s all about me.”  It’s not.  It’s about the kid.  You know nowhere near as much about the kid as the parents do, and you have no right whatsoever to undermine their decisions about how it is raised.  If you don’t like being called “Miss Megan,” avoid the kid.  As for “truly respecting people” perhaps a little respect for the parents might be in order. 

Parenting is a huge responsibility and has all sorts of insecurities wrapped up in it for the parent.  The demands on time and emotional energy are hard to overstate.  If it turns out that some rule the parent imposes is useless or even counterproductive the damage is most often less from simply leaving it alone than from trying to attack it, thereby sucking up even more of the parent’s limited time and emotional energy.  I don’t know how much inconvenience you suffer from being referred to as “Miss” but I’m going to guess it’s pretty trivial compared to the hassle the parents deal with facing people trying to undermine their parenting, each one utterly convinced that theirs is the one true way to raise a child and many of them completely clueless about child development, age appropriate expectations, and of course the particular child in question.

Comment #57: togolosh  on  01/26  at  05:40 PM

I can’t tell you how many of my friend’s tales of their first time begin with “I was at this church retreat…”

“And then this one time, at Jesus Camp…”

I recall having the “if you play you pay” mentality in regards to abortion when I was a young teen. I definitely viewed childbearing as some sort of just punishment for sex. Sick, no?

Not really - this is one of the things people infer from Genesis 3:16 - you could have picked it up as part of religious teaching.

Comment #58: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  01/26  at  05:40 PM

Project much?  We’re not talking about deferring to authority for the sake of it, at all. AS I said, it is a parenting tool that is useful for parents with children who need more well-defined boundaries.  It is especially useful when introducing a youngish babysitter.  SHould that babysitter insist on being called by a first name, and then complaining when my kid treated her as another kid, not an in charge adult - I’d have to tell her “she asked for it.”

I would think that the babysitter’s adult status would be far more destroyed in the child’s eyes by a parent who doesn’t respect the babysitter’s wish to choose how she wants to be addressed. It’s not the babysitter who’s putting herself in a subordinate position.

Comment #59: Rebecca  on  01/26  at  05:41 PM

The point is that it’s the parents role to decide what the rules are for the kids

So if some kid’s parents insisted that it’s “respectful” to never call anyone by a nickname, should every Tom, Dick, and Harry tolerate being called a name they don’t like?  What about fundies who think it’s only proper to use “Miss” and “Mrs.”, but I prefer the label “Ms.”?  Isn’t it disrespectful to call someone a name they don’t want to be called?  Shouldn’t each person be allowed to choose for themselves how to be addressed?

Honestly, your quip about avoiding the kid is unnecessary.  I’ve never met a parent who was so authoritarian that they insisted their kid call me something that I don’t want to be called.  But if a kid learns the lesson that their parent isn’t always perfect and right, that’s not such a bad thing.  Maybe they’ll learn a little about genuine respect when they realize that different people have different preferences.

Comment #60: bananacat  on  01/26  at  05:49 PM

SHould that babysitter insist on being called by a first name, and then complaining when my kid treated her as another kid, not an in charge adult

Dozens of children have called me by first name and respected my adult status at the same time.  Every kid I’ve known was smart enough to figure it out when their parent said, “Megan is in charge”, even when I was just 13 and the kids were barely toddlers.  If your kids have a problem with that, I doubt that a simple title will change anything.  When I was a kid, I kid, I called all my babysitters by their first names and I still respected and obeyed them.  Conversely, I never respected my teachers any more than I respected my babysitters, even though I had to address them by their last names.  There were plenty of teachers that I didn’t respect because they didn’t deserve it, even though I addressed them in the “correct” way.  Babysitting isn’t about dominance or being and alpha dog.  Kids have always respected me because I acted like a responsible, fair adult and earned their respect.

Comment #61: bananacat  on  01/26  at  05:55 PM

Wow. It’s not about Any of you and your theoretical sitters or actual kids.

Because it’s not about kids and babysitters.

It’s about teenagers—some on the verge of adulthood—and women who have NO AUTHORITY OVER THEM except a phony-baloney moral authority they have asserted based solely on age (and race?) and non-knocked-upness.

Comment #62: Well, what?  on  01/26  at  06:04 PM

whoops. O’er-blasphemed.

Anyway: it should not be controversial to say that the situation depicted in the documentary is FUCKED THE FUCK UP.

Personal exceptions involving authority and boundaries and the autism spectrum really aren’t at issue here. We’re talking about indoctrination that verges on child abuse, both in the abstract and in one particularly galling situation.

