For shame, Franco.

At 9:15pm Thursday night, my evening was on a romcom heroine pre-makeover trajectory — stretchy inside-pants donned, computer open, a half eaten 1 lb bag of Red Vines on my bed, and a Pac Man tumbler of white wine on the bedside table. There may or may not have been string cheese involved (I'm gross!). When suddenly, a Tweet appeared in my feed that Changed Everything.

"I want @drake to murder my vagina," said Amanda Bynes or a lab chimp pumped full of sex hormones that had taken control of Amanda Bynes' Twitter account. I. Want. Drake. To. Murder. My. Vagina. I want Drake to murder my vagina. IwantDraketomurdermyvagina. What could it mean? Why couldn't I stop reading it? Why did getting fucked in the decency feel so good? I haven't been this preoccupied and disturbed by something since I was at a sleepover and accidentally looked in on my friend Jenny's mom's boyfriend watching a particularly not for kids part of Blue Velvet when I was in 5th grade. Murder my vagina. Vagina murder. The more I pull on it, the more I don't know. The more I need to know. Here are 25 of the mental dead ends I've encountered since I first learned of Vagina Murder. Maybe you can help me.

1. Is Vagina Murder covered by any provisions of the Violence Against Women Act?
2. What, if any, penalties would Drake face if he were to in fact murder Amanda Bynes' Vagina?
3. Would Drake face extradition to Canada if he were arrested for the murder of Amanda Bynes' Vagina?
4. What if Amanda Bynes is planning to fake her own vagina's death and then frame Drake for the murder? Can someone write a Law & Order: SVU episode about this?
5. What does Vagina Murder entail? I'm assuming from the fact that Amanda Bynes has really been GOING FOR IT — sexual histrionics-wise — lately that she intended the Tweet to be a sexual overture to Drake. Would that mean that only a penis can murder a vagina?
6. Can other things besides penises murder vaginas? Could a vibrator murder a vagina? How about a knotted sheet? Could I theoretically murder my vagina with my own fingers?
7. Is Amanda Bynes offering her vagina as a sort of spiritual sacrifice to Drake? Was this a public offering of her vagina in the same way that Aslan publicly offered himself to the White Witch in The Lion, The Witch & The Wardrobe?
8. Is Drake a known murderer of vaginas? If so, why are we only paying attention to his vagina murder when a pretty, rich, famous girl publicly brings it to our attention? How many thousands of non-famous, non-rich, possibly non-pretty vaginas has Drake murdered? What does this say about us as a society?
9. What possible benefit could Amanda Bynes gain from having a murdered vagina?
10. Did Amanda Bynes recently take out an insurance policy on her vagina that pays out millions in the event that her vagina is murdered? Maybe she should delete that Tweet then because insurance investigators will find it in, like, a second.
11. What does Amanda Bynes' vagina have to say about this?
12. Is there any way that vagina protective services can intervene and perhaps seize temporary custody of Amanda Bynes' vagina, since she's calling for its murder and clearly shirking her responsibilities as the caretaker of a vagina?
13. Because this was broadcast on the internet, if Amanda Bynes' vagina were to be murdered, would this become a matter for the FBI?
14. Is Amanda Bynes really mad at her vagina or something? I feel like the vagina must have done something to make Amanda angry with her, otherwise Amanda publicly call for her vagina's execution.
15. What would my vagina have to do for me in order for me to take a hit out on it?
16. What if Amanda Bynes just realized that her sexual urges were becoming a detriment to her happiness? If that's the case, why does Drake need to be the one to murder her vagina?
17. Has Amanda Bynes considered less extreme means of vagina surrender than murder? Has Amanda Bynes considered vagina adoption?
18. What if Drake tried to murder Amanda Bynes' vagina and it didn't work because her vagina is tenacious and then her vagina came out of a coma and was like, Now it's my turn, bitches, and then Quentin Tarantino made a movie about it? I'd watch. No, I actually probably wouldn't.
19. Is it possible that Amanda Bynes just made a typo and she actually wanted Drake to murder something other than her vagina?
20. If you murder a vagina in Texas, can you still get the death penalty?
21. What if during sex people yelled "Murder me! Murder my cock/pussy!" instead of the normal stuff that people yell? Gross.
22. How amazing would it be if Drake responded, "Sry, @AmandaBynes, I only murder buttholes."?
23. Seriously though what do you think Drake did in response? If I were his publicist, I'd have driven over to his house and been like GET OFF THE COMPUTER NOW! STOP LOOKING AT THE INTERNET!
24. Oh man, do you think there's going to be a reference to vagina murder on Drake's next album? Do you think he'll actually use the word "vagina" or will he call it something Drake-y like "vajay-jaaaaaaayyyyyy"?
25. Why would you Tweet that?

