Watch me on BBC, Canada AM, WGN, and CNN!

Boobquake is almost upon us, which means the media is super interested in covering the end of the world. I just thought I’d let you know what shows I’ll be appearing on in the next twenty four hours, since they’re… uh, kind of huge. And if you need more motivation to watch, yes, I’ll be showing cleavage – at least as much as is appropriate for TV.

4/25:
11:10 pm WGN Radio Chicago – The Nick Digilio Show – Audio here!

4/26:
In the morning in your part of the world – BBC World Service – The World Today

7:00 am Canada AM – Video here!

9:00 am WGN Morning News

5 – 7 pm CNN – The Situation Room (I swear to FSM I’m not making these things up)

I’m also being interviewed by The Young Turks tomorrow night at 9 pm, but I’m not sure when it’ll be online.

For those at the epicenter of boobquake (West Lafayette, IN), we’re going to have a meeting on campus mainly so news outlets have something to videotape (information here). I know that Fox59 Indianapolis, WRTV6 Indianapolis, CBC TV, and WLFI Channel 18 will be there, and who knows who else. I also know that BBC Persia will be covering boobquake, with footage of the gathering in Washington DC and interviews with me, but I don’t know when it’ll be on. Keep an eye out for all of these things!

Head of Iran’s Guardian Council supports Sedighi’s earthquake hypothesis

When I first conceived my boobquake experiment, I thought I was testing the claims of a single man who had failed to think scientifically. But now someone higher up in the Iranian government is supporting Sedighi’s hypothesis – Ahmad Jannati, “longtime head of the ultra-conservative Guardian Council, which vets all laws and political candidates for office.” The LA Times reports:

Ayatollah Ahmad Jannati might have thought he was clarifying remarks by his colleague, the cleric Kazem Sedighi, who suggested in a Friday prayer sermon a week ago that women who dress immodestly cause earthquakes by angering God.

Instead Jannati, who delivered the nation’s keynote sermon in the Iranian capital this Friday, reiterated the claim that human behavior causes — and can also prevent — earthquakes.

He told worshipers on Friday that while science cannot yet predict earthquakes, they can be spiritually prevented by repentance and prayer.

“We can avoid earthquakes if the faithful and devoted people pray to God,” Jannati said during the Friday sermon.

Ah, good thing I wasn’t grossly misinterpreting anything! Though for the sake of science, I hope people who believe this keep their repentance and prayers at normal levels on Monday. I don’t want any confounding variables ruining my study. And they shouldn’t either – wouldn’t they like to know if they’re right about women’s immodesty causing earthquakes?

On a more serious note, I love how since earthquakes are unpredictable, we must therefore conclude that they’re controlled by God. We understand how they occur, but it’s difficult to predict a location. Why? Because so many variables are constantly interacting with each other, and that sheer amount of complexity is incredibly difficult to model. Maybe one day we’ll have even more scientific knowledge and computing power to do so. But just because something is complex doesn’t mean we throw in the towel and yell “God did it!”

Of course, maybe God is making the earth rumble because he hates immodestly dressed women. That’s what makes Sedighi’s claim so wonderful – it actually is scientifically verifiable. And when someone makes ludicrous claims that can be tested, we should do so. Monday night I’ll do some statistics, and then we will have a better idea. Though it seems even Jannati has his doubts:

While Jannati called for prayer as a way of preventing earthquakes, he didn’t rule out using less celestial methods. “Officials precautionary moves to make homes quake-proof are appreciated,” he said.

Does he doubt the power of modesty to prevent earthquakes? Or does he doubt that women can easily be forced against their will to dress modestly?

Obligatory disclaimer: I in no way think that all Muslims or Iranians or theists agree with these two men. For all the rational thinkers out there who happen to fall into those groups, my mockery is not directed toward you.

Live interview in an hour!

This is incredibly late notice, but I will be talking live with Barry Lynn from Americans United for Separation of Church and State at 4pm EST at his radio show Culture Shocks. I’ll be on for about 20 minutes making a fool out of myself discussing boobquake and anti-women fundamentalists. Tune in!

