..
Massachusetts House overrides governor's veto of abortion bill
By Ryan Foley, Christian Post Reporter
Tuesday, December 29, 2020
Massachusetts Republican Gov. Charlie Baker participates in a signing ceremony of a bill that mandates state insurers to provide contraception coverage on Nov. 20, 2017, at the Massachusetts State House in Boston. | (Photo: Twitter / @MassGovernor)
Just days after Gov. Charlie Baker vetoed a bill that would expand abortion access in Massachusetts, the state’s Democrat-led House of Representatives has voted to override the veto.
Last week, Baker, a Republican who supports abortion, elected to veto abortion legislation known as the ROE Act. The bill, which was originally included as part of the state’s budget for fiscal year 2021, would codify the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion nationwide into law and loosen abortion restrictions in the state.
“I strongly support a woman’s right to access reproductive health care, and many provisions of this bill,” Baker wrote in a letter to state lawmakers explaining his decision. “However I cannot support the sections of this proposal that expand the availability of later-term abortions and permit minors age 16 and 17 to get an abortion without the consent of the parent or guardian.”
The House of Representatives voted 107-46 Monday to override Baker’s veto of the bill, just barely exceeding the two-thirds majority required to overcome a gubernatorial veto. The Massachusetts Senate, where Democrats outnumber Republicans 36 to 4, is expected to follow suit, meaning that the ROE Act could very well become law in spite of Baker’s veto.
The Senate has until Jan. 5, when the current legislative session expires, to override the veto. If enacted, Massachusetts will become the 14th state to pass a law establishing a right to abortion that would remain in effect if the Roe v. Wade decision was ever reversed. According to the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute, the others are California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.
Even before issuing a veto of the ROE Act, Baker had expressed concerns about the legislation and offered amendments to the bill. While he described the provisions in the bill calling for the codification of Roe v. Wade into law and allowing abortions after 24 weeks in cases of a fatal fetal anomaly as “important changes to protect a women’s rights and autonomy in the commonwealth,” he offered an amendment that would remove language enabling 16- and 17-year-olds to get abortions without their parents’ consent.
Additionally, Baker asked lawmakers to consider changing the language in a provision of the bill that allows abortions to take place after 24 weeks gestation “if it is necessary, in the best medical judgment of the physician, to preserve the patient’s physical or mental health” to read “if a continuation of the pregnancy will impose, in the best medical judgment of the physician, a substantial risk to the patient’s physical or mental health.”
The legislature rejected Baker’s amendments and sent the abortion legislation to his desk as a standalone measure, which he vetoed. The pro-life group Massachusetts Citizens for Life praised Baker’s veto, arguing that it would “limit violence against women & babies.” The group also noticed that his veto coincided with Christmas Eve and slammed Democratic House Speaker Bob DeLeo for “putting #abortion special interest over #womenslives & babies lives.”
The ROE Act is one of several efforts put forward by lawmakers in Democrat-run states to pass liberalized abortion laws. In early 2019, New York passed the Reproductive Health Act, which allows abortion up to the moment of birth for any reason.
Shortly after President Donald Trump announced his nomination of pro-life Judge Amy Coney Barrett to serve on the United States Supreme Court, New Jersey Democrats rallied around the Reproductive Freedom Act, which would codify Roe v. Wade into law and require insurance companies to cover abortions and contraception at no out-of-pocket cost to patients. No action has been taken on the bill, which has been referred to the Senate Health, Human Services and Senior Citizens Committee.
Fashion designer Alexander Wang rejects sexual assault allegations as male models take up #MeToo mantle
1 Jan 2021 20:54
© Reuters / Caitlin Ochs
After several young men went public with claims they were sexually assaulted, even drugged, by the American couture prodigy, Wang has denied the accusations. Some, however, insist his behavior was an “open secret” in the industry.
The 37-year-old designer denounced the allegations as “grotesquely false” in a statement on Thursday, several days after men began coming forward with their stories of being preyed upon by Wang. Accusing the men of spreading lies, the designer insisted he had “never engaged in the atrocious behavior described.”
“I intend to get to the bottom of this and hold accountable whoever is responsible for originating these claims and viciously spreading them online,” Wang continued in a statement to People magazine on Thursday, insisting the allegations were the product of “social media accounts infamous for posting defamatory material from undisclosed and/or anonymous sources with zero evidence.”