Any insight, readers? Any burning questions of your own? Leave them in the comments.

It's impossible to open a magazine or turn on a TV show without hearing someone yammer on about when it's best for women to have babies. Do it too soon, and you'll basically be poor forever and your kid will end up becoming a Florida carnie when he grows up. Wait too long and your husband has to inject hormone shots into your ass every night and you cry every time you get your period (that is, if you've got good enough insurance to be able to afford fancy ass-shots). Ideally, somewhere along the sparkly pink timeline of a woman's life, there's a point where she's financially and emotionally mature enough to support a child and her body is still capable of making babies — but what about the alternative? When's the best time to have an abortion?

One of the perks (well, side effects) of writing publicly and frequently about how women should be able to control what happens inside their own skin is that every time a friend gets knocked up and wants to end her pregnancy, she ends up confiding in me, a person she knows will not tell her she's going to hell for choosing abortion. "You're going to hell for other things," I'll say, to make her feel better. "Like the time you peed in that litterbox at a party because the line for the bathroom was too long. Also your engagement ring is made of a conflict diamond."

The other week, after talking to yet another friend who had seen the plus sign on a pregnancy test, I started thinking about how many women I've known over the years who have chosen to end pregnancies. They've ranged in age from 17 to their early 40's. There have been so many, in fact, that a clever anti-abortion rights/baseball fanatic might nickname my phone's address book "Murderers' Row." (and I'd be fine with that, because while I take issue with abortion being equivocated with actual murder, I respect the reappropriation of baseball slang). So when is abortion the best? If I remembered how to use a graphing calculator, I'd make a chart on an X-Y axis. But since I don't, here's a weighing of the pros and cons of abortion at almost any age, in listicle form.

Under 18

Pro: Well, duh. This one's a no-brainer — teenagers aren't, as an almost universal rule, equipped to be mothers. And pop culture abounds with living, breathing DO NOT HAVE CHILDREN WHEN YOU ARE A TEENAGER warnings — Teen Mom, Bristol Palin, Justin Bieber's weird mom who went out on a date with Chris Harrison, host of The Bachelor (not to be confused with Chris Hansen, host of To Catch a Predator). When it comes to giving birth as a teen, it's not a question of IF you'll experience massive hardship as a result of bringing a child into the world before you're old enough to legally buy lottery tickets; it's a matter of how much of a lasting lifefuck will result.

Con: Expense, awkwardness, access. Teenagers don't tend to have several hundred dollars lying around for an abortion, and having the "Mom, can you drive me to the abortion clinic?" conversation is probably the most awkward talk a teen could have. And (pushes up glasses on nose) 88% of counties in the US don't have abortion clinics, so a teen with limited resources might have difficulty accessing abortion services until too late. Further, kids still living under their religious parents' roof may have some Bachmannian hang ups about when life begins and how totally damned they'd be if they ended their pregnancies, making the decision logically sound, but morally difficult. Hell, when I was a teenager, I chose "Madeleine" as my confirmation name and had a button that read VOTE PRO LIFE on my bulletin board in my bedroom.

18-23

Pro: Early twentysomethings still have their whole lives ahead of them, including many years of fecundity. But having a child at this age is less life trajectory-altering than teen motherhood, but young mothers still end up in poverty with greater frequency than the rest of the population.

Con: Cost, access, you can't use your parents' insurance because they'll know.

24-27

Pro: Young enough that you can still get pregnant from making extended eye contact with a guy with a beard, old enough that you've probably got a job that pays enough that you no longer must shop at Forever 21.

Con: Women in their mid-twenties might still be dating around, but this is the point at which some women start thinking about getting serious with that One Special Guy who they someday hope might fill them with a baby (and the average age for a college-educated woman to marry for the first time is about 27). As a rule, it's more emotional to abort when you know the guy's last name.

27-30

Pro: If you haven't acquired an expensive coke habit by now, congratulations! This is the richest you've ever been on your own! If you saved up a little, you could probably afford a designer abortion. A Marc Jacobs abortion, in teal.

