LOL of the day: pro-choicers should have been aborted

Every once in a while, we get a comment that crashes right through the absurdity barrier, breaks the speed of hypocrisy and just kind of inspires me to keep doing what I’m doing. Today, we got one of those comments from someone going by “Jeri Lynn.” It was on the article wherein I suggested pro-lifers need to own that they just hate women. I have reproduced the comment here, but I break in on a few key points to offer some highlights.

No you murdering asshole. We hate those who murder. We especially hate those who murder the most innocent in our society…something you VILE PERVERSE MURDERING advocates seem to never understand.

You have the morals of Stalin and the attitude of of a chimp. You cannot even grasp SIMPLE concepts.

It’s true – we here at The Stalin & Hitler Fan Club throw our feces at each other all the time like you would not believe. The poor janitors, LOL! The lodge we rent for meetings actually asked us to find a new place, but we told them they and their families would be rounded up and shot as traitors if they said one more word, and that was the end of that. And we laughed and laughed and laughed!

Honestly, I wish your mothers had aborted the lot of you mass-murdering freaks of hell.

I, too, am pleased our mothers had the option of… wait, what? Let me get this straight. You’re against abortion, even in rape and incest situations, but you’ll make an exception for fetuses that are going to grow up to be pro-choice. Huh. It would be pretty tricky to enforce this, but you should get in touch with Dr. Who, who could transport you to each of our first trimesters so you can explain to our mothers why you want them to abort us.

Putting people to death for reasons, such as murder, is perfectly justified and that I why I think ALL WOMEN and ALL MEDICAL CARE MANGELAS, should be rounded up and PUT TO DEATH. WITH EXTREME PREJUDICE.

You think all women should be put to death? I thought you were one, Jeri Lynn, but I won’t dust off my Freud pipe just yet. Let’s see – well, your unusual suggestion here will definitely resolve the abortion issue. This is a very avant garde take on the pro-life stance. I applaud your outside the box thinking, even though I can’t agree, myself, as I would like to see the human race continue.

And what’s a “mangela”? At first, I thought this was some kind of internet slang for “mangler” but I looked it up in my search engine and got something about “Mangela Animal Touch Farm”. So then I remembered Josef Mengele (and no worries, I would’ve spelled it wrong, too), the man who decided who would die in the concentration camps. So I’m pretty sure you’re just continuing your comparison between Evil Dictators of the 20th Century and people who think raped 11 year old girls shouldn’t be forced to give birth to their own siblings.

Anyhow, I’m quite surprised to learn I have the ability to choose who gets an abortion and who doesn’t! I thought that was the job you wanted, Jeri, so I’m a little confused.

You THINGS, you CREATURES of death…. I swear you are so evil you think it bad when other actually OPPOSE putting CHILDREN to death.

Hey, that’s not fair. I’m pretty much completely against putting children to death. Unless they exhibit signs of embracing a political philosophy I don’t like or something, and then I TOTALLY CHASE THEM WITH DEATH SCISSORS MWAHAHAHAHA!


Yeah! I am officially making you a member of the Stalin & Hitler Fan Club right now, girlfriend! You are much better at it than any of the rest of us – you put us to shame! In fact, I’m making you Vice Undersecretary. Keep up that violent tyrannical zealotry, and you’ll be Fuhrer of the club in no time!


Okay, thanks for stopping by!


  1. sbg says

    I saw that comment and just couldn’t trash it. I meant to bring your attention to it (though I knew you’d see it anyway), because the ludicrousness of proclaiming how anti-murder she is followed up by that much violent hatred (and death wishes! BWAHAHA!) was too cute for words.

    Truly, the leaps in logic are adorable.

    I, for one, embrace my perverted, amoral chimp side. I’m pretty sure it’s my best one.

  2. says

    The scary thing is how pro-life groups, especially the right wing religious pro-life groups, can justify violence (murder) against those who espouse pro-choice viewpoints or who are abortion providers. The ‘logic’ of violent radicals isn’t so much logic as it is self-rationalization of their ideology: to them, killing a pro-choice advocate or abortion doctor isn’t murder, it is preventing the future murder of the unborn, which means it is justified.

