The Supreme Court is not a fucking beauty pageant.

For as strongly as I support a woman's right to choose abortion in the event of an unwanted pregnancy, a pregnancy gone wrong, or any number of other difficult life situations, there are indeed some pro-lifers who I really respect. It's a small number, but they're out there. (This is where I give a shout-out to the lovely Ms. Kelsey Hazzard, of Secular Pro-Life.)

There really are some pro-lifers out there who are genuinely interested in helping needy pregnant women. That is totally cool! Much as I may disagree with their views on whether or not abortion should be legal, I greatly respect that some people are actually willing to follow through on their rhetoric and help women who would rather not have abortions. (There are some very legitimate criticisms of some crisis pregnancy centers that I'll have to save for another time.)

Alas, Gingi Edmonds does not fall into the aforementioned category of pro-lifers I respect. I recently discovered the writings of Ms. Edmonds on Facebook. She is an avid anti-abortion activist and a self-proclaimed freelance photographer based out of California. (By the way, for a truly awesome freelance photographer, contact Jeremy White. He will not bother you about politics.) Edmonds also apparently holds very anti-gay views and as far as I can tell, has not an intelligent thought in her head. I'm not saying that to be mean, either! Just check out this post that I'm about to disembowel.

As those of us who follow politics instead of sports know, President Obama recently nominated Elena Kagan to fill Justice Stevens' spot on the Supreme Court. Kagan appears to be pro-choice, so abortion opponents are screaming about that, but not Gingi!

Apparently faced with a dearth of any original or constructive criticism of Kagan, Edmonds decided to exit onto the low road and attack Kagan for her lack of glamour and conventional feminine beauty.

Edmonds muses:

How can she be an aware and insightful interpreter of these complex and modern times if she's never heard of Crest Whitestrips?

What? Really? ... I mean... Seriously? Even if that was an attempt at satire, it was pretty bad satire, unless that's what passes for comedy among anti-abortion activists.

Let's read on, shall we?

All joking aside, I think the fact that she looks like a foot is extremely relevant. A person's cleanliness and tidiness (combed hair, brushed teeth, clean clothing) are a clear indicator of mental orderliness and tidiness. We don't have to view her un-Constitutional and pro-abortion record to get an indication that she is not fit to be in a position of leadership in this country.

To clarify, I don't like her simply because she's unattractive. I can accept that Elena Kagan is an ugly bull dike. But an ugly, pro-abort, socialist bull dike? Never.

Umm... There doesn't actually appear to be any evidence that Kagan lacks basic hygiene. Sure, she doesn't fit our ridiculous standards of conventional feminine beauty (Speaking of those who live in glass houses, neither does Edmonds), but she doesn't look dirty or unkempt. A quick Google image search reveals that Kagan actually looks rather well-groomed and tidy. And while we're judging a person's character based on superficial images found on Google, I think Kagan looks downright jolly.

Gingi, if you want to see some people who really don't give a shit about their appearance, I invite you to come to Enfield Superior Court any day between Monday and Friday. If you're lucky, you might see a DUI defendant wearing pajamas or an obviously unwashed domestic violence defendant wearing a t-shirt that reads "Fuck the police."

But maybe Edmonds is onto something. Maybe women who support abortion rights are uglier than women who oppose them. Just check out the heinous wench whose pic I posted above. :-P

A quick one today

Jill Stanek is bleating more nonsense about birth control again. Color me shocked.

The source she cites, the DailyFail, is dubious at best, so take it with a grain, no, scratch that, a bucket of salt. The article she discusses essentially says a recent study shows the birth control pill may have an effect on the type of man a woman finds attractive. The article then goes on to assert the popularity of stars like Johnny Depp, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Will Smith, is likely proof of this.

From the source:

On days when women are not fertile, their tastes swing towards more feminine, boyish faces and more caring personalities, researchers have shown.

However, if women are taking the Pill they no longer have fertile days.

That means they no longer experience the hormonal changes that make them more attracted to masculine men and those with dissimilar genetic make-up.

Stanek characterizes men with caring personalities as "wimps" and "quiche eaters." Call me crazy, but I don't want some big, hulking Neanderthal to throw me over his shoulder and bring me back to his cave for a dinner of woolly mammoth steak. I'm a 21st century woman. I want a guy with a caring personality. I want a guy who has a good sense of humor and can hold an intelligent conversation. Why is it a bad thing to be attracted to men with caring personalities? Wouldn't those men be better fathers in the long run anyway? Also, what does quiche have to do with this? I didn't know food was supposed to be masculine or feminine.

Lesson learned, ladies: If you take the pill, not only will you be able to have as much sex as you want while simultaneously preventing unintended pregnancies, you'll also fall for nicer guys.