It is in your body. Therefore, you have the right to have it removed if you don't want it there.

yeah, but it has a penis so forget it.

That? Is so bloody absurd that it's destined to be one of my favorite comments ever.

I'm trying really hard not to make this bitchy comment but I can't resist.

‹bitchy comment› Her idea that a fetus growing inside of you isn't part of you if it's male neither surprises nor alarms me in the least. After all, I don't put too much stock in someone who can't differentiate between for and fore.‹/bitchy comment›

Stunning. From the insane stupidity of the email to the comic genius of the headline, this might be the perfect post. You have outdone yourself, Jessica. Bravo! :)

Every part of a woman has to be a woman?!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_division

:p

Haven't they ever heard of hermaphrodites? Sheesh!

So then, when does it become "not yours"? Is it not yours when it is conceived, or when you can see the teensy penis in the sonograms?

Aren't all fetuses basically female until about the 6th week when the little peeny kicks in?

Qusan: given that these eventually-male fetuses are already XY, does it mean that they're transgendered for the first six weeks? Coming to think of it, does it mean all males are transgendered beginning in week 6 of the pregnancy?

Ok, so this person:

1. can't spell and is not familiar with English grammar

2. has no knowledge of human biology (maybe this has something to do with being taught intelligent design in science class, or something)

I cannot believe the extent of the ignorance of this comment!

i have to step away from y'all on this one. i think the writer really brought up a brilliant koan for us all to consider.

in truth, we are all one body, one spirit...

"How can it be a part of your body if it is a male?"

how, too, can you be part of me if you are you?

really, this is the strongest argument for protecting the right to choose, for, if you are part of me and i part of you, we need to trust in one another's abilities to make principled decisions and we need to respect those decisions.

sometimes, the buddha speaks through people from whom we would never expect to hear the buddha's voice. this comment, at once, exemplified ignorance and the essential wisdom of being.

give thanks!

I think the study sounds interesting, but the BBC article annoyed me when they quoted an activist: "Increasingly, credible evidence appears to indicate that being gay is genetically determined rather than being a so-called lifestyle choice."

This study doesn't show a genetic link. It shows an environmental link. The BBC should stop trying to melt our brains with bad science!

The narrative frame of Dorian Gray is perhaps of as much interest as the picture frame. As I began by observing, the narrative describes an act of framing, moving from the unframed portrait on the artist’s easel to the framed portrait on its owner’s wall. As Mary Ann Caws has noted about literary frames, “the distance from the earlier tendency toward the isolation of a picture or a scene as framed to stand out from the rest, or to stand still in the center of the narrative flux, to the later thrust toward the notion of the frame itself as the principal object of interest, represents the distance from premodernism to modernism at its height.” Modern literature foregrounds its narrative frame and structure over its content or theme, and the same emphasis holds true in the development of picture frames. In Wilde’s novel the two teleologies of framing coincide: the novel’s narrative frame tells of how a picture frame determines the story’s shape, and the novel’s picture frame(s) represent the main character’s narrative journey from art to life. The narrative frame points to the picture frame, and the picture frame points to the narrative. Both types of frame are as modest as frames prefer to be, always pointing elsewhere—to a picture, to a moral, to any alibi that will distract from their critical power to mark the limits of art.

The narrative frame of Dorian Gray is perhaps of as much interest as the picture frame. As I began by observing, the narrative describes an act of framing, moving from the unframed portrait on the artist’s easel to the framed portrait on its owner’s wall. As Mary Ann Caws has noted about literary frames, “the distance from the earlier tendency toward the isolation of a picture or a scene as framed to stand out from the rest, or to stand still in the center of the narrative flux, to the later thrust toward the notion of the frame itself as the principal object of interest, represents the distance from premodernism to modernism at its height.” Modern literature foregrounds its narrative frame and structure over its content or theme, and the same emphasis holds true in the development of picture frames. In Wilde’s novel the two teleologies of framing coincide: the novel’s narrative frame tells of how a picture frame determines the story’s shape, and the novel’s picture frame(s) represent the main character’s narrative journey from art to life. The narrative frame points to the picture frame, and the picture frame points to the narrative. Both types of frame are as modest as frames prefer to be, always pointing elsewhere—to a picture, to a moral, to any alibi that will distract from their critical power to mark the limits of art.