Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Commerce Clause & AFA Pt. 1

Oh, what fun we're having. We as in me. Fun as in reading with glee all the many and nefarious ways that Barack is beating Antoin and Clarence over the head right about now.  Somewhere deep down in my sick twisted sense of humor, I hear Barack say to Clarence, in that exclusively I'mblacknurrblacksoIcangetawaywithit way of saying "[censored], I HAVE GOTCHYO ASS." Because, the Affordable Care Act is constitutional. Unless.  There's that word again. Unless. Thank you, Dr. Suess. It's such a good word and you have reminded me of it yet again.

The AFA is constitutional unless you want to limit the power of the federal government. This is a Republican, conservative court mind you. Limit the power of the federal government is not something conservative courts usually do. Ever. Even progressive, liberal courts don't do it. No 'unless' really needs to apply here. EVER. Not once in the history of US has that happened.

It's like this. There is all this power out here in the land of US. What does not belong to the fed, belongs to the states. Unless. It affects interstate commerce.  Because of that silly little sentence that says US shall have the power to regulate Commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states [do take note of the Oxford comma, it's totally relevant here as we'll see later on], and with the Indian Tribes.  For all this, we have regulation on telephones, what goes through the mail, highways, navigable waters, medicine, food, alcohol, you friggin name it. It's all federal power. Unless it's not. The state has been regulating something (employment contracts for instance) for all of history, but now, the fed wants to it with the Labor Relations Board. STATES' RIGHTS everybody screams. DORMANT COMMERCE CLAUSE the supremes scream right back in a big loud kissmyass voice.  WHA?  The fed always had that power just chose not to use it, in which case the states are free to use it until the fed wants to and then it's the DORMANT COMMERCE CLAUSE that kicks in and sucks all the power away from the states.

For the last forever, states have been regulating health insurance. States have insurance commissioners, and laws and rules and all kinds of charts and arrows and notations and such. Now, with the AFA, the fed has said - it's my power now, suck it states. And the states are suing. They've tried this before. Never won.

Ah, you say. But isn't this just what those asswaffle tea baggers are wanking about? Yes, it is. But, those asswaffle tea baggers are states rights morons and the supreme court does not give one fat rat's ass about them. Nope. When was the last time you heard of a state's rights case being upheld by the supremes? Yeah, right, me either. Good luck with that one. Why? Well, for starters, they aren't asswaffle tea baggers - they are FEDERAL JUDGES.  When payday comes, they are snarfing out of the federal trough, not the states' rights trough. So, not too likely they will rule in favor of taking away power from themselves.

Also, several of them are flag waving greedy ass self appointed sanctimonious holier than thou intellectual aristocrats (aka gasbags). When was the last time you heard of a gasbag voluntarily relinquishing power when his nuts weren't in a literal (not even figurative) vise?  Me either. Letting go of federal power is not a likely scenario.

Monday, March 19, 2012

I'm No Sexist - I'll have Cream and Sugar With That

I know a lot of men who really, truly are NOT sexist. They love women. Really. They respect women. Openly and out loud, even in front of other men. Well, unless they're men they don't know all that well. Or, unless there aren't any women around. Or, well, unless they're just minding their own business. Truly, they would never vote to interfere with a woman's right to choose, or stand in her way, God forbid, should his significant she ever have to choose. Nor would he not celebrate her raise, her promotion, her advanced degree. He is TOTALLY liberated and progressive at all times.

Unless.  It's a show on televsion where one of the characters played by Charlie Sheen is more than just little bit sexist.  C'mon, men. Somebody was watching that show. But, we know it wasn't you.

Unless.  It's a radio broadcast in his boss's car spewing angry Rush-ness. Sure, I would demand it be turned off, but I'm a woman. And, if another woman is in the car, does a good man let her make the call, or does he do for himself. Because, really, who does want to listen to that hate? But, we know you would.

Unless. It's porn. Where women just want that big old macho man to rock her hard in the ass and come all over her face! Right. Porn isn't made for women and women do NOT (at least the ones I know) really want it that way. Neither do you. Really.

