Sharron Angle is a former Nevada Assemblywoman who is currently vying for Harry Reid’s Senate spot.

She is batshit crazy.

Among her many, many strong views, you will find an agreement with L. Ron Hubbard’s “natural medicine” take when it comes to curing addiction (if America votes a Scientologist into any kind of political office, I really am leaving. And not just the ole’ “I’ll move to Canada” sentiment we all tossed around when Sarah Palin become a Vice Presidential candidate. I would seriously move to Toronto. It’s lovely and clean there) and the belief that people on unemployment are “spoiled.”

But lil Miss Sharron over there is also very much pro-life. Cool—everyone has a right to their own opinion. Except when that opinion includes forcing victims of incest to see the bright side of their unfortunate pregnancy. Yay! Here’s that delightful snippet from Crazy Town’s interview on the Alan Stock Show.

Stock: What do you say then to a young girl, I am going to place it as he said it, when a young girl is raped by her father, let’s say, and she is pregnant. How do you explain this to her in terms of wanting her to go through the process of having the baby?

Angle: I think that two wrongs don’t make a right. And I have been in the situation of counseling young girls, not 13 but 15, who have had very at risk, difficult pregnancies. And my counsel was to look for some alternatives, which they did. And they found that they had made what was really a lemon situation into lemonade.

Oh, gosh, of COURSE! We’ve all been looking at this the wrong way! Here I was thinking that any victim of rape or incest who then has to deal with an unwanted pregnancy as a result is dealing with one of the worst kinds of horror imaginable. Little did I know that all it takes to turn things around is a little positivity. A wee bit o’ sunshine, if you will. Take that “bitter” hand you’ve been dealt and turn it into a sweet and delicious treat!

Listen, if you’re of the mindset who believes that abortion is wrong in every single case, even for victims of rape and incest, more power to you. I wholeheartedly disagree but you have a right to your own opinion. But don’t you DARE patronize victims and liken the unimaginable torment they’ve endured to a simple bad day that you can turn around on a dime.

Sharron Angle disgusts me and I feel absolutely ashamed to even share a gender with her. But what’s more disheartening to me is the fact that there are many people out there who agree with her. People who have never been touched by tragedy even comparable to rape or sexual abuse and yet deem themselves righteous enough to speak on behalf of those victims. I can’t even imagine what it is to be a victim of such a crime, let alone have to deal with a pregnancy from it afterwards (and for those hospital personnel who refuse the morning-after pill to victims of rape because of “morality issues”, you are also the subject of much of my loathing), so why do so many other people presume to?

Why do we live in a country where front-page headlines showcase that it’s seemingly more acceptable to judge such victims and their subsequent actions, instead of supporting them whole-heartedly through every single step of their long and arduous recovery process? Why do parents spend more time teaching their children to become embodiments of the black-and-white sides of the argument (“You are Pro-Life!” “You are Pro-Choice”) instead of equipping them with the knowledge, skills, and emotional maturity it takes to fully empathize with people who have been abused, raped, etc?

I don’t have children. Maybe one day I will or maybe I won’t. But if I ever do, I will take a cue from my parents who taught me that idealistic beliefs, religious convictions, and the like are never as important as empathy and human kindness—and the ability to realize that you don’t know it all.

So, just shut the fuck up Sharron Angle and please return back to whatever demon underworld  you came from.

I stumbled upon this fantastic article from a friend’s Facebook posting this morning. (Facebook is good for something after all!) Author Starre Vartan takes a stand on the all too often used label of “real women” for plus-sized gals. She suggests that this label may be more damaging to women than empowering, which is certainly not its intent. But think about it, if we consider “plus-size” or “curvy” women to be “real” than what are we calling thinner ladies? Not Real. That’s neither true nor fair. Yet this “real women” phrase comes up more and more in an attempt to encourage larger women to take pride in their bodies.