EDIT: Sorry about that bit of miscommunication. My interview with Barry Lynn will air on Friday the 23rd at 4:30 PM! You can still catch it by going here then.

A quick clarification about Boobquake

Holy crap.

So what started as a joke and somewhat sarcastic reply to the ludicrous notion that women’s immodesty causes earthquakes has now exploded. Seriously, internet, you scare and amaze me sometimes. The Facebook event already has almost 14,000 attendees (and 60,000 invited) in just over 24 hours. The wall is getting comments so quickly that I had to disable Facebook email notifications because my inbox was getting flooded. The twitter stream for #boobquake is updating so quickly that I can’t keep up. To top that off, I just got interviewed by the largest newspaper in Canada and some radio station in Ireland wants to interview me.

Because I made a boob joke.

Since this is probably only going to get crazier in the next couple of days, I want to make a quick clarification. This post is going to be far shorter than it should be since I am a student and I’m trying to finish homework and such, but I wanted to at least acknowledge what people are saying.

I just want to apologize if this comes off as demeaning toward women. To be honest, it started as silly joke that I hurriedly fired off since I was about to miss the beginning of House. I never thought it would get the attention it did. If I would have known, I would have spent more time being careful about my wording.

That being said, I don’t think the event is completely contrary to feminist ideals. I’m asking women to wear their most “immodest” outfit that they already would wear, but to coordinate it all on the same day for the sake of the experiment. Heck, just showing an ankle would be considered immodest by some people. I don’t want to force people out of their comfort zones, because I believe women have the right to choose how they want to dress. Please don’t pressure women to participate if they don’t want to. If men ogle, that’s the fault of the men, not me for dressing how I like. If I want to a show a little cleavage or joke about my boobs, that’s my prerogative.

I also hate the ideal of “big boobs are always better!” The cleavage joke was just a result of me personally having cleavage, and that being my choice of immodesty. And I thought “boobquake” just sounded funny. Really, it’s not supposed to be serious activism that is going to revolutionize women’s rights, but just a bit of fun juvenile humor. I’m a firm believer that when someone says something so stupid and hateful, serious discourse isn’t going to accomplish anything – sometimes light-hearted mockery is worthwhile.

Anyway, I’m not forcing anyone to agree with me. Maybe I am failing at Feminism 101, or maybe I’m just taking a different approach.

And to the scientists who are concerned with my methods – don’t worry, I fully plan on doing some statistics after the event. I know many earthquakes happen on a daily basis, so we’re looking to see if Boobquake significantly increases the number or severity of earthquakes. Or if an earthquake strikes West Lafayette, IN and only kills me, that may be good evidence of God’s wrath as well (I’m not too concerned). And yes, I know I need a larger sample size to make this good science. Maybe I’ll include Mardi gras in my calculations.

Apparently having sex means I'm weak and dependent

Sex negativity in the media no longer shocks me, but I have to say I’m surprised who it’s coming from – Lady Gaga. Yep, apparently you can parade around mostly naked, dance around naked and make out with girls in your music videos, have songs about sex, but then still take the moral high road of abstinence.

The worse part is that it’s one of those articles that starts off very nice, then kicks you when you’re not looking:

The 24-year-old singer who’s made a career with songs that glorify carnal pleasures told London’s that she is currently under a self-imposed sex ban and that others should consider a similar posture.

“I can’t believe I’m saying this — don’t have sex. I’m single right now and I’ve chosen to be single because I don’t have the time to get to know anybody,” she said while visiting England to help promote MAC’s Viva Glam campaign, which supports global HIV and AIDS projects. “So it’s OK not to have sex, it’s OK to get to know people. I’m celibate, celibacy’s fine.”

Gaga said her celibacy is something she wants to “celebrate” with her fans, extending her oft-repeated message to her “little monsters” that they should be secure in their own skin and not shy away from being different.

“It’s OK to be whomever it is that you want to be,” she said. “You don’t have to have sex to feel good about yourself, and if you’re not ready, don’t do it. And if you are ready, there are free condoms given away at my concerts when you’re leaving!

