• Jezebel
  • celebrity
  • sex
  • fashion
  • Profile logout login

#scottroeder#gtlink

Jezebel

Share Cancel
   
Upload an image | Add an image URL
×

logging in
  • FAQ. Include # before tag:
  • #tips,
  • #snapjudgment,
  • #groupthink,
  • etc.

New York, 3:41 AM
Wed Nov 25
57 posts in the last 24 hours

Tip your editors:
tips@jezebel.com

Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
Email | Twitter

Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
Email | Twitter

Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
Email | Twitter

Contributing Editors:
Anna North
Email | Twitter
Sadie Stein
Email | Twitter

Reporter:
Irin Carmon
Email | Twitter

Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
Email | Twitter

Contributors:
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Latoya Peterson
Email
Jenna Sauers
Email
Lizzie Skurnick
Email

Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter


Weekends/Commenter Moderator:
Hortense
Email | Twitter

SUBSCRIBE TO Jezebel RSS

New: Breaking news and daily top stories via email
1770 Subscribers
Jezebel
  • Your version of Internet Explorer is not supported. Please upgrade to the most recent version in order to view comments.
    Dsmvwl  Admin  Promote to frontpage Approve user Ban user ×
    Image of whynotshesaid whynotshesaid
    11/10/09

    In reply to Can Scott Roeder Really Use The "Necessity Defense?"
    The AP is reporting that he is not using the necessity defense and that there is no such thing in Kansas. #scottroeder
     Reply
    whynotshesaid was starred whynotshesaid was unstarred
    Image of vgnvxn vgnvxn
    11/10/09

    In reply to Can Scott Roeder Really Use The "Necessity Defense?"
    "there is a mountain of scientific evidence that shows the humanity of an unborn child" Oh really? "Science" that proves "humanity?" I bet.

    Also, I wish every one of these articles in the MSM that talk about late-term abortion would include a story about the type of women that seek this "choice" - generally they have no other medical option, and these fetuses are very much wanted. It's fucking heartbreaking to imply these families are murderers. fuck. #scottroeder
     Reply
    I_can_still_pitch promoted this comment vgnvxn was starred vgnvxn was unstarred
    Image of theringer theringer
    11/10/09

    @vgnvxn: I could not agree with you more. People argue against these late term abortions as though women find themselves 7 months along in a healthy pregnancy and then say "no baby for me." These are tragic cases where the baby and/or mother would not likely survive birth. These families have enough to deal with without being called murderers.
     Reply
    wtfox?! promoted this comment Edited by theringer at 11/10/09 4:16 PM theringer was starred theringer was unstarred
    Image of EkaterinaBallerina EkaterinaBallerina
    11/10/09

    @vgnvxn: Exactly. These families and women have no other choice. Do most of them want to make that choice? Heck no. It's the most painful choice they'll ever have to make, I wish these people would stop trying to make it any worse by implying it's criminal. What's worse, to claim that it's God's will if the mother dies and that medical intervention shouldn't be used to save her life if need be is an argument against any form of medical intervention. I don't want to go as far to correlate a tumor and a fetus but in a way, if a person had a brain tumor that was killing them and could be removed and they could live, why wouldn't you do it? I understand that in this case we're talking a possible human life here, but given the choice between saving a life or losing two, I think I'd pick the former. #scottroeder
     Reply
    EkaterinaBallerina was starred EkaterinaBallerina was unstarred
    Image of KikiCanuck KikiCanuck
    11/10/09

    @theringer, @vgnvxn: Exactly... Esquire published an excellent article this summer called "The Last Abortion Doctor" ([www.esquire.com]) about Dr. Warren Hern, who since George Tiller was killed is the last doctor in the U.S. who specializes in late-term abortions. It should be required reading for anyone who could possibly support this proposed defense, or indeed anyone who identifies as "anti-abortion."

    From the flyer explaining the services offered at Dr. Hern's clinic:
    "Specializing in late abortion for fetal disorders. Outpatient abortion over twenty-six menstrual weeks for selected patients with documented fetal anomaly, fetal demise, or medical indications."

