Feminism: The End of Feminity?

It's 2017!  Yet somehow I get the distinct impression that certain politicians and others are trying to pull us further back in time.  I equate the words strong, independent, and willful to myself and many of my fellow women.  This can be both the career woman, the young student, and the stay-at-home mother.  Somehow I feel that some people think of it as a radical way that went well beyond what the suffrage movement intended.  I quite frankly am very glad that women's movement has continued to evolve generation later into something bigger than just the right to vote.

All too often people equate feminism with the women trying to be manly.  Is that feminism?  Yes and No is the short answer! I currently sit in front of my laptop typing away in a skirt.  Does this mean that I am not a feminist?  I will answer this question later.  Feminism by definition according to www.merriam-webster.com is:

"1. The theory of political, economic, and social equality of the sexes.

2.  organized activity on the behalf of women's rights and interests."

So in other words, feminism is aligned with the equality of the people from all genders.  Yes, I know that there are now 50+ genders according to LGBTQIA, but I am referring strictly to women.  Do I believe in fighting for women's rights?  The issue is the fact that now more than ever, I feel like I have to.  You would thing that in the almost 100 years since women have had the right to vote the issue wouldn't be so difficult.

Let's take the atmosphere of the most recent election which has made the idea of a feminist movement more front and center in the minds of everyone in the US.  I believe that comments made by 45 (aka "Grab them by P***y) have reignited women to organize and stand up for their fundamental rights.  But is that enough!  No, we had just the other day the example of James Green who wrote a letter to the editor in which argued that women making less than men is a matter of simple economics.  He goes on to discussing how if women make as much as men it would mess up the traditional family dynamic.  If women are paid more, men would have to be paid less.  I am not sure about his use of simple economics, but he needs a few math lessons to say the least.  Luckily he has since resigned from his station in Utah.

I wish that I could say that these are the only 2 examples.  When I was in my 20's I received a bit of wisdom from an inspiring woman who is now a VP of company.  She told me that women have to work twice as hard as men to be thought of as half as good.  I wish I could say that this has not been the case in my experience.  Sometimes it has and sometimes it hasn't.  I am lucky right now that I work in area predominantly with working mothers who understand the hectic schedule of all the kid activities.

Feminist? I personally don't label myself as a feminist.  I like to consider myself an equalitarian. Here's why.  I think that men and women can do the same job for the same pay.  I also believe that there needs to be the same qualifications for men and women should they choose to do the same job.  Take for instance a firefighter.  Why would there be different entry requirements for a man and a woman.  I have seen where a man is required to lift 250 pounds, but the women entry requirement is 180 pounds.  Personally if I get caught in the fire, they both better be able to lift me out.  So equality.  The same holds true when men and women have different requirements in the military.

Is feminism the end of femininity? In my opinion, no!  If you think that it is not feminine to stand up for yourself then that is your problem.  This women here is just as girly as the next make-up wearing, accessorizing, and massive shoe collecting women.  Just because I believe that I can work, be a mom, and still stand up for my rights does not make me a feminist, it makes me a woman in 2017!

Why I March - The Women's March 2017

Let me start first by saying - wow I've been meaning to get back to blogging!

The Women's March on Chicago has inspired me more than the political climate of this past election to make sure that I get more passionate about everything.  Let's start by saying some thank you's:
- To the organizers of the Women's March on Chicago

Picture taken at the Women's March on Chicago

- To all the nasty women who came out not only in Chicago, but also all around the country and around the world!
- To our  US Bill of Rights 1st Amendment right to free assembly (and free speech!)
- To my family for letting me be AWOL for a day
Thank you!

I am by no means a feminist which may upset a few people who read this blog.  I have had many debates about equality.  I believe in equality and let's leave it at that.  I did attend the Women's March on Chicago yesterday.  I was surrounded by a sea of a thousand pink hats.  No, I did not wear one.  I saw many posters directed at this country's new president.  I did not have one of those either. Why?  Because I did not go to the Women's March to be an anti-Trump supporter.  No one man can destroy my rights.  My friend and I went there because we are supporters of women's rights and other's rights.  After all, women's rights are human rights. (There can be no argument in mind about that point!)

