Damn, Grace has been doing ResLife at Smith for 5 years. That’s intense. No one showed up to the Bodywise workshop; we were not surprised. It’s the Quad, plus, bad timing = Senior Ball last night and the march in Washington today. ‘Twas a lovely day for a walk to the Quad and back, though.
You’re all intelligent ladies (and gents, and female-bodied-persons-who-reject-the-ter
Speaking of the March... seeing the "Pro-faith, pro-family, pro-choice" ad on the T last weekend made me happy, even though abortion squicks me. It occurred to me recently to be seriously squicked by the name of the march: "March for Women's Lives." I understand the argument about abortion rights being about a woman’s right to control her own body, but i think a title like “march for women’s lives” should be reserved for things like mass slaughter of women not mass circumscription of one particular right of women. lilithchilde keeps talking about this march being this gigantic thing, and perhaps it will be; it’s so not on my radar screen that i can’t judge. But i can’t help thinking that as legit as slippery slope arguments may be right now, abortion is not in immediate danger of across-the-board criminalization, and wouldn’t the big deal, history making marches, be the ones that occurred when abortion was illegal?
Oh, i was pleased to see someone on the zinesters list (from whence i heard about the “if women ruled the world” anthology) pointing out the problematic essentialist assumptions and suchlike, particularly since i hadn’t been up for writing a response of my own (well not for the list anyway; clearly i wrote something on LJ -- oh and speaking of LJ, i was so glad to see that i wasn’t the only one who had problems with that kind of feminism *hugs y’all*).
Maybe i will grow up and be that person who campaigns for stuff like allowing DDT to be used as an anti-malarial because it’s like a super-uncool cause, but that doesn’t mean i don’t bitch about the stuff that does get lots of press.
A letter-writer on AndrewSullivan.com compares Iraq and South Africa:
In reading articles marking 10 years since the end of South Africa apartheid, I was struck by the similarities between that country’s struggle since liberation and the current struggle since the liberation of Iraq. Likewise, I was struck by the relative silence of the left on the real problems South Africa has faced in the past 10 years.(Emphasis mine.) I’m well aware that there will be no mind-changing between myself and my readers, i just like posting stuff i think is interesting, that i didn’t know or hadn’t thought about before.
In the early 1990’s, the movement against apartheid was one of the most passionate cause of the American left. The struggle for freedom is South Africa ended on April 27th 1994 when over 90% of the people of that country went to the polls to elect the first democratic government the country had ever seen. Since that time, South Africa has been one of the most, if not the most, dangerous place to live on the planet.
In 1998 for instance, South Africa led the world with a recorded 59 murders per hundred thousand citizens (source: Interpol). By comparison, the United States had 6 per hundred thousand that year; England had 1, France 4, and Russia 21. The closest to South Africa was Colombia, with 56.
Presently, although crime seems to have abated, the country is still racked with problems. An estimated 20.1% of the population has AIDS, 50% of the population is below the poverty line, and 37% of the population is unemployed. The current life expectancy is 46.56 years.
Now, very few people on any side of the political spectrum would argue that South Africa was "better off" under apartheid. Yet, those that oppose our war in Iraq often bitterly complain that the Iraqis are not better off. Both countries, when liberated, were coming from oppressive governments with people unaccustomed to the democratic process. It has taken ten years to get South Africa to the still troubled, but gradually improving, state it is currently in. Why is so much expected of Iraq so quickly? Apparently, the left's criterion for democratic progress is a double standard.