• An amusement park in South Korea schooled 30 female and male wannabe-Santas today on what it takes to be Santa Claus. • An Illinois woman who recently finalized her divorce claims that her ex-husband and his girlfriend broke into her house over the weekend and stole half of her king-sized bed as well as some electronics. • Captain Kate Philp of the British Army became the first female soldier to lose a limb in Afghanistan when she lost half of her leg following a blast that killed another soldier. • A report on Tuesday of a fetus in a trash bin behind the Gulfcoast Ultrasound Institute in Florida turned out to be a training tool for doctors and nurses to perform ultrasound procedures. • Nancy Kerrigan will star in an ice skating TV special, Holiday Celebration on Ice, which will air on Sunday on NBC. •

[Image via Planned Parenthood of Greater Orlando.]

Another new wrinkle in the analysis of recent abortion statistics is that women who have abortions now are much more likely to already be mothers than women who had abortions 30 years ago. Back then, most of the women getting abortions were teens and college students. According to NOW President Kim Gandy, "Women are making a decision, 'Can I feed another mouth? Did my husband leave me with three other kids? Is this going to mean that I can't feed my kids?' There is a real life decision that a woman has to make."

Day Gardner, the president of the National Black Pro-Life Union, claims that the number of inner city abortion clinics is the reason for higher rates of abortion among black women. She tells the L.A. Times, "It doesn't have as much to do with poverty as that the abortion facilities are there, ingrained in the neighborhoods." (Riiiight — these women are mere abortion pawns, not adults with their own agency who have made the choice that's right for them. Think of the children!) Unfortunately, the anti-choicers are getting their way in some cases, as University of Alabama assistant political science professor Michael J. New tells the Washington Post, "The states with the most active pro-life laws have seen the biggest abortion declines."

Abortion Rate Is Down, But Report Cites Racial Disparity [LAT]
The Changing Face of Abortion [Newsweek]
Study Finds Major Shift In Abortion Demographics [Washington Post]

Because, for one, most schools in Alaska do teach comprehensive sex-ed, and the Alaska Department of Education & Early Development offers schools a choice of curricula that include programs focusing on abstinence without endorsing a specific program. In fact, there have even been debates in Alaska since the start of Palin's tenure whether exempting children from comprehensive sex ed is constitutional. Palin's statements on abstinence-only education date to one questionnaire from a right-wing group during her campaign in 2006 when asked the following question:

Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?

In answer to that leading question which conflates comprehensive sexual education with condom and Pill distribution, her campaign answered:

Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.

In the last year and a half, searches of her office's website and the Guttmacher Institute revealed no abstinence-only initiatives by her administration. Simply put, Sarah Palin is by no means the world's biggest promoter of abstinence-only education, as some people are claiming.

Is it possible that she supports it (or supported it)? Sure, it's certainly a Republican initiative. But there's no evidence that I can find that she yanked Bristol out of sex ed classes or denied her contraceptive education. To make a 17-year-old girl who didn't likely choose either to be pregnant or to be some political football the new poster child for attacking her mother's policy positions doesn't leave any better a taste in my mouth this afternoon than I had this morning.

On a more personal note, though, let those of us who did remain abstinent in high school (and thereafter) and always practiced safe sex throw stones. I lost my virginity at 16 not because I wasn't exposed to comprehensive sex ed or because my parents were too religious or even too permissive. I chose to have sex with my high school boyfriend because I loved him deeply and because I wanted to. The two of us were honors students, tops of our classes, responsible and reliable and I'll be damned if I can sit here and swear that we were the safest sex practitioners on God's green earth. That we didn't end up pregnant had likely a lot more to do with luck than it did a rigorous adherence to what Ms. H. taught us in health class. And, had we gotten pregnant, I would've strongly preferred to get an abortion — but I don't think he would've been quite as enthusiastic about that alternative.

I can only imagine the courage it took for Bristol to go to her parents, pregnant at 17, and lay out one of the most personal aspects of human life — her sexual activities — and the consequences of those activities and that she was choosing to keep the child despite the high probability of political embarrassment that would be laid at her mother's doorstep. And all of that was before her mother was about to be made VP. She didn't by any means choose the easy path here, and everyone probably fully expected that this big reveal would happen at some point rather soon. That it has doesn't make my bile rise any less with every post I read about how, ha-ha, look what happens when you promote abstinence. Once again, even for this great lover of Schandenfreude, my lips are curling in a little disgust with the glee shown by some of my political compatriots at this news.

Yes, we need to have a rational conversation in this country about striking the balance between providing students with age-appropriate sex education and a rational discussion about moral values and their role in making sexual choices. I am a full and complete supporter of comprehensive sex ed — which includes information like "there is no such thing as blue balls" and "no means no" and "saying no to sex can be a sign of respect for both of you." But clapping our hands in joyous rubbernecking over Bristol Palin's being in the family way is not going to be the start of any discussion. It makes us look as judge-y as we accuse Them of being, it makes us look like abortion-promoters instead of choice-respecters (it does mean both choices, after all) and it makes us look like we think a 17-year-old target is easier to hit than a 44-year-old target. Sex education will be a great topic for discussion and reform in an Obama Administration, and it wouldn't — and shouldn't — involve the now rather-public embarrassment or shaming of a 17-year-old girl.

Palin's Daughter Pregnant [Politico]
To Rebut Rumors, Palin Says Daughter, 17, Pregnant [Reuters]
Health Education Curriculum in Alaska [Alaska Legislative Information]
HIV/STD and Sexuality Education Curricula [Alaska Department of Education & Early Development ]
2006 Gubernatorial Candidate Questionnaire [Eagle Forum Alaska]
Alaska Schools Discuss Whether Exempting Kids from Sex Ed is 'Unconstitutional' [Christian Post]

She goes on with drivel about hearing her baby's heartbeat for the first time, and takes the abortion blogger to task for her "disregard and disgust for pregnancy," and adds that the blogger "certainly does the abortion movement no favors." I don't understand the logic of that. Shouldn't a woman who has a "disregard and disgust" for pregnancy, well…not have a baby?? Does this letter-writer expect to shame the blogger into wanting to be a mother? Then the writer goes on to project her life and fantasies onto the blogger:

If I weren’t so consumed with my desire to bitch slap her, I’d feel nothing but pity. I’d like to fast forward 10 years from now to a point where she might be expecting a baby that she desperately wants and is in love with the moment she holds that pregnancy test in her hands. Will she immediately be avoiding Starbucks and suddenly be drawn to organic versions of her favorite foods like I am?

First of all, I'm entertained by the letter writer's complete bourgie myopia! Because to her, being a pregnant woman is about OMGZ avoiding Starbucks and eating organic! Not, you know, frantically fearing that you're pregnant and don't even have the health insurance that a Starbucks employee is guaranteed. I bet this self-centered jerk doesn't give a hoot about the women who, according to ABC News, are taking off-label drugs or attempting to herbally induce abortions because they either can't afford to pay for a doctor-instituted abortion or are immigrants who don't even know that a medical abortion is a possibility.

The woman ends her letter writing, "This little girl is doing herself no favors in documenting her thoughts at this time in her life. They will be there in all their shameful glory forever, and she will most certainly live to regret it." I think the only thing the abortion blogger would regret is having a baby she didn't want and couldn't provide for. I'd like to fast forward to fifteen or twenty years from now, when this letter writer's unborn baby is a teenage girl, who is pregnant and feels she can't talk to her mother about her options. Maybe this teenager will do some creative Googling and find some solace because she's not the only one with ouchy titties.

My Abortion, Ctd. [The Atlantic]
Some Worry Underground Abortions Are Still a Reality [ABC News]

Earlier: Blogging An Abortion: "Precious, Silver-Tongued, Knocked Up 16 Year Olds Where Are You??"

• Rachel Maddow has finally been given her own show at MSNBC. She's taking over Dan Abrams' 9:00 ET spot on September 8 (the Monday after the conventions). Congrats! [NY Times]
• Barack Obama told John McCain to stop questioning his patriotism just because they disagree on national security. It won't work, but it was well-said, so go read it. [Politico]
• John McCain might really be prepared to piss off the fundies and pick a pro-choice VP, which should mean that very few pro-choice women will actually vote for him but could mean the fundies will stay home in a snit on Election Day. [CNN]

• Diane Feinstein, expected to chair the California delegation at next week's Democratic convention, won't be able to attend because she broke her ankle last week. Get well soon! [CNN]
• Polls show pet owners strongly prefer John McCain over Barack Obama. Quick! Get cute pictures of Obama with puppies! [US News & World Report]
• We might consider offering corrupt, almost-impeached former military dictator Pervez "Uncle Pervy" Musharraf asylum because he faces perprosecution in his home country. God forbid he face that! [AFP]
• There's an 8-year-old boy named James Robinson on our government's Do Not Fly list. Our government won't take him off, but it turns out if they use his middle name, he doesn't get stopped. Foolproof system we got there to deter terrorists. [CNN]