Okay, that’s totally fine. In fact, I agree. You shouldn’t be forced or pressured to have sex if you don’t want to. You should take measures to avoid disease, and one way is abstinence – if you actually follow it. Many people fail, but at least Lady Gaga is reasonable and pro-contraception. And while I don’t think everyone has to do this, I personally think it’s a good idea to get to know someone before doing the deed. You don’t need to be soulmates, but at least know the person isn’t a stalker or serial killer.

But then, it rapidly goes downhill:

“I remember the cool girls when I was growing up. Everyone started to have sex. But it’s not really cool anymore to have sex all the time. It’s cooler to be strong and independent.”

…Fuck you, Lady Gaga.

Abstaining from sex does not automatically make you strong and independent, nor (as the quote implies) does having sex make you weak and dependent. You know what makes you strong and independent? Being able to make whatever goddamn choice you want about your own sexuality. Being pressured into abstinence because God or a pop idol told you does not make you strong or independent.

Oh, and kudos on the slut shaming. Having sex all the time isn’t cool. You know what? I have sex all the time because I like having sex. In fact, I wish I got more sex. I’m not trying to impress anyone or conform to societal norms; I just like fucking every once in a while. What a shame that you don’t understand that concept – the sex you did have must not have been that fulfilling if you were just doing it to fit in.

The ultimate irony is that she says you shouldn’t have sex to try to be cool and fit in…but then argues that it’s cooler to not have sex, thus using the same sort of peer pressure. Wonderful logic.

Apparently having sex means I’m weak and dependent

Sex negativity in the media no longer shocks me, but I have to say I’m surprised who it’s coming from – Lady Gaga. Yep, apparently you can parade around mostly naked, dance around naked and make out with girls in your music videos, have songs about sex, but then still take the moral high road of abstinence.

The worse part is that it’s one of those articles that starts off very nice, then kicks you when you’re not looking:

The 24-year-old singer who’s made a career with songs that glorify carnal pleasures told London’s that she is currently under a self-imposed sex ban and that others should consider a similar posture.

“I can’t believe I’m saying this — don’t have sex. I’m single right now and I’ve chosen to be single because I don’t have the time to get to know anybody,” she said while visiting England to help promote MAC’s Viva Glam campaign, which supports global HIV and AIDS projects. “So it’s OK not to have sex, it’s OK to get to know people. I’m celibate, celibacy’s fine.”

Gaga said her celibacy is something she wants to “celebrate” with her fans, extending her oft-repeated message to her “little monsters” that they should be secure in their own skin and not shy away from being different.

“It’s OK to be whomever it is that you want to be,” she said. “You don’t have to have sex to feel good about yourself, and if you’re not ready, don’t do it. And if you are ready, there are free condoms given away at my concerts when you’re leaving!

Okay, that’s totally fine. In fact, I agree. You shouldn’t be forced or pressured to have sex if you don’t want to. You should take measures to avoid disease, and one way is abstinence – if you actually follow it. Many people fail, but at least Lady Gaga is reasonable and pro-contraception. And while I don’t think everyone has to do this, I personally think it’s a good idea to get to know someone before doing the deed. You don’t need to be soulmates, but at least know the person isn’t a stalker or serial killer.

But then, it rapidly goes downhill:

“I remember the cool girls when I was growing up. Everyone started to have sex. But it’s not really cool anymore to have sex all the time. It’s cooler to be strong and independent.”

…Fuck you, Lady Gaga.

Abstaining from sex does not automatically make you strong and independent, nor (as the quote implies) does having sex make you weak and dependent. You know what makes you strong and independent? Being able to make whatever goddamn choice you want about your own sexuality. Being pressured into abstinence because God or a pop idol told you does not make you strong or independent.

Oh, and kudos on the slut shaming. Having sex all the time isn’t cool. You know what? I have sex all the time because I like having sex. In fact, I wish I got more sex. I’m not trying to impress anyone or conform to societal norms; I just like fucking every once in a while. What a shame that you don’t understand that concept – the sex you did have must not have been that fulfilling if you were just doing it to fit in.

The ultimate irony is that she says you shouldn’t have sex to try to be cool and fit in…but then argues that it’s cooler to not have sex, thus using the same sort of peer pressure. Wonderful logic.