Con: Hey, this is my demographic! And this is the age where I've first started to notice mild finger wagging against taking one's fertility for granted. Thirty, after all, has a three in front of it, whereas twenty-nine only has a two in front of it. Three is greater than two, therefore you're already starting to wither. Better take advantage of whatever pregnancies you can get, at this age. Who knows when you'll find another guy willing to repeatedly fuck your aging-out-of-online-dating carcass.

30-34

Pro: Women in their early thirties can probably afford setbacks of a few hundred dollars — or, at least, they're more likely to be able to afford it than their lower salaried, younger peers. They might already have kids, too, and maybe even an IUD.

Con: Tick tock, says your aunt at Thanksgiving, pointing to your maybe-barren womb. Tick tock, says that show where sexy doctors tell you about how to best regulate your fertility and really smooth out your poop. And maybe you're not sure you really want kids, but who knows when it will happen for you again?

35-39

Pro: Well, women in their late 30's can probably afford it. But at this age, certain birth defects are more common, and thus the reason to have one might not be an issue of maturity or financial ability, but of viability. Which is a total heartbreaking bum-out, to put it glibly.

Con: Having a normal pregnancy after this age is hard. It could be your last shot, Liz Lemon.

After 40

Pro: Birth defects, likelihood that one's family might already be complete, access/affordability.

Con: The media's been warning women about this for the last decade of their lives, but this is the point at which the last egg heads down the chute.

So what's the best age to have an abortion?

Taking into account access, ability to keep life plans intact, affordability, and likely relationship status, it's 25. Disagree? Hash it out below.

The jury selected to determine the fate of a lawsuit filed by the former Bengals cheerleader who famously slept with a teenage student against ooky revenge porn site The Dirty is having a hell of a time reaching a verdict. Apparently they've caught one of the worst possible cases of "Team Nobody." Can you blame them? Well — kind of.

The apparently profoundly unlikeable story began when a user of upscale gentleman's social mingling internet forum virtual playground for human dingleberries The Dirty posted a missive against then-Bengals cheerleader Sarah Jones. The post claimed that Jones was a woman of ill repute filthy, smelly hooker hole who had all sorts of social diseases and slept with all of the Cincinnati Bengals, which would have been impossible, because everyone knows the Bengals suck at scoring. (HEYOH!) Jones claimed the posting damaged her reputation and is seeking $11 million in damages from the owner of The Dirty.

But suing a revenge porn site isn't the only newsworthy event in Jones' life. Last year, she made headlines when she was convicted of sleeping with an underage student who is now her boyfriend. At one point, Jones texted her student that it was "love at first sight" when he walked into her freshman English classroom. Which— ew.

The posts on The Dirty predated Jones' dalliances with her student, but that hasn't stopped lawyers from The Dirty and its owner, Nik Richie, from claiming that Jones shouldn't get money from the lawsuit because she's an icky prostitution whore who can't be trusted to tell the truth because vagina. Richie's lawyer seems especially hellbent on this "Dicks in, lies out" theory of whether women can be trusted.

In his closing argument, Alex Ward — one of Richie's attorneys — argued that the first post about Jones having sex with all the Bengals players was a clear exaggeration that no reasonable person would believe, and therefore, didn't amount to defamation. He said the second post, which said that Jones' ex-husband cheated on her with 50 women, had gonorrhea and chlamydia, and likely gave it to Jones, was merely an opinion that also did not amount to defamation.

Even if jurors didn't agree with those arguments, Ward told them that they should not find in Jones' favor because she's a convicted felon, an admitted liar and had sex with a student.

He added that the posts were generally true because Jones has shown that she is "sexually immoral."

Meow!

Further, Richie says that he can't be held responsible for posts members make on a public forum — even though his public forum exists almost expressly to humiliate and shame women. It's not his fault that people used his website for the purpose for which it was designed!

Jones' lawyers want the jury to ignore her studentfucking and focus instead on the greater good that would be accomplished if only they'd make The Dirty pay Sarah Jones $11 million. That amount of money could cripple the site, and a judgment against it would almost certainly doom its future. Never mind the fact that it would also buy a 27-year-old woman with a freshly 18-year-old boyfriend tons of stuff. Like happiness.

The jury, unsurprisingly, is having trouble picking sides, and were ordered to try again after telling a judge yesterday that they simply couldn't agree on a verdict.

Richie has vowed to appeal a decision against him. Thank god. It's about time someone bravely fought for the right to rag on women's looks and sexuality.