On an important tangent - I have also seen quite a few posts on Facebook and other social media from women who said they were embarrassed by the march or those women don't represent me.   This I do not understand.  I can say the new administration has not enacted policies that have taken away any abortion rights or women's rights yet. Are a lot of women upset about the platform and attitude that President Trump has expressed about women - again yes!  Have I heard personally heard worse comments than "grab them by the p****!," of course I have.  Please keep in mind that this is not from anyone that is to serve as the Commander-and-Chief of this great nation.  Some women have expressed that they are not a disgrace to women because they did not attend.  NO - they are not!  This is their own personal choice.  If you attended any march - that is your personal choice.  It is a personal decision and women need to stay united for their rights no matter how this was expressed.  And just as we need not slut shame women, we need not shame women who did or did not attend a march.

So to those women who did attend the march wearing pink hats and/or anti-Trump posters, I support your right to do so.  I still consider myself a nasty woman. I understand there is nothing that can change the outcome of the election, so I need to work within the establishment to make sure my voice is heard.  Have you ever agreed with every single decision or enactment of a political leader? I haven't!  If you want a politician who shares every view point that you do, run for office!  Even then, with all the fat that has to go into a bill to get passed, you may still not agree with everything in your own bill.  Nature of the beast, I guess.  Again, this is why I marched.  I did so for several reason.  #whyImarch

The spirit of the march to me was to show unity with the world about some of the social and political issues that we have and need to protect.  This is non-partisan, in my opinion, and simply about being decent human beings. "All men [people] created equal.  They are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness," Declaration of Independence 1776.  While I may stricken men and inserted people, it is true to this day that we are all equal.  Unfortunately, equality seems to mean different things to different people.  What is your definition of equality? My definition of equality means that we protect rights of: Women, Minorities, LGBTQ, Christians and non-Christians, Children, Disabled, and more! I wanted my voice to be heard and I chose the march to do it!

First of all the Affordable Care Act (ACA) better known as Obamacare has made it that more Americans are insured than ever before.  Is the ACA perfect?  No!  Does it need some changes? Yes! To all politicians, don't take it away without providing an alternative.  It's like giving someone food and then deciding that the food isn't good enough.  The food might be edible, but not cavier, so let's give them no food at all?!? I don't follow the logic.  So I marched!

Secondly, my body = my choice! Whether you agree with abortion morally or not, it is not for me to tell you what to do.  Stare decisis is a legal term meaning "standing by things already decided." Come on, Roe v Wade was decided before I was even born. De-funding Planned Parenthood that provides services to women simply because it has abortion services does not make sense.  What about all of the other services it provides? According to the 2013 Planned Parenthood Annual Report, only 3% of its 10.6 million services were abortions.  I don't eat pork, but I don't boycott restaurants that have it on the menu.  So I marched!

- Gay marriage! Even Trump stated that the matter is settled.  I don't plan on having a gay marriage, so I should tell others not to? So I marched!
- Muslim registry - the founding of this great nation was separation of church and state.  I'm Jewish!  The Nazi's registered my people and no religion should face that again.  So I marched!
- Immigration - I'm 3rd generation here on every side of my family.  My children's father is immigrant.  This nation was built by immigrants and is so diverse.  So I marched!
- Exercising my 1st Amendment. So I marched!

There are many more reason, but I mostly I did it for my children - 2 daughters, 1 son.  My bi-racial children from a Jewish mother and an immigrant Christian father.  They are my heart and the future. This country is so great because we are a melting pot.  For my son who gets profiled because he looks Indian and gets stopped at the airport for "random" searches, I wanted to support him.  So I marched! For my oldest daughter who one day hopes to grow up and be a civil liberty's lawyer, she wanted to attend the march but was at her speech competition.  She was with me in spirit,  So I marched! Lastly for my youngest daughter who has a heart of gold and much younger than the rest, she embraces and understands the freedoms of this country and the importance of protecting them far beyond her years. She inspires me with her old soul to do the right thing.  So I marched!

Some women have posted why not march for the rights of people in other countries who do not have the same freedom's as I do in the US.  Great - let's go do that too!  #standwithaleppo Write your congressman, senator, or call them!  There is so much more to do. But what we should not do, is ever stop challenging the establishment, protecting the rights of others, or being decent human beings.  Regardless of your opinion about the march or political affiliation, we need to stand united to let both sides of the political spectrum hear our voices.

Thanks Mitt! Open Mouth, Insert Foot



From About.com Political Humor



Still trying to get a grasp on the upcoming election.  Luckily I have completed my voter registration because I definitely need to make sure that I cast a vote.  It still feels like the election comes down to who will do a better job representing the American people and not always who I would like to lead this great nation.  So, I would like to start by thanking Mitt Romney!

Over the course of the last few weeks, Governor Romney has successfully put his foot in his mouth to make us start forgetting about some of the Bushisms.  Let me start by saying that not only have his comments infuriated me, but also help many Americans realize how out of touch with most of us Mitt really is! There are so many instances over the course of this campaign to even write about., Probably the most telling sign of Mitt's unfiltered errors is the amount of Republicans distancing themselves from the candidate.

First, my deepest sympathy to the families of the four US diplomats killed in Libya.  It was also a great loss to the foreign policy relations with the country.  It was NOT a time to direct blame or to use the situation to try to garner political support.  But, thank you Mitt for opening your mouth and trying to show that you have no idea about the complexity of foreign policy.  After your statements directed at the Obama administration, it is clear that you lack both experience with foreign policy and tact.  To express that the current White House sympathizes with the attackers is gross misrepresentation of the facts and down right political opportunism.  The Obama administration condemns not only the attacks on the US embassy in Libya but also the horrendous representation of the Muslim prophet Mohamed which incited the attacks.

Moving on two prime example two.  In perfect political timing, a  tape of Romney was released in which condemned Americans who do no pay taxes.  In the governor's own words, this represents 47%  of Americans.  As to not obscure what Mitt Romney has said, let's use his own words.

"There are 47 percent of people who will vote for the president no matter what.  All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon the government, who believe they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility for them, who believe they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, you name it.That that's an entitlement.....These are people who pay no income tax.  47 percent of Americans pay no income tax..."

What governor Romney has failed to realize that a large chunk of people who do not pay income tax are senior citizens and military personnel.  These are a part of the Romney base.  So I hope that the voters are savvy enough to understand that this is a dig directed at the have nots.  Romney explains that this is why people are opposed to giving taxes to the rich because they don't pay taxes.  Well, thank you again Mr. Romney for once again showing the American your contempt for 47 percent of us and how out of touch you are with the average American.

During the W. Bush era, I thought that we couldn't get a presidential candidate or president who could express themselves so badly.  It just goes to show that I can be proven wrong.  As part of the 99%, I thank you very much Mr. Romney for lack of compassion, your total disregards for your supporters, and most of all for helping many undecided voters see your true colors.

Welfare: Reform, Overhaul, Status-Quo?



What too many people think about when they think welfare!

 Another hot topic during election season is welfare.  I can't recount how many times I have heard or seen the picture on this blog on facebook or other media sites.  As the picture shows, too many people believe that welfare is just a government hand-out to people who don't want to work.  So is that really the case?

The answer is YES, NO and MAYBE SO...

You might be scratch your head and saying, "Huh?" It's politics, there are no clear cut answers. Where do you think the term politically correct came from? Politicians!  There can be a wide debate on welfare, but there are also some hard truths that both conservatives and liberals  need to face.

Are there people on welfare who know how to "work" the system?  Absolutely!  Are there people on welfare who really need assistance?  Most definitely!  Is there a grey area? That's a rhetorical question.  The right question to ask is why is the system that way.  Simple answer...inherent design flaw.  In all reality, the system works best for those who don't help themselves.

You might be asking what do I mean? Well great strides were made to the TANF program (the one that grants money) when recipients were required to work to be able to collect cash benefits.  Supporter or not of welfare, you should see this as a win-win.  So small businesses and charities were able to put unemployed workers in the workforce.  Think of it as a free trial run for the employers.  The goal was for the employers to hire the employees who worked well.  This was suppose to alleviate some of the burden to small business and give valuable work skills to those who need it.  The SNAP, EBT, or Food Stamp program as it is more widely know as does not have the working requirements.  Unfortunately, the new changes are giving the states more leeway in the working requirements like when they can be waived.

Why don't they have a requirement? Simple answer again...people need to eat.  I am not going to talk about people who have cash paying jobs, or illegal activities that subsidize their income.  This will always be a way to "work" the system that can have little governmental oversight.  There are also people who will always find ways around the system.  I know many states are trying to crack down on people who sell their food stamps for cash.  Before you condemn them, think that only food is covered on the program.  So items like toilet paper, toothpaste, soap, feminine products, and diapers are not covered.  I am not saying that this is right, but I could understand why someone does it.  Then there is the flip side where people sell them for cash in exchange for illicit purposes like drugs.

So with all the bad things that can happen, when is this not a case of abuse?  When the system works as many thought of it was originally made to work then we have the proper welfare.  A perfect example would be a single mother who does not have a job or works for minimum wage and needs to make ends meet.  If you think that minimum wage can pay the bills for a small family, I am not sure where you live in the United States, but please let me know.  Some think that this case never happens, but it happens more often then many want to think. One of our largest employers is a good example--Walmart!  This large conglomerate receives tax breaks for creating jobs...jobs for which many of the employees are on public assistance or qualify for it.  Some savings there!  So these individuals are being taxed to pay for their own assistance.

I talked about grey area, which is pretty much every other case.  Take for example a mother working for $16 hour in large expensive area like New York City.  For some $16 an hour may seem like a lot, but not if that is the only money a family of four receives.  So before taxes, the family brings home $640 a week.  The family is no longer eligible for food stamps, TANF, and in many states medical coverage.  In reality, the family will have approximately $467 take home a week.  If you take into account, the family should have medical and dental coverage, you are looking at about at least $80 a week for insurance for a family.  Now the take home is $387.  I believe the calculation is 4.2x the weekly rate which mean the monthly income is $1,625.40.  It would be hard to pay rent in a decent neighborhood with that amount of money.

So hear is where is works best not to help yourself.  If mother did not work, she would receive approximately $800 per month in rental subsidy, $668 per month in food, over $400 a month of cash assistance with free medical.  I didn't mention that her $87 a week medical also has deductibles for everything where as the government is free for children and minor charges for adults.  So her net with aid is over $1,868.  This doesn't include other assistance out there for low-income families.  She may qualify with $16 an hour for some of them since she is still below the poverty line, but not at the same rate as if collecting public aid.  So the system is not designed to help those who try to help themselves!  It actually works against you while you are in this grey zone between cap limits and getting over the poverty line.  But as a mother, wouldn't you do what is best for your child?  Some may argue that it is by leading a better example and scrapping by, but financially it is more sound to do nothing. 

With everything said, does anyone else see the inherent flaw in welfare?  Don't argue about your taxes when many of the people on welfare are paying taxes for their own assistance.  It seems like a good time to go back to the drawing board.  Reform, Overhaul, or Status-quo...you decide.

Roe v Wade Almost 40 Years Later

It's not about what is wrong with today, that would be an entirely different subject.  It's what is wrong with this era.  Now this could take a few blogs.  It's like where do I begin?  More importantly, where does it end? (or for somethings the better question might be where does it end?).  So, I am going to tackle just one topic today.

Too often, we as a society lose sight on what the real issues are.  I am not talking about whether or not Jennifer Aniston got engaged just to show up Angelina Jolie or whether or not, Kim Kardashin and Kanye West's relationship is a media gold mine.  I could care less!  I wish more people did too.  Somehow the real issues in society got lost.  Let's start with Roe vs. Wade.

Yes, I am going back almost 40 years.  It seems like we should have moved on from the topic, but it keeps coming back.  Pro-life or Pro-Choice.  If you know me, you know exactly where I stand.  If you don't know where I stand you will by the end of the blog.  First of all, this is a  very strong topic and I welcome all stances and opinions.  We all know that for the most part the politicians are divided by party lines like Republicans are pro-Life and Democrats are pro-Choice.  This is not always the case, but is primarily true.

What does pro-Life entail?  This is probably the easiest side for me to understand.  It means that life begins a conception.  So from the time that an egg is fertilized by one of those strong swimmers (think Michael Phelps in Beijing) then the fetus is alive.  Many pro-Choice politicians, including Mitt Romney, agree that abortion is ok in the case of rape.  (Let's not talk about Rep. Akin and his stance on "Legitimate Rape" that is another of my blogs.)  It would be hard to argue with this exception, so I won't.  It is also the same party that would like to get rid of welfare that helps lower economic class to support their children.  (Welfare reform is another topic all together.)  So let's take away an option for you to not have a child you can't support...hmmm.

Pro-Choice is the other side of the fence. The woman is the one who gets pregnant, it is her body, it is her choice.  The concept also seems pretty simple to me.  Who give the government the right to tell a woman what she can and can not do with her own body?  Does this mean that a life is being terminated?  In reality, this is a matter of religion and/or personal belief.

So how would I consider myself...a moderate maybe.  I believe that fundamentally the government does not have the right to tell me what to do with my own body.  Maybe I also have a unique perspective with the fact that having another child could literally kill me.  The odds would not be so great considering that I was on a ventilator when my last child came into the world.  My little miracle baby as I call her.

So yes, I am pro-Choice!  I maybe getting a little bit of flack from my pastor father-in-law for openly saying this, but it's my personal belief.  Why Roe v Wade should not be vacated? It's for people like me, people who have been raped, people who should not be having children, people who can't afford more children, people who should just have the right to choose,etc.  I know there a probably a lot of people who would argue with me about people who can't afford it or shouldn't have children so please post a comment if you would like.

Moderate? Yes!  While I do believe in a woman's right to choose, I also believe that there other factors that need to be considered.  Personally, I believe a life begins when the fetus can survive outside of the womb.  Many people don't know when this can actually occur, but I believe it is toward the end of the second trimester.  I viewed in great depth the progress of someone who went to high school with me who had a 23-week child.  A child who was given a 5% chance and in a couple of months will celebrate another birthday.  (I can't tell you how many prayers I said for that little girl and her family and I'm not religious.)

So for me, she was alive and a life.  This is where I draw the line.  In some countries, they allow late-term abortions.  I believe that this is beyond comprehension.  I don't agree with abortions after the first trimester.  I once worked with a European who said that if her amino at 16 weeks showed a baby who was handicapped then she would not carry the baby to full term.  I'm not sure how I feel about that and luckily I have never been put into that situation.  I also don't agree with using abortion as birth control.  Again, that is a personal belief and not one that the government should have a say in.

After almost 40 years, it seems like we would have more to talk about than the right (or wrong) of choice.  Not everyone who supports, pro-Choice agrees with abortion, not everyone who is pro-Life doesn't kill (too many bombed abortion clinics to count)!  Hopefully, we can find more substantial political points to argue about in the future like the economy, international trade relations, and government spending.  As for Roe v Wade, maybe Tupac said it best, "Since a man can't make one [a baby], he has no right to tell a woman when and where to create one."

Where is their American Dream?

Let me start by saying that I am third generation born in the United States.  Not one of my great-grandparents was born in the United States. They all came post-WWI.  Am I proud to be an American?  Shouldn't be a difficult question because it's not.  I am very happy to be born in this wonderful country.  Where I can sit in front of a laptop and type away all my thoughts without fear of what might happen to me.  (Other than some nosey little CIA or FBI poking around.  LOL)  I live in a country where freedoms exists and anyone can make it.  Well almost anyone!

My family came to this country to escape the hardships of their homelands in hope for a better future.  A better future not only for themselves, but also for their children.  It is every parents wish and desire for their children to have a better life than they did.  (At least for every parent I know.)  So it was no wonder that my great-grandparents came here to live the "American Dream."  Who could blame them? 

But not all of my great-grandparents came here as adults.  Some of them came here as children.  Let me remind anyone reading this, that children are innocent, nature and nurture develop them.  They came here with big dreams.  Some of them lived them and some of them at least saw the opportunities bestowed on their children.  Is it any wonder why so many people try to immigrate to this country?  We built up this "American Dream" and offer it on TV, the Internet, heck anywhere we can blast it.  I hear how often that the US is the best place to live in the world.  I hear from Americans daily...proud Americans.

Some of these proud Americans are the same people who don't understand how enticing that dream is to people who not as fortunate.  I am talking about immigration.  I know another political topic during an election year...who would have thought I would go there?  (Insert sarcasm!)  I am bringing this back to the children.  My great-grandparents were not asked to come to this country.  There parents brought them here. When I took my children to Disney World, they didn't have a choice on when, where, or how long we would be there.  Why?  Because they ARE children!!  So why can't some of these immigrant children share the dream!

