What does the DoD and Abortion Have In Common?

 

(This picture is shameful, I know.)

That is the question, but what is the answer?

I recently entered the wonderful world of wikiscanner (alliteration intended), and unfortunately, I got lost in the heap. The multiple IP addresses threw curve balls at me and the random user names did not provide comfort for me, either. My personal assessment- I think wikiscanner could use some new “skin,” to provide a much better aesthetic appeal.

Anyway, after I pierced the epidermis of the controversial wikiscanner, a sense of awkwardness came over me. I felt like I had just stepped into someone else’s business- but hey, we’re talking about the world wide web, here. I wanted to know which organizations were fighting in the wiki editing ring, so I typed “Planned Parenthood,” “National Abortion Federation,” and National Right to Life in the wikiscanner search field. To my surprise, an evident wiki brawl was not occurring in this sphere. So, I decided to search for “abortion” – the more general term- believing that these organizations were likely feuding in this realm. I was shocked.

Let’s play a game. Is 214.13.4.151 the IP address for Planned Parenthood, the National Abortion Federation, or the National Right to Live? -Wrong. You lose. This is a trick question, and I failed it the first time I played, too. I conducted a quick search of this IP address, which was registered to the Department of Defense. “Hmm, odd,” I thought. What’s the abortion got to do with the DoD and vice versa? Maybe some DoD employees got bored in their spare time, I thought. Or perhaps “defense” entails defending and/or protecting a woman’s body? Am I pulling strings here or am I on the right track? I mean defense = protection on all accounts, right? Marvin Gaye asked, “what’s going on?” And so did I.

Is some employee from the DoD is playing around on Wikipedia? Whoever it is, they are making significant changes to the wiki page on abortion, and all signs point to someone who is perhaps pro-life. The problem? Aren’t wiki pages supposed to be NPOV? The DoD wiki contributor inserts words and phrases in the description of methods of abortion such as “violent,” “crushing of the fetal child’s head,” “to ensure the fetus is killed,” “right of an unborn child to live,” and strategically edits the placement of the word “controversial” in the page. The edits of the DoD user imply that he or she could be against the concept of abortion, or the user just rather prefers to be very explicit about the act of abortion (yea, sure). Earlier edits of the page show contributions from a variety of different users, who are at odds with the DoD on the NPOV of the edits. However, this debate is quickly squashed by the DoD user who victoriously succeeds at controlling the edits of the page. The In Wiki World, the last user standing is probably the most persistent one.

Again, what is the DoD doing on the “abortion side” of the wikisphere making 1,674 edits surrounding the concept of abortion? I’m baffled- well, maybe- then, on the other hand, maybe I shouldn’t be asking these questions because someone could be listening (wink, wink). I think Virgil’s allowing us to enter a realm where we are allowed to witness controversial debates that participants within might wish to censor. There was a debate taking place on the wiki abortion page, but the DoD user won, hands down. Maybe one of our presidential candidates will proclaim, “Our government will not only use funds to protect our homeland, but also to protect what happens between a woman’s legs!”