Comment #63: Well, what?  on  01/26  at  06:07 PM

Catgirl @61 - The answer to your questions depends on the situation and the kid’s age.  In the case of babysitting part of the deal is that you are in effect substituting for the parent while they are away, which makes it all the more important to do things their way.  If it’s a family gathering with your cousin’s kids running around it’s different, and if it’s complete strangers at the mall it’s even more so.

I have a hard time understanding how the use of an honorific could be so bothersome, but I’ve also had people get upset at me for saying “please” and “excuse me” so there is clearly some subculture out there that finds something offensive in what reads to me as treating people with common courtesy.

Comment #64: togolosh  on  01/26  at  06:24 PM

After I asked to interview them, a group of eighth-graders from St. Mark School, a private Catholic school in Catonsville, sang a song they wrote, based on a Miley Cyrus tune:”

Whenever I see this as proof that young people must really care about this issue because why else would they sing and dance about, I want someone, just once to turn to the kids and say something like, “Hey did you guys see the latest American Idol with that old guy singing “Pants on the Ground”? Could you guys show me that? You know like Brett Favre did.” And then watch a group of 13 year olds clown around singing pants on the ground in unison. Because that would prove how they must really care about American Idol, Brett Favre and clowning with their classmates as much as they care about the anti-choice movement.

Comment #65: shakahi  on  01/26  at  07:13 PM

sorry, I disavow any representation of catgirl’s views. I speak only for myself above.

Comment #66: The Erl  on  01/26  at  07:29 PM

i went to catholic schools also. my mom, the nice jewish lady, taught in them. being pre-roe, the whole “sanctity of life” thing wasn’t that big a deal, especially since my friend’s and classmate’s fathers/uncles/brothers were coming home in body bags from vietnam at the time. i really don’t recall the adults involving us all that much in adult subject matter, we were just kids.

i see these people, lined up along rt. 1, across the street from the hospital and dr’s offices, once a year, with their signs, their children carrying signs as well, that they probably haven’t a clue what they mean, and i feel nothing but disgust for the adults.

Comment #67: cpinva  on  01/26  at  07:29 PM

is it just me, or is the new troll unusually out of touch with reality? (tikitik @ 40)

That particular troll is the male equivalent of the over-cloistered children in the Post story.

Comment #68: Molly, NYC  on  01/26  at  07:58 PM

“sanctity of life”

That phrase cracks me up every time. “Life is sacred”. Yeah, right. Tell that to my nephew in Arlington Cemetary.

Comment #69: Mark  on  01/26  at  08:00 PM

Lately I’ve been reading a lot of memoirs by people who grew up in China during the Cultural Revolution, and while of course there are more differences than there are similarities between those writers and the teens who attend pro-life rallies, one thing I noticed that seems to apply is that pre-teens and teens will, generally, enthusiastically espouse whatever political beliefs will gain them the approval of peers and adults whose opinions they value.  In the memoirs I’ve been reading, it’s clear that the most popular and esteemed young people in Cultural-Revolution era Chinese schools were the ones who were the best Maoists—the authors describe participating (at above the required level) in rallies and other political activities *primarily* because in order to emulate, and get positive attention from, their most popular classmates and teachers.  It seems likely that the same forces are at work with the kids who go to these parochial schools that are anti-choice echo chambers.  I wonder how many of the teens at this rally signed up to go because their most popular classmates were going?  (Also, free trip to Washington, DC!). 

What’s interesting, however, is that the memoirists I’ve been reading are all unanimous in saying that they weren’t *faking* being committed Maoists—in that period in their lives, they experienced themselves as being 100% committed to their movement’s ideals—even when they had only a superficial understanding of what those ideals were.  I think it must be pretty similar for these young people: if you asked them today, they would say that of course they are 100% pro-life, abortion is murder, people should take personal responsibility for their actions—they’ll spout whatever talking points they’ve been given, and they will experience that as speaking from the heart. 

But because those ideas have been swallowed uncritically, exposure to alternate points of view, or to the hypocrisy within the movement, will generally bring the whole thing tumbling down.  If you arrive at a political viewpoint logically, rather than accepting a whole package of “this is what people you want to be like believe and do,” you can adapt your beliefs to new information, and can assimilate the knowledge that some people who believe some of the same things also have serious faults, without completely abandoning the original belief.