Unless. It's video games. Where women barely exist and when they do, they are so overly bodified and sexualized that even Barbie feels fucking inadequate. But you don't want (or, ok, at least expect to ever get) a woman like that. You appreciate a woman's mind, too, we know.

Unless. It's beer commercials, which have improved but still fall back on the hot babes will fuck you if you buy this beer routine which is usually NOT true, but most especially NOT true of the beer being advertised.

Unless, unless, unless - I could go on. Does the 'girl' at your office make the coffee, do the dishes, clean out the 'fridge, water the  plants? In an office romance, who looks for another job when the romance ends? Do you refer to any woman working in certain jobs as a 'girl'? Do you refer to any female over age 18 as a girl? Yes, you, too, are a  sexist. So, am I. Men should kill bugs, fix cars, and worship the ground I walk on, make the world safe for democracy, have a tea party with his daughter, stand 10' tall always.  Unless . . . he's human, as am I.

Saturday, March 17, 2012

Rally In Huntsville - JUST GO

Busy much? Yep, me too.  That being said, our attention is needed. Women are getting the short end of the stick in state legislatures these days. Especially this week. Neoconservatives have taken it upon themselves to impose their own strange version of Sharia law upon women. Everything from transvaginal ultrasound to allowing employers the decision on what reproductive choices are appropriate for a woman have been imposed in more than 80 laws passed just this week. Google it. I'm not into providing sources for that at the moment.

Sunday, 3/18/2012, a lot of women and men are getting together in Huntsville for a rally for womens' rights. Sure, they are focusing on their own state laws, but they are including all women and all of America in their protest. Information about the rally:

I'm planning to be there - sporting my new walking shoes, fancy camera and all the indignation I can muster.  Please join us. Millions of women and girls (and men and boys) will thank you one day.

Monday, March 12, 2012


People don't like that word. It makes them uncomfortable for some reason. I don't know why. I just know it does. This comes from my abject talent at being able to figure out a person's buttons - those things they push to set themselves off into a funk/anger/rage/whatever. It's a survival skill developed from a tortured childhood wherein knowing such information was essential to avoiding catastrophe.

The only thing that seems to bother people more than saying 'vagina' is saying "MY VAGINA". Making it actually personal is just, well, TMI. Perplexed about this phenom, I Googled it. That's what we do these days. It used to be those horrid little books in libraries that listed every article published by every publisher on just about any topic. Now, it's Google. Even an article in Psychology Today takes one whole paragraph and some 100 words before it actually names it and then, the fine physician who wrote it, a woman, calls it "VAJAYJAY". Don't believe me? Google it.

According to this same illustrious source, some vaginas do have teeth. It's happened. It's called a dermoid cyst. Men apparently have a deep primal understanding of this possibility. Still, given there has not been one single documented case of vaginal teeth castration, the fear if utterly absurd.

Be that as it may, it's not as absurd as some other ideas about vaginas. Pervasive cultural beliefs that vaginas are inherently yukamondo are legion. Physicians world wide offer procedures to make them prettier (lay still, Georgia O'Keefe), less smelly (only if you really have something not good going on) and tastes bad (sperm - yummy). Enter the Linger Internal Vaginal Flavoring, or Altoids for your vagina. Sugar pussy! Which can lead to yeast infection galore. Yum.

The web page has a whole guide to the vagina and her accoutrements. It's fairly accurate, but what disturbed me was a 'first impression' poll rating the article that showed that it angered 5% of the men who read it. 11% laughed. Truly, in a statistical fight, women are no better or worse. It was a woman who coined the termed 'vajayjay' and women who repeat it daily. In fact, my African American name is Shanaynay in her honor. C'est la vie.

There will be a V-Day - February 14, 2013. The European Parliament will perform the Vagina Monologues, among other events worldwide to drive end violence against women. has the goods on all that's going.

Most disturbing to me is the plethora of ads for designer vagina surgery. Seriously. Apparently, it is now also necessary that we have perfectly pretty pusses, not just clean, functional ones. No man on earth would have surgery on his penis to make it prettier. Not a chance. Nor have I ever heard of man saying "honey, I don't mean to be one, but little Suzie is kinda of a honker - I just can't stand to look at it." Frankly, most of the men I've discussed this with have voluntarily gone off on great, profound oratories on the various beauties and delights and the plethora of glorious attributes they find wonderful about the whole area, hair included. In all my days, I have never once heard one single complaint, about me or anybody else.

