1. I believe that women, like men, are guaranteed the right to bodily autonomy in our Constitution. This means that women are allowed to do as they want with their body without infringement from the government. This even means they're allowed to do things that other people may not approve of, such as having lots of sex with or without the intention of having babies as a result.
2. I believe that contraception - including the pill, IUDs, the morning after pill, and abortion - is a basic medical necessity for women. Even and especially, when it's used for the purpose of having recreational sex. As women have the right to do what they want with their bodies, basic medical resources should be available to them to engage in a basic human activity enjoyed freely by the other half of the population. Just as medical and insurance providers aren't justified in refusing to treat a patient who acquired tetanus as a result of an amateur tattoo job, medical and insurance providers aren't justified in refusing to treat a patient who requires contraceptives so that they can engage in recreational sex.
3. I believe the liberal focus on abortions in cases of medical necessity and/or rape, as well as the focus on contraceptive use for non-contraceptive reasons is misguided. Yes, those are important reasons to point out. However, women having sex is not something to shy away from. The majority of abortions are sought out not because of a rape or due to medical necessity. They're because of unwanted pregnancies. The majority of contraceptive use is because women would like to engage in recreational sex. There is no shame in this. There is no crime in this. This is completely legitimate. When only the exceptional cases are pointed to, the conservative strategy will then attempt to seek out these exceptions while continuing to ban the rest, as we see currently happening in Arizona.
4. I believe it's simplistic to state that all anti-abortion people just hate or want to control women. I think a number of them do, especially the people who are at the fore of the anti-abortion movement. However, the "pro-life" message of the anti-abortion movement is relatively new. What's more, it's been immensely effective because it appeals to emotion in its rhetoric of saving children. A large number of the people who back pro-life policies, I believe, truly are thinking of "the children". Approaching them as de facto misogynists will not change their minds. Their opinion is part of a wholly different worldview than what most liberals subscribe to. To appeal to them, it's necessary to understand the framework in which they're working.
5. I believe that the state of being pregnant presents a complex situation in terms of legal rights in this country. This complexity is too often simplified on both sides, which leads to a very polarized and hostile debate.
6. I believe that the determination of when life begins is best left to the scientists rather than politicians. Since scientists have been arguing about the specific meaning of "life" for a long time now, I doubt we're going to get an answer on that soon.
7. I believe that the past few decades of complacency on the part of liberals with regards to the reproductive rights of women have led to this junction wherein Roe vs Wade is in dire threat, if not literally than effectively. I believe that the Democrats care about women when it is beneficial for them to do so, such as now during an election year. I believe that Democrats are otherwise indifferent to the idea of throwing women, half of the country's population, under the bus.
8. I believe that basic reproductive rights for women is one of the easiest ways to improve our economy, our education, our standard of living, and our society wholesale. Empowering women to control the size of their family is a boon not only for women but for everyone.
9. I believe efforts to ban such rights are rooted in religious fundamentalism and/or conservative ideals of traditional families. I believe we are still in the midst of a backlash against second wave feminism, and with this current legislative war against women we're seeing the culmination of years of quieter resistance.
10. I believe that the status quo will be maintained past this year's election, and that this will not be a desirable situation for women. I believe that only radical change will ensure our Constitutionally granted rights. I believe that the Equal Rights Amendment should be part of this change.
This entry was originally posted at http://gabrielleabelle.dreamwidth.org/36
- Current Mood:
thoughtful - Current Music:Jenny Owens Young - Here is a Heart
Profile
gabrielleabelle- The One Who Isn't Chosen
Page Summary
- enigmaticblues : (no subject) [+4]
- penny_lane_42 : (no subject) [+2]
- local_max : (no subject) [+2]
- lycoris : (no subject) [+1]
- ladycallie : (no subject) [+1]
- christycorr : (no subject) [+1]
- ssddgr : (no subject) [+1]
- peroxidepirate : (no subject) [+1]
- harsens_rob : As to this thorny topic [my way of saying don't de-friend me] [+6]
- samsom : (no subject) [+5]
- agnes_bean : (no subject) [+1]
- ever_neutral : (no subject) [+1]
- owenthurman : (no subject) [+1]
- beer_good_foamy : (no subject) [+1]
- itsnotmymind : (no subject) [+1]
- ferlonda : (no subject) [+3]
Comments
Also, have you read Half the Sky by Nicholas Kristof and Sheryl WuDunn? I think it would be right up your alley if you haven't yet, and the movement is pretty cool.
And gabs, AGREE on your whole post. Well said.
Did you catch this interview a while back?
http://www.npr.org/2011/11/09/14209
Anyway, it's always nice to see people on either side of the debate acknowledge the humanity of the ones on the other side. So thanks again! :D
On the question of life determination/scientists: to a certain extent I'm not sure that science will ever be able to answer the question satisfactorily. Rather, scientists can tell us a great deal of information about the zygote's/fetus' development, but the moral status of the child is something ethicists and society will have to determine. That said, it is not something that can be determined without scientist input.
I agree that the focus on rape/incest is misguided, sort of like the "born this way" argument to homosexuality (the one where it's okay to be gay because you were born that way, rather than that it's okay to be gay full stop). I understand it, because it's that much more galling that women who were raped or the victims of incest can't get access to abortions, but it is probably unhelpful.
Agreed.
To be honest, I don't much care about the "when life begins" question. I mean, I get the importance for a lot of people, but when the vast - VAST - majority of abortions take place so early in the pregnancy, I don't think we're running up against any life vs life conflict. I may end up being wrong depending on what consensus is in the future, but I choose to keep my focus on the entity that I unequivocally know has legal rights.
