When did Brooke McEldowney start hating women so much?

Hahahahahah! Yes! I wrote a graphic novel! You can scoff at it or fund it or just keep an eye on it at here or here


Welcome to the post everyone loves to hate! And now you can even put some money on it! Yay!

Thank you so much for your support. Really. PayPal buttons are below. Email me at editor@wapshottpress.com for Dwolla and Stripe options. Thanks!

How you can keep me going month after month after month etc.

Or buy an ad to express how much you love to hate this post!

This has been a Mayerson Service Announcement. Now please enjoy the post you’re here to love to hate!

I wonder. I mean, Brooke, if you don’t approve of abortions, don’t get one.

I also wonder when I’ll start liking this strip again. I’ve only been reading it for 15 years and I hope this is its nadir or something.

9 thoughts on “When did Brooke McEldowney start hating women so much?

  1. Frankly, I’ve never felt the need to support a woman’s right to choose pregnancy, because I’ve never seen that right challenged. Apparently Mr. McEldowney has seen such a challenge, and is responding to it. My first thought was that he was setting up a strawman argument, but he claims to have received such messages. It’s not a pretty picture of “pro-choice,” but I agree that it is as important to support pregnant women in whatever choice they make as it is to make sure they have choices.

    • I replied to your comment in the wrong place, below it instead of on it, but I did reply and I appreciate your reading and commenting.

  2. Thank you for your thoughtful comment, K Forsyth, but Brooke McEldowney no longer lives in any reality I recognize. I would be willing to cut Brooke some slack, but the pro-“life” people have too much blood on their hands from clinic bombings, assassinating doctors, and women who have died because they couldn’t get a safe abortion for a dangerous pregnancy. Unlike Brooke’s personal, and therefore unverifiable, incidents there are far too many of these events and they are documented: http://www.prochoice.org/about_abortion/violence/history_violence.html

    Brooke’s timing is especially bad since the Komen mess removed funding from Planned Parenthood, which provides women’s health (usually cancer screenings and suchlike) and contraception to a vulnerable population. Brooke has turned Edda and Amos into caricatures that are privileged, white, rich, and irresponsible, something few of us in the 99% can afford to be.

    And lastly, I guess no one reads the funnies to their kids anymore because 9 Chickweed Lane has become a very PG-13 kind of place. I mean, who wants to explain what a fibroid is to their eight year old? The Seth-is-gay was presented so naturally, the Edda-is-pregnant story feels very forced. And yes, Seth is a huge stereotype, but it is a newspaper comic by a man who lives in some kind of parallel universe full of easy outs, second chances, and femmebots. This used to be a good comic and now it’s not.

    • pregnancy story did feel forced. it was obstructing and intrusive. but is that not what pregnancy is for a relationship where 2 young kids are torn between what they want to do, what they think they should do, and what they have to do. i thought the whole scenario was played quite well. you may not agree with most of his views, but to say he hates women is rather brash and exaggerated.

  3. Am new to Chickweed & Pib so I am not familiar with past content yet. Can only say I thought the Edda’s pregnancy ark was very well thought out. Keep up the great work I for one will be waiting for the next adventure

  4. “I wonder. I mean, Brooke, if you don’t approve of abortions, don’t get one.”

    Gee Ginger, your rapier like logic is unassailable. Unless you actually have more than one brain cell…
    How about these fun replacements: “If you don’t approve of murder”, “If you don’t approve of misogyny”, “If you don’t approve of rape” …

    The empirical case against abortion-as-birth-control is easily made, but you keep on with your own religious adherence to selfishness and the liberal/feminist mantra.

  5. “Gran” says it best: clearly anybody, regardless of their point of view, who believes that the RIGHT to CHOOSE abortion is in any way an OBLIGATION to do so simply doesn’t understand the meaning of the word “choice.”

    I recall reading somewhere that one of the most violently anti-choice activists in Congress openly supported a supposed “right” of overseas sweatshop operators to coerce their pregnant employees to abort pregnancies. Evidently his problem was not with abortion as a thing itself, but with women having control over it.

    To be “pro-abortion” is to believe that abortion should be a birth control method of first choice, rather than one of last resort: that it should replace all forms of contraception, as well as responsible behavior. I hold it as self-evident that no sane human being could embrace that point of view.

    To be “pro-choice,” on the other hand, is to recognize that regardless of whether a fetus is a sentient being, and regardless of the point at which a fetus becomes a sentient being, the woman carrying it most certainly IS a sentient being, and her body in general, and her reproductive anatomy in particular, is the most intimate piece of property she can possibly own. Therefore, so long as pregnancy remains both an involuntary condition (which it is, so long as no form of contraception is totally effective, totally foolproof, and totally without side effects), and so long as it remains a life-threatening condition (and even in the developed world, women still die of complications of pregnancy and childbirth), any unreasonable restriction on a woman’s right to terminate a pregnancy is effectively an act of using that woman’s reproductive anatomy as a weapon of domination against her.

    There’s a word that describes the use of a woman’s reproductive anatomy as a weapon of domination against her. It’s called “rape.” And I hold that any unreasonable restriction on a woman’s entirely free choice to either terminate a pregnancy, or carry it to term, is nothing less than an act of rape-by-legislation.

    • Having been “pro-choice” all of my adult life (I’m a 67 year old white male), I have to say that your reply to the asinine assertion that Mr. McEldowney hates women appropriately avoided a confrontational tone, and provided both one of the most succinct and comprehensive comments on the subject of pro-choice that I have ever read. Kudos.

  6. McEldowney does not hate women. On the contrary. And he is not opposed to abortion, either. We believe in choice, do we not? Choice applies to BOTH (or all 3 or 4) alternatives. We sometimes forget that Choice is not preordained to be an abortion. Choice permits NOT getting one, if a woman so chooses.

Comments are closed.