http://www.wikio.com
Showing posts with label discussion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label discussion. Show all posts

Sunday, February 25, 2018

American Gun Rights: Why are we fighting to keep guns in the hands of future criminals?


The idea that some person with guns is going to fight off the government isn't a sound one for arguing for gun rights. For one thing, the examples of Waco and Ruby Ridge should have pretty much summed up by now why that's a bad argument. If the government wants to take you out, they are taking you out. That in itself is a major problem that gun culture is not only NOT solving, its probably making worse by suggesting to people that having stores of weapons is somehow going to make them safe in a conflict, whereas we're probably just more likely to witness another standoff wherein children are put into danger and more often than not, killed.
In the same breath I hear "criminals don't follow laws so how is making guns illegal going to stop them", which lines "criminals" out like people that aren't any of "us" and that's ridiculous. Things that are perfectly legal in ONE state would make you a "criminal" in another. Criminality comes usually out of a place of desperation, lack of education and/or opportunity, existential threat, deprivation, etc. Most people are not born with a "criminal" mindset, and even the mentally ill are usually not specifically more dangerous to a society (some extremely rare exceptions do exist, but writing the mentally ill off as a whole is a careless and dangerous thing to do). A life circumstance beyond your immediate control could force you into engaging in "criminal" acts to save your life or protect your family. You know, like shooting a person (which is pretty much illegal).
For some, legal use of guns and legal gun ownership is considered more criminal than others. We have a law enforcement and judicial system that disproportionately impacts people of darker skin. Racism in relation to gun access and laws is a whole different Pandora's box of problems, as well. Philando Castile was not a criminal, informed an officer appropriately about having a gun that he was licensed to carry, and was shot to death as a passenger in a car in front of his girlfriend and her toddler. Had that jumpy ass officer aimed his gun so much as an inch to the right, he'd have SHOT that toddler in her car seat. More guns did not help that situation. Marissa Alexander was being abused and was in fear of her and her infant's life, so she fired a WARNING SHOT into the upper corner of a wall in her home to scare back her abusive husband and was GIVEN 20 YEARS in prison, while the next year in the same state George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin, whom he had literally stalked during the course of an evening and was told by law enforcement to stop following and he was let off on the same "stand your ground" defense that failed Ms. Alexander (whose conviction was thrown out on appeal after a few years, thank God). More guns are not helping in these situations either.
So, we have some incompatible ideas going on here. If you engage in a standoff against police (enforcement arm of government), that's pretty illegal and would be considered criminal behavior. Hell, I would think that planning for such an event in advance by its own nature would be considered conspiracy in regard to future criminal acts. Yet, I find that a commonality found with the pro-gun crowd is a pro-police mentality, yet at the same time, the pro-gun crowd tends to bandy about the idea that you have to have guns to fight off the government which would first be ..the police. So, you don't want "criminals" to be the only ones getting guns cause what.. if.. you.. need.. to do something.. criminal, too? I don't get it.
Rather, I do get it, but it's hypocritical as fuck and a dangerous mindset to feel that you're entitled to kill people but no one else is. Yet at the same time, lets make sure people have more guns.
Seriously, fuck this. Keep a lever-action rifle at home in case shit gets hairy or you have a maniac banging down your door. Tell me why you need to not only have guns, but an armory full of guns that can kill people faster than fuck, like rapid-fire weapons?
Who are these "criminals" again?

Yeah, they probably won't, dude..
yeah, they probably won't, huh?

The Feminine Context

Friday, November 15, 2013

Why Men Call Women "Crazy" - Turns Out That It's Total Bullshit Like We Thought It Was

From "On Labeling Women 'Crazy'" by Harris O'Malley on HuffPost:

"Back in the bad old days, I was notoriously self-absorbed. It wasn't that I thought that I was the greatest thing ever, it was just that I didn't really stop to spare too many thoughts for others. I was willing to make an effort for others, but only so far as it didn't really inconvenience me past a "reasonable" point. I didn't want to have long drawn out conversations about how my behavior made my girlfriend feel and I certainly didn't want to get dragged into what I saw as unnecessary drama. In fact, I was incredibly drama-averse, thanks to an early unhealthy relationship.