The Bush administration's proposed law is meant to allow health care professionals to refuse to give women birth control for "religious reasons," which could actually end up hurting a lot of anti-choice people. And as anyone with a rudimentary knowledge of women's health knows, birth control is prescribed for many reasons other than the prevention of pregnancy. I imagine that many women who don't believe in birth control or abortion still suffer from uterine fibroids, endometriosis, and the scads of other disorders that are alleviated by birth control pills. Just like this commenter, who noted, "I'm Catholic as they get, and I didn't use birth control for my own (my own!) moral and religious reasons - I would have never foisted my beliefs on others, though, and have plenty of friends who tell me about their choices without me getting preachy. Then it turns out I have to take Ortho Tri Cyclen for a grave medical problem - the Catholics are okay with that. Ironies of ironies, I get a pharmacist who won't dispense because of his morality. I went on a furious rant about privacy, how he doesn't know why I'm taking this medicine and I don't need him in my bedroom, etc. I thought about telling him that I was way Catholic and pointing out my Mary medal, but that just felt wrong and desperate and none of his business. None. Of. His. Business."

Anyway, according to a new poll from Bloomberg News and the Los Angeles Times, the country's views on abortion have remained virtually unchanged since Roe vs. Wade was passed 35 years ago. "Young Americans' views were almost identical to those of their mothers and fathers: About one-third said it should be available, one-third said it should be outlawed, and one in five said it should be legal with stricter limits." Despite the fact that the pro-choice movement is not necessarily growing, the International Herald Tribune points out that "The only time a deeply divided public comes down clearly on one side is when it appears the other side is gaining an important advantage." Which means, hopefully, that an outraged bunch of Americans would never let a law like Bush's anti-birth control proposal pass.

Clinton Vows To Fight "Insulting" Abortion Plan [Reuters]
Abortion, Remarkably, Remains An Issue In U.S. Politics [IHT via Bloomberg]

Earlier: Bush Administration Memo Tries To Define Birth Control As Abortion

Reuters adds that the Department of Health and Human Services would not verify the contents of the widely-circulated memo, "but noted their responsibility to protect against discrimination of doctors and pharmacists who object to abortion or birth control on religious or moral grounds."

Pro-choice organizations and women all over the country are understandably up in arms over this. Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL, asks the New York Times, "Why on earth is the Bush administration trying to discourage doctors and clinics from providing contraception to women who need it?” Good question! Apparently, they're peeved over recent state laws, like Connecticut's 2007 legislation requiring hospitals to distribute Plan B to rape victims, and according to Reuters, the proposal was "specifically designed to counter" those laws. How convenient for Republicans to be in favor of states rights…for everything except a woman's right to choose!

And speaking of Republicans, NARAL's blog notes that while John McCain has yet to comment on this specific proposal, he has voted against choice 125 times in the Senate. It's obvious that the Bush administration will stand behind the straw man of "religious freedom" when defending this proposal, but if it's so concerned with religious freedom, why does this law only apply to birth control? Some Christian Scientists are against using modern medicine. So, by this logic, it would be discrimination to not hire a Christian Scientist because he or she refused to dole out insulin for diabetes, or declined to give a cancer patient chemo? Exactly. The only discrimination here is against a woman's right to choose.

Family Planning Groups Object To Abortion Plan [Reuters]
Abortion Proposal Sets Condition On Aid [NYT]
Another Day, Another Dangerous (Proposed) Bush Regulation [NARAL]

According to Bazelon:

[The 8th Circuit Court] bought the state's argument that the statute circumvents ideology by defining "human being," elsewhere in the statute, as "an individual living member of the species Homo sapiens, including the unborn human being during the entire embryonic and fetal ages from fertilization to full gestation." Presto, said the majority—with that definition, the "truthfulness and relevance" of the provision "generates little dispute." Yes, this logic is as tautological as it sounds. The legislature basically defined "human being" to include unborn human beings…As Yale law professor Robert Post says in a 2007 article in the University of Illinois Law Review, "If South Dakota were to enact a statute requiring physicians to inform abortion patients that they were destroying the 'soul' of their unborn progeny, and if it were explicitly to provide in the statute that 'soul' is defined as 'human DNA,' the evasion would be obvious." Instead, South Dakota has co-opted human being and attached its own meaning to it.