Comment #70: A.  on  01/26  at  08:14 PM

I recall having the “if you play you pay” mentality in regards to abortion when I was a young teen. I definitely viewed childbearing as some sort of just punishment for sex. (Vacuumslayer @ 53)

It kills me that so many people who have the gall to call themselves “pro-life” believe that children and parenthood should serve as a punishment. 

If you’re convinced that your kids’ main reason for existing is to serve as your personal private penance, part of some metaphysical shit sandwich that God requires you to eat every day, how can you be anything but a lousy parent? (Case in point: Sarah Palin)

And why would they think any kid deserves parents like that?

Comment #71: Molly, NYC  on  01/26  at  08:30 PM

True respect means calling people what they wish to be called.  If I don’t want to be called “Miss Megan”, then it’s disrespectful to call me that, no matter your parents say.  Why should I let people call me a name I don’t like just out of some sense of false respect?  Maybe you should teach your kids about truly respecting people, and not putting on a show.
Comment #56: catgirl on 01/26 at 03:10 PM

No, you wouldn’t be called anything by my children because it would be unlikely your attitude would get you a babysitting job or even past the front door to get as one friend of mine was used to saying, “piss to take a pill” from me.  You sound like the idiot who kennel sat where I was training a former police dog.  I cautioned that he was fine with gentle handling but that you couldn’t roughhouse with him because he read that as OK to practice bite work   The now stitched up idiot said “Every dog I’ve known was smart enough to know I was just playin’.”  There are exceptions to all your anecdotal evidence.  You might do well to respect those who have a bit more experience with any particular specimen of human or animal. 

You really need to separate the idea that it’s a RESPECT issue from it’s a boundary issue with different behavioral/role expectations. 

And just for the record, as my particular kid ages, there is less and less need for that line.  But said kid is also gt whose true peers are quite a bit older, even adult.  He needed to be able to navigate both worlds - and that’s a tough order when adults try to confuse the issue.

@Well what - oh c’mon, we’ve had parallel discussions on here before.

Comment #72: phylosopher  on  01/26  at  09:19 PM

Granted, I’ve seen some bitter old cranks in their 20s…

I’ll see you and raise you.  I was a bitter old crank in my teens.

Comment #73: bekabot  on  01/27  at  12:36 AM

As a Catholic girl, I can assure you that 99% of those girls will stop being anti-abortion once they have sex.  The other 1% will never have sex, or at least admit to it.

Comment #74: Shaenon  on  01/27  at  12:56 AM

A mile wide and an inch deep- that describes the “convictions” of most teenage kids. Bragging about being able to foment “outrage” in this age group is like bragging about being able to entice dogs to eat scraps of food from the table. A much more telling measure of how much impact the anti-choice movement is having would be to point out how many non-religious, disinterested third parties have been swayed by their marches. As that number is probably somewhere north of “none” and south of “many”, I can understand their reticence to do so.

Comment #75: Neko Onna  on  01/27  at  01:00 AM

This all reminds me of that terrifying Jesus Camp documentary.  At one point, someone crows about how s/he got a whole auditorium full of kids to start speaking in tongues.  I had two problems with this:

a) Isn’t “speaking in tongues” supposed to be something that happens spontaneously, because the Holy Spirit has moved in/through you?  Not babbling nonsense and expecting…I honestly have no idea.

b) If you have a group of kids who haven’t reached the adults-are-stupid-by-definition, cynical, world-weary stage and you have enough confidence, you can get them to do/believe *anything.*  I loved the “Pants on the Ground” suggestion upthread.

Comment #76: Leely  on  01/27  at  01:46 AM

Engu- kids, even teens, addressing adults only by first names is less common here in Memphis than in other places. But my real interest is- what was the name of that documentary?

I believe it was called “Beyond Babyland”.

Comment #77: Egnu Cledge  on  01/27  at  02:03 AM

As a Catholic girl, I can assure you that 99% of those girls will stop being anti-abortion once they have sex.  The other 1% will never have sex, or at least admit to it.

Mother Avenger graduated from Notre Dame High School in 1954, San Jose, CA, and said that half of the class got married very soon afterwards because it was the only way in their eyes to satisfy their curiosity about sex.

Comment #78: Dark Avenger Guardian Chow Mein  on  01/27  at  02:28 AM

Wow. It’s not about Any of you and your theoretical sitters or actual kids.

Seconded.  For fuck’s sake, people, was Guav so entertaining that you want to bring hir presence into threads that don’t mention guns?