  3. says


    And by our commenter’s logic, you could also rationalize killing a lot of people. Say, rich bankers involved with the IMF – they are the reason for most of the starvation in Africa. Like abortion doctors, they are choosing which lives in the world should be sacrificed so that others can live more freely. So, make the world a better place! Go kill a banker you believe is involved in the IMF! Except, no, wait – I too am living better at the expense of people in Africa. Oh, shit, now I have to go kill myself. 😉

  4. says

    Jennifer Kesler,

    you could also include in your commenter’s logic all employees of international development agencies that have maternal health programs, as those programs usually include providing women with access to safe abortion (or at least the employees of those agencies which acknowledge that maternal health initiatives should also include the health of the woman and not just her children…I won’t name which countries have decided that abortion won’t be part of their maternal health programs because it is too embarrassing).

  5. Nialla says

    The so far to the right those in the center can’t see them anti-choice people have an unusual view of being “pro-life” to me. As long as it’s in the womb, it’s their sacred duty to protect it. The second it’s born, that baby and the family it’s born to are non-existent to them.

    They generally don’t want to help poor women get health care, even during pregnancy, and they certainly don’t want help with the costs of delivery, baby care, etc. But deliver that baby at all costs! Then they can ignore its’ future needs completely. It’s a bizarre “I got mine! You get your own!” attitude of not wanting to help others in need, even though denying health care such as condoms and other forms of birth control would reduce the need for abortions.

  6. Cheryl says


    I have no idea where I fall on the whole pro-life/pro-choice thing, because my views don’t fall into either camp. Because of my religious views, I do see abortion as murder, but I recognize that making abortion illegal without addressing why women seek abortions isn’t the answer and will only lead more women doing DIY abortions and increased numbers of single mothers and children living in poverty on the public assistance rolls (and we all know how conservatives feel about public assistance). Teaching about birth control and how to use it correctly is essential, as is education about STDs and their treatment and prevention. Men not taking responsibility for the children they’re the sperm donor of needs to be dealt with, and the attitudes that enable women being single parents with multiple children need to be addressed, too. Support for single parents so they can find and hold down a job that pays a decent wage needs to be there, starting with an increase in the minimum wage. Take the media and culture to task for the gratuitous amounts of sexuality that assault us every single day. But, most of all, sex education and empowering women. Make sure kids and adults are getting the right information.

  7. Cheryl says


    Tunnel vision. Tunnel vision and ignorance about the realities of public assistance. They need to be hit upside the head with a Clue By Four.

  8. says


    You’re pro-choice, Cheryl. A lot of pro-choicers are personally against abortion, but publically support the right of women to make their own choice about it, and also support initiatives to reduce the reasons people feel compelled to abort. “Pro-choice” strictly refers to your political stance, not your personal beliefs.

    The really sad thing is that most of the reasons people seek abortions are rooted in anti-feminism, so feminists and pro-lifers really ought to be on the same side about the measures you’re talking about. Instead, pro-lifers are being pushed to support making the pill illegal, even for those of us who take it as a hormone balancing med rather than birth control. Who’s pushing them? Misogynists who resent that the best way to reduce abortions is to support women’s rights, I believe.

  9. DNi says

    Yeah, I don’t think anyone is actually “Pro-Abortion”. Nobody grabs a coffee from Starbucks and then heads to the dry cleaners next door to pick up some wire hangers and makes a Day out of it. It’s an unpleasant necessity; you could make all sorts of philosophical pontifications about how it shouldn’t happen, or how we as a society shouldn’t allow it, and how it’s this or that.

    But it’s all moot. There are going to be women, young girls even, who are going to need to have abortions. It sucks, but it’s something that needs to be accepted. And maybe it’s even something we can make better with social programs and welfare that make parenthood doable for the people who need the help most.

