Kathleen Barry is interviewed on the problems of masculinity and war. Dr. Leroy Carhart changes offices and gets new protesters, and the Smithsonian caves in to people who use religion as a cover to attack gays and lesbians, and especially AIDS victims.

Subscribe to RealityCast:
RealityCast iTunes subscription
RealityCast RSS feed

Links in this episode:

Megan Carpentier on MSNBC

Scenes from an abortion protest

Amanda Hess interviews the protesters

Bill Donohue uses the “grass on the field” defense

Smithsonian caves to the demands of a man who defends child abusers

Glenn Beck: a lying lie machine

A grown-up reacts

Kate O’Beirne attacks hungry children

On this episode of Reality Cast, I’ll be interviewing Kathleen Barry about masculinity and war.  Also, Dr. Carhart changes offices and gets a new batch of protesters, and the Smithsonian caves in to demands made by homophobes who are better ignored.

Megan Carpentier talked all things Palin to me last week.  She was also on MSNBC talking mom and daughter Palin.

• megan *

My feelings right now are that Sarah Palin is painting herself into a corner where the only people that really like her are rabid anti-choicers, and they’re really not enough of a constituency to swing a nationwide election.  But a lot could change in two years.            

*********

Dr. Leroy Carhart is one of the few abortion providers in the country to specialize in late term abortions.  He’s spent most of his career in Nebraska  He worked with Dr. George Tiller before Dr. Tiller was assassinated, and vowed to carry on Dr. Tiller’s work after the murder.  Nebraska, in a show of extreme tastelessness, then passed a law aimed basically at shutting down Dr. Carhart’s ability to perform medically necessary late term abortions. But Dr. Carhart’s patients need help and he’s moving his practice to Maryland so they can get it.  And that means the protesters are getting all excited.

I found an excellent YouTube video of the demonstrations, both for and against Dr. Carhart.  A UCC pastor was thankfully out to show his support for Dr. Carhart.

• carhart 1 *

If anything, this point of view is more important when it comes to late term abortions.  Most early term abortions are done because the woman in question isn’t ready to have a baby right then, and often the decision is completely private.  But a woman having a late term abortion is often making the decision in a context where she was intending to have the baby.  And then something goes wrong.  So the decision involves her family and her friends to a much larger extent than earlier abortions often do.

I really liked this guy, too, because he was quickly able to dispense with the red herring question of when does life begin.

• carhart 2 *

I was tickled to see later in the video that a woman was interviewing an extremely angry protester.  Why tickled?  After watching for a few seconds, I realized the woman was Amanda Hess of TBD, who was doing some reporting on her blog about interviewing the protesters.

• carthart 3 *

I linked her report in the show notes. She has a really good break down of the different kinds of people who show up to these sorts of things, a combination of young people who are extremely ignorant, middle-aged men with all sorts of rage issues aimed at younger women, and women who show up to punish other women for being sexually active.  There’s also a side dose of investment in the idea that sexual liberation is foisted on women, and that women can’t actually be assumed to be moral agents who make choices.  This woman is promoting that line.

• carhart 4 *

Did you catch that?  Her assumption is that abortions are something inflicted on women and not chosen by them. To unwind this a little with regards to her daughters, the narrative is that women on their own would never choose sex for pleasure.  It’s assumed that this is something feminists and men bully them in to.  And it’s assumed no woman would ever not want to have a baby.  Again, it’s assumed women aren’t moral actors, but are just being led around by men.  I can imagine for a sex-phobic woman, the idea that her daughters could grow up to be sexual beings who could have abortions is intolerable, so she sticks to this extremely silly narrative.

I will point out, however, she’s protesting a doctor who performs abortions on women who often wanted their babies.  I wonder if she realizes that what she is trying to do for her daughters is create a world where they could be condemned to death if they have a pregnancy that goes wrong.  I guess anything, including death, is better than accepting that women are full human beings with moral agency.

**********

insert interview

***********

Bill Donohue, the leader of a tiny organization called the Catholic League, should have never been taken seriously as a spokesman in the first place, something that should be evident the first time you see his angry, embittered face on TV.  But in case that wasn’t obvious enough, then he should have been banned from being taken seriously the second he did this.

