Thursday, April 19, 2007

Have mercy...

There I was, innocently browsing teh internets for work purposes (yes, I swear it's true) when all of a sudden - kapow. Apparently, the Times has discovered that a lot of its readers would vote BNP.

Okay, so this is not exactly surprising. The Times is hardly at the forefront of the class struggle (speaking of which, if I had not studied Marxism, a recent visit to Blenheim palace might have converted me), still, I had at least hoped there was *some* vestige of sanity left. Alas, it was not to be.

Rather than mocking this inbred, irrational, nutcase element of their readership, it seemed sympathetic. Commenters pointed out how brave the Times was to go against the tide of the "PC" etc etc. Admittedly, whenever I see this kind of comment, I do go a pleasant shade of magenta and splutter "what???!?" in an increasingly high pitched tone. Still.


Obviously, you're not. So forget that question. I have a horrible feeling we're going to end up like France, having to choose between Chirac and LePen. Let me state categorically that this would be the *only time* that voting for Cameron would be acceptable. If the BNP keeps gaining support, I will have to emigrate to... okay, given the lack of acceptable alternatives, some sort of mental breakdown would probably be in order. The outcome of that event happening is, seriously, just to horrible to contemplate.


In more (directly) feminist news, bad news for women in the US regarding the Supreme Court and a certain method of abortion. BitchPhD has some good posts on this - so I suggest you go to her. I would link to her, but (in gross technical incompetence) have forgotten how. Google it; you'll all be fine.

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

You what?

Yesterday’s shock stories regarding more and more doctors refusing to give abortions were, just a tad, misleading. Turns out, if you actually bother reading the articles, that what is happening is that medical students etc are simply choosing *not to specialise* in this area, leading to a potential shortage of people qualified to perform the procedure. Presumably, there are shortages in other areas too as doctors choose to specialise in, say, neuroscience(?) rather than something a little more mundane. Sure, some people may be choosing not to go into this area because they don’t wish to perform abortions, but quite frankly, the evidence did not actually seem to lead to this conclusion.

Imagine my surprise then, when I was flicking through the TV channels this morning before leaving for work. There, on Sky sunrise, discussing the day’s papers, was some idiotic guest journo-hack who apparently *had not* actually read this article, but only the title. Sanctimoniously, he announced that *even pro-choicers* (because we are evil, child-killing demons from hell) had to question the 24 week limit and that it was great that doctors were saying no because “after all, abortion is murder”.

Pardon me?

Where did that come from? When did it become perfectly okay for a middle aged, middle class, smug man to go on a breakfast news programme to discuss papers and come out with something like that? I am okay with gentle sarcasm, a bit of light bitching. However, I will not be morally judged or hectored by *anyone* who goes on these programmes in the name of objective, impartial journalism. To be honest, I was absolutely outraged. If he is pro-life, fair enough. He can believe whatever he likes. At the same time, there is no way that I have to have his beliefs inflicted upon me, with no nod to reason, sanity or any justifiable argument behind his position. His comment was unnecessary and inflammatory and I am completely appalled that Sky news felt it was appropriate for the situation to let that go.