As a result... well, I wasn't willing to consider how others were feeling. When the woman I was dating would try to explain to me how the way I treated her felt, I would tell her that she was seeing things. She was overreacting to inconsequential stuff. She was being over-sensitive, reading things into what I was saying or doing that just weren't there.

The subtext to everything I was saying was simple: "You are behaving in a way that I find inconvenient, and I want to you to stop." I wasn't willing to engage with her emotionally and address her very real concerns because I was too wrapped up in my own shit to think about other people. As a result, I would minimize her issues. By telling her that she was reading too much into things, I was framing the situation as her being irrational.

I didn't realize it at the time, but what I was doing was, in effect, telling her that she didn't have the right to feel the way she felt... because I didn't want her to feel that way."


I would love to see more of this kind of thought process from men. The patriarchal status quo ain't helpin THEM out either, making them all out to be emotionally-challenged, overgrown children who are incapable of interacting with others without gratuity. That's not healthy for anyone, and its not true. Following the societal norms of  traditional gender roles to the letter; fearful, skeptical, and cynical of any deviation, does nothing more than entrap us in unhappy lifestyles and a dangerous, violent culture.

The Feminine Context

Sunday, September 29, 2013

Anita Perry Can't Stomach Uttering Total Bullshit Out Loud, Media Frenzy Ensues

I'm thinking that Rick Perry is shitting platinum bricks right about now..




OH MY GAWD.. A PROMINENT REPUBLICAN STATE FIRST LADY EXPRESSED A PERFECTLY VALID AND HUMAN VIEWPOINT ON REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS!

From the HuffingtonPost:

"When pressed on women's rights by Texas Tribune's Evan Smith at the 2013 Texas Tribune Festival, the First Lady of Texas said, "That's really difficult for me, Evan, because I see it as a women's right. If they want to do that, that is their decision; they have to live with that decision."

"Mrs. Perry, I want to be sure you didn't just inadvertently make news," Smith replied. "Are you saying that you believe abortion is a women's right, to make that choice?"

Smith pressed again, asking if she believed it's a person's decision within the law, to which Anita Perry replied, "Yeah, that could be a women's right. Just like it's a man's right if he wants to have some kind of procedure. But I don't agree with it, and that's not my view."

You can understand that women should have the right to choose what's best for them and, at once, not be all pro-abortion. To be pro-choice means that you realize that abortion is one of several choices a woman can make in the face of an unplanned pregnancy, and it IS in fact, OKAY to know that you yourself would not make that particular choice.

Kudos to Mrs. Perry for having the chutzpah to say this out loud in front of cameras. You can tell she's feeling backed down toward the end, but she didn't bail out entirely, either.

oh, and also VOTE WENDY DAVIS FOR SENATE!!!!!!!!!!!!
The Feminine Context

Friday, November 11, 2011

"Not Really" Is Still "No". One Man's Introspective Article

Anyone who has read this blog can easily detect my feminism within a few posts. It's not something I hide, I don't consider "feminism" a bad word, and I don't use feminism as a way to assault men. As a feminist, I tend to worry less about what men are doing, and find myself most often taking offense at the behaviors of other women who want to reap the rewards of feminism while abandoning the personal responsibility of earning them.

That being said, I'm not a mysogynist. Sexual politics within any culture are complex by nature, built upon historical, religious, economical, and other factors. To unravel an issue, means that one must take the time to untie all of the good intentions and practical measures that somehow developed into a likely unintentional problem. With the efforts of many individuals on different ends of the discussion, there can be some understanding and resolution.

This is why I ADORE you, Hugo Schwyzer.