My professor's Holocaust story

Today is Holocaust Remembrance Day. On Friday our newspaper ran a piece about the upcoming Greater Lafayette Holocaust Remembrance Conference, which featured the story of one of my former professors here at Purdue. As a former student, her story was especially touching to me, but I thought all of you would enjoy it. I’ve added some more information in sparse parts, taken from here.

Anna Berkovitz had a normal childhood until 1944. Now, years later, she still has nightmares of her family being taken from their home by the Nazis.

“I was 13 years old at the time when I was taken with my family to Auschwitz, just before D-Day,” said Berkovitz, Purdue Professor Emerita of biology.

At the concentration camp, Berkovitz and her family faced grim odds of survival. Six hundred thousand Hungarian Jews entered the camp between May and September of 1944. In just three months, 500,000 were killed.

“The killing machine was so effective that names were not even taken when we arrived.”

Berkovitz’s grandparents, aunts, uncle, cousin and probably her father were among the victims of the genocide conducted by the Nazis.

Her survival, as Berkovitz says, can only be accounted for by a series of miracles. …

Anna and Elizabeth were taken to Camp-C in Birkenau. To this day Anna ponders how she survived six months of brutal treatment, harsh conditions, starvation and disease there.

In November 1944, Anna and Elizabeth were transferred to a slave labor camp near Magdeburg, Germany, where they were put to work in an underground ammunition factory. Ten days prior to the end of World War II, they were liberated by the Swedish Red Cross and taken to Sweden, where they spent three months in a sanatorium recovering from malnutrition and physical and emotional traumas. …

This year, Berkovitz will be attending the conference, but participating in these events brings personal pain.

“It’s very difficult for me … to me it’s just like it happened yesterday, so I don’t need a conference to remember.”

Still, Berkovitz recognizes and even asserts the necessity of the conference and sees participating as a duty.

“I think I owe it to the people who died to be remembered.”

Berkovitz’s story does not end in Sweden; rather, her rescue from tyranny marks the start of a new journey that defies the unthinkable trauma of the Holocaust.

In Sweden, Berkovitz maintains that she suffered from no depression or bitterness and looked forward to the future.

“I could have lived my life as a victim, but I did not,” she said. …

In April 1946, Anna and Elizabeth emigrated to the United States. They arrived in Los Angeles pennyless and not speaking English. In order to resume her schooling, Anna worked as an au-pair for several years. During this time she completed four years of high school and four years of college, graduating from U.C.L.A. in January 1952 with a B.S. degree in bacteriology and with Phi Beta Kappa and magna cum laude honors. While working as a laboratory technician, Anna met Leonard Berkovitz, who was then a post-doctoral fellow at Caltech. They were married in June 1953, and their sons Dan and Kenneth were born in 1956 and 1960, respectively. During this period Anna worked part time in various cancer research laboratories.

In 1962 Leonard accepted a position at Purdue University, and the family moved to West Lafayette, Indiana. When Kenneth was in kindergarten, Anna decided to continue her formal education. She was accepted as a graduate student in the biology department at Purdue University. She was working on her Ph.D. thesis when, in 1967, she was asked to take a temporary teaching position to fill an unexpected vacancy in the department. This temporary position turned into a lifetime career of teaching, and while Anna never obtained her Ph.D., she earned a tenured position from which she retired in 2003 as Professor Emerita in Biology.

Anna’s efforts as a teacher, her dedication to her students and to the discipline were amply recognized by her students, colleagues and the administration. She was selected by the students as one of the Top Ten Outstanding Teachers in the School of Science 14 times, she received the Murphy Award, the top recognition of teaching excellence by the University, and was given the Chiscon Award for outstanding teaching performance by the Biology department. Anna was elected to the Teaching Academy at Purdue and her name is in the Purdue Book of Great Teachers.

