<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Metro Swathed In Anti-Abortion Shame</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/04/30/metro-swathed-in-anti-abortion-shame/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/04/30/metro-swathed-in-anti-abortion-shame/</link>
	<description>Sex and Gender in D.C.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Aug 2010 12:24:38 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: J</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/04/30/metro-swathed-in-anti-abortion-shame/comment-page-1/#comment-6030</link>
		<dc:creator>J</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 03 May 2009 00:48:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/?p=3794#comment-6030</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s chilling that many of you want to silence one side of the abortion debate.  First Amendment or not?  Free society or not?  

It would be one thing if the ads specifically said, &quot;women are irresponsible and untrustworthy, especially the black and poor,&quot; but as it is, the ads are clearly referring to abortion, not to sex, race, class, politics or astronomy.

And finally, what could be more racist and sexist than referring to grown or nearly grown adults as &quot;the vulnerable,&quot; who somehow need to be protected from corrupting influences?  Let them decide for themselves.  That&#039;s the very definition of pro-choice, isn&#039;t it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It's chilling that many of you want to silence one side of the abortion debate.  First Amendment or not?  Free society or not?  </p>
<p>It would be one thing if the ads specifically said, "women are irresponsible and untrustworthy, especially the black and poor," but as it is, the ads are clearly referring to abortion, not to sex, race, class, politics or astronomy.</p>
<p>And finally, what could be more racist and sexist than referring to grown or nearly grown adults as "the vulnerable," who somehow need to be protected from corrupting influences?  Let them decide for themselves.  That's the very definition of pro-choice, isn't it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sexist Comment of the Week - The Sexist - Washington City Paper</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/04/30/metro-swathed-in-anti-abortion-shame/comment-page-1/#comment-5906</link>
		<dc:creator>Sexist Comment of the Week - The Sexist - Washington City Paper</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2009 16:01:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/?p=3794#comment-5906</guid>
		<description>[...] This one&#8217;s a two-fer, in response to my post on the omnipresent anti-abortion Metro ads, &#8220;Metro Swathed in Anti-Abortion Shame.&#8221; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] This one&#8217;s a two-fer, in response to my post on the omnipresent anti-abortion Metro ads, &#8220;Metro Swathed in Anti-Abortion Shame.&#8221; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Versatile</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/04/30/metro-swathed-in-anti-abortion-shame/comment-page-1/#comment-5886</link>
		<dc:creator>Versatile</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 19:37:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/?p=3794#comment-5886</guid>
		<description>The bus I rode earlier this week had 17 of these ads and no others.  If these are paid ads I suppose I am OK with that (provided they are PAYING for 17 ads).  But if these are free or reduced rate ads I would be quite upset.  My question would be if anti-abortion Metro employees are plastering their buses with these ads.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The bus I rode earlier this week had 17 of these ads and no others.  If these are paid ads I suppose I am OK with that (provided they are PAYING for 17 ads).  But if these are free or reduced rate ads I would be quite upset.  My question would be if anti-abortion Metro employees are plastering their buses with these ads.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amanda Hess</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/04/30/metro-swathed-in-anti-abortion-shame/comment-page-1/#comment-5877</link>
		<dc:creator>Amanda Hess</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:41:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/?p=3794#comment-5877</guid>
		<description>Obscure Supreme Court knowledge FTW</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Obscure Supreme Court knowledge FTW</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lisa</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/04/30/metro-swathed-in-anti-abortion-shame/comment-page-1/#comment-5876</link>
		<dc:creator>Lisa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:28:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/?p=3794#comment-5876</guid>
		<description>Amanda, you pointed out the legal problem with this ad campaign yourself. When you say, &quot;but when ad bombardments are targeted specifically on a captive audience of economically vulnerable women, they can be outright threatening,&quot; you hit the nail on the head. 

In Lehman v. City of Shaker Heights, Justice Douglas says in a concurring opinion, &quot;the right of the commuters to be free from forced intrusions on their privacy precludes the city from transforming its vehicles of public transportation into forums for the dissemination of ideas upon this captive audience.&quot;

I think this applies here, and the revenue from the Crisis Pregnancy Crap Houses should be turned down. I don&#039;t want to be forced to ride a shame mobile.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Amanda, you pointed out the legal problem with this ad campaign yourself. When you say, "but when ad bombardments are targeted specifically on a captive audience of economically vulnerable women, they can be outright threatening," you hit the nail on the head. </p>
<p>In Lehman v. City of Shaker Heights, Justice Douglas says in a concurring opinion, "the right of the commuters to be free from forced intrusions on their privacy precludes the city from transforming its vehicles of public transportation into forums for the dissemination of ideas upon this captive audience."</p>
<p>I think this applies here, and the revenue from the Crisis Pregnancy Crap Houses should be turned down. I don't want to be forced to ride a shame mobile.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amanda Hess</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/04/30/metro-swathed-in-anti-abortion-shame/comment-page-1/#comment-5866</link>
		<dc:creator>Amanda Hess</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 15:02:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/?p=3794#comment-5866</guid>
		<description>That&#039;s a great point, and one that Kat discusses in her post. But I don&#039;t think Metro&#039;s legal position is really at issue here. Metro is legally required to post the ads, but that doesn&#039;t mean that bloggers shouldn&#039;t call attention to them and post about them to combat their message. Crisis Pregnancy Centers can buy as many ads as they want. Obviously, they will go away at some point and be replaced by other ads. But while they&#039;re still up, there should be resources out there that address why they can amount to a very oppressive bus ride for some women. And I don&#039;t think contracting Metro to let them know that---or choosing to get off a bus because the ads are too oppressive---is out of the question.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That's a great point, and one that Kat discusses in her post. But I don't think Metro's legal position is really at issue here. Metro is legally required to post the ads, but that doesn't mean that bloggers shouldn't call attention to them and post about them to combat their message. Crisis Pregnancy Centers can buy as many ads as they want. Obviously, they will go away at some point and be replaced by other ads. But while they're still up, there should be resources out there that address why they can amount to a very oppressive bus ride for some women. And I don't think contracting Metro to let them know that---or choosing to get off a bus because the ads are too oppressive---is out of the question.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Craig Howell</title>
		<link>http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/04/30/metro-swathed-in-anti-abortion-shame/comment-page-1/#comment-5852</link>
		<dc:creator>Craig Howell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 14:24:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/?p=3794#comment-5852</guid>
		<description>Um, there&#039;s a First Amendment issue here, folks.  As a government agency, Metro cannot indulge in viewpoint discrimination.  This matter was settled 30 years ago when the courts told Metro it could not refuse to run bus ads sponsored by the Gay Activists Alliance. I have been a member of what is now the Gay &amp; Lesbian Activists Alliance since 1973, and this victory remains one of our signature achievements.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Um, there's a First Amendment issue here, folks.  As a government agency, Metro cannot indulge in viewpoint discrimination.  This matter was settled 30 years ago when the courts told Metro it could not refuse to run bus ads sponsored by the Gay Activists Alliance. I have been a member of what is now the Gay &amp; Lesbian Activists Alliance since 1973, and this victory remains one of our signature achievements.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