His bio, from his website:

"Hugo Schwyzer is an American author, speaker and professor of history and gender studies at Pasadena City College. He presents workshops on body image, sexual harassment, rape prevention, and the “myth of male weakness.” He is also a frequent guest on nationally syndicated radio programs and has appeared on CNN and CTV (Canada) as an expert on body image, sexuality and gender justice."


I came across one of Mr. Schwyzer's articles today, and simply HAD to share it..


From "Accidental rape. I knew I hadn't committed a crime but..."


"Most “good guys” take a woman’s firm “No!” for an answer. (Those who don’t are best left to the ministrations of our criminal justice system.) But lots of men are like the guy I was at 19—assuming that while “no means no” anything short of a firm “no” is either a “yes” or a “keep at it, boy, because you just might get a ‘yes’ soon.” Call it male sexual legalism, the first rule of which is “All that is not expressly prohibited is assumed to be permitted.” That legalism can turn many men into accidental rapists"

We need more of this guy, and less of this guy..

The Feminine Context

Sunday, November 6, 2011

God Save The Teens: An Intervention

This is an actual Facebook-comment conversation I had with my niece the other night. It is at times like this that I'm grateful for the long, lonely, isolated adolescence I experienced as a home-schooled student. At least I never had the opportunity to pick up dumbass habits like this.

Names and identifying information removed. Kids, if no one's slapped you for abusing the English language like this, please do what's right and slap the holy shit out of YOURSELF.



The Feminine Context

Sunday, October 30, 2011

Occupy Together: Sad Paper Airplanes Don't Cost Postage

On October 28th, members of the Occupy Wall Street movement marched through Manhattan to the headquarters of many major banks, including Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, Bank Of America, JP Morgan Chase, and Well Fargo. Assembling outside the entrances to these banks, the OWS protesters threw paper airplanes made of folded up letters from members of the "99 percent". These letters had been written to banking executives and published to the website "OccupyTheBoardroom.com".

Now, personally.. I kinda dig the whole OccupyTheBoardroom thing. Here's a description, in their own words.

"Life gets awfully lonely for those at the top. What can we do to let them know someone's thinking of them? Maybe they need some new friends! We've thought of two ways we can help them with that.

Option 1: Pen Pals
Make your voice heard by the Wall Street elites who wrecked the economy and made the rest of us pay. Click on someone below and tell them a story that you think they should listen to. Just got a college degree and nothing to show for it? Just got evicted while your banker gets bonuses? Share your special story with someone who ought to know.

Option 2: Best Friends Forever
If you're feeling even more generous, why not reach out in a more creative way? Click on a banker below, then read the instructions and examples to get inspired. Maybe your banker needs some kind words, or maybe an intervention. Most importantly, use your imagination! The best, funniest, most revelatory interactions win prizes."

Now that's some old-school-meets-new-tech, good vibes, sarcastic American protesting. That warms me to the cockles of my heart. Maybe the sub-cockular area as well. Either way, I freakin' love it.

When you fold that shit up into a paper airplane, tossing it limp-wristed into the air to watch it nosedive onto the sidewalk... well, shit. How do I put this? This paper airplane gig leaves me cold. It kinda puts the "pussy" in "pusillanimous".

I'm sorry. I'm all for peaceful protesting, but the paper airplane thing looked sad and pitiful. It looked like a bunch of little birds dropping dead at the doorstep. On a purely visual level, to me it made the 99-percent look as weak and fragile as those paper airplanes that no one apparently knew how to fold in such a ways as to make them fly. Don't know what I'm talking about? Watch it for yourself by clicking here. Set it to a string quartet composition in a minor key, and it'll be the most depressing eighteen seconds ever filmed.



In what I can only surmise is a direct response to the sad paper airplane display, YouTube user RansackedRoom gives us THIS.


Our clever friend here has devised a lovely form of protest utilizing the junk mail that people receive every day from banking corporations. His suggestion is to take all of the credit card (and other banking product) offers received in the mail, and simply MAIL THEM BACK, using the postage-paid envelope that the banking corporation has so generously enclosed.