In her retirement Anna has more time to travel, attend theater, to be active in her Temple, and to winter in California. But, what she most enjoys is still interacting with young people, be it her own five grandchildren or students at the University. She currently participates in the University Honors Program, where she developed a new course, “The New Genetics – New Perspectives, New Dilemmas,” which she teaches in the Fall semesters. …

Marveling at her accomplishments for the time – raising a family while entering a competitive career field as woman when it was rare – Berkovitz attributes much of her drive to a belief that humanity was good. Only a small group of evil was responsible for her painful experiences.

“Unfortunately, now I see that there are still evil groups of people in the world killing or wanting to kill innocent people just because they are different from what they are,” she said. …

Though Berkovitz’s story is one of inspiration, she still bears emotional scars.

“I have recurring nightmares that I’m told that I have to pack up and leave home … that’s part of me; that’s part of my existence.”

Preventing scars such as these in others is a duty for Berkovitz; an obligation driving her to participate in programs such as the Holocaust Remembrance Conference.

“It’s very relevant to what’s going on in the world today.”

I had Dr. Berkovitz for the Honors Genetics course (mentioned in the article) and for Human Genetics, and she was one of my favorite professors here at Purdue. You could tell she was passionate about the subject, and she did a great job of explaining genetics. In class she would encourage stimulating discussions on eugenics, genetic testing, gene patenting, and abortion.

When she overheard me telling another student about the Society of Non-Theists, she asked to be put on the mailing list and has attended all of our pro-evolution events (including my talk about the Creation Museum). From our class discussions, I could tell she shared my liberal views. She even once showed us a clip of Stephen Colbert talking about DNA, and we were the only two to giggle when he talked about Jesus burying the dinosaurs.

But in addition to being a great professor and skeptic, she was a wonderful person. She would always take time to talk to me about random articles in the news she thought I would be interested in. She encouraged me to shoot for the stars when it came to genetics. When I was still considering becoming a genetic counselor, she encouraged me to get a PhD, saying someone with my skills in genetics should be doing research or running the clinic. And when I had asked her to write me a letter of recommendation for grad school, I discovered that her husband had passed away just a week before. Seeing someone I looked up to so much distraught and crying was horrible. I quickly told her I could easily find someone else to do it, but she insisted – even when overwhelmed with grief, she wanted to help her students.

I always said that this is exactly how I want to be when I was 80 – compassionate, skeptica
l, witty, and still excited
about science. That was before I knew her history as a Holocaust survivor. To think that she became such a strong woman and wonderful scientist even through that tragedy is amazing. She’s a role model to everyone, but especially to female scientists. I can only hope to be half the woman she is when I’m 80.

My professor’s Holocaust story

Today is Holocaust Remembrance Day. On Friday our newspaper ran a piece about the upcoming Greater Lafayette Holocaust Remembrance Conference, which featured the story of one of my former professors here at Purdue. As a former student, her story was especially touching to me, but I thought all of you would enjoy it. I’ve added some more information in sparse parts, taken from here.

Anna Berkovitz had a normal childhood until 1944. Now, years later, she still has nightmares of her family being taken from their home by the Nazis.

“I was 13 years old at the time when I was taken with my family to Auschwitz, just before D-Day,” said Berkovitz, Purdue Professor Emerita of biology.

At the concentration camp, Berkovitz and her family faced grim odds of survival. Six hundred thousand Hungarian Jews entered the camp between May and September of 1944. In just three months, 500,000 were killed.

“The killing machine was so effective that names were not even taken when we arrived.”

Berkovitz’s grandparents, aunts, uncle, cousin and probably her father were among the victims of the genocide conducted by the Nazis.

Her survival, as Berkovitz says, can only be accounted for by a series of miracles. …

Anna and Elizabeth were taken to Camp-C in Birkenau. To this day Anna ponders how she survived six months of brutal treatment, harsh conditions, starvation and disease there.

In November 1944, Anna and Elizabeth were transferred to a slave labor camp near Magdeburg, Germany, where they were put to work in an underground ammunition factory. Ten days prior to the end of World War II, they were liberated by the Swedish Red Cross and taken to Sweden, where they spent three months in a sanatorium recovering from malnutrition and physical and emotional traumas. …

This year, Berkovitz will be attending the conference, but participating in these events brings personal pain.

“It’s very difficult for me … to me it’s just like it happened yesterday, so I don’t need a conference to remember.”