  10. Cheryl says

    Jennifer Kesler,

    What do you mean, the reasons are rooted in anti-feminism?

    Pro-lifers are lied to about the pill and are told that it works by preventing a fertilized egg from implanting. I remember hearing that years ago, and when I learned that wasn’t true, I brassed off by the pointless, intentional dishonesty. There are few things I abhor more than that kind of crap. People should be given accurate information and allowed to make up their own mind. Period, end of story. If you’re going to support a woman carrying a child to term, you bloody well better be in support of the programs and resources she’ll need to care for that child and raise it properly after it’s born. If you’re not going to do the latter, then the only difference between you and a deadbeat dad is you aren’t the sperm donor.

  11. says

    DNi, precisely. Where we should all be able to agree is that it would be awesome if we could eliminate the various reasons that make abortions desirable.

    Cheryl: What do you mean, the reasons are rooted in anti-feminism?

    Er, I think I phrased that badly. I meant: abortions happen because of reasons such as poverty, lack of various types of support (including but not limited to money), ignorance about birth control and the inability to access birth control. Also rape, probably more often than people think (since rapists don’t usually bother with condoms). Fixing these problems would empower women – that’s why they’re already on the feminist agenda. There are a lot of people who’d rather see children harmed than see women empowered, so they’ll twist anything to that goal. Those are the people lying about the pill and trying to make it harder for women to make informed choices about their sexuality.

  12. Cheryl says

    Jennifer Kesler,

    Thanks for clearing it up. I had a feeling that’s what you meant, and I agree. Misogyny is definitely in there, and so is people on the pro-life side not being in touch with the realities of those they’re seeking to exert control over. Sex ed in schools immediately comes to mind. Adults forget what it’s like to be a teen and/or have a rose-colored, G-rated version of their own teen years and think that if you don’t tell kids about sex or you tell them not to have sex, they’ll stay chaste. In an ideal world, perhaps, but this ain’t an ideal world. Teens are going to have sex. That’s the reality. Now, they can be equipped with accurate information about the risks and how to reduce those risks, or you can tell them just to keep their legs shut and jeans zipped but don’t be surprised when Jane ends up pregnant because, shocker of shockers, douching with Coke after having sex doesn’t stop you from getting pregnant, or she believed you can’t get pregnant your first time. There’s a school district near me where, in the 90s at least, you could tell which grade someone was in by which STD they had.

    Parents protest that it should be them, not the schools, that tells their children about sex. Okay, great. Then do it. How many parents put off The Talk until their kid is fourteen or fifteen? That’s too late, especially these days. I know what classmates did the summer after sixth grade, and that was back in ’91. I shudder to think what’s going on now. How many parents cultivate an environment in which the human body is treated openly and honestly? Trying to discuss something like sex when the body and what it does have been hushhush–yeah, good luck with that.

  13. Casey says

    Bwa-ha-ha, I kinda want Jeri Lynn to be allowed to post, just so we can watch her get her shit wrecked with more epic replies. XD

  14. SunlessNick says


    can justify violence (murder) against those who espouse pro-choice viewpoints or who are abortion providers

    Or in this commenter’s case, apparently all women everywhere, whether they’ve had an abortion or not. But yes, I agree with you, the anti-abortion movement – ie not people like Cheryl above – is steeped in violence.

  15. Lika says

    Man, I wish these people had a fraction of the rage for child molesters, abusive parents, and institutions that exploit, enslave, oppress, and cause massive poverty and misery to whole populations. Only of course those populations and victims of abuse and molesters are out of the womb so they’re pieces of shit that don’t deserve any care or rights. I love how I’m at my most valuable to these people before I’m born, but my mother is worthless to them and I’d be too once I’m born.

    Honestly, I wish your mothers had aborted the lot of you mass-murdering freaks of hell.

    I don’t even know what to say to that. The hypocrisy and troll logic hurts my head.