Don't stop there! He also recommends that while you add an insert of your own to indicate your support of the Occupy Movement, that you also enclose ALL your excess junk mail. Why? Well to drive up the postage cost to the bank, of course! For extra points, why not add a small piece of wood or roofing shingle? This will not only make the envelope heavy enough to count for extra postage, it will also make the envelope RIGID, which equals to an ADDITIONAL postage cost.

Sorry, but if I want to make an impact with a peaceful protest involving paper, I'd rather send a roofing shingle, an OWS-themed note, and a firm NO THANK YOU written on the offer sent to me by the bank, than to throw some dumbass paper airplane at a door. Besides, this also makes for a "greener" protest. RansackedRoom's method involves recycling materials that you would have only thrown away, and reusing them for a purpose.

Enjoy! I'm going to go start collecting flat, heavy things. Right after I check my mail.

If anyone's interested, RansackedRoom can be found on Twitter by clicking on this link.


The Feminine Context

Sunday, October 23, 2011

Surrounded by Total Weaners And Staying A-Breast Of Research

No, I didn't misspell anything. I am surrounded by weaners. Big, obnoxious weaners who are constantly trying to pummel me with their weaniness.

I don't go all breastfeeding-nazi on here, and that's for a reason. As strongly as I feel about the subject, and I DO feel strongly about it, there are PLENTY of websites and blogs available for for breastfeeding mothers and bottle-feeding mothers to duke it out and sound like bitches together. I'm not going to participate, thanks. This bitch has nothing to prove to the rest of you bitches, and that's half the point of this post.

There are so many blogs and websites devoted to the daily minutia of motherhood, that it leaves me certain of a future field of psychotherapy that will deal exclusively with the tortured offspring of the web's former UberMommies, who have all been busy fighting for Alpha-Bitch rank while their kids sat in playpens and watched them type... WITH INDIGNATION. If possible, I'd like to avoid doing any more emotional damage to my daughter than the standard amount that she's sure to accuse me of by the time she hits sixteen and obnoxious. She's already slated to hit me with a full onslaught of teen angst when my powers of reason and self-composure will be weakened by menopause. Why should I leave my future opponent a time-capsule cache of surplus ammunition? That's like leaving the Terminator a "hope chest" full of weapons and emergency contact numbers for Sarah Conner. It's just asking for fucking problems..

This is probably not going to be the only post that I ever make on the subject of breastfeeding. I don't think it's wise of me to say "only once, and never again", because that's a rule I'm sure to break at some point. Be assured though, this isn't going to be a major trend on this blog.

So.. why does everyone seem to think they have a right to an opinion when it comes to me breastfeeding my child?

When my daughter was born and I committed to breastfeeding her, women I knew who didn't breastfeed their own children became noticeably uncomfortable. I started getting these bits of advice and "support" from other stay-at-home mothers like ..

"Well, even if you can only do it for (two weeks/a month/three months) that's good. That's enough"

"I guess it helps. They always say breast is best. It's just impractical."

"Oh dear, that's going to be exhausting"

"Don't force yourself to do it, if you can't, it's fine"

"If you're going to breastfeed, start pumping NOW. When you get tired of it, you can put her on a bottle and she can have breast milk longer."

and my favorite..

"Why are you letting her father be so LAZY? Pump that milk and make him feed her when he's home. Feeding just from the breast is too hard on anyone, and you might be risking her dad's ability to bond with her."

So by naturally feeding my child, without artificial food or implements (like bottles), I was apparently running headlong into a situation that undoubtedly wouldn't work out on a long-term basis, and I was denying her father some important bonding experience with his child. What a silly, impractical, selfish bitch I am!

What a load of bullshit.

These were stay-at-home mothers. The title alone can only suggest that the woman's primary function is to care for her child, herself, at home. I had determined that I, too, would stay home and thus, have the time and availability to my child so that I could feed her exclusively from the breast.