Sunday, March 11, 2012

Hit 'Em Where It Hurts

One of the big cries of the neocons is that, while we scream about Rush's denigration of Sandra Fluke, nobody showed outrage over Bill Maher's calling Sarah Palin a T**T. Except, we did. NOW did. In March 2011. And before. And since. Lisa Bennett, wrote on a NOW blog later Tuesday: “Listen, supposedly progressive men (ok, and women, too): Cut the crap! Stop degrading women with whom you disagree and/or don’t like by using female body terms or other gender-associated slurs." And the neocons know it. For the full article on the above quote, check out Fox News. Read more: "

But, neocons go further and decry Progressives for calling Palin and Bachman "Morons I'd Like to Forget".  The issue here is different though. That isn't really sexism talking, so much as reasonable opinion based on discernible fact. Palin and Bachman, objectively speaking, are not the brightest stars in the sky. Bachman has college and law degrees to tout as her claim to intellectual stardom, but anybody who is anybody knows that having degrees does not make you intelligent. Education is what you make of it.

Bachman has made a showing of stupidity by saying such things as 'not all cultures are equal' and 'there isn't even one study that shows carbon dioxide is a harmful gas' and 'if we took away the minimum wage we could wipe out unemployment'.

"Palin, on the other hand, says things like 'Refudiate,' 'misunderestimate,' 'wee-wee'd up.' I won't go on. You've heard the rest. Too many times. The defense to the general every day insult of these women is that they are being insulted for qualities most of us find reprehensible in political candidates: like stupidity.

Insulting women because they are, in fact, stupid is appropriate. Using expletives appropriate only to women to insult women is NOT appropriate. Bill Maher and Rush Limbaugh be forewarned. We're not gonna take it. As for stupid women who insist on supporting men and policies that obliterate rights based on gender and sexuality or race, or any other insular quality, karma's gonna get you. Oh, and karma? She's a BITCH.

Saturday, March 10, 2012

Name Change

Name Change - sort of like Game Change. I always knew that one day I would change my name to suit a new sense of me. I just never knew what it would. I certainly never thought it would be Slutzky. But, there it is. That's what came up and that's what it is. The time is now.

There is a war afoot. We Americans can't seem to do without one, so we'll pull one out of the air if we have too. We did. I say 'we' in the metaphorical sense. Rush Limbaugh in this case, and his ilk, are the real 'we'. The corporations and the legislators who are attempting to take away health care and birth control are the 'we'. The shamers, the haters, the perverse mean bullies who have co-opted the Republican party, to the shame and horror of good Republicans everywhere, the neocons (neo-conservatives) of America have declared that women are less than, and sexual women, as in ALL women, are evil, repulsive, and vile.

My mother voice wants to point out that for every finger pointed at me, there are 3 more pointing back at you, but my crone me knows that's pointless. My school teacher voice wants to say that words can never hurt me, but my spirit knows that's not true. Fingers and words can be vicious tools of petty warriors, but they can still do harm. So, I will point and speak until I have obliterated each and every ignorant, mean hateful thought I possibly can. Each and every day until this insanity stops or they pry my fingers off the keyboard. Whichever comes first.

And, I will paint. And create beauty and laughter where ever I can. And I will not stoop to name calling or childish invectives, unless I just can't help it or I slip up.

Wednesday, February 29, 2012

War Against Women Call For Action

Much has been said lately about the rights of women in regard to choice, birth control, health care, and reproductive rights, especially where the right to an abortion is concerned.  This has become a really BIG FUCKING DEAL. There is a large contingent of humanity that believes women should be relegated to not having sex, not having birth control, and not have health care where those two factors are concerned. This really disturbs me, primarily because it fails to take into consideration proper medical basic health care for women. Do whatever you want, but reproductive issues are a huge part of what makes and keeps women healthy. Having insurance coverage for that is imperative to a woman's health.