I agree that the focus on rape/incest is misguided, sort of like the "born this way" argument to homosexuality (the one where it's okay to be gay because you were born that way, rather than that it's okay to be gay full stop). I understand it, because it's that much more galling that women who were raped or the victims of incest can't get access to abortions, but it is probably unhelpful.
Yep, agreed. Even with the gay thing. :)
Yeah, I'm on board.
Yep, agreed. Even with the gay thing. :)
It was doublemeat who brought up the problem with the born this way argument recently in a post.
Nicely stated and I very much agree.
Re #4: I come from a deeply religious family, and I am 110% pro-choice, but I have a hard time explaining to my feminist friends why I don't automatically assume everyone who is pro-life is a raging misogynist. Abortion is a deeply personal issue for a lot of people on both sides of the debate, and many pro-lifers do honestly believe it is an act of unthinkably cruel violence to an unborn baby--more of a violence than it is for the woman to suffer an unwanted pregnancy, I guess. *sighs* There are women among them who are not at all against equality and women's rights in all other aspects, but who cannot stomach the idea of abortion. These people are extremely hard to convince, but I find their positions on the debate far easier to tolerate than your garden variety misogynist who thinks women shouldn't be promiscuous, blah blah whatever the tripe du jour is.
Sing it, sister.
I'd like to believe I'd be cool and would make peace with a female partner if she became pregnant due to a mistake or whatever... but... I can't help but take the male side here. Y'know, being a guy. Same on the other side... I don't want to be a dad, I had 1 drunken encounter... now I'm looking at a lifetime of responsibility toward somebody I didn't know and didn't want to know. I mean, wow. That is some heavy burden. Again, I REALLY want to think I'd be decent and step up and all that. But... I'm not sure. Would I be a total douche about it in my panic?
As somebody who took a friend to a clinic to have the procedure done, where she didn't tell the father, and supported her choice and didn't argue with her or anything -- and a GUY... And, wondered through the whole thing about 'what if I was in the circumstance', I'm just saying: there are nuances here. I can't see where I'd EVER say that any woman must be my baby-incubator, but I can't demonize any man who wants to protect a potential-child that he really wants. It's one of those hideous, complicated, awful, and very human things we need to fight our way through.
Ultimately, I give the right to the womb... The woman must have the final say, even if I WANT this child, and she doesn't. But, that in no way makes this an easy argument. I do agree though, that scientists have to inform of us the facts. I, just for a very personal view, would find it much more acceptable to have a group of dividing cells be aborted then have a developed brain be aborted. Once the fetus develops a brain, though... things become much, much more complicated and no matter what I say, I'm conflicted about it and ambiguous about it.
I completely don't support the "life at conception" view, but I also have problems with the "mother's life is paramount no matter what the circumstance" view... for this practical reason I completely support the 'morning after pill' for ANY GIRL/WOMAN who requests it... no questions asked. But after you're into the second trimester? Well, now I'm getting really uncomfortable.
Does this make me "THAT GUY"? 'Cause I don't want to be that anti-feminist, anti-women-power, guy. But... y'know, the brain is developing... and the father should have some kinda say... and... well, it is getting hideously messy now.
Or, I'm just a guy-controlling-jerk. I'll leave it to you women if I've just crossed a line in my opinion, here.
One thing I can agree on with you though 100% is that POLITICIANS are the LAST group who should be deciding these things. With modern technology, drug therapy, knowledge... we desperately need scientific facts to tell us when 'life' is life and when it is a group of cells that aren't actually living... like bacteria or viruses [no, I'm not calling a fetus a disease; I'm saying there is a difference between something with a mind developing and a mindless lifeform... please tell me there is SOMEONE who can appreciate the difference between a baby and a virus].
So, there. Jeez... I feel like I really should not post this. But I'm going to hit 'post comment' anyway. Convince me, as a guy, I should have zero rights in this at all.
#2 - completely agree.
#3 - Yep.
#4 - I'm much more ambiguous about this. They claim "pro-life" when it comes to condoms or the 'morning after' pill, but then want to slash welfare programs and cut completely 'family planning' support. It DOES seem they only want to support the fetus while it's a fetus. Once it is born, well then, those *effin' sl*t* should get out there and get a damned job to support those babies. [And, yes, I do see a very big difference being voice between Anna Sue Whitebread finding herself in a 'problem' and Shaquita May Brownskin making the same 'mis-judgement'... which is why I hate it all so].
#5 - Jeezus, yes. Humans are the most complex beings on the planet. EVERYthing we do is complicated. Demonizing either on any side is basically making them a caricature for argument's sake.
#6 - MOSTLY, yes. I think we're coming closer to figuring out when 'thought' or 'awareness' begins, which is only going to cause a bigger can of worms. But, science must be our guiding principal in this circumstance, as far as I'm concerned.
#7 - Somewhat agree. I don't think it is "willing to throw women under the bus", so much as "recognizing how it will be short-blurbbed in the media" and trying not to lose the ship while saving a single passenger. Is it right? No. Is it practical... well... fuck, I'm going to get slammed... but yes. They do the same thing to fags [raising hand]. You can't win a battle if you tell people they're jerks with ignorant views. POLITICS clouds every-damned-thing. This is a reality, too.
#8 - This is a given, if you are willing to look at the studies with an impartial eye. You give women more power and control, society generally improves... but you're stuck in the "not in my backyard" problem. I'm great with every OTHER woman having ultimate control on their reproductive rights... but what happens when I am personally affected. Will I still be so "pro-choice" when I want the woman to abort/not abort? In the U.S., anyway [and I think in most societies in the modern world] we're still in the patriarchal society. I don't like it... but that doesn't make it not so. {Hey, I'd be happy to place Buffy or Ripley in charge)
#9 - With complete respect... 'cause I friended you, so you know I love considering your opinions. But... I think this is too simplistic. I don't