Re: Disney's Black Princess
It only took them about a quarter of a century to realize that maybe a Black princess would be a good idea? Wow.

Re: XXX Family Values
"For [her parents], Sunny's co-stars are her 'dates,' and they say they'd rather her have sex on a porn set than with a 'civilian' who might eventually break her heart." The hell?

Wow.
That Michigan high school is all of 20 minutes from my folks' place. That's a little upsetting.

Also, the duclod man story was really creepy, but also fantastic.

Is it bad that I think the duclod story would make a good book/ movie?

I, personally, am REALLY excited for Disney's the Frog Princess movie. I'm a Disney employee and from the information I've dug up it looks like they are pouring a ton of money and energies into this movie to create a true classic in the spirit of their older films which I can't wait for!

Yeah, its pretty sad that its taken this long to introduce a black princess but from the looks of things they are doing it right with a really wonderful movie deserving of the Princess.

Personally I'm glad to see it happening now when they are interested in breathing life back into their 2D animation with a big budget film verses years ago when they were cranking out ugly movies with weak storylines.

I'm excited for "The Frog Princess", too. I can't wait to see more illustrations - the style looks gorgeous.

I thought the article about female politicians and comedy was interesting, but I bristled at this particular quote:

"...a front-runner to take on the commander-in-Chanel role should Clinton win in November 2008"

Commander-in-Chanel? Jeezy. Because "woman" = "clothes". Or women are seen as more equipped to pick out a wardrobe than oversee a country. Funny how no-one makes a fuss about W.'s suit budget (between $2,000 and $14,000 per suit) and his penchant for $1,000 shoes.

(Yes, I know that was a relatively small part to pick at from an entire article, but I only have so much time!)

Eek. The duclod story freaked me out (and yes, mimo, I think it would make a good story). For one thing, I live in central MA, and I work in a store where one of my regular customers is a middle-aged man who comes up to me all the time and says stuff like "You know, I tell at least 3 lies a day."

Creepy. I'm sure it's not the same guy though.

I started writing this reply to the post on WHN about the pelvic exam/rapes, but it got so involved I figured I would post it on my own blog, which I never did. I posted my reply on WHN today, and I will repost it here:

I trained as a midwife for two years, and am now a medical school applicant planning on doing family practice with obstetrics.

The ethics (or, should I say, complete lack of ethics) underlying doing a pelvic exam on an anesthetized patient without any clinical relevance to their case for instruction purposes, to me, is a clear issue. Informed consent, always. In fact, some online discussions of this have correctly pointed out that a pelvic exam without consent violates many rape statues.

However, I primarily want to discuss the educational experience.

I think doing a vaginal exam on a dummy like those is almost as useless as doing one on an anesthetized patient. I have seen and used a similar product in classes, and it is nothing like the real thing.

First of all, it is overwhelming for most new students to overcome the newness and all the associated baggage (of the student AND the patient) of asking a patient to disrobe, seeing a vagina (and they really really do vary in shapes and sizes and decoration) and then inserting their fingers into the vagina.

Do they ask permission? Do they put the patient at ease? What terms do they use for the vagina? Do they touch the patient on another part of their body first, like an arm or shoulder, before putting on the gloves?

Have they checked the chart to see if this patient has disclosed a past of sexual abuse? How about infectious disease?

Do they know to warm the speculum in their gloved hand first while explaining what the procedure will entail and why they are doing it? Do they remember to use lubricant? To turn the speculum to one side as it inserts, but to watch the thighs? To not press on a woman's clitoris or rectum with the speculum or the knuckles?

Are they looking for scars, bruises, infections, smells, veins, or any other clues?

If a woman is not awake, she will not tense up as many do. If she doesn't have a gynecological issue to which a pelvic exam would be relevant as a diagnostic tool, which they most likely DON�T because they are there for unrelated surgeries, this is not going to train these doctors-to-be to diagnose pathologies. What would train them would be to do an appropriate Ob/Gyn rotation in which they saw live patients and observed and participated in true medical education.

re: Linda Hirshman, check out the response she posted to her personal blog: http://www.gettoworkmanifesto.com/blog/2007/03/i_make_ex_lawyer_mommybloggers.html

To summarize, Hirshman personally attacks the individual "Punditmom" who named her cringeworthy because: (a) Punditmom went to a public college; (b) Punditmom decided to become a SAHM; and (c) blogging isn't a real vocation. According to Hirshman, individuals who go to state financed schools and don't apply their education in a vocational sense owe the taxpaying public a refund. Wacko alert. Which is fine, because the blogosphere is full of wackos. But she invokes feminism in support of her views, which makes her a dangerous wacko.

I could give two farts about Linda Hirshman herself, but the piece in which she was labeled "cringe-worthy" made ME do a lot more than CRINGE. I have never seen such badly-written SHIT on anything other than a (usually very) personal webpage in my LIFE. I actually registered with MSN.com just to post this on the message board about the article:

"I don't really have the energy to care about this list. Some of the choices I agreed with, some of them I disagreed with, but all in all, I really, honestly don't care. Do you know why?

Because Joanne Cronrath Bamberger, whoever she is, is a terrible writer. Terrible. Barely a single sentence in this headache-inducing piece was without an egregious spelling or grammatical error. This piece is an embarrassment to the website it appears on and to everyone connected with it in any way. For God's sake, spend the extra money for a proofreader or copyeditor if you're going to hire such "writers"!

This is completely aside from the 'content'/commentary -- which, by the way, is awful, unoriginal tripe. There's not a single thing in the piece that is surprising, or thought-provoking, or new. (Is 'Joanne Cronrath Bamberger' not a person, but a sham? Was this article actually generated by a poorly written computer program? I honestly had that thought. I promise, I'm not joking.)

Please, whoever was responsible for putting this **** out there for the public to see on your website should be fired. And, assuming the errors are hers, no one should ever use this freelance writer again. Put her on your do-not-call list."

I thoroughly enjoyed the work/life issue of American Prospect, including the article authored by Ann. And a tip, if it hasn't hit your radar: Washington state is considering paid FMLA. See link: http://www.babble.com/CS/blogs/strollerderby/archive/2007/03/16/momsrising-lobbies-washington-state-legislators-for-paid-family-leave.aspx If Washington state acts, maybe Congress will start to pay attention. We can only hope.

As far as the Frog Princess goes, it's a bit too late for me to enjoy it but I'll be happy for my niece to have something to see.

The parents running their porn star daughter's career was creepy.

Re: Disney's Black Princess

The lead "princess" is a chambermaid, there's a pair of voodoo practitioners, a plantation owner, a singing alligator, Randy Newman is doing the score (Stevie Wonder wasn't free? Babyface? Prince?) ...and the prince is white.

Eeeeee-yup, definitely a "must miss" for the whole family.

I was shocked this morning that the conservative Chicago Tribune got crisis pregnancy centers right on their front page:

To foes, pregnancy sites blur the abortion picture. Crisis pregnancy centers offer alternatives to abortion, but critics say they are misleading

They tend to spin everything in the GOP's favor.

Evil Potato ... you must have a bad browser.