Then, I got to thinking about what would be an imperative call to action for men's health. Then, I remember a pamphlet I read while waiting at a vet's office. Then, I found that pamphlet. Then, I rewrote it to be relevant to men's healthcare today:


The overpopulation and the dumping of unwanted infants and children in the welfare system is an all-too-common side effect of irresponsible sex. Every year, thousands of unwanted infants and older children are dumped on the welfare system (where they ultimately end up dying from neglect or finding their way into prostitution or shelters). Many of these children do not ever get adopted. This sad waste of healthy life can be reduced by not letting people breed indiscriminately and one way of preventing any accidental, unwanted breeding from occurring is through the routine neutering of all non-stud (non-breeder) males. By having companion males neutered, they are unable to go out and mate with feral or stray bitches and get them pregnant. This results in fewer babies being born which, in return, benefits not just those unwanted children (who lead a tough neglected life), but also society in general. Human breeding is not merely the production of children, it is the transferal of genes and genetic traits from one generation to the next. Responsible adults should desex males that have conformational, colouring and temperamental traits, which are unfavourable or faulty to the breed as a whole in order to reduce the spread of these defects further down the generations. Males with heritable genetic diseases and congenital defects/deformities should also be desexed to reduce the spread of these genetic diseases to their offspring.

The prevention or reduction of testicular (and epididymal) diseases:
It is difficult to contract a testicular disease if you have no testicles. Early neutering prevents men from contracting a range diseases and disorders including: testicular cancer, epididymal cancer, orchitis (testicular inflammation), epididymitis, testicular torsion, testicular abscessation and testicular trauma.

The prevention or reduction of testosterone-induced diseases:

Males can suffer from a range of diseases and medical conditions that are directly associated with high blood testosterone levels. These disease conditions include:benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH), prostatitis, prostatic abscess, perianal or perineal adenomas (small cancers that occur around the anus of males), perineal hernias and certain castration-responsive skin disorders (dermatoses). Desexing removes the main source of testosterone in the male's body (the testes), which not only prevents the onset of these diseases but can even help to control or cure these diseases if they are already present.

The prevention or reduction of testosterone-mediated behavioural problems:

The testicles are responsible for producing testosterone: the hormone that makes male animals look and act like male animals. It is the testicles that make male animals exhibit the kinds of "male" testosterone-dependent behaviors normally attributed to an entire animal. Males are likely to be more aggressive and more dominant and more prone to male-to-male aggression (inter-male aggression) than neutered animals: i.e. they act like bossy entire males. They will tend to exhibit sexualised behaviours including: aroused interest in females of their own species; mounting of females (particularly in-heat, estrus females); mating of females; mounting and humping of inanimate objects (including toys, chair-legs and human legs) and complete erection of the penis when excited. They are more prone to displaying often unwanted masculine territorial behaviours such as the guarding of resources (food, bones, territory, companion people and pets and so on) and the marking of territory with urine and feces. Additionally, entire male animals are more likely than neutered animals are to leave their yards and roam the countryside looking for females and trouble. Roaming is a troublesome habit because it puts other animals (wildlife, livestock and other pets) and humans at risk of harm and it puts the roaming male at risk from all manner of dangers including motor vehicle strikes. The neutering of entire animals can reduce some of these problematic testosterone-mediated behaviours. 

The disadvantages of desexing  - why some people choose not to neuter.

The male may become overweight or obese:

Studies have shown that neutered males probably require around 25% fewer calories to maintain a healthy bodyweight than entire male animals do. This is because a neutered animal has a lower metabolic rate than an entire animal does (it therefore needs fewer calories to maintain its bodyweight, Consequently, the myth of automatic post-desexing obesity has become perpetuated and, as a result, many owners simply will not consider desexing their males because of the fear of them gaining weight and developing weight-related problems (e.g. diabetes).

 The fact of the matter is that dogs will not become obese simply because they have been desexed. They will only become obese if the post-neutering drop in their metabolic rate is not taken into account and they are fed the same amount of food calories as an entire animal. 

Those of you who care about your finances might even be able to see the benefits of desexing here. A neutered dog potentially costs less to feed than an entire animal of the same weight and, therefore, neutering your animal may well save you money in the long run. 

Desexing equates to a loss of breeding potential and valuable genetics:

There is no denying this. If a male is the 'last of its line' the choice to desex that male means he will not pass on valuable genetics and it will essentially spell the end for that lineage. Of all the reasons given here that argue against the desexing of males, this is probably the only one that has any real merit. Desexing does equate to a loss of breeding potential. In an era where many unscrupulous breeders ("backyard breeders" we call them) will breed any low-quality male regardless of breed traits and temperament just to collect child support, the good genes for soundness, and good temperament are needed more than ever. Desexing a male with good characteristics, good temperament and no genetically heritable defects/diseases will count as a loss for that males quality in general, particularly if there are a lot of subquality studs saturating the breeding circles. 

Loss of testosterone as a result of desexing may result in immature development of masculine characteristics and a reduced body musculature:

The testicles are responsible for producing testosterone: the hormone that makes male animals look and act like male animals. It is the testicles that make male animals develop the kinds of masculine, testosterone-dependent body characteristics normally attributed to an entire animal. These include: increased muscle size and development; reduced body fat; mature penis development; mature prepuce development (mature penis sheath development); the ability to extrude the penis from the sheath (prepuce) and the suppression of development of feminine characteristics (mammary gland development, milk production etc.). Desexing, particularly early age desexing, may limit the development of mature masculine features such that they remain immature and juvenile looking and cause the neutered male to have a reduced muscle mass and strength compared to an entire animal of the same size and breeding. 

So, as you can see, like our dogs, if we aren't interested in actually reproducing with the males in our lives, THEY are better off and healthier if we just whack off their balls now.  So, ladies, write your legislators and send them a copy of this decisive research and demand NOW that all non-breadable males be neutered immediately.

Thursday, January 26, 2012

Love is Not a Choice

Have you ever been in love? Did you fall into it? Or did you choose? Did you go out and scope out the landscape to decide who would be the best person to love? Did you ask for references? A relationship resume? Or was it more like Some Enchanted Evening: you saw a stranger across a crowded room and somehow you knew, you knew even then, that you would see her/him again and again.

I never once chose to fall in love. I sometimes fought against it with every fiber of my being. The last time, I had to walk away from it and it took about all I had. I have soared beyond the moon and I have faced the gates of hell. All for love. Sometimes even with the same person. I look around and wonder who chooses to fall in love. Who would? Sure, that first blush is grand and glorious - there is no drug like it, there is no greater high, no bigger rush, no finer thing in all creation. But then, after that, there's the whole working out which side of the bed, who cleans the bathroom, who pays this bill, who gives up what furniture.

Divorce is the most loathsome area of practice in the courts. Divorce clients are never happy because love gone bad is every bit as passionate as first love, but turned ugly. Divorce clients are never happy because courts never issue orders allowing you to mow down your ex with a tank. Divorce only highlights the reality that people never choose to fall in love. Nobody would choose to fall in love with a man who would beat her unmercifully or a woman who would run through his money, kidnap the children and sell them to strangers for sex. Yet, day in and day out, people do fall in love with just those sorts of people.

Newt was married, twice, when he started extra-marital affairs. Did he choose to do that? Did he consciously wake up one day and say "You know, enough of this. I want to lose my mind over some dumb blonde and screw my wife out of all she has left?" Mind you, I'm not so sure he didn't. But, more plausibly, did Mariane wake up one day and say "Newt! Yep, he's married, he's a dog, but I think I'll totally ruin my life and throw it away on total shithead, wtf!"  No way. Something hit her like an arrow out of the blue and she was a total goner.

We can blame it on Cupid, if we like. Frankly, that's the most plausible explanation I've heard so far. Some little bozo with wings shooting arrows nails you. That's how it feels - coming and going. Love is all well and good, but sooner or later, inevitably and always, love HURTS and it hurts BAD. No sane person would choose that. It's why most people DON'T become heroin addicts. No matter how good the high, it is not worth the low.  Luckily, heroin doesn't catch your eye across the crowded room, rush over and inject itself into your veins. Love does.

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

Let 'Em Bleed

As a writer, I have (on occasion) toyed with the idea of what it would be like to be a serial killer. The idea of someone who kills, has blood on her hands, legs, face, who for whatever reason, in joy, horror or desperation, thrives on the taking of life. Frankly, I just don't relate. Sure, there were times when I was quiting smoking that I did relish the thought of separating one or twenty assholes from their mortal coils, but who hasn't? In any event, we just don't do it. Now, I have discovered, that one might maybe can . . . .

"Corporations are people, my friend" is a quote from Mittens Romney that keeps being blasted ad nauseum on our airwaves.  "Hmmm," my sick, twisted inner voice says. "Wonder how you kill a corporation. Will it bleed?"  My sane, rational self has joined in at this point: "BP bleeds. It bled all over the Gulf of Mexico,"  my rational self opines.  "NO!" my sicko self says. "That was Mother Earth bleeding, and BP caused it. BP should die."  Good point.  "No, when corporations bleed, they bleed money - that's how you know they hurt."  My sicko self has a definite intellectual edge over my rational, compassionate self. But, then, it has a legal education, so that only stands to reason.

"How do you make a corporation bleed?" I asked my twisted self.  We collaborated at this point. You can revoke its charter. It's not done very often. There's a pretty good article (the best I could find) that dates back to 2001, in IREASON (Killing Corporations by Jesse Walker In truth, killing corporations involves litigation, which involves lawyers and which does not involve corporations bleeding money fast enough and long enough for my taste. I will say this in favor of the death by litigation tactic - it rarely results in death, but it usually results in wishing for death as a something preferable to litigation. An advocate for children once said "From the perspective of my inner child, I would rather be raped than go to court - it doesn't hurt as much and and it doesn't last nearly as long."  So, for the sole purpose of causing pain, litigation might be your choice.

But for  me, I want blood. And litigation for corporations doesn't get that for me. Not even close. After spending my life working for the man, working for myself, working, and spending more than I made for decades, life presented me with what I saw as no other choice but to just drop out, walk away, do something else. It's what I always really wanted to do anyway, and frankly, I'm better at being a slacker than I ever was at working for a living. Somehow (meaning I have really awesome friends who help me figure out ways to help them in return for things like cash and other stuff that improve my physical circumstances) I have a roof over my head, indoor plumbing, a beautiful lake outside my window, love, food, a dog, a car, my rent and utilities paid with a little cash left over at the end of the month. Never in all my working life did I do this well.

What I don't do is spend all of my money supporting large corporations. Ah, the other way to hurt corporations. They don't generate their own blood (money). We give money to them. If we stop giving money to them, it's almost like bleeding. If the influx of blood (money) stops, they die. If you want to kill a corporation, cut off its blood (money) supply. Do it. Today. Every way you can. Pass it on.

Thursday, January 12, 2012

Say You Want A Resolution . . .

My big resolution for 2012 is to have a better relationship with food. I don't like the size I've grown up to be and in examining that fact, I've decided to examine how I treat food and how food treats me. Let's fact it, the primary relationship of my life has been with food. typical of me, that hasn't always been healthy.

First on my list is to waste no food. I throw away enough food to save the lives of several small children in Africa. Ok. Several LARGE children and a few adults. If there's such a thing as sin, that's it in my book. Plants and animals sacrifice their lives so I can toss them in a landfill. Not good. Not nice. I am pleased to say that so far this year, I haven't tossed out food.

My next focus is simple nutrition. It's bizarre that I eat food that contains no nutritional value. Okay, true popcorn is a whole grain, but in all honesty it's just filler. Something to eat to be eating. Even celery can fill that void, but at least it qualifies as a vegetable and contains Riboflavin, Vitamin B6, Pantothenic Acid, Calcium, Magnesium and Phosphorus, and a very good source of Dietary Fiber, Vitamin A, Vitamin C, Vitamin K, Folate, Potassium and ManganeseSheesh, it's a virtual vitamin with zero calories. Hmm, I wonder how it tastes with butter?