  16. says


    And in addition to that is the problem that a lot of teens are going to get raped. By dates, or even by family or someone who has access through her family. So even if a kid intends to remain chaste, she may not have any say over it. And we will call her a whore and make excuses for the person who raped her. And in many cases, she will believe it was somehow her own fault, too. I shudder to think how many girls and young women over the years have been forced/pressured into marriage with their rapists. It’s a great strategy for rapists, having a society wherein women are blamed for pretty much all activity involving the one body part they don’t have (the penis).

    Any society that refuses to even look into how its own attitudes abet rapists has no business talking about eliminating abortion.

    I don’t think ANYONE is educating kids about sex properly. In addition to the biological facts of it, your personal family moral stance on it and some info about birth control options, kids need to be hearing some hard truths: sex is about 85% psychological for humans (and maybe other primates, we’re learning). It can be an extremely different experience to have it because you think you’re supposed to or you feel obligated or curious versus having it because you really truly want it in the moment. (That’s just one example.)

    We also fail to teach boys and girls about consent. Girls don’t always feel entitled or safe about saying no – in a culture where rejection can bring out Angry Guy who may or may not be Rapist/Batterer guy, it literally ISN’T always safe to say no, and many girls and women have had seemingly consensual sex they didn’t want to have because they were scared of what a guy might do if they rejected him. And boys aren’t taught to respect what girls go through, and recognize that isn’t not enough that she didn’t say no and kick you in the balls; she should be saying yes in a clear way. Some people try to claim this requirement would wreck those moments where two people wordlessly fall into it, but I can’t imagine what would be unsexy to guys about a woman saying, “Oh, YES, do it to me right NOW” or some variation on that, LOL.

  17. Cheryl says

    Jennifer Kesler,

    “We also fail to teach boys and girls about consent. Girls don’t always feel entitled or safe about saying no – in a culture where rejection can bring out Angry Guy who may or may not be Rapist/Batterer guy, it literally ISN’T always safe to say no, and many girls and women have had seemingly consensual sex they didn’t want to have because they were scared of what a guy might do if they rejected him. And boys aren’t taught to respect what girls go through, and recognize that isn’t not enough that she didn’t say no and kick you in the balls; she should be saying yes in a clear way.”

    Yes, yes, yes! I didn’t mention this because I didn’t want my comment to be too long, but we absolutely need to talk to people (young *and* old) about this. Females must be taught that it’s not only okay, it’s their right to refuse and stand firm and, if they need to, kick and hit and punch and yell. Guys need to be taught that ‘no’ means ‘no’ and ‘stop’ means ‘stop’, and that ‘I don’t want things to move so fast’ means stop. ANYTHING that conveys ANY hesitancy means ‘stop’–which goes for all areas, not just sex. We need to stop telling women how not to be raped and start telling guys not to rape. I forget if it was your blog or elsewhere, but someone said that if the campaign against DWI was run like the campaign against rape, it would be telling people if they didn’t want to be a victim of a drunk driver, don’t be out on or near roads at night, which I think is an excellent comparison.

    Your comment about kids feeling like they’re obligated to feel one way or another after sex brought to mind a section of The Goddess Test by Aimee Carter. The main character, Kate, who’s 18, has just had sex for the first time with the love interest, Henry. When she wakes up the morning after, she says when she talks to her mother about how things are going with Henry, she wants to skirt the topic of what she and Henry did that night when they were together, not because she’s embarrassed about it, but because it’s the kind of thing she doesn’t want to tell her until she has no choice. “Better she assumed that sort of thing happened after the wedding, if it happened at all.” I was like “Bwah?” I get not wanting to talk to your mom about your sex life, but there’s nothing indicating Kate’s mom would be judgmental or condemning about Kate having sex before she marries and there’s a lot to indicate her mom is very in favor of her pairing off with Henry, so I don’t get why Kate wants her mom to think she’s a virgin when she marries, and what the frag is with this “if it happened at all” crap? Married people have sex. That’s normal and expected and taken as a given. Does Kate really think her mom is idiot enough to think her daughter will be celibate after she’s married?