Don’t get us wrong, we love when women take pride in themselves regardless of shape or size, but it’s important to do that without indirectly putting another group of women down. Girl C and I have both grown up on the slimmer side of the scale and feel thinner women get a bad rap sometimes. Call it luck, call it genetics, call it whatever you like but we assure you we are authentic women. Plus-size ladies are undoubtedly underrepresented in the media – that is the issue we should be addressing here instead of using this “real women” label in retaliation.
We all have so much pressure on us as females to look and act a certain way and we really should be empowering each other without slighting others in the process. We talk about girls being pitted against each other a lot here at Girl Hate and Vartan mentions it in her article as well:

Throughout the history of feminism, we’ve seen groups of women pitted against each other, whether it was the old conflict between Flappers and more traditional ladies in the 1920′s, or the newer conflicts between foreign-born nannies and their upper-middle class employers. The best way forward is to work together of course, and support the idea that ALL bodies are beautiful

We couldn’t have said it better ourselves!

I just wanted to preface this post but saying that I’m not a fan of the Twilight book series or the movies, nor am I fan of any particular actor in the movies. To go even further, I am not a big fan of Kristen Stewart. I’ve had the “pleasure” of meeting her before for my day job and I found her to be a rude young girl. However, it was the type of rudeness that is evident in oh so many teenage girls so I’m going to give her the benefit of the doubt and hope that she has grown out of it because I do see potential in her as an actress. However, I will say this: rudeness does not equal “keeping it real” as many of KStew’s biggest fans claim. You can actually be pleasant without being fake. This ends my tirade.

And now I shall rush to her defense! (Sort of). A few weeks ago, Kristen Stewart caught some major flack for comparing the paparazzi intrusion in her life to rape. Was it an incredibly stupid comment? Of course. Should she have thought about her words a bit more before saying it. Absolutely. But do I really think the girl meant to trivialize rape in any way? No I do not. (In fact, Kristen gave a very moving performance as a rape victim in the movie Speak, based on the YA novel. Check it out if you have chance).

Kristen has since apologized profusely for the comment after coming under major fire for it, as she should have. However, the subject was brought up again in a recent Entertainment Weekly interview with Kristen and her co-star Rob Pattinson, and it took an interesting turn.

You got a lot of criticism recently for comparing the intrusiveness of the paparazzi to rape. The comment got blown out of proportion very quickly, and you apologized.
STEWART: I’m so sensitive about stuff like that. That is the one subject that means a lot to me. I made one movie directly concerning it [2004's Speak], and I made another one where my character has a horrible history of rape [2010's Welcome to the Rileys]. I talked to a lot of people about it. I used the wrong word. I should have said “violated.” But I’m young and emotional. It’s just the way it goes sometimes. I probably shouldn’t say this, but I just feel like people got so excited once they saw that it was me. It was like, “Sweet! Let’s get her!” And then for the people to exploit it under the guise of being morally upstanding is disgusting — and it embarrassed me because I was a part of it.

Did you see it all unfold and then think, I have to issue an apology?
STEWART: No, I was in Korea when it all got bad. My publicist called me and said RAINN had issued this terrible statement.
ROBERT PATTINSON: Who’s Rain?
STEWART: You know, the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network.
PATTINSON: None of those associations came out and gave a statement [criticizing Kristen] without being called upon by the media first — who were doing it specifically to get hits on their websites. That whole system of Internet journalists, where no one is called to account, is almost entirely about hate. All these people get away with doing it because they have no responsibility to anyone. All they need is to get a salacious headline and people click on it, because it’s easy. And it’s quite good being part of these Twilight films because you have to give so many interviews all the time, you can defend yourself. That’s the only way. All of us stick together, as well. There are so many little nerds behind their computers, on their little blogs.
STEWART: See, if I said that? Crucifixion. You can say so much more than me. It’s insane.
PATTINSON: That’s not true at all. When did I say anything [controversial]?
STEWART: You’re really good, but you could say, “I just took a s***on the Queen’s face,” and people would be like, “Oh, I love him! I love him!”

Point taken KStew. And I do happen to agree with her on this one. Hottie of the moment Robert Pattinson could probably say almost anything at this point and not be reprimanded for it by the media or fans but it’s a very different story for Kristen—or any woman in the spotlight for that matter.

I’m not suggesting that men are not also sometimes brought into question over comments made in the media or that women should be able to say whatever the hell they want, with no consequence. I only raise the issue to bring up the question of whether or not the world (and females, specifically) cut men more slack when it comes to outlandish comments. And I also wonder about the reasons behind it.

Does it all just fall under the “It’s A Man’s World” philosophy, where men get away with so much more than women do? Or does it have something to do with the fact that we would expect a woman to harbor more sensitivity about potentially hurtful comments, such as rape?

Kristen’s comment was wrong and a retraction of her statement plus an apology was needed in this circumstance. But in my world, I would expect ANY man to treat sensitive subjects such as this with as much sensitivity as any woman. Why are men patted on the back when they tell a rape joke (and trust me, I heard them ALL the time from guys in college and as recently as a few months ago from a 45 year old man) but a woman who compared a different sort of violation to rape is condemned?

Penny for your thoughts? I’d love to hear other people’s takes on the subject.

The New York Post’s film critic, Kyle Smith, went on a political rant today titled: Obama vs. New York City. In it, he spews the usual Post-style whining about taxes and healthcare from a New Yorker’s perspective. We’re not entirely sure why a film critic is getting significant opinion column space to discuss this, but we’re confused by a lot of things the Post does so whatever. What really stands out from this whole bizarre column is Mr. Smith’s lovely concluding paragraph:

Oh, you thought Obama was one of us, a Columbia grad and urban sophisticate? You’re like a dependent spouse. Every fresh bruise just proves how much he loves you.

Ah the Post. Keeping it classy as always! Way to belittle battered women everywhere with an asinine statement that has no place in politics. We get it GOP…you’re unhappy with this healthcare bill. The government is taking over! Socialist Nation! Taxes! Poor people getting your hard-earned money! We know your stance on this. And we even understand that you’ll continue making nasty comments about our President because he will be the “death of our country” and all. But domestic abuse is a very serious issue, and this comment is disgusting and completely irresponsible. It’s not cute or funny; it’s extremely insulting to women, especially victims of domestic violence. So great job Mr. Smith and the New York Post, you’ve once again proven why your newspaper is more known for its shoddy journalism and sensationalism than accuracy and detailed fact.

Bxth don’t come at Chris Brown like that.! Fuck you and this bullshitty ass website.!

We assume that first word is supposed to be “bitch.” And our response to this comment is as follows.

We will “come at” Chris Brown as often and as many times as we’d like. The only reason we approved your comment was to show off its ridiculousness to anybody else who happens to be reading. When you beat a woman to a bloody pulp and then expect your fans and the public to forget it as if it were no big deal, you deserve everyone in the world to “come at you” every single day. Just as you are entitled to your opinion, we are entitled to ours. And our opinion is that Chris Brown is a whiny scumbag who deserves to be in jail (as do all women beaters).

But thanks so much for your comment!

Love,

The writers of this “bullshitty ass website”

The interview below (which is hosted by two sane people in agreement with us, btw. Actual Fox interview starts about ten seconds in) is two annoying women on that hellish network picking apart Lady’s Gaga’s “degrading” new music video for her song “Telephone.” (BTW, we LOVEEEE the video. It’s pure brilliance and we’re ecstatic to see someone in music trying to bring back the era of artful music videos). Anyway, these repressed wenches go on and on about how she’s hurting the children and our society, blah blah blah.

Some gems from the interview include:

[The video has] Beyonce and Gaga has gay, lesbian lovers. It’s disgusting.

GASP! Not…not…LESBIANS! Shield your children’s eyes! The lesbians are coming! It doesn’t seem like Beyonce had any problem with playing the role despite her “traditional” and “real” marriage to a man. And please explain to us what the problem would be if both Lady Gaga and Beyonce really were lesbians? That would be a FIERCE couple, just sayin’.

This is poison for the minds of our kids and for our minds too.

If this is poison, we’ll glady keep drinking the Kool-aid! And since Lady Gaga doesn’t profess her music to be for children in the first place, why don’t you be a fkn’ parent and monitor what they’re watching yourself?

But here comes our fave part! When the ladies try to link Lady Gaga’s video to sexual predators. Yay!

The men who do these things to young girls, something like 85% of them, are involved in some sort of porn. So you may not watch it, your kids may not watch it, but I’m telling you that the man next door who is a sexual predator probably does watch it. And it has an effect on all of us. This should be outlawed, this should be banned.