If that weren't bad enough, the South Dakota law requires doctors to talk to patients about "increased risk of suicidal ideation and suicide" that allegedly come with undergoing an abortion. While there are some studies that back up claims of increased depression post-abortion, those studies are, to put it mildly, hotly disputed, and many doctors, including some who probably live in South Dakota, don't believe them. "Our doctors are now being asked to say things they do not believe are true," Sarah Stoesz, the head of Planned Parenthood in South Dakota, North Dakota, and Minnesota tells Slate. I'm sort of at a loss for what to do, as there are mere weeks before this idiotic law is going into effect, but here's the website for Planned Parenthood of Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota. They have a pledge you can sign against the South Dakota ruling and information about donating.

Telling Doctors What To Think [Slate]

We've all met young men and women like Aliza Shvarts: They come from relatively happy, upper-middle-class families, and are so desperate to be "edgy" and "crazy" that they perform a series of stunts — whether through drug experimentation, sexual exploration, or bad performance art — to differentiate themselves from their hopelessly bourgie peers and parents. The problem with Shvarts' little art project, however, is that her need to rebel has potentially big ramifications outside her ivory tower of academia. (One assumes that Shvarts used, at least in part, the abortifacient RU-486, a prescription-only drug that some politicians want added to the list of Schedule I controlled substances.) Plus, conservative bloggers are already up in arms and using Aliza's capriciousness to support their anti-abortion agendas. (At 9:00am this morning Shvarts' name had 53 hits on Google; as of 11:52am, it had 291.) And though the Buckley School valedictorian claims that she wants her piece to be a medium for "politics and ideologies," it's not like she's shedding light on an obscure subject. People debate the ethics of abortion constantly, and possibly harming your body by forcing it to miscarry repeatedly? Yeah, that's not helping the discourse.

Molly Clark-Barol, a Yale student and commenter on the YDH's website, sums up Shvarts's egocentrism better than I could: "Congratulations, Aliza Shvarts '08: you have single-handedly trivialized not only an entire generation and a half's fight to gain and retain the right to choose, through harassment and against massive odds, but also history of women's struggles, not only politically, but with the emotional, moral, and spiritual impacts of the choice to terminate a pregnancy. You also spit upon every couple who has tried, and failed, sometimes repeatedly, to have children. it is the emotional impact of these struggles, emotional impact that you shamelessly exploit, not explore, in your senior project."

[Image via Soapbox Event]

Related: Absolutely Fascinating [Bitch, PhD]

Well I'm not going to lie to you; this is not a particularly exciting film. If you, like me, are into slow, drab, quiet movies about Soviet bloc nations during the dreary endless wintertime, you'll forgive this. A minor spoiler follows (though you can't really spoil this movie because so much of it is told through its Communist scenery, its muted bleakness of outlook.)

This movie belongs not to the character in need of the abortion, but to her roommate Otilia, who not only scrapes together the funds to secure a hotel room and the services of a black-market doctor, but sets the whole thing up, has sex with the abortionist when he makes it clear that's how he prefers his remuneration, and runs frantically through the night searching for a way to properly get rid of the fetus. Before she does that latter part she picks a fight with her boyfriend, who came inside her without a condom the week earlier; the contrast of his cluelessness with her combination of human neediness and escalating contempt are alllll too familiar.

And yet the most contemptible character — at least among my co-viewers — was the girl who needs the abortion, Gabita. She lies to Otilla, she lies to the doctor, she bursts into desperate tears at nothing, she lies some more, she waxes her legs, she stares, frightened, into mirrors; she smokes Otilla's last cigarette.

She waits four months, three weeks and two days. Her bloody fetus — you get to see it, yay! — is the size of a doll.

She is completely unprepared to give birth. She is completely unprepared for anything. At the end she nearly gives Otilla an aneurysm by sneaking down to the restaurant for dinner; Otilla is sure she's dead or taken away to the gulag or something. But she's deciding between dinner meats. It's the only kind of choice she seems equipped to make.

But Otilla is profoundly strengthened by the experience. The movie is in many ways the story of a young person growing up. Sort of like Seth Rogen in Knocked Up. Only, like, not quite as commercially viable.

Related: A Choice That Films Ignore [Guardian]
Earlier: Romanian Abortion Drama 4 Months Opens To Rave Reviews

Uh, right. The harsh reality, however, is that if access to abortion is further imperiled, the women who will truly suffer are the poor, not teens from Philadelphia suburbs with median incomes of $90,000. And although this is not a new revelation, several women have published specific anecdotes underscoring that point. Activist and Radcliffe fellow Kissling also writing in Salon, tells the story of Rosie Jimenez, a woman who died from a back-alley abortion in 1978 because Medicaid funds for abortions had been cut off. The botched abortion had caused an "infection that had turned her skin a dark greenish brown and caused blood to seep from her eyes." Rural women are affected deeply, too. Erica Sackin relates a story about a friend who " had to drive 15 hours and two states out of small-town Texas to an abortion clinic — a clinic that has since closed." Here at Jezebel we shared own stories of abortion, and asked you to share your own, in the hopes of lessening the stigma attached.

The message to be gleaned from today's anniversary is that the fight for our reproductive rights is not something that languishes in the distant past. It's a battle being waged every day by embattled abortion providers in Albuquerque who will only speak anonymously to the Washington Post about "Miffy" or mifepristone, the abortion pill, for fear of local retribution. An abortion ban is such a feasible reality that the NARAL pro-choice organization has developed a map showing which states are likely to outlaw abortion if given a chance to. (What would happen in your state?) On the anniversary of Roe v. Wade and, in an election year with several geriatric Supreme Court judges on the verge of retirement, the least we can do today is remember that our reproductive rights aren't something to be taken for granted.

Abortion's Battle Of Messages [Los Angeles Times]
Anti-abortion Cause Stirs New Generation [Los Angeles Times]
Voices: A Real Anniversary Present [Metro]
Roe, 35 Years Later [Salon]
As Abortion Rates Drop, Use of RU-486 Is On Rise [Washington Post]
Map [NARAL]

Earlier: Unlike Alveda King, I Am Neither "Reformed" Nor A Murderer
Experts Don't Understand Why Fewer American Women Are Getting Abortions

I had my first abortion at the age of 18, while in the early throes of a love affair that eventually turned emotionally abusive. Fresh off my first year of college, I fell pregnant through a combination of raging hormones, high fertility, and, most notably, sheer recklessness. Four weeks later, hunched over and damp with tears after undergoing a D&C at my local Planned Parenthood, I vowed I'd never behave that stupidly again.

Talk about famous last words: Six years later, I did just that.

I could go on and on about my unwillingness to have a child, about the unsuitability of my romantic partners, or the precariousness of my financial situation as a young women in the big city without a trust-fund or even a savings account. I could talk about the dreams I had for my future, dreams that did not include a changing diapers, nursery school and single motherhood. I could express my belief that the embryos that existed inside me for four weeks were not fully-formed, functioning human beings. And I could converse for hours about my terror at the thought of disappointing my parents, or the long-held conviction (as a young girl I had walked hand-in-hand with my mother at many an abortion-rights march) that it was my right to control over what happened to my body, and that, when push came to shove, if I was going to talk the talk, I was sure as hell going to walk the walk.

But eventually I'd have to come back to the simple fact that, no matter how educated and "aware" I was, when I got pregnant I was young, stupid, and yes, "selfish". (Tracie, who's been through it too, disagrees: "It's not selfish. Having a baby and then not being a good mother would be selfish.") There was nothing comedic, heartwarming or cinematic (a la Juno and Knocked Up) about my getting pregnant (except for the time I was heating up soup in the kitchen and realized I was both barefoot and pregnant), or my choice to end a pregnancy. But most importantly, I was simply not willing or ready to have a child; I was just a baby myself. And although I can't speak of the reasons and realities behind the other third of American women who've undergone abortions over the past three and a half decades, perhaps some of you can?

Who's Getting Abortions? Not Who You'd Think [MSNBC, via AP]
If Men Could Get Pregnant, Abortion Would Be A Sacrament [Huffington Post]
Pregnancy Films Like 'Juno' Skip Message, Go For The Humor [USA Today]

Earlier: Experts Don't Understand Why Fewer American Women Are Getting Abortions
•Do You Care How Dudes Feel About Their Abortions?
•How Much Time Should Women Spend In Prison For Having Abortions?
•How Old Is Too Old To Have An Abortion?

Another possible reason for the decline could be limited access to clinics for many women living in rural areas. Newsweek cites a troubling, almost unbelievable statistic: 87% of American women live in counties without an abortion provider (!!!). (What's almost more disturbing is the L.A. Times' theory that part of the decline in abortions is due to laws in 30 states which mandate counseling before a woman is allowed to go through with an abortion. These "counseling" sessions often purposely spread disinformation, reports the paper — "For example, warnings that abortion raises the risk of breast cancer or causes post-traumatic stress disorder — and employ the use of "photos of fetal development through nine months, though 90% of abortions take place in the first trimester.") Or maybe it's the simple fact that more women want babies these days. (This theory is buffeted by the statistic that abortions have dropped in left-leaning states like Oregon and California, where birth control and abortions are relatively easy to come by.) Whatever the reason, let's hope the decline is because of the simple fact that more women are mentally, emotionally and financially able to take care of a new baby, and not because one in four of them have to travel at least 50 miles to get to the nearest provider.

Abortions Down 25% From Peak [Los Angeles Times}
Report: Overall Abortion Rates Continue To Drop [USA Today]
Better Prevention or Changing Attitudes? [Newsweek]

Earlier: America's Amazing Baby Boom Has Nothing To Do With A-List Actresses
My Darling, My Hamburger: I Will Gladly Pay You Tomorrow For A D&C Today

Head protester Will Duffy went on Denver's local Fox morning show to speak out against anyone even remotely involved with Planned Parenthood, right down to the cleaning ladies and contractors. They all deserve to be picketed, he said, because they are helping PP "rip the arms and legs off unborn children." Uh, what? I'm pretty sure they don't do that. Fox also interviews Vic Barta, whose Denver Security Services were hired to protect the Planned Parenthood lot from security breaches. Barta has since abandoned the lucrative contract because the protesters outside his house scared his 14-year-old child. Vicky Coward of Colorado Planned Parenthood puts it pretty succinctly: the protesters "say they're pro-family, but they're really terrifying families and communities."

Albuquerque Has Renewal of Attacks on Abortion [New York Times]
Contractor Opens Up About Abortion Protesters [My Fox Colorado via feministing]

• CNN the news network, known for its in-depth coverage of the Paris Hilton Goes To Prison Scandal, gets all deep in their exploration of "frenemies". Listen, sometimes really shallow girls turn on their friends over things like boys, and drugs, and fame. Is that so hard to understand? [CNN]
  
• A professor at Harvard's Dental School says dentists should be at the forefront of combating domestic abuse, as the most common injuries are to the victims' head and neck areas. [Boston Globe]
  
• Research supposedly shows that men who were born to overweight mothers have "poorer quality" sperm. In other words, KFed may LOOK cheap, but his spunk is actually quite expensive. [Daily Mail]

• Black women are at a higher risk of developing the most deadly form of breast cancer and 77% are more likely to die of the disease than white women. Mother Nature is a fucking racist. [CBSNews]
• Speaking of breast cancer, survivors of double mastectomies will bare all in an upcoming calendar. Normally we'd decorate our cube with a lovely Anne Geddes calendar or something, but this sounds like the kind of objectification we can get behind. [USA Today]
• Duke Medical School has hired Dr. Nancy Andrews as the first woman to lead its prestigious medical school. The other medical schools in the Top Ten are all run by men. One small step for womankind... just another day on the job for man. [Breitbart]
• A pair of friends may have worked together to commit over 20 rapes and upwards of 60 additional sexual assaults in Melbourne, Australia over the last decade. The assaults were dubbed "The Hot Chocolate Rapes" because the loathsome criminals slipped drugged their victims with roofie-laced hot drinks. Hopefully someone will be inspired by these two pigs and will give their disgusting willies a good scalding. [NEWS.com.au]
• There's been a huge crackdown on brothels across England, but law enforcement has also discovered that many of the UK's sex slaves have been auctioned off at pubs — this is why we go to wine bars. [Guardian]
• Democratic NY Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney wants to establish a global women's rights office that will have the government advocating for women around the world. Fingers crossed that Bush actually signs off on that! [Ms. Magazine]
• The Times of London erroniously labeled Christina Aguilera and Avril Lavigne anti-choice in its story about Amnesty International's new abortion stance, alienating some of its rock star supporters. Oh, and it also erroniously reported that Aguilera and Avril are, in fact, "rock stars". [The Times of London]