Congress Tackles Toilets

Here is one from the “Really? Congress, really?” file. A new bill sponsored by Rep. Edolphus Towns (D-N.Y.) really brings forth the question, is this really necessary? In a move that is being hailed (by the 5 feminists that know about it) as a victory for woman’s rights, Rep. Towns proposed a bill that would require the number of toilets available for women to equal or exceed the number of toilets and urinals in men’s restrooms.

This is a bill that will finally address this long standing issue that hasn’t been a concern until last month, about women no longer being oppressed by the evil male phalacrocy by having too few places to pee. But what are people saying about this?

Former District mayor Sharon Pratt weighed in on this desperate situation as she told the house committee that “the disparity in restrooms is glaring, inconvenient, enormously inefficient and downright unfair.” Also, Kathryn H. Anthony, an architecture professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, said that being forced to wait in line for restrooms is a form of gender bias. Ms. Anthony also stated “Delaying voiding can result in serious medical conditions,” she said in remarks submitted to the committee.

However, in a slap in the face to all the gerbil bladders out there, Robert A. Peck, the GSA’s public buildings commissioner, said his agency generally does not get complaints about the lack of facilities for females in office buildings. I do not see how that can be I mean with the economy in the shitter and the worst oil spill in history going on right now how could he possibly not see the dire situation that toilet disparity causes.

Good for you congress, putting national security and the economic stability of this country on the back burner so that you can address this life threatening issue (jack asses) at taxpayer expense. Now I am sure that they are going to have to run the numbers by the CBO in order to make sure that it is not cost effective or efficiently handled, after all it is Congress.

Until Next Time: Honey-bucket

Potty Parity

NOW Complains About Football Ad

Posted in Social Issues, activism by White Male Oppressor on February 9, 2010 No Comments yet

Hello my lovely reader. It has been a while since I picked on the National Organization of Women. It has been almost 2 months since they have done something annoying, which is saying something for a Left wing crybaby activist group. But now we have a new gem from their Media Hall Of Shame (imagine a deep echoing voice when you say it) with a new complaint about a commercial that was shown during the Superbowl. Before I go off I will let you decide if they are off base or not, so for those of you who missed it the first time here it is:

Now that you have seen it let’s take a look at what Leftist whiners have had to say. Since it was let out that the organization “Focus on the Family” was putting this spot on the Superbowl there has been a holy shit storm from the Left saying that it was a horrible anti-abortion scheme, and it was anti-choice. I didn’t get any of that out of it but maybe I am just not bitchy enough (however there are those out there that say I am plenty bitchy).

Before I continue on to what NOW said remember, Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views and then are offended and shocked when they realize there are other views. With that said on with the National Organization of Women who in their Bad, Naughty Media page had this to say about the Tim Tebow and mom ad; “NOW’s Analysis: Focus on the Family has an aggressively anti-abortion, anti-LGBT, anti-woman agenda. This ad reportedly promotes the decision of one woman to go against her doctor’s advice to terminate an at-risk pregnancy. While NOW would never disparage any woman’s reproductive choice, we believe that all women should be free to make the decision that is right for them. We also believe that this ad could potentially put women’s health and lives at risk by promoting ideology over medicine.” WOW!!!!! What a reach!

Oh and that’s not all. NOW President Terry O’Neil said to the Associated Press that this ad was “extraordinarily offensive and demeaning.” And continued with the whiny tirade “That’s not being respectful of other people’s lives,” O’Neill said. “It is offensive to hold one way out as being a superior way over everybody else’s.” Sort of like their demand that everyone believe exactly like they do or else, right? Color me confused, that last comment almost seems hypocritical. But I could just be over reacting because of being brainwashed by that commercial. Not only that but because Tebow tackled his mom it promotes violence against women………. (sorry for the pause I was laughing at that claim.) No seriously just ask Ms. O’Neil, she is after all the President of NOW and she said “I am blown away at the celebration of the violence against women in it” which is what she said to the Los Angeles Times. (Did she watch the whole commercial?) and then she continues (unfortunately) “That’s what comes across to me even more strongly than the anti-abortion message. I myself am a survivor of domestic violence, and I don’t find it charming. I think CBS should be ashamed of itself.” This woman is an absolute piece of work no wonder she is the President of one of the whiniest, “we are victims” organizations out there.

feminism_demotivational

Voluntary Human Extinction Movement. Go Team!!

Here is one from the “please carry on” file. Finally I have found an extremist group that I want to continue what they are doing. This group is the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement or (VHEMT) and no I am not kidding. Finally an extremist group with the right idea.

As you know I tend to pick on extremist groups and treat them very harshly but finally I found one with an interesting idea that I have yet to find anything about it that is worth picking on but a lot that is if nothing else amusing. The whole point of the voluntary extinction movement is thus: if we stop breeding our species will die out allowing the natural progression of the Earth to continue unabated and allow the planet to repair the so called damage that the human race has caused.

While the thought of this could be laughable to some, the up points of this group to me are numerous. For one their movement is advertised as a state of mind not an organization; it has no member dues, no officials and no offices. While people who sympathize with the ideology of VHEMT do set up booths at some shows like the Annual Land, Air,  Water conference with information booths that are set up at the University of Oregon School of Law’s Knight Hall for the environmental law conference every year.  People who believe in this talk about the idea and sell t-shirts and bumper stickers. The money does not go to any central organization or lobby group, it goes to whom ever is doing the selling of said products.

In fact the first paragraph under the question what is the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement it says : “VHEMT (pronounced vehement) is a movement not an organization. It’s a movement advanced by people who care about life on planet Earth. We’re not just a bunch of misanthropes and anti-social, Malthusian misfits, taking morbid delight whenever disaster strikes humans. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Voluntary human extinction is the humanitarian alternative to human disasters. We don’t carry on about how the human race has shown itself to be a greedy, amoral parasite on the once-healthy face of this planet. That type of negativity offers no solution to the inexorable horrors which human activity is causing. Rather, The Movement presents an encouraging alternative to the callous exploitation and wholesale destruction of Earth’s ecology.”

I have no problem what so ever with this movement because as I said above no lobbying for legislation to forbid reproduction, they don’t blow up fertility clinics, or engage in any maliciousness or other activities that interfere with the free will and choice of other people. And for that I say bravo and it is a refreshing change to see a fringe ecology group take such a stance. Plus they have a humorous cartoon instead of disgusting ones like PETA pumps out.

See appropriot and non offensive "good for you"

See appropriate and non-offensive “good for you!”

I think that this non-organization should be commended on its approach. While I think that there are definitely ways to help the Earth’s ecosystem without non-breeding ourselves out of existence at least there is a fringe group that is not dangerous in their message. “GO TEAM!”

extinction demotivational

Next Page »