British model Owen Mooney posted a TikTok video on Wednesday alleging the designer had groped his crotch at a Manhattan nightclub in 2017, causing him to “freeze completely because I was in so much shock.” That shock, Mooney said, was only magnified when he realized whose hand was fondling him.
“Any time I see [Wang’s] name mentioned or see him with celebrity best friends, it just reminds me of what he did, and it’s a really f***ed-up memory to have,” the model explained.
Mooney is far from alone in being victimized by the popular designer, if the stories that have surfaced in the last few days are any indication. Transgender model Gia Garison accused Wang of trying to pull down her panties while she was dancing at the same party where Mooney was allegedly groped. Garison said she has repeatedly refused to wear Alexander Wang clothing in subsequent fashion shoots due to the incident.
Another model, “Nick,” who declined to reveal his last name shared that after going clubbing with Wang in 2017, he emerged from a blackout to find Wang performing sexual acts on him – twice. “I honestly feel so embarrassed and manipulated,” the man, who subsequently remained in contact with Wang, told the Daily Mail.
“The whole #MeToo movement has been more around women and people don't realize this can also happen to men, I being one of them,” the 25-year-old said, adding that he misunderstood Wang’s “aggressive” behavior and had even been warned by a former boyfriend of the designer – whom he wrote off as jealous at the time.
I think it's a big wake up call to gay men.
While Nick does not believe his drinks were spiked with MDMA, he insisted he had never blacked out before or since, and several other men have accused Wang of drugging them en route to various afterparties by slipping the substance into bottles of water he then encouraged them to drink.
Model Alliance, a fashion advocacy group, released a statement on Instagram earlier this week underlining its “solidarity with those who have shared accusations of sexual abuse by Alexander Wang.” The organization emphasized that the #MeToo movement should not be limited to female victims, noting that “the fashion industry’s lack of transparency and accountability leaves all models vulnerable to abuse, regardless of their sex or gender identity.” Another fashion watchdog group, Diet Prada, claimed rumors about Wang’s predatory behavior had been an open secret in the modeling world for months if not years.
Facing massive backlash, Wang has disabled comments on his Instagram account. However, he is no stranger to controversy, having been raked over the coals in 2017 for casting R&B singer (and sexual predator) R. Kelly in one of his runway shows. Others, including rapper Azealia Banks, have attempted to bring attention to his behavior in the past by mirroring anonymous accusations against the designer.
=====================================================================================
Danish kids' show about man with magic penis is
'innocent and goofy,' says TV critic
John Dillermand — which roughly translates to 'John Wienerman'
— is sparking controversy in Denmark
CBC Radio ·
Posted: Jan 07, 2021 5:43 PM ET
John Dillardman, the titular character in a Danish children's show, has the longest penis in the world
— and it's magic. (DRTV)
A children's TV show about a man whose unnaturally long and magic penis gets him into all sorts of trouble is "very Danish" and nothing to fret over, says a TV critic who watched every episode.
The claymation show John Dillermand, which airs on the Dutch public broadcaster, is aimed at children ages four through eight.
Why should children aged 4 - 8 be thinking about a man's penis, for any reason?
So far, it's proved popular. But, according to the Guardian, it's also causing a stir in the country among those who think it's inappropriate for young people, or that it sends the wrong message in the Me Too era.
But Ida Rud, a freelance film and TV critic, has seen every episode of John Dillermand and says it's just good, silly fun. Here is part of her conversation with As It Happens host Carol Off.
How on Earth does a TV show for preschoolers about a man who cannot control his magic penis ... even get past the pitch stage?
I think it's a very Danish way of making children television where there's kind of no rules as long as no one is getting hurt. And if it's silly also, I mean, that's just the plus.
People were just like, this is courageous and silly, so why not do it? I mean, it's totally innocent and goofy.
And very Danish, as you say.
It is very Danish. We're kind of laid back in some ways, and also like to have like a dark sense of humour and also to cause a bit of an uproar. So, of course, I don't think anyone is surprised that this show caused an outrage, but maybe the criticism, that it was so huge, was a bit of a surprise.
And speaking of huge, this is the issue, right? Can you describe this character? First of all, his name's John Dillermand, the character in the show. And this is a cartoon. What does that mean?
Like a childish term for "penis" with the "man" attached. So Wienerman. So the name itself is enough to make children laugh, because any time you say wiener, it's funny.
He lives with his great-grandmother, who's this old, conservative, a bit scared, lady. Like, "Put that away, John. You can't go showing your penis. You can't use that to pick apples. You can't use that to walk the dog."
But the penis has a mind of its own.
I'm a feminist myself. But when I saw the show, I didn't think of this at all.
I just thought it was hilarious and silly.
- Ida Rud, TV critic
In my experience, feminists are not very protective of children, even girls.
Oh, gosh... What does his penis look like?
If you don't understand the language and you just saw, like, a trailer for this show, I don't think you would know it was a penis. You would think it was a tail of some sort, because it's just red and white stripes, just like his bathing suit. And it's just very long, slim tail. There's no scrotum, there's no pubic hair. There's nothing realistic about this penis.
It's short and long, and sometime you can't see it. And it can pick the apples from the tree and pick up the neighbour if he's being a pain ... in the butt.
OK, so he does some heroic — or his penis does some heroic things. But, well, the penis gets him into trouble from time to time, doesn't it?
For instance, the penis wants an ice cream. And the great-grandmother says, "No, you can't take an ice cream." And then they go to the zoo and it sees an ice cream truck and it steals an ice cream.
And because of this, a lion gets out and chases the children around. And John is about to say, "Oh, I can't handle this. I'll just go away and leave it to someone else." But then he's like, "No, I have to handle this. I have to take care of this problem." And then the penis is slapping the lion, so it goes back in.
Ida Rud is a Danish freelance film and TV critic. (Submitted by Ida Rud )
I know there are people in Canada and the United States are listening to this and thinking there is no way this could be made anyplace else. But it is true that there are people in Denmark who think that this shouldn't be made. What ... criticisms of this show have you seen?
There's, like, two camps. And the one is the obvious one with parents who are appalled that someone would have a grown man's penis on a kid's show.... They think it's perverse and they think it's a gateway for pedophiles to groom their children and teaching children that, oh, the male penis is not something you should be scared of. So if someone comes into the playground and pulls it out, it's just fun and games.
Recently we had like a second wave, a second discussion/debate, about Me Too. And because of this, people are like ... why do we always have men like, "Oh, the penis is doing it. It's not my fault. The penis has a mind of its own. I shouldn't be at fault for this." Kind of like maybe grown men abusing their power in Me Too relations.
I'm a feminist myself. But when I saw the show, I didn't think of this at all. I just thought it was hilarious and silly. But I get that it's bad timing that there's a show about a male character with a big penis. But I'm just hoping that that the second season or the first season of a completely new show would have a female lead character with a vulva or long titties or something like that.
But as you point out, there's nothing sexual about this, and ... kids that age especially think that penises and vaginas and vulvas are hilarious, right?
CBC interviewers are all feminists!
Yeah, exactly that's what I'm thinking. And I also think it's important that children don't feel inhibited by their body, their sexuality. I mean, it's too early for children that age to feel awkward about having a penis or having a vagina. But in time, we have a lot of problems with children and young adults who feel insecure about their bodies. They don't shower after having gym in school because they don't want to be seen naked. And I think this show is actually helping in that regard because it's nothing to be ashamed of being naked.
Good line for a paedophile!
I've also been debating maybe this criticism about John Dillermand being offensive, being bad, then maybe small boys will hear about this — because children pick up things like this — and maybe think, "Oh, I am bad for having a penis. My penis is bad." That would be the worst thing to happen from this debate.
Another good line for a paedophile! Has anyone investigated who the creators of this crap are?
But this is not the first time that Denmark's public broadcaster has made a show with controversial children's show, right?
No, we have that often. We have a guy called Uncle Reje who likes to play heavy metal and who at some point encouraged children to become Satanists ... and people were very offended by that as well.
OMGosh! I wonder why?
And also with nudity, we have a show where grown-ups take off their clothes in front ... children [older] than four to eight. But they bring school classes in and then people with maybe disfigurements or who are transgender or obese or something like that, they take off their clothes and then the children are allowed to ask them anything they want.
Wow, the Danish way.
The Danish way. To show them basically that there's nothing wrong with the way you look ... and that's one of the things that the Danish television wants to tell these kids.
Do you think that they will make another season, then, of John Dillermand?
I think so. It's been quite popular. I mean, we're not a large country, so I heard it had been seen 86,000 in the first weekend here.
And [after] all this debate, I'm sure a lot of people will find it.... Sometimes it works for you, having all this lively debate.
Written by Sheena Goodyear. Interview produced by Jeanne Armstrong. Q&A has been edited for length and clarity.
No comments:
Post a Comment