    So, not a capricious change of mind about the baby you're carrying, but rather a heartbreaking decision to end a wanted pregnancy and go home without the baby you have dreamed of, carried, and loved in your arms. Murder is gunning someone down in a church. #scottroeder
     Reply
    wtfox?! promoted this comment KikiCanuck was starred KikiCanuck was unstarred
    Image of Luckwouldhaveit Luckwouldhaveit
    11/10/09

    @EkaterinaBallerina: I suppose the saving grace here is that, if Roeder is allowed to bring evidence of the necessity defense at trial, to wit "Dr. Tiller is an evil murderer of babies at the whim of frivolous women who change their minds" then the prosecutor can bring in (willing) patients of Dr. Tiller as witnesses to testify regarding their choosing late-term abortion, ie deformed fetuses who will die at birth and risk the patients' lives in the meantime. Who do you think the jury is going to side with there? #scottroeder
     Reply
    wtfox?! promoted this comment Luckwouldhaveit was starred Luckwouldhaveit was unstarred
    Image of Penny Penny
    11/10/09

    In reply to Can Scott Roeder Really Use The "Necessity Defense?"
    Double post, sorry.
     Reply
    Edited by Penny at 11/10/09 3:51 PM Penny was starred Penny was unstarred
    Image of Penny Penny
    11/10/09

    In reply to Can Scott Roeder Really Use The "Necessity Defense?"
    I want to ask this question again because I am genuinely curious and I don't want my previous comment to get buried.

    According to the law, when is the "unlawful" death (i.e. when a pregnant woman is murdered) of a fetus possible? Are there any parameters around this? I assume there are no federal laws and this is decided on a state-by-state basis?

    I know people have been charged with, and I assume convicted, of murdering a fetus. How do we differentiate between something like the Scott Peterson case and other cases when the fetus was in its earlier stages?

    Is the line drawn when a fetus can survive outside of the womb? #scottroeder
     Reply
    Penny was starred Penny was unstarred
    Image of yvanehtnioj yvanehtnioj
    11/10/09

    @Penny: These are state laws, brought up by really really anti-choice people and mostly in the places you'd expect. They vary from being an aggravating factor (like if you assault someone it can be a worse crime if that person is 1. a cop, 2. elderly, 3. a child, 4. pregnant, etc) to a place that defines "citizen" as conception through death (cough*Kansas*cough).

    Even still, murdering a fetus isn't normally a function of the gestational age, but of the act. A doctor performing an abortion wouldn't be charged with murdering a fetus anyway, but a person throwing a pregnant woman down a flight of stairs might (whether it's because she paid him to or not, like that Utah case). #scottroeder
     Reply
    yvanehtnioj was starred yvanehtnioj was unstarred
    Image of scootermom scootermom
    11/10/09

    @Penny: Some states have laws that recognize crimes against fetuses. Fetal homicide, fetal battery, etc. Harming the fetus, zygote or blastocyst is a crime separate from that of harming the pregnant woman.

    Most such laws contain provisions that specifically exclude abortion, or "the actions of the woman in regard to her own fetus" (in other words, self abortion or self harm). Although some states have gone crazy and charged women with child abuse for not seeking medical care or consuming drugs or alcohol.

    The laws are bad, as they elevate the health of the fetus above that of the pregnant woman. #scottroeder
     Reply
    wtfox?! promoted this comment scootermom was starred scootermom was unstarred
    Image of lizdexia lizdexia
    11/10/09

    @Penny: This is a great subject.

    What do folks here think of this? I know these laws are usually proposed by pro-life legislators, but they make a certain amount of sense. If I'm pregnant, and I want the baby, and someone beats the hell out of me for the purpose of ending the pregnancy, I have just been deprived of a wanted child. I would absolutely want them charged with murder. But I have to recognize the logical inconsistency implied by both assigning a fetus personhood for the purposes of murder charges while keeping abortion legal. I'm not really sure what the answer is, except that emotionally, killing a wanted fetus in utero seems much, much graver than aggravated assault. #scottroeder
     Reply
    yvanehtnioj promoted this comment lizdexia was starred lizdexia was unstarred
    Image of yvanehtnioj yvanehtnioj
    11/10/09

    @lizdexia: I don't like these laws because really, even a late stage fetus is not a person. Let's leave personhood (and therefore the ability to be murdered) for after birth. Is it a terrible tragedy when a pregnant woman loses a pregnancy she wanted? Yes. And if you miscarried because a crazy person beat you up, that person should go to jail. But it's fundamentally different from seeing them shoot your two-year-old in the head in front of you, which is murder. A potential life and an extant life are different things, and I think it should stay that way in the law.