Comment #79: Seraph  on  01/27  at  03:00 AM

My parents are fundies, and I figured out they were full of shit pretty much immediately. Just because I have to “respect your rules in your house” or go pitch a tent, doesn’t mean that I don’t understand you’re an idiot.

Comment #80: banisteriopsis  on  01/27  at  05:02 AM

This is very much what happens. It’s also a survival mechanism. If your allowed social group and sole moments of freedom are through church youth group activities, you’ll at least ape the nonsense and even follow it to your own detriment until you find real freedom. My fundie friends all had their various collapses from the propaganda from one freedom or another.

I think this is why the fundies are so chummy with the cut taxes, small government crowd. The economic collapse has been great for the fundie parents I know in retaining control of their kids into their 20s because living on one’s own is really hard to do in this economy, especially when you’re trying to balance survival with discovering who you really are and what you really believe.

My best friend’s sister is stuck in this and it’s blocking her coming to terms with her lesbianism, because her parents made an example out of her brother, my best friend, when he tried to move out and live on his own and barely surviving and needing to rely on a big network of non-church friends to just get by.

It ups the ante on living true to yourself rather than just following “supposed to be” propaganda in order to retain financial and emotional support from one’s abusive brainwashing family and friend network.

But yeah, back to the original point, I think it’s easy to fall into those frames when you’re young and sexually inexperienced. The information out there is non-existant or harder to find than problematic depictions of it like mainstream porn and you know that it can be bad because of the only information you get being on how you will either get AIDS or pregnant or have pregnant AIDS. People around you are being sexual, but it’s peformative and seems to have all these problems and those who went through with it describe it as being nothing like the fairy tale “it’s awesome” messages and the nuances of sexual reality like rape but also saying what you want, aren’t really highlighted or sometimes completely corrupted by problematic stuff.

If you’re female the rules seem arbitrary and schizo. One is supposed to present lots of sexuality for the protections of popularity, but at the same time doing so means you’re a slut who should be ignored or at least you should be ashamed of it and if you try to quit the game, you can feel alone and persecuted for being “a prude” and daring to admit being scared or unready. If male, there’s all this pressure to lose it and you already “lost” to the man running his mouth about how he nailed a babysitter at age 5 and therefore not a man and there’s all these rules on how to mistrust women to be accepted into the club and damn you if you think you’re not ready or your desires or wants don’t match the narrative.

When in that frantic soup, you get covered in the social messages of conservatism, it can be really easy to morph that into dumbass views of sex and sexuality including fetal worship.

As a young asexual, I managed to avoid that, but still had some dumbass opinions on sex and its relative worth and the worth of those who “overindulge” that I have well gotten over with a more genuinely feminist awakening in college.

Comment #81: Cerberus  on  01/27  at  07:31 AM

As a young teenager I felt unready for sex (though I did masturbate 1 to 4 times per day), but I never had any sympathy for the anti-abortion movement, I had no interest in punishing anyone for having sex and enjoying it, and I was terrified of getting pregnant as well, nor did I think that me existing was more important than my mother having control of her own body, particularly since by that logic rape is a-ok, in fact, while my mother is happy she had me and we get along great these days she really did not benefit from marrying my dad, overall (they’re divorced now) and if she’d had more choices and maybe dated more I might not have existed which is cool with me because she’s an individual with rights, just like I am.  I’m just starting out on my first (possibly sexual) relationship now, but I’ve been pro-choice for as long as I can remember.  Though I will say, being forced to go through with an unwanted pregnancy is a punishment, it’s just that it’s the fundies/conservatives/other misogynists that are punishing you and not a non-existent god/sky fairy/FSM/jesus.

Comment #82: RadFemHedonist  on  01/27  at  05:43 PM

Which I think led to my whole disenchantment with organized Christianity as teen - this pervasive peer pressure or groupthink that I was constantly exposed to, that ‘we’re going to be celibate until marriage, and abortions are icky’ that was espoused in youth groups.

And then seeing the same individuals macking in back rooms at school or at parties, usually in various states of undress.

Which is why the “not ready for sex” thing is pretty much orthogonal to whether someone is a virgin or not. If anything, I’d expect the anti-choice fervor to be even stronger among fundie kids who are having sex when they’re not emotionally ready to have it, with partners who aren’t necessarily skilled.