Jurors at Odds in Ex-Cheerleader's Libel Suit [NYT]

Soledad O'Brien, imaginary bestie to grown up Lisa Simpson types the world over, can chalk up another victory in her ongoing war on bullshit. Today, noted Wisconsin Idiot Senator Ron Johnson made the common moron mistake of appearing as a guest on her program, and he got his condescending ass handed to him. It was beautiful. Like the Grand Canyon at sunset, maybe with a shirtless Paul Ryan crying loudly about the Green Bay Packers. That kind of beautiful.

If did not suffer a memory-erasing concussion in the last 24 hours, you likely recall Johnson's dickish Fox News talking point-tacular questions he directed toward the Secretary of State, and Clinton's perfectly fiery response. You also likely anticipated the amazing gifsplosion that would happen afterward.

You may not have anticipated that after the hearing, Johnson was going to dial up the dick even further, by telling Buzzfeed that his man brain was pretty much 100% positive that Clinton was being a fake crybaby in order to avoid answering his important Crazy Man With Blog questions. Here's the full quote, from the Buzzfeed piece,

I'm not sure she had rehearsed for that type of question. I think she just decided before she was going to describe emotionally the four dead Americans, the heroes, and use that as her trump card to get out of the questions. It was a good way of getting out of really having to respond to me.

When Soledad O'Brien had Johnson on his show, it was the perfect opportunity for Johnson to clarify what he meant when he said that. Or, you know, for Soledad to choke Johnson with his own words. Guess what happened?!

Ugh, women. Always fake crying, shopping, and reminding America that Ron Johnson is a dumbass..

[via Mediaite]

The Catholic Church has long been the Nadia Comaneci of mental gymnastics, but a new lawsuit where a Catholic-run hospital claims that fetuses aren't people with any legal rights sets a new standard for a triple twisting double-WTF logical dismount. Even Elfie Schlegel would be forced to abandon her perpetual stinkface and applaud.

The story of How Pre-Humans Are Both People And Not People to the Church begins with a New Year's Day emergency room tragedy involving 31-year-old expectant mother of twins Lori Stoghill. John Tomasic at the Colorado Independent explains,

She was vomiting and short of breath and she passed out as she was being wheeled into an examination room. Medical staff tried to resuscitate her but, as became clear only later, a main artery feeding her lungs was clogged and the clog led to a massive heart attack. Stodghill's obstetrician, Dr. Pelham Staples, who also happened to be the obstetrician on call for emergencies that night, never answered a page. His patient died at the hospital less than an hour after she arrived and her twins died in her womb.

After Stoghill's death, Lori's husband Jerry filed a wrongful death suit against St. Thomas Moore Hospital in Cañon City, claiming that Dr. Staples should have at least instructed ER personnel to perform an emergency C-section. Jerry's suit states that the hospital's negligence resulted the deaths of three individuals — his wife, and his two unborn but post-viability sons. In response, Catholic Health Initiatives, the nonprofit that runs St. Thomas Moore and 170 other healthcare facilities, claimed that Jerry Stoghill has no grounds to sue them for the loss of three lives, as unborn people aren't technically "persons" under Colorado law.

(This is the part of the story where my brain — totally on its own — made the record scratch sound.)

Not to get all smug Bond villain here but: Well, well, well, Catholic Health Initiatives. Well, well, well. Looks like someone is trying to have things both ways. In recent years, Catholic run health care systems have, in their brave, brave crusade to defend "life," lobbied for the right to deny rape victims Emergency Contraception, advocated laws that would allow health care facilities to let women die rather than receive abortions, and fought Obamacare's inclusion of emergency contraception in its birth control mandate on the farcical grounds that EC causes abortions. But now that the idea that fetuses are people just like me or you or Vin Diesel might cost a religious run facility a metric fuckton of money, time to run and hide behind a law that is in direct opposition to the Church's endlessly regurgitated worldview.

Sure, you could argue that CHI is just using the law in the way that best benefits them, but at the very least, CHI's refusal to acknowledge the deceased Stodghill twins as "persons" is a massive cop out — as Tomasic notes in the Independent, accepting Jerry Stoghill's claim that three lives were lost that New Year's Day in 2006 would make a powerful — but expensive — statement. But isn't your eternal soul worth it, Catholic Health Initiatives? Unless "protecting life" is just dog whistle talk for keeping women pregnant and Catholic Churches full. Perish the thought.

In malpractice case, Catholic hospital argues fetuses aren't people [Colorado Independent]

He's either the dumbest man in the world or erroneously thought he was the smartest. Either way, what a story.