    I don't mean to sound unfeeling, but there's a camel's-nose-under-the-tent problem here, where the first law is introduced because a mugger might just kick a pregnant lady in the stomach a bunch of times because he hates babies and OMG HE SHOULD GO TO JAIL FOREVER and every single lawmaker agrees, and now it's on the books. But then more and more laws get introduced and it's not about these extreme violent acts, it's really about classifying the fetus as a human to make an end-run around legal abortion and to control pregnant women. Honestly, next stop is arresting pregnant women who have a glass of wine. I take a hard line against the laws, even though it looks mean-spirited at the far end, because the other end is just as important to me (more important, really, because it affects more women and is more plausible than the crazy-mugger scenario).

    Just my thoughts. #scottroeder
     Reply
    yvanehtnioj was starred yvanehtnioj was unstarred
    Image of lizdexia lizdexia
    11/10/09

    @yvanehtnioj: I completely hear what you're saying. It's one of those nasty areas where no one's going to be happy I think. Emotionally, I'm sure I would feel like my child had been murdered.

    But you're right, using it as an end-run around abortion rights is bad news. And we are getting close to the point where it's easy to imagine arresting women for anything that could potentially endanger a pregnancy.

    I think someone said upthread that some states have laws that make harming a fetus (with exceptions for abortion and acts of self-harm) a crime. That might be the best way to split the difference. #scottroeder
     Reply
    lizdexia was starred lizdexia was unstarred
    Image of Zombies make the heart grow fonder Zombies make the heart grow fonder
    11/10/09

    @lizdexia: Well, in some states it is done specifically to tailor to your concern. If a person attacks you with the intent to cause you to lose the fetus, it is an aggravated offense and within that very statute there is an exception which states this provision may not used in the case of a licensed physician providing an abortion. I don't have a problem with this type of statute because I think it helps protect a vulnerable individual (namely a pregnant woman) from a potential attacker (namely a disgruntled lover who doesn't want her to carry out the pregnancy) and preserves her right to choose. It just happens that in this instance, it protects the right to choice in a way that is opposite to what we are used to seeing. #scottroeder
     Reply
    Zombies make the heart grow fonder was starred Zombies make the heart grow fonder was unstarred
    Image of GoldenRatioφ (aka -girl11) GoldenRatioφ (aka -girl11)
    11/11/09

    @yvanehtnioj: Women already are being prosecuted for homicide and child neglect under these laws for harming their fetuses through substance abuse. You're right, as soon as you start regarding the fetus as a separate entity with separate legal rights, you are striking at a woman's ability to have integrity over her own body. One homeless woman was sentenced to 12 years in prison when her pregnancy ended in a stillbirth, even though there was no evidence that drug use caused the stillbirth.

    [www.advocatesforpregnantwomen.org]

    Instead of these "unborn victims" laws, people who kill pregnant women should just be charged with murdering a woman, because that is a pretty serious crime in and of itself. People who harm a fetus or cause a miscarriage could be charged with assault- which should be considered a serious crime anyway!
     Reply
    Edited by GoldenRatioφ (aka -girl11) at 11/11/09 12:11 AM GoldenRatioφ (aka -girl11) was starred GoldenRatioφ (aka -girl11) was unstarred
    Image of yvanehtnioj yvanehtnioj
    11/11/09

    @GoldenRatioφ (aka -girl11): Right on. Also women can be chained to operating tables and forced to undergo C-sections because a judge says so ([feminocracy.wordpress.com]). It's not a slippery slope fallacy when anti-choicers with any power at all are greasing their fucking skis.

    These laws are meant to give the government an "in" to control women, and that's exactly what they do. #scottroeder
     Reply
    yvanehtnioj was starred yvanehtnioj was unstarred
    Image of bumbleleaf bumbleleaf
    11/11/09

    @Penny: Re: the "line" being drawn at viability outside the womb. This idea makes some kind of intuitive sense, i.e. we seem to feel that late term abortions are wronger than early ones.

    However, it's not really a good tool for figuring out when "personhood" begins, because the age of viability has been shifting over time. Even 10 or 15 years ago, babies born at 32 weeks were unlikely to live. Now, babies born at 24 weeks, while they have tons of complications, can be expected to live. So, since changes in medicine have changed viability -- have they also changed the point at which "personhood" begins?

    So there is no point at which a switch is flipped and voila, the fetus is independent now! I really wish people would leave this question out of it. Not you, Penny, but anti-choicers who think they have science on their side.
     Reply
    yvanehtnioj promoted this comment Edited by bumbleleaf at 11/11/09 12:59 AM bumbleleaf was starred bumbleleaf was unstarred
    Image of emfish55 emfish55
    11/10/09

    In reply to Can Scott Roeder Really Use The "Necessity Defense?"
    Why bother with laws at all? After all, we have folks like Roeder and Hirsch who already know how we're all supposed to act. They'll just run down a list of all the people on Earth, put checkmarks next to the good ones, and kill the rest.

    But then what will Jesus do when he comes back for the second coming? Dude's got some badass shit planned. Maybe we ought to just leave the final reckoning up to the big guy, after all. #scottroeder
     Reply
    emfish55 was starred emfish55 was unstarred
    Image of sybann sybann
    11/10/09

    In reply to Can Scott Roeder Really Use The "Necessity Defense?"
    That junior high school grade artwork is enough for me to say life without parole (at LEAST). The only thing missing are fighter jets and bomb dashes. #scottroeder
     Reply
    sybann was starred sybann was unstarred
    Image of Hooplehead Hooplehead
    11/10/09

    In reply to Can Scott Roeder Really Use The "Necessity Defense?"
    It might be time to re-examine your views if they are honestly telling you that murder is A-OK and everyone will buy that argument if you only explain it properly. #scottroeder
     Reply
    Hooplehead was starred Hooplehead was unstarred
    Image of Sputnik_Sweetheart Sputnik_Sweetheart
    11/10/09

    In reply to Can Scott Roeder Really Use The "Necessity Defense?"
    So there's no denying by rational people the humanity of an unborn child, and the only difference in the unborn child and you and me is size, age and location.

    Well, size, age, location, and the ability to move around freely. And not being dependent on an umbilical cord to get all vital nutrients. And the ability to breathe oxygen. And a belly button.

    When someone starts out with "there's no denying by rational people" what they are about to say is completely irrational. #scottroeder
     Reply
    Sputnik_Sweetheart was starred Sputnik_Sweetheart was unstarred
    Image of Maritsa Maritsa
    11/10/09

    @Sputnik_Sweetheart: This is a good rule of thumb. #scottroeder
     Reply
    Maritsa was starred Maritsa was unstarred
    Image of morninggloria morninggloria
    11/10/09

    In reply to Can Scott Roeder Really Use The "Necessity Defense?"
    Do we have the technology to surgically change his sex to female and then impregnate him? Then he can have a uterus of his very own to worry about. You're welcome, Scott Roeder! #scottroeder
     Reply
    morninggloria was starred morninggloria was unstarred
    Image of bluebears bluebears
    11/10/09

    @morninggloria: It's possible! I've seen Junior...

    [www.imdb.com]
     Reply
    Edited by bluebears at 11/10/09 3:41 PM bluebears was starred bluebears was unstarred
    Image of I_can_still_pitch I_can_still_pitch
    11/10/09

    In reply to Can Scott Roeder Really Use The "Necessity Defense?"
    This clearly shows [Roeder's] connection to the most extremist branch of the anti-abortion movement, which has long advocated this defense, that somehow the murder of doctors is justifiable.

    If we can prosecute racist organizations and their leaders who incite their followers to murder, and effectively bankrupt them out of business, why can't we do it with these people?

    Christianity has been used to excuse and support slavery, racism, genocide, annihilation of cultures, homophobia, misogyny, molestation and murder. I am so sick of it. #scottroeder
     Reply
    I_can_still_pitch was starred I_can_still_pitch was unstarred
    Image of morninggloria morninggloria
    11/10/09

    @I_can_still_pitch: I'm right with you. But people get REALLY ANGRY when you suggest that organized religion is bad. #scottroeder
     Reply
    morninggloria was starred morninggloria was unstarred
    Image of Bunsen Honeydew Bunsen Honeydew
    11/10/09

    @I_can_still_pitch: Hey now. Not all Christians are anti-choice nutjobs. Many of us are also okay with other races, gay people and women. And many of us are strongly anti-genocide, anti-molestation and anti-murder. How about we focus on the anti-choice folks rather than throwing around blanket, hateful judgements. #scottroeder
     Reply
    Bunsen Honeydew was starred Bunsen Honeydew was unstarred
    Image of yvanehtnioj yvanehtnioj
    11/10/09

    @morninggloria: Hahahaha you're psychic! #scottroeder
     Reply
    yvanehtnioj was starred yvanehtnioj was unstarred
    Image of PilgrimSoul PilgrimSoul
    11/10/09

    @Bunsen Honeydew: Okay, so, I'm not really saying "ANNIHILATE CHRISTIANITY NAO," but there is a certain point where I wonder how long the religious are gonna keep claiming they have no responsibility towards extremists. They're more likely to listen to you than to an atheist, for example. #scottroeder
     Reply
    PilgrimSoul was starred PilgrimSoul was unstarred
    Image of I_can_still_pitch I_can_still_pitch
    11/10/09

    @Bunsen Honeydew: I said "Christianity", not Christian people. I am a very religious person, I just don't believe in Church. #scottroeder
     Reply
    I_can_still_pitch was starred I_can_still_pitch was unstarred
    Image of Bunsen Honeydew Bunsen Honeydew
    11/10/09

    @yvanehtnioj: Hahahah yeah, I was kind of impressed once I hit send and saw that.

    I just really hate getting lumped in like that. It's not cool for me to try to force Jesus on people. I know, I get it, and I don't assume everyone who doesn't believe is going to hell because I'm open minded. I just sometimes wish that more non-Christians could look at me the same way I look at them? #scottroeder
     Reply
    Bunsen Honeydew was starred Bunsen Honeydew was unstarred
    Image of lizdexia lizdexia
    11/10/09

    @I_can_still_pitch: Assuming this is a serious suggestion, I wonder how that could actually be done? It's not like Christianity is some monolithic group with headquarters and a registered CEO of any kind. Do we prosecute all the Christian churches in existence when someone nuts flips their shit?
    Now, if we want to start prosecuting specific pastors and preachers who call for the murder of doctors or violent overthrow of the legal system, the hell yes, let's prosecute them for inciting violence. #scottroeder
     Reply
    I_can_still_pitch promoted this comment lizdexia was starred lizdexia was unstarred
    Image of I_can_still_pitch I_can_still_pitch
    11/10/09

    @lizdexia: That's what I was getting at: they need to prosecute the discreet organizations and their leaders and spokespeople. For instance, when Tom Metzger's followers killed an Ethiopian immigrant, his racist organization and his wealth were dismantled. They didn't take racists to court, they took the Aryan Brotherhood to court. The Metzger case set the precedent that people that run and fund violent groups can be held criminally and civilly liable for the actions of their followers. #scottroeder
     Reply
    I_can_still_pitch was starred I_can_still_pitch was unstarred
    Image of lizdexia lizdexia
    11/10/09

    @I_can_still_pitch: That's completely reasonable. We shouldn't tolerate evil regardless of the clerical robes it might be hiding behind.

    And I think the suggestion to hold specific Christians accountable for their actions and the actions they've called for will go over much better with folks than the suggestion that Christianity as a belief system, and by extension all Christians are responsible for the terrible actions of individuals. #scottroeder
     Reply
    lizdexia was starred lizdexia was unstarred
    Image of SwirlGirl SwirlGirl
    11/10/09

    @I_can_still_pitch: And, Christians who do disown the extremists within the religion can also seek out branches/parishes/etc that more accurately reflect their views--vote with their feet, so to speak. I changed denominations because although my basic faith was intact, I could not in good conscience be part of a branch that actively preaches that homosexuality is a sin, abortion is murder, etc. So I found a new church that reflects my views. I still have some amount of internal questioning about faith, religion, etc, but I feel like aligning with a new denomination has allowed me to personally reclaim Christianity just a bit. #scottroeder
     Reply
    I_can_still_pitch promoted this comment SwirlGirl was starred SwirlGirl was unstarred
    Image of I_can_still_pitch I_can_still_pitch
    11/10/09

    @SwirlGirl: Good on you. I wish more people would do exactly what you did.