So what's the problem? Why is there an assumption that it's only human to want to pack it in on the nursing and toss the kid a bottle? With breastfeeding, I don't have to clean bottles, worry about the formula being warm, or if she's allergic to it. Not to mention the fact that there isn't a credible doctor ANYWHERE that's going to tell you that bottle-feeding is best or ideal. I'm willing to do it, so where is the problem?

Once that group realized that their lukewarm support (or negative opinion) of my breastfeeding wasn't affecting me in any way, the same crowd pretty much shut the hell up. Friends of mine who had primarily or wholly breastfed their children patted me on the back with a "good for you for sticking with it". However, without fail at every three month mark in my child's first year, someone invariably asked "oh my, are you still breastfeeding her?", as though they were surprised that I hadn't given up all that idealistic nonsense by now.

So here we are and my daughter is one year old, just popped out her first tooth (working on five more), no allergies, ear infections, etc, and her doctor says she is "perfect". Suddenly, even some of those who supported my breastfeeding are starting to assume I'm weaning her off the breast, some a little taken aback when I tell them I plan to nurse her for another year unless she gives it up herself before then.

It's really simple. I don't do things for her based on what's "comfortable" for me. I make decisions on how I care for her based on my research and careful consideration of all variables involved. I do things for my child based on what's best for her. 

That's called being a parent. It's not about me. It's about her. I'm a mother, and my baby is helpless and incapable of making any decisions or interventions regarding her own care. If I'm not her advocate and I don't put her first, no one else is going to do it.

Sure, breastfeeding can be really difficult, especially at first. Right after delivery, the entire lower half of your body (and I do mean the ENTIRE lower half) feels like someone dragged it behind a truck for about five miles. That's enough. When you breastfeed, the upper half starts to experience pain that really doesn't seem to make any sense. Before you have the baby, its easy enough to imagine that your nipples are going to be sore, but it's more than that. I remember hurting in places around the back of my rib cage, thinking, "what the FUCK? why would it hurt back THERE of all places?". Then, I did the damn research.

There's really no excuse to not know how your body works, considering that the internet makes it possible for you to learn these things without even getting out of your pajamas. Mammary glands and associated/connected glands were being used for the first time ever, at high volume and QUICKLY. You're damn right that shit is going to hurt. Why didn't the nurse tell me THAT at the hospital? Why did I hear "if it hurts, you're doing it wrong" instead of "hey, just a heads up, your armpits, breasts, rib cage, and shoulders are probably going to be pretty sore for the first month, but it goes away if you stick with it"?

It is a big commitment, as well. Solely breastfeeding means that no one can feed the baby but you, AND that the baby will eat about twice as often as a formula-fed baby, so that means you ain't goin' NOWHERE without her. It also meant that my girl never went to the pediatrician for anything but routine checkups and shots. As far as my physical discomfort was concerned, It DID get better and in the long run, breastfeeding my child cost less money, time, and effort than bottle feeding would have.

So why, when the World Health Organization recommends that babies breastfeed for two years, are my previously supportive peers getting weirded out that I choose to keep feeding my baby in the most medically-sound way possible? I'm the one with the chubby little darling using my breasts as a jungle gym, how is it anyone ELSE'S business to make my commitment to my child's health and well-being any more of a challenge than it already is?

My partner said, "Oh, don't worry about them..". I really don't WORRY about what people say and think when I make parenting decisions. I tend not to worry much about what people think or if they like me, but I do get irritated at the selfishness of insensitivity and by people's negative intentions. In short, if you see someone breaking their ass to be a good parent, what with all the people out there who pop out kids like their candy and don't even seem to LIKE their children (let alone concern themselves with their development), what in the hell would possess you to make a negative comment on someones parenting of a well-developed, healthy child who (under this same parents' care) is doing JUST GREAT?