Um, hate to break it to you Sandy, but if you’re suggesting that most men who watch porn are also out to rape woman and little children, then you better be packing heat with you at ALL times because almost every single male in America watches porn. Many women watch porn as well. Some couples even watch it together (Scandalous!) Yes, 85% of sexual predators may have admitted to watching porn, but various studies have shown that up to 88% of ALL men admit to watching porn—and almost every day (the number has varied for women, anywhere from 25% to 66% have admitted to it). If 85% of sexual predators admitted to eating bananas every day, are we going to assume there’s a link and ban bananas too? Whatever your feelings are about porn (it’s a healthy expression of sexuality unless it turns into obsession vs. it’s degrading and breeds unrealistic images of sex in men’s minds), we should all be in agreement that watching porn does not equal rapist.

And furthermore, can we just STOP perpetuating that myth that all men are these ticking rapist time bombs?! “They can BARELY suppress their sexuality as it is, and all it could take is someone flipping a simple rapist switch (like Lady Gaga perhaps!) to make them lose control!” Underlying theme: it’s not REALLY the rapist’s fault. This is just how men are. They need the sex! And when they watch porn, we shouldn’t really be surprised if they then go out and force themselves on women and children. It’s actually horribly insulting to all the good men out there.

Oh, and final thought: Lady Gaga and her music video are not porn. And if Sandy is having a hard time figuring out exactly what porn is, she should just check  her husband’s computer. That would clear it right up for her.

We’re not even putting a picture of this ugly bastard up here because looking at his face annoys us. We’re still not sure why this disgusting excuse for a man was allowed to run but at least the voters wised up and gave him the boot.

We’re sure this isn’t the last we’ve heard from Hiram, but we can hope…

In case you don’t know who she is, Erin Andrews is a sports reporter for ESPN. In July of last year, a video was released on the Internet showcasing a nude Erin Andrews. Nope, she was not just another pretty girl with a sex tape that was “accidentally” released—this video (and others like it) was taken through a peephole in Erin’s hotel rooms by a sick pervert and stalker named Michael David Barrett who was later arrested and just sentenced to 30 months in prison yesterday. (He also stalked and videotaped up to 16 other unsuspecting women as well).

Erin Andrews was understandably mortified when these videos emerged and has taken to various press outlets to talk about it and has, to our absolute approval, called out some of the assholes who have made comments that she somehow brought this upon herself.

One such asshole is Christine Brennan, a USA Today sports columnist who offered this lovely unwarranted douche-y advice to Erin:

She doesn’t deserve what happened to her, but part of the shtick, seems to me, is being a little bit out there in a way that then are you encouraging the complete nutcase to drill a hole in a room….I also would suggest to her … that she rely on her talent and brains and not succumb to the lowest common denominator in sports media by playing to the frat house.

Hey! Thanks for contributing to that “she deserved to get raped” mentality, Christine! Are you fucking kidding me with this? And of course, as Erin has admitted in various interviews, many other people (and women!) have expressed the same sentiments to her. Will this bullshit ever end??

Is Erin Andrews pretty? Of course she is. Is her career in front of a camera? Yes it is. Was there, at some point, a marketing team behind the decision to place an attractive girl in a sports reporter role on an network mainly watched by men? We’d be naive if we didn’t say yes.

But newsflash Christine Brennan (and the rest of the idiots out there who agree with her), almost every single woman who appears on television is attractive. I know, shocking, right? We can go on for days about how the media sells sex and that a woman needs not only talent but looks to succeed in the entertainment world, but honestly everyone with half a brain should realize this already.

It doesn’t matter that Erin Andrews is pretty or that she’s marketed as such for her role on TV. SHE DOESN’T DESERVE TO GET STALKED! We can’t even believe that this is actually a discussion. When a young starlet’s sex tape comes out, the world condemns her—and while that may not be fair either, you can understand a public’s lack of sympathy for that certain predicament. Erin Andrews was videotaped in her hotel room bathroom through a peephole. We can’t even imagine how violated she, and every other woman who has been a victim of a crime like this, feels and we commend the honesty and grace she’s exhibited throughout this whole nightmare.

Christine Brennan can suck it.

Because this cover is just too annoying to ignore.

OMG, Shiloh (beautiful child of Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt) has a short haircut! And are those…pants??? THE HORROR! Get Suri Cruise’s stylists over here immediately and give this little girl a lesson in inappropriate-for-the-weather sleeveless dresses, no outerwear, and kitten heels for 3-year-olds.