    Unfortunately, I live in Central Florida, so most people's idea of a good church is a 3 to 5 thousand person big-box church where you go see a "pastor" give a two-hour PowerPoint on who to vote for and what TV shows are ok to watch before they pass the plate. #scottroeder
     Reply
    I_can_still_pitch was starred I_can_still_pitch was unstarred
    Image of PaintedTrollop PaintedTrollop
    11/10/09

    In reply to Can Scott Roeder Really Use The "Necessity Defense?"
    So, the folks who paid Roeder to kill Dr. Tiller are going to continue to use him as a cash cow. That's what this is REALLY about - fundraising. #scottroeder
     Reply
    PaintedTrollop was starred PaintedTrollop was unstarred
    Image of LucilleMcGillicuddy LucilleMcGillicuddy
    11/10/09

    In reply to Can Scott Roeder Really Use The "Necessity Defense?"
    jesus, has it really come to this? it's painful to watch progress undo itself, to realize that things we fought for are perilously close to being taken away, that anyone anywhere would not lock away a cold-blooded killer and throw away the key. it chills me through. #scottroeder
     Reply
    LucilleMcGillicuddy was starred LucilleMcGillicuddy was unstarred
    Image of Zombie Ms. Skittles Zombie Ms. Skittles
    11/10/09

    In reply to Can Scott Roeder Really Use The "Necessity Defense?"
    This version of the necessity defense sounds like something out of Law & Order
    Actually, I believe it WAS an episode of Law & Order. Starring that guy who divorced Catherine Zeta Jones in "Intolerable Cruelty" but forgot to change his will and then died. It didn't work for him, either. #scottroeder
     Reply
    Zombie Ms. Skittles was starred Zombie Ms. Skittles was unstarred
    Image of GreyEminence GreyEminence
    11/10/09

    @Zombie Ms. Skittles: I remember that episode! The man was Lorelai's father from "Gilmore Girls", right? Phew. My encyclopedic knowledge of L&O really comes in handy for...commenting on blogs. #scottroeder
     Reply
    Zombie Ms. Skittles promoted this comment GreyEminence was starred GreyEminence was unstarred
    Image of Zombie Ms. Skittles Zombie Ms. Skittles
    11/10/09

    @GreyEminence: I think so. And it turned out at the end that the doctor had performed an abortion on his ex and he was pissed that she'd gotten one and that's why he did it. #scottroeder
     Reply
    Zombie Ms. Skittles was starred Zombie Ms. Skittles was unstarred
    Image of lilbobbytables lilbobbytables
    11/10/09

    In reply to Can Scott Roeder Really Use The "Necessity Defense?"
    Abortion is legal. Murder is not. No effing way. #scottroeder
     Reply
    lilbobbytables was starred lilbobbytables was unstarred
    Image of linnyt is a walking cliché linnyt is a walking cliché
    11/10/09

    In reply to Can Scott Roeder Really Use The "Necessity Defense?"
    I don't see how a necessity defense could be used against someone that was doing something legal. I'm not a lawyer though, and I don't play one on TV. #scottroeder
     Reply
    linnyt is a walking cliché was starred linnyt is a walking cliché was unstarred
    Image of Kitten is an 80s rocker Kitten is an 80s rocker
    11/10/09

    @linnyt is a walking cliché: but i did stay in a holiday inn express! #scottroeder
     Reply
    Maritsa promoted this comment Kitten is an 80s rocker was starred Kitten is an 80s rocker was unstarred
    Earlier discussions Other discussions Show all discussions Show featured discussions only Start a new discussion

Login

Enter your username and password.

Please enter a username.
Please enter your password.
logging in
Login via Facebook | Sign Up | Forgot Password?

Reset Password

Please enter your email address to have your password reset.

Please enter your email address.
Please enter a valid email address.
requesting password reset

Register

Registering will give you a user profile and the ability to add other users as friends. To become a commenter, however, you need to audition.

Want to know more? Consult the Comment FAQ and legal terms.

Please enter a username.
Please enter a password.
Please confirm your password.
Passwords are not identical.
Please enter a valid email address.
registration sent, waiting for reply

Submit Your Comment

You don't need to login to comment. Just enter your email address below.

See how your address will be displayed in the Comment FAQ.

Please enter a valid email address.
Please enter a valid email address.
logging in

Login with your Facebook or Jezebel account.

Sign up here.



  • Archives
  • About
  • Advertising
  • Legal
  • Help
  • Report a Bug
  • FAQ
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.