I think the short answer is that sometimes, people need to shut the fuck up and mind their own business and their own kids. Here's a wild idea.. maybe bother to educate yourself so that you can make independent decisions for yourself and your own children, based on facts and data and not on what your mom (who you've been pissed off at since you were sixteen years old an obnoxious) said you should do. It's not that you can't take advice from people, but make sure it's good advice, especially before you go cramming it down everyone else's throat.

Yeah. This was a rant. Deal with it.

I need to go nurse my baby now, so before I go.. here are words and links from the World Health Organization that provide information about the benefits of breastfeeding. It IS the best for babies.

------------------------------------------------------------

WHO recommends

WHO strongly recommends exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of life. At six months, other foods should complement breastfeeding for up to two years or more. In addition:
  • breastfeeding should begin within an hour of birth;
  • breastfeeding should be "on demand", as often as the child wants day and night; and
  • bottles or pacifiers should be avoided.

Health benefits for infants

Breast milk is the ideal food for newborns and infants. It gives infants all the nutrients they need for healthy development. It is safe and contains antibodies that help protect infants from common childhood illnesses - such as diarrhoea and pneumonia, the two primary causes of child mortality worldwide. Breast milk is readily available and affordable, which helps to ensure that infants get adequate sustenance.

Benefits for mothers

Breastfeeding also benefits mothers. The practice when done exclusively often induces a lack of menstruation, which is a natural (though not fail-safe) method of birth control. It reduces risks of breast and ovarian cancer later in life, helps women return to their pre-pregnancy weight faster, and lowers rates of obesity

Long-term benefits for children

Beyond the immediate benefits for children, breastfeeding contributes to a lifetime of good health. Adults who were breastfed as babies often have lower blood pressure and lower cholesterol, as well as lower rates of overweight, obesity and type-2 diabetes. There is evidence that people who were breastfed perform better in intelligence tests.

Why not infant formula?

Infant formula does not contain the antibodies found in breast milk and is linked to some risks, such as water-borne diseases that arise from mixing powdered formula with unsafe water (many families lack access to clean water). Malnutrition can result from over-diluting formula to "stretch" supplies. Further, frequent feedings maintain the breast milk supply. If formula is used but becomes unavailable, a return to breastfeeding may not be an option due to diminished breast milk production.

HIV and breastfeeding

For HIV-positive mothers, WHO recommends exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months unless replacement feeding is:
  • acceptable (socially welcome)
  • feasible (facilities and help are available to prepare formula)
  • affordable (formula can be purchased for six months)
  • sustainable (feeding can be sustained for six months)
  • safe (formula is prepared with safe water and in hygienic conditions).

Regulating breast-milk substitutes

An international code to regulate the marketing of breast-milk substitutes was adopted in 1981. It calls for:
  • all formula labels and information to state the benefits of breastfeeding and the health risks of substitutes;
  • no promotion of breast-milk substitutes;
  • no free samples of substitutes to be given to pregnant women, mothers or their families; and
  • no distribution of free or subsidized substitutes to health workers or facilities.

Support for mothers is essential

Breastfeeding has to be learned and many women encounter difficulties at the beginning. Nipple pain, and fear that there is not enough milk to sustain the baby are common. Health facilities that support breastfeeding - by making trained breastfeeding counsellors available to new mothers - encourage higher rates of the practice. To provide this support and improve care for mothers and newborns, there are now more than 20 000 "baby-friendly" facilities in 152 countries thanks to a WHO-UNICEF initiative.

Work and breastfeeding

WHO recommends that a new mother should have at least 16 weeks of absence from work after delivery, to be able to rest and breastfeed her child. Many mothers who go back to work abandon exclusive breastfeeding before the recommended six months because they do not have sufficient time, or an adequate place to breastfeed or express and store their milk at work. Mothers need access to a safe, clean and private place in or near their workplaces to continue the practice.