Let’s be honest here—I think everyone in the world has that inner moment of “Awww” when we see an adorable little girl in a cute little dress with pigtails. Some of these tiny clothes made for baby and toddler girls are too cute to even describe in words. And I should know—between my boyfriend and myself, we have 5 nieces (and 3 nephews) and more on the way. I’ve spent more time in children’s clothing stores in the last couple of years than any other person I know in my age bracket and I’ve squealed and giggled like the best of them at the doll-sized raincoats, satin dresses, and bathing suits.

And there is generally a pretty specific set of standards when it comes to clothing for little boys and girls. The girls get the dresses and skirts and leggings and ruffly sweaters. The boys get the argyle, button-up shirts, and corduroy pants. Even when you see jeans for little girls, they generally have flower decals on them or some sort of pink racing stripe down the sides that ease our minds and hearts as it assures us that “Yes, these pair of pants are definitely for your little girl.”

It’s not as though little boys and girls choose to wear these specific outfits when they’re 1 and 2 years old. You think your 1-year-old son really wants to wear a button-up? All of these outfits merely satisfy our desire to see our kids as miniature versions of ourselves. I’m a woman and I wear dresses so naturally I want to see my little girl in adorable little dresses as well.

And nothing’s wrong with that. Little girls have been wearing dresses since the beginning of time and there’s no reason to insist that should change anytime in the near future. However, as I’ve noticed personally, when a little girl hits that 3-ish age, they’ve already developed this amazing personality that’s all their own. They have certain foods they like, colors, TV shows, etc. My 3-year-old niece loves Disney princesses, the color pink, and baking with her aunt (and I’m all-too-happy to oblige), among other things. And to be honest, her mom (my sister) isn’t even entirely sure where those interests came from. In fact, my sister didn’t want to encourage her to like princesses or play dress-up at all—but she didn’t discourage it either.

And that’s really the main point here. Kids are going to like a variety of things and not all of those things are going to be something you necessarily encouraged. So, why is it that when a little girl likes dresses and dolls and princesses we “Aww!” and pat her on the head, but when she likes wearing pants and playing sports, we get concerned?

I don’t know Shiloh personally or her parents nor do I have any clue what their parenting is like. However, I do know that at 3-years-old, Shiloh is perfectly capable of expressing the types of clothing she likes to wear and even how she wants her hair to look. So what if she prefers wearing pants and having a short haircut?? I hated dolls as a little girl (much to my mother’s dismay) and preferred to play with Ninja Turtles and I turned out just fine, if I do say so myself.

I assume we’re not going to give up on our crazy obsession with celebrity children anytime soon but maybe we could stop pushing our pre-conceived notions on tiny children? Just because we’re desperate to see Shiloh grow up into the most gorgeous princess in all of the land because of her two genetically-gifted parents doesn’t mean we have to to turn into villagers with pitchforks when she denies us this by wearing pants and having short hair as a toddler.

We should be encouraging little girls to express themselves and their individuality however it turns out, because this is the age where they can be fully and freely themselves. Three year olds don’t worry about what other people think about them (besides seeking the normal approval from their parents and loved ones, of course). They don’t know how to be self-conscious—but shit like this cover story insinuates that they should be self-conscious. Thank god Shiloh can’t read yet.

This kind of article only succeeds in perpetuating the scrutiny our society places on women—except it’s even worse this time because they’re extending it to toddler aged girls. One can only hope that the dying magazine industry will seek to claim another victim in Life & Style ::Crosses fingers::

Now please excuse me—my other niece Angelina (how appropriate) is running around in pants (for the third day in a row!), short hair, sneakers and playing with a soccer ball. I must put an end to this immediately.

Houston doesn’t want to have only firemen on their force – they want fire women too. Camp Houston Fire is a biannual 2-week long program where participants learn the ins and outs of fighting fires. It’s a new effort to recruit more females to the profession, as currently only 100 of Houston’s 3,900 firefighters are women. The HFD faced discrimination allegations last summer, and hopes to make amends by getting more young women interested. The program is free, and participants get to not only learn more about the job, they get to practice the physical requirements that are often challenging for both genders.

If nothing else, it seems to be a positive self-esteem booster for young Houston women. 18-year-old Andreina Rodriguez told the Houston Chronical:

“I like knowing I can do what men can do. I’m not weak”

We think that’s pretty cool!