Comment #83: paul  on  01/27  at  11:34 PM

Going on a weekend camping trip supervised at a 10-1 ratio by college student “adults” barely two years older than you?  ANd a token priest or minister (the former often a hebephile himself) - sure, honey, let me help you pack.
Comment #24: phylosopher on 01/26 at 12:09 PM

Yeah, that’s how I got raped at age 13, in the back seat of a car on the way to a church sponsored weekend at the ocean.  It was dark, but I’m pretty sure the college students in the front seat (in bucket seats) could tell what was going on. 

I suppose they thought it was consensual, or just didn’t want to think about it.  And I expected to be blamed for it if I said anything, so I didn’t.

Comment #84: oldfeminist  on  01/28  at  05:46 AM

catgirl:  “You know, I’ve been asking anti-choicers for years how they justify their stance by using the Bible, and I can’t get an answer out of any of them.  I’m just so curious which verses they use, because I’ve looked closely and haven’t found any that even suggest that abortion is murder (actually, I’ve found the complete opposite). “

Jeremiah 1:5, “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee;”

God is here quoted as speaking to the prophet Jeremiah.  He continues, saying, “and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.” 

There’s also

My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, your eyes saw my unformed body.  All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be (Psalm 139:13-16).

That this could mean God is beyond time and space and can see into the future because he’s already there is too hard.  It must mean you have a face and an identity and you’re loved by God even when you’re a blastocyst.

In contrast, Numbers chapter 5 has God directing his priests to give (unfaithful) women abortions.

Comment #85: oldfeminist  on  01/28  at  03:58 PM

Yeah, that’s how I got raped at age 13, in the back seat of a car on the way to a church sponsored weekend at the ocean.  It was dark, but I’m pretty sure the college students in the front seat (in bucket seats) could tell what was going on.

I suppose they thought it was consensual, or just didn’t want to think about it.  And I expected to be blamed for it if I said anything, so I didn’t.
Comment #85: oldfeminist on 01/28 at 03:46 AM

I’m sorry about your experience.  Mine was more about the giggly but we thought it wild consensual type and the room and privacy to have it.  Church choir was about the horniest group of teens ever, IIRC.  A little Kumbaya before fucking and a shared fifth of JD around the campfire - Hallelujah!

Comment #86: phylosopher  on  01/29  at  05:07 AM

DC Fem (55):

She said her mom still shudders at the “sound of a vacuum cleaner”

Sounds like a dusty childhood*

Though some theories suggest that can prevent autoimmune disease, so ...

*Since, not only does the mother not vacuum, but no one else can vacuum while the mother is in the house.

catgirl (61):

So if some kid’s parents insisted that it’s “respectful” to never call anyone by a nickname, should every Tom, Dick, and Harry tolerate being called a name they don’t like?

You actually should call them “Thomas,” “Richard,” and “Harold” until you’re told otherwise; it’s socially easier to correct someone who errs on the side of too much formality than too little.

My stepdaughter, born in Maryland and largely raised in New Jersey, called me “Mr. Hershele**” for quite a while after we all started living together. Granted, it’s nota babysitting arrangement and I’m no longer a teenager. I don’t feel it’s necessary for her to see me as a peer.

**Though with my real name, obviously.

Comment #87: Hershele Ostropoler  on  01/29  at  01:40 PM

You actually should call them “Thomas,” “Richard,” and “Harold” until you’re told otherwise; it’s socially easier to correct someone who errs on the side of too much formality than too little.

Absolutely. As long as you call them Tom, Dick and Harry once you’re asked to. phylosopher is saying, essentially, that if someone prefers being called Tom to being called Thomas, he deserves disrespect from phylosopher’s children.

Comment #88: Rebecca  on  01/29  at  02:54 PM

I’m sorry about your experience.  Mine was more about the giggly but we thought it wild consensual type and the room and privacy to have it.  Church choir was about the horniest group of teens ever, IIRC.  A little Kumbaya before fucking and a shared fifth of JD around the campfire - Hallelujah!
Comment #86: phylosopher on 01/29 at 03:07 AM

Oh sure, I know much of it is consensual.  I had consensual experiences later in outings with that same church group.

The problem is, if sex is shrouded in an atmosphere of fear and hiding and shame, when something goes wrong, you’re afraid to ask for help.  This is the real evil of making all sex bad—there’s no way a girl or boy who’s ever been curious can come forward without facing that shame. 

It makes it super easy for the predators, because they know their victims won’t say a word.  I’m pretty sure I was not the first victim of the boy who did this to me.  But at the time I had no idea.  The wisdom of an adult would have helped a hell of a lot, whether he ever got punished or not.

Comment #89: oldfeminist  on  01/29  at  11:42 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.