Still, Berkovitz recognizes and even asserts the necessity of the conference and sees participating as a duty.

“I think I owe it to the people who died to be remembered.”

Berkovitz’s story does not end in Sweden; rather, her rescue from tyranny marks the start of a new journey that defies the unthinkable trauma of the Holocaust.

In Sweden, Berkovitz maintains that she suffered from no depression or bitterness and looked forward to the future.

“I could have lived my life as a victim, but I did not,” she said. …

In April 1946, Anna and Elizabeth emigrated to the United States. They arrived in Los Angeles pennyless and not speaking English. In order to resume her schooling, Anna worked as an au-pair for several years. During this time she completed four years of high school and four years of college, graduating from U.C.L.A. in January 1952 with a B.S. degree in bacteriology and with Phi Beta Kappa and magna cum laude honors. While working as a laboratory technician, Anna met Leonard Berkovitz, who was then a post-doctoral fellow at Caltech. They were married in June 1953, and their sons Dan and Kenneth were born in 1956 and 1960, respectively. During this period Anna worked part time in various cancer research laboratories.

In 1962 Leonard accepted a position at Purdue University, and the family moved to West Lafayette, Indiana. When Kenneth was in kindergarten, Anna decided to continue her formal education. She was accepted as a graduate student in the biology department at Purdue University. She was working on her Ph.D. thesis when, in 1967, she was asked to take a temporary teaching position to fill an unexpected vacancy in the department. This temporary position turned into a lifetime career of teaching, and while Anna never obtained her Ph.D., she earned a tenured position from which she retired in 2003 as Professor Emerita in Biology.

Anna’s efforts as a teacher, her dedication to her students and to the discipline were amply recognized by her students, colleagues and the administration. She was selected by the students as one of the Top Ten Outstanding Teachers in the School of Science 14 times, she received the Murphy Award, the top recognition of teaching excellence by the University, and was given the Chiscon Award for outstanding teaching performance by the Biology department. Anna was elected to the Teaching Academy at Purdue and her name is in the Purdue Book of Great Teachers.

In her retirement Anna has more time to travel, attend theater, to be active in her Temple, and to winter in California. But, what she most enjoys is still interacting with young people, be it her own five grandchildren or students at the University. She currently participates in the University Honors Program, where she developed a new course, “The New Genetics – New Perspectives, New Dilemmas,” which she teaches in the Fall semesters. …

Marveling at her accomplishments for the time – raising a family while entering a competitive career field as woman when it was rare – Berkovitz attributes much of her drive to a belief that humanity was good. Only a small group of evil was responsible for her painful experiences.

“Unfortunately, now I see that there are still evil groups of people in the world killing or wanting to kill innocent people just because they are different from what they are,” she said. …

Though Berkovitz’s story is one of inspiration, she still bears emotional scars.

“I have recurring nightmares that I’m told that I have to pack up and leave home … that’s part of me; that’s part of my existence.”

Preventing scars such as these in others is a duty for Berkovitz; an obligation driving her to participate in programs such as the Holocaust Remembrance Conference.

“It’s very relevant to what’s going on in the world today.”

I had Dr. Berkovitz for the Honors Genetics course (mentioned in the article) and for Human Genetics, and she was one of my favorite professors here at Purdue. You could tell she was passionate about the subject, and she did a great job of explaining genetics. In class she would encourage stimulating discussions on eugenics, genetic testing, gene patenting, and abortion.

When she overheard me telling another student about the Society of Non-Theists, she asked to be put on the mailing list and has attended all of our pro-evolution events (including my talk about the Creation Museum). From our class discussions, I could tell she shared my liberal views. She even once showed us a clip of Stephen Colbert talking about DNA, and we were the only two to giggle when he talked about Jesus burying the dinosaurs.