President Obama, (I just felt the eye rolls from some Anti-Obama readers), has made some changes to the immigration law calling it the "Dream Act".  First I want to point out that this rule applies only to people who came to this country as CHILDREN.  Remember, the ones who had no choice but to come with their parents.  Unless by chance, you would move to another country and leave your kids behind?  Secondly, it does not make the US citizens.  Can it lead to citizenship?  I'm sure it could given the right circumstances, but that is not the topic at hand.  What the new law allows is for illegal immigrants who came to this country to obtain a green card.  But they have to meet certain criteria:

• Had to come to this country as a child (before age 16)
• Must posses a high school diploma or GED
• No criminal convictions
• Been in the country for at least 5 years

 The "Dream Act" creates a special immigration status for these children.

Now here come the opponents.  First of all, why would we not want them to obtain a green card?  Now we can collect taxes?  Now we have at least high school educated, non-criminals in the job force legally?  People who never had a say as to whether or not they should live in the US.  People who live in constant fear of being deported over something that their parents made them do.

Do I support the "Dream Act"?  YES! Triple times YES!! Why? Let's start with the fact that I have a heart.  Continue with the fact that I want these people to be able to live the American Dream too.  When so many of our American born children are dropping out school, why not have a better educated workforce.  Why not provide people with an opportunity that my great-grandparents were given?  Oh, did I also mention that my children are first generation born here from an immigrant father?  So you go around flaunting this American Dream, like a bully waving an ice cream cone in front of a little kid, and then don't give it to them!  I ask the opponents why not?  At what price must freedom come?  Somewhere long ago your ancestors (unless you are native American) came from somewhere else too! 

If you get to live the American Dream, why can't they?

Legitimate Rape

There has been a lot of debate (if you can call it that) about the term "legitimate rape" and the reproductive system of women.  First of all, Rep. Todd Akin, I understand that you have apologized, but apology not accepted.  The term "legitimate rape" has sent the entire civilization back at least a hundred years.  Even more, if you consider how cave-man like the term really is. I want to start by saying that RAPE is RAPE.  There is no way to sugar coat it or water it down.  It's not a subject that everyone wants to hear about, but is on my mind.

I know that there are many terms out there that people associate with rape: date-rape, sexual assault, incest, molestation, etc.  Let me start by saying, not one of those terms could be as possibly offensive as "legitimate rape."  Rape no matter how you term it, it is detrimental to person that is why they are called victims.  So for anyone to say that there is a definition of what can  be considered legitimate rape and what is not then you have never been a victim or known a victim yourself.  (Heck at this point, I would wonder if anyone using this term has a mother, wife, sister, or daughter who they think would have to endure a "legitimate rape".)

Rape is one attack that is FOREVER.  It is widely under reported and more widespread than many people know.  This is primarily because the victim has to prove it.  The entire burden of proof is on the person who has already been assaulted, who must keep reliving and retelling one of their worst memories of their entire life.  The hardest of all to prove is date-rape.  There are still too many people in this world who think that NO can still mean YES.  (NO means NO!!!!)  So just because someone is your boyfriend, friend, or husband (speaking for woman right now, yes men can be raped too!), forces themselves on a woman does not mean she was looking for it.  It does not matter how provactively she dressed or how much she flirted or teased, no permission for the cookies, means NO!!  So Mr. Akin, is date rape not legitimate rape?  And who are you to judge that?

Sexual assault is the term most often heard in the media especially if the victim does not have a lot of bruising.  It is also what most rapist plead down to or get convicted of in the court system.  I guess some people believe that if you didn't have a lot of physical evidence that you really didn't fight back hard enough.  But tell me anyone, if your attacker has a good 100 pounds on you and has you pinned, its a little hard to fight back.  So if your knees are wrist or the only thing bruised, I guess that's not legitimate rape, Mr. Akin and your supporters?  How silly can us women be, next time we should make sure that we sustain some broken bones!!

And worst of all, you believe that women have control over their bodies while being "legitimately raped" and can somehow stop impregnation.  If we had that much control, then why are there so many unplanned pregnancies in this country?  I guess we just didn't have enough control over our bodies when we aren't being savagely attacked.  In addition to suffering this horrendous attack, 31 states in the US have laws giving parental rights to attackers who happen to father children during rapes.  So, you wonder why there aren't many reported cases of impregnated women who report rape because they bargain away their right to justice to keep the creep who attacked them out of their lives!  I read somewhere that 30% of women who conceive a child during rape, give birth to the child.  Not sure I could handle it, but I definitely wouldn't want the creep in my life forever just because he viciously donated unwanted sperm.

So can I ever accept your apology Mr. Akin?  I would have to be an idiot!  And you are still a caveman!