The next step: phasing in new foods

To meet the growing needs of babies at six months of age, complementary foods should be introduced as they continue to breastfeed. Foods for the baby can be specially prepared or modified from family meals. WHO notes that:
  • breastfeeding should not be decreased when starting complementary feeding;
  • complementary foods should be given with a spoon or cup, not in a bottle;
  • foods should be clean, safe and locally available; and
  • ample time is needed for young children to learn to eat solid foods.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Acceptable medical reasons for use of breast-milk substitutes

Authors:
World Health Organization

Infants who should not receive breast milk or any other milk
except specialized formula

􀂄 Infants with classic galactosemia: a special galactose-free formula is needed.
􀂄 Infants with maple syrup urine disease: a special formula free of leucine,
isoleucine and valine is needed.
􀂄 Infants with phenylketonuria: a special phenylalanine-free formula is
needed (some breastfeeding is possible, under careful monitoring).

Infants for whom breast milk remains the best feeding option
but who may need other food in addition to breast milk for a limited period

􀂄 Infants born weighing less than 1500 g (very low birth weight).
􀂄 Infants born at less than 32 weeks of gestational age (very pre-term).
􀂄 Newborn infants who are at risk of hypoglycaemia by virtue of impaired metabolic adaptation or increased
glucose demand (such as those who are preterm, small for gestational age or who have experienced significant
intrapartum hypoxic/ischaemic stress, those who are ill and those whose mothers are diabetic) (5) if their
blood sugar fails to respond to optimal breastfeeding or breast-milk feeding.

Maternal conditions that may justify permanent avoidance of breastfeeding

􀂄 HIV infection1: if replacement feeding is acceptable, feasible, affordable, sustainable and safe (AFASS)
 
Maternal conditions that may justify temporary avoidance of breastfeeding

􀂄 Severe illness that prevents a mother from caring for her infant, for example sepsis.
ô€‚„ Herpes simplex virus type 1 (HSV-1): direct contact between lesions on the mother’s breasts and the infant’s mouth
should be avoided until all active lesions have resolved.
􀂄 Maternal medication:
- sedating psychotherapeutic drugs, anti-epileptic drugs and opioids and their combinations may cause side effects
such as drowsiness and respiratory depression and are better avoided if a safer alternative is available (7);
- radioactive iodine-131 is better avoided given that safer alternatives are available - a mother can resume
breastfeeding about two months after receiving this substance;
- excessive use of topical iodine or iodophors (e.g., povidone-iodine), especially on open wounds or mucous
membranes, can result in thyroid suppression or electrolyte abnormalities in the breastfed infant and should be
avoided;
- cytotoxic chemotherapy requires that a mother stops breastfeeding during therapy.

Maternal conditions during which breastfeeding can still continue, although health problems  may be of concern

􀂄 Breast abscess: breastfeeding should continue on the unaffected breast; feeding from the affected breast can
resume once treatment has started (8).
􀂄 Hepatitis B: infants should be given hepatitis B vaccine, within the first 48 hours or as soon as possible
thereafter (9).
􀂄 Hepatitis C.
􀂄 Mastitis: if breastfeeding is very painful, milk must be removed by expression to prevent progression of the
condition(8).
􀂄 Tuberculosis: mother and baby should be managed according to national tuberculosis guidelines

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

State Tax Systems Burden The Poor, While Rich Get Off Easy - HuffingtonPost Article

"Contrary to the rhetoric from Republicans that half of Americans are not paying income taxes, at the state level the poor are paying more than twice as much of their income toward taxes than the super rich. At the same time poverty levels haven risen to highs not seen since 1993, with 15.1 percent of Americans officially classified as poor.

But those in the bottom 20 percent pay closer to 12 or 13 percent of their income in state and local taxes on average. The top 1 percent of income earners only pay 7 to 8 percent, according to the Institute on Taxation & Economic Policy." - Tyler Kingkade, Huffington Post


Go HERE to see this story on HuffingtonPost.com

Tuesday, September 6, 2011

Statement of Purpose

Hello.

This blog is intended to be interesting to both men and women, due to its emphasis on male/female communication.