• Smithsonian 1 *

Yep, he used the “grass on the field” defense for raping children.  I hear that’s a popular one for men who cruise junior high schools for girls to abuse, and now Donohue has floated it for the priests whose victims had the misfortune of being, say, 12 or 13 instead of 10 or 11.  These are not the words of a serious person who should ever be listened to ever again on any subject.  But especially not on the subject of whether or not it’s appropriate for the Smithsonian to host an exhibit where the topic of AIDS is broached.  I’m guessing Donohue’s overblown contempt for gay men puts him where the most mean-spirited conservatives were in 1983, which is believing people with AIDS are disgusting and deserve to die.  And yet, this man who has gone out of his way to fight anyone who tries to get justice for the victims of rapist priests has been listened to when it comes to his angry, homophobic opinions on a new exhibit at the Smithsonian.

• Smithsonian 2 *

So, let’s get this straight.  In Donohue’s world, art that depicts the suffering of AIDS victims by linking it to traditional Catholic imagery about the suffering of Christ is wrong and should be censored.  But priests who sexually assault young teenagers shouldn’t be distinguished in any way from regular gay men.  Got it.  It’s nice to know that blatant hatred and bigotry like this is something the federal government still feels the need to cater to.  By the way, the artist who did this piece that’s causing all the outrage passed away from AIDS in 1992.  But that doesn’t protect him from accusations that he only did this kind of work about AIDS to offend the sensibilities of people like Donohue, who prefer AIDS victims to be silent as they shuffle off this mortal coil.

I particularly love how he hides his hatred of gay men, and especially of AIDS victims behind the “Christians are so offended!” schtick.  That really sets up who and who doesn’t get to be offended, doesn’t it?  I’m offended at everyone who has blocked HIV relief and prevention efforts in the name of Jesus.  I’m offended at everyone who tries to silence AIDS victims in this way.  And I’m offended while also being firmly in the anti-child rape camp. But my being offended doesn’t amount to a hill of beans.

Luckily, those folks on the side of art and compassion are not just rolling over for this one.  Anti-censorship protesters gathered around the Transformer Gallery and held a protest.

• Smithsonian 3 *

I would guess that it’s because the offense has little to do with the crucifix and everything to do with the theme of the art, which is compassion for AIDS victims and rage at dying of AIDS.  The Jesus stuff is just a cover story to attack AIDS victims, especially gay men.

And, of course, Glenn Beck had to get in on this whole thing.

• Smithsonian 4 *

Obviously, gay people or AIDS victims can’t have values, or work hard, or be thrifty.  Those are qualities that magically appear once you start putting a penis in a vagina. 

• Smithsonian 5 *

So many lies in that short clip!  First of all is the accusation that the Smithsonian is doing this as a Christmas exhibit.  They’re not.  It’s an exhibit that’s lasting many months, and Christmas happens to coincide with it.  Museums, like the rest of the country that isn’t in a shopping mall, continue to do the work that they do year-round, even during Christmas.  Then there’s his suggestion that there’s no way to understand what’s going on in the exhibit, when it’s actually quite simple, so long as you don’t throw a temper tantrum any time someone actually asks you to think about something harder than how to find Fox News with your remote control.  Then there’s the lie about how this is being funded, which Beck claims in a graphic in the clip is by taxpayers.  Actually, the exhibit is funded by private donations.  But let’s not let the facts get in the way.  There’s some hate and bigotry to be drummed up, and by gum, they’re going to do it.

I’ll leave you with some thoughts from someone who actually bothered to see the exhibit.

* Smithsonian 6 *

***********

And now for the Wisdom of Wingnuts, damned if you do, damned if you don’t edition.  There’s never a good time for this sentiment that anti-feminist and anti-choicer Kate O’Beirne expressed on a panel, but it’s especially ugly during a recession that’s driven unemployment up to 10%.

• school lunch *

In Kate O’Beirne’s ideal world, you would be forced to bear children if you got pregnant, no matter how little you felt you could afford it.  And then, after she forces you to have children you can’t afford, she’s going to call you a child abuser if you need help that you knew you needed. If you buy this logic, it makes sense to starve innocent children, I suppose. The logic being, screw the poor, that is.