There’s something about the way you bow your head when you walk from class to class that makes you hard to spot-

there are kids wearing bright colors while you blend into sidewalks and locker-walled hallways,

kids who shout across rooms to their friends, barely even noticing that they’re on their toes to see over you.

I see you.

You and your whisper-soled sneakers, you and your arriving sixth to class,

not so early that people think you’re eager but not so late that people give you funny looks when you walk in after everyone else is seated.

I wonder if the teacher ever reads your essay out loud.

I wonder if the boy who sat in front of you in homeroom for two years knows your name.

When you walk home from school, you watch your feet. I’m sure you’ve noticed that you’re walking in a rut made by footsteps of someone else who took the long way home too. Those are my footsteps.

I was invisible too, once-

clear as fine glass, hardly catching light on my edges, and just as easy to break.

I used to count the empty desks in classrooms and include my own.

I didn’t sleep at night because sleeping meant missing the only quiet I could ever preserve.

I didn’t eat during the day because when you eat alone you always feel like there’s someone watching you and when no one sees you in the first place you’re always alone. We live in a system of feedback inhibition.

Invisible child, you’re allowed to wear shoes that click against the floor when you walk just for the joy of knowing you’re making the atmosphere vibrate.

Invisible child, remember that your desk chair is full. You are sitting in it.

Invisible child, I am you except my voice has grown stronger from use and when I walk home, I watch the sky instead of my feet because I like the way the clouds change. Neither of us are made from glass, as I thought I was and you think you are- we are blood and bone and skin and we have minds to think with and mouths to speak with and bodies that no one can see through.

Invisible child, I see you.

—  a letter to invisible children (-r.z.)
It’s been just two short months since you first made your move, 6 weeks since you asked me out. But I already know I’m in love. Every time I look up at you I want to tell you I love you, but when you look down at me, what do you see?
—  Excerpt from a book I’ll never write #30 // R.Z.
Taka już jestem. (…) Potrzebuję ciepła, potrzebuję roztoczonej wokół siebie swego rodzaju powłoki, która będzie się składać z jego skóry, kości, mięśni, stawów, tkanki tłuszczowej, krwi, zapachu, oddechu. (…) Taka już jestem, że nie brak mi nic wtedy, kiedy leżę i słyszę, jak bardzo mnie kocha, jak jego skroń drgającym nerwem wykrzykuje mi tę miłość. (…) Taka już jestem - krucha, płaczliwa, tęskniąca - przez kilometry, przez ścianę, przez koc, przez ubranie.
(…) I czy mógłbyś mnie kochać taką, właśnie taką?
—  R.Z.

anonymous asked:

Personally, I used to be pro life, but since getting older, learning more and becoming a much more mature adult, I can see the many good reasons for abortion. I agree with the one anon. Catching it early, it is not a baby yet. What if you were raped or can't afford to take care of a child? What if there is something wrong with you and the fetus could endanger your life? Or you could endanger it's life? If I were to get pregnant now, I would abort. I believe in the importance of being pro choice.

(Referencing this.)

Hello. Do you know, the timing of your message is uncanny because the way you laid out your argument fits almost perfectly with an article I read just a few days ago. It talks about how abortion activists are changing their strategy to move away from the vague term “pro-choice” and towards more specific talking points like “women’s health” and “economic security” - and the bulk of your argument is made up of those exact two talking points. 

Catching it early, it is not a baby yet. - I wonder if you consciously chose to use the term “catching it early.” That’s the term doctors use when they talk about a cancer or a disease. 

What if you were raped - I have to refer back to my post about abortion being only one of two things. If abortion just means getting rid of a “blob” then there’s no justification needed at all. But if it’s a living baby, the fact that it was conceived in rape does not make the baby any less alive than any other unborn baby. I’m certainly not trying to belittle the suffering of any woman who has been raped - but if I’m going to stand by my belief that life begins at conception, then I don’t get to squirm away from the difficult questions by picking and choosing which unborn babies I defend. A baby conceived in rape is no less deserving of protection than the most wanted, hoped for baby in the world.

As an aside, I find it bizarre that an organisation like Planned Parenthood would even attempt to claim that they stand for victims of rape:

Planned Parenthood’s cover-up of child sex trafficking

Investigations found seven Planned Parenthood clinics in four different states were willing to aid and abet the sex-trafficking of minor girls by supplying confidential birth control, STD testing, and secret abortions to underage girls and their traffickers.

Planned Parenthood’s cover-up of sexual abuse:

Investigations found eight Planned Parenthood clinics in five different states were willing to cover-up sexual abuse, disregarding mandatory suspected statutory rape reporting laws.  Clinics also provided instructions on how to circumvent parental consent laws.

Planned Parenthood Sued for Doing Abortion on Raped 13-Year-Old, Returning Her to Rapist:

Throughout the visit, four staff members spoke with and observed R.Z. and her step-father. All of them had opportunity to see that R.Z.’s birth date indicated she was only thirteen—well below the age of consent. Yet, none of them asked R.Z. about their relationship. None of them asked why their last names were different. None of them asked about potential sex abuse. And none of them reported anything to the state.

After the abortion, R.Z. walked back out to the parking lot, got into her step-father’s car, and went back home. And the abuse continued.

or can’t afford to take care of a child? - I would make two points on this:

(a) It’s estimated that there are between 1 and 2 million people waiting to adopt a child in the U.S. The number of abortions performed every year is about 1,300,000. The number of adoptions is about 58,000. For every single baby aborted, there was very likely someone waiting to adopt and take care of him or her. 

(b) I find the “economic” argument extremely shaky for another reason. What if I lost my job when my child was two years old and I couldn’t afford to take care of her? Following your logic, is economic security the only justification needed for killing a child?

What if there is something wrong with you and the fetus could endanger your life? - Here is what I wrote to someone else who asked the same question:

“Abortions are never medically necessary. If a woman’s life is in danger and her baby has to be delivered early, I am not against that. But they can try to save the baby’s life too.* Now that I’ve realised that, it’s unbelievable to me how many stories I have read of doctors - people who are supposed to save lives - jumping straight to steering a woman towards abortion instead of trying to save her and her baby. 

This table shows that babies born as early as 23 weeks stand a 10-35% chance of surviving. The chances of a premature baby’s survival go up rapidly from that point on.

I think that many - maybe almost all - supporters of abortion believe that people who are against abortion must value the life of the baby above that of the mother. I don’t believe that at all. To me, both lives are equally valuable and equally deserving of protection.”

Or you could endanger it’s life?I think there must be a typo here somewhere, because you’ve just written that ending a baby’s life is the way to avoid endangering her life. 

I believe in the importance of being pro choice.That’s a very noble-sounding statement - but (and my intention isn’t to be rude) I’m surprised that your arguments don’t have more substance given that you used to be on the other side of the debate, and you must have done a lot of thinking on the subject. The post of mine that prompted you to write to me laid out my reasons for why I define life the way I do. You obviously disagree with me - but you didn’t attempt to refute any of the points I raised. If you were once pro-life, your definition of life must have changed for you to now support abortion. So I’m curious about how you would answer my questions to that other person on the subject of when life begins. 

Anyway, thanks for your message.