If I go on writing in this blog with the same dryness contained in that description, it will no doubt be interesting to NO ONE.

So.. let's just get this out of the way.

This blog will probably be updated in a somewhat random fashion, but I'm REALLY going to try and do it with some sort of regularity. I've attempted to maintain several blogs over the years, but like houseplants, I just can't seem to keep them alive. This time, I think I've got a topic that's entertaining enough to ME that it can keep my interest. We'll see.

Right now, it's September of 2011, and come September of 2014 you might run across this blog with a total of 15 posts that end abruptly in October of 2011. If that's YOU and you're reading this in 09/2014 and I've killed another potentially fun blog through pure neglect.. well, to hell with you and your judgments! I at least left a trace of myself to float out in the e-cosmos, probably with as many bad puns and puerile humor as I could possibly shove into the pitiful number of posts this blog contains. For like, ten minutes worth of reading, I WAS SOMEBODY... that you probably didn't want to hang out with... BUT I WAS STILL SOMEBODY, DAMMIT!

Tirade break.

In case anyone is wondering, I'm female, over 30, and an avid bullshit-enthusiast. Some have called me an "artist", but as far as bullshit is concerned, I really consider myself more of a hobbyist. Perhaps a connoisseur of fine bullshit artistry. Believe it or not, this rambling preamble is actually leading to the point of this blog. Points, really.

Point One :
Men and Women are different. Their BRAINS are wired differently. They have equal needs, usually the same needs, but they communicate, learn, and prioritize differently from one another.

Point Two :
This causes a lot of problems. A lot. A lot of problems that could potentially be avoided by keeping Point One in mind before anyone says ANYTHING to ANYBODY.

What I plan (hah.. "plan") to do with this blog is to effectively illustrate these two points, as often and obnoxiously as I possibly can. I plan to assist you men out there by decoding the subtle, hidden messages that the women around you are lobbing at you at every possible opportunity. You know how your mom/sister/ex/current/female friend is constantly trying to tell you that so-and-so is a total bitch? Believe it or not, she probably is. However, its pretty dumb to make decisions based on one person's interpretation of this hidden, foreign language. I think it would be better to work on a sort of "travel phrase" guide here, just so you get some idea of what the HELL is going on between the women around you. Trust me, its enough to scare you NOT straight.

Ladies? I'm not forgetting you. Men are loading you down with the same type of conversational manure that they are mired in as a result of our communication differences. Between us girls... well, let's be honest, we're not getting ANYWHERE trying to translate it together. All of our girls nights out are loaded with questions.. questions about men. Usually we're in a small group of women without enough testosterone between us to support ONE testicle, let alone the fact that we're all squawking the same damn questions at each other. It doesn't help that our groups diminish and repopulate based on a bunch of illogical assumptions about what some other girl "meant by that". It could be something as simple as a facial expression. An item of clothing that someone deems inappropriate. Talking to the wrong man or talking to him at the wrong time. It could be anything. We will recognize it as some great personal (or worse) group insult. We will ostracize that girl within an inch of her life, and bring her back only when she has been sufficiently punished for that thing that ACTUALLY meant this other thing that was SO GODDAMN OFFENSIVE that we were momentarily motivated to burn her for the bitch witch she was ...

.. FOR WEARING THAT BLOUSE WHEN SARA WAS TRYING TO TALK TO THAT GUY THAT SHE DOESN'T KNOW. OMG.

Yes, men. It is that bad. Shame on us. Shame on you guys for running about willy-nilly in a gender-integrated world and not realizing the intensity of the female-to-female interactions that go on around you at all times.

Shame on all of us for not being honest. Shame on us for playing this retarded game that makes no one happy.

Maybe, if I can stay interested long enough, I can dig a couple gold nuggets out of the giant shit-pile of confusion that we all work so hard to build, dividing us a species into two, confused, bitter groups of people who aren't getting laid and don't like each other most of the time. I can give it a try.