But in addition to being a great professor and skeptic, she was a wonderful person. She would always take time to talk to me about random articles in the news she thought I would be interested in. She encouraged me to shoot for the stars when it came to genetics. When I was still considering becoming a genetic counselor, she encouraged me to get a PhD, saying someone with my skills in genetics should be doing research or running the clinic. And when I had asked her to write me a letter of recommendation for grad school, I discovered that her husband had passed away just a week before. Seeing someone I looked up to so much distraught and crying was horrible. I quickly told her I could easily find someone else to do it, but she insisted – even when overwhelmed with grief, she wanted to help her students.

I always said that this is exactly how I want to be when I was 80 – compassionate, skeptical, witty, and still excited
about science. That was before I knew her history as a Holocaust survivor. To think that she became such a strong woman and wonderful scientist even through that tragedy is amazing. She’s a role model to everyone, but especially to female scientists. I can only hope to be half the woman she is when I’m 80.

Annual pro-life demonstrators out again

The anti-choice group on campus has a large event every spring called the Cemetery of the Innocents. Before I try to explain it, it might just be easier to show you:Yep, Memorial Mall gets turned into a giant cemetery for all those unborn babies evil women keep aborting. But only Christian babies, apparently.

I can’t quite explain how much this event gets me down. It’s here every spring, but you never can quite prepare yourself for when it’s going to happen. They change the date and keep it very secretive so pro-choice and feminist groups can’t counter protest. Only my freshman year was a feminist group able to figure it out, and set up a stand handing out condoms – a real way to reduce abortions. Though of course, the pro-lifers didn’t get it. “What does sex have to do with it? That’s so immature!” they whined.

Yeah, we’re dealing with intelligent people, here.

I guess I should be thankful they’re not the kind of group spouting Bible verses or waving signs of bloody fetuses. It’s just that this event reminds me of what the majority of Purdue is really like – conservative, religious, anti-choice, and willfully ignorant about social issues – and it kind of depresses me. Can’t go hide in my liberal atheist feminist bubble of friends when I have to walk past this thing five times during the day.

But of course, I’m a masochist, so I had to go poke around. If the signs that greeted you really wanted to be honest, they would say “Warning! Emotional arguments within! No substance or rational thought!”I approached the table where most of the pro-life students (mostly women, how sad), were standing. After gathering up some flyers (which I wish I could unread, dear lord the stupid burns), I decided to ask some questions:

Me: So, do you think abortion should be illegal?
Gal: Uh…well…we just want women to know there are other options to getting abortions.
Me: So you don’t want it to be illegal?
Gal: Well, we don’t have an official stance. I’d like it to be illegal, but even if we did people would still just get abortions illegally, and those would be more dangerous, so it wouldn’t really accomplish much. Instead we want to educate people that they have this option.
Me: So do you guys support contraceptives then?
Gal: Well, we don’t have an official stance, but I don’t believe in them.
Me: How do you plan on reducing abortions then?
Gal: We just want people to know there’s an option of adoption. People think it’s either have the baby and raise it, or kill it. A woman in her forties came up and said she got pregnant at 18, and her mom gave her the option of getting kicked out of home, or having an abortion, so she had it and now regrets it.
Me: Well, I’m pro-choice, and even I would say that’s bad. That’s not choice, that’s an ultimatum. No one should be forced into having one.
Gal: Uh…oh.

I then asked why they used Christian crosses to represent all abortions, and their response was basically “We’re lazy and crosses were the easiest and cheapest things to make.” Well, at least they’re honest.

Really though, I’m disappointed. Pro-life groups are getting a lot smarter. They know certain things that they believe will make them look cruel or idiotic, so they don’t officially make it a group stance, even though all of the members support it. They can’t officially be Christian or oppose contraception or want abortion illegal or want prison terms for females, because that would expose the world to the crazy. In the past the group would babble about baby holocausts and other insane crap.

They say they’re providing an option, but they also think they’re right and if you chose incorrectly you’re a horrible murderer who will be doomed to a life of guilt and suffering. That isn’t an option, it’s an ultimatum. They just hope people who come up to their table will be distracted by the cute little plastic fetuses and succumb to their emotional arguments.

I gave up asking them questions, because it was obvious I wasn’t going to get a straight answer out of anyone. Wasn’t holding my breath that someone would have an answer to overpopulation, caring for all of these unwanted children, the lack of families willing to adopt, rape, disease…