    It comes out a few minutes later that she and Henry were drugged with an aphrodesiac. Henry is Pissed as hell about this and stalks off without a word to Kate about what’s going on or that he doesn’t see her as having any culpability in what happened (there’s a reason it’s a Big Deal that they had sex and there are Big Consequences). Kate’s stewing in anxiety, waiting to hear from Henry on what’s going on, and during her internal monologue, she says that she doesn’t feel like what happened has fully sunk in. “This was supposed to be a big deal; I was supposed to feel upset or dirty, or at the very least confused about what to feel about the whole thing.” Emphasis mine. I just about hit the ceiling when I read that. What the F*** is this bullshit about how you’re supposed to feel upset or dirty? I’m totally in favor of abstinence until marriage and do believe it’s the best way to go, but pounding girls with messages like this is wrong and disgusting on so many levels.

    There’s an incident of slut shaming earlier in the book where Ava, a friend of Kate, is in bed with Guy #1 and Guy #2, a mutual friend and someone Ava’s been intimate with recently, knocks on the door. Ava, without thinking, tells him to come in. He sees Ava in bed with Guy #1 and flips out. The guys fight and #1 ends up dead (in the context of the book, it’s less horrific than it sounds). Word gets to Kate something bad has gone down, she goes over to Ava’s, finds out the details, and after the body and the killer are gone, Kate and Ava talk. Ava wibbles on about how she has no idea how this happened, it all happened so fast, etc. Kate asks if #1 attacked #2, or if it was the other way around. Ava says she doesn’t know and that “It doesn’t matter anyway, does it?”

    This causes something in Kate to snap and she says that everything points to #2 killing #1 because he caught Ava in bed with #1. Kate asks if Ava even cares or if she’s upset because “you just lost a toy?…I get it,…you’re having fun…[b]ut this isn’t fun anymore, not for anyone but you–you’re playing with these guys like they’re only here to entertain you. You act like no one else matters except in relation to you getting what you want, and now [#2] is dead because of you.”

    Ava says she didn’t kill #2, to which Kate responds, “You didn’t hack him into little pieces, but you’re the reason it happened…[#2’s sister doesn’t want anything to do with you]. Frankly, if all you’re going to do is waste your time sleeping with every guy in the manor and acting like the world revolves around you, then [neither] do I. You’re useless here. The only things you’ve done are bicker with [#2’s sister] and get [#2] killed.”

    Kate’s internal monologue says she regrets saying that as soon as it comes out, but she couldn’t take it back and “[i]t was the truth, or at least an exaggeration of it.” A little bit later, she tells Ava that “…all you’ve done is get one of Henry’s [friends] killed and [another] branded a murderer. Do you have any idea how awful that makes me feel?” Oh, yeah, and after Ava accuses her of being jealous because Ava has her choice of guys, Kate tells her she’s not jealous, she’s ashamed of her, and to bugger off and leave her alone because she has enough to deal with “…without having to make sure you don’t get anyone else killed.”

    Because if you’re female and don’t take sex or relationships seriously and two of your admirers fight and one ends up dead? Yeah, totally your fault. Bad slut! If you’d just kept your legs together and been a good girl, none of this would have happened. [/tongue-in-cheek] Love triangles figure heavily into the trilogy, not to mention Kate being groomed from before conception to be Henry’s wife (he’s Hades incognito, and what happened to Persephone is explained, albeit in a way that makes her look like a total skank). There’s a mysterious killer on the loose, offing the other contenders to be Henry’s wife, and when we find out who it is and why they’re doing it, it’s a total ‘chicks fighting over a guy’ trope. Tension between Kate and Persephone in the second book focuses around that trope as well. Anything Henry might have done to make Persephone unhappy in their marriage (which, according to Carter, was actually an arranged marriage) is downplayed and Persephone being an unfaithful skank is emphasized. Yeah, the series is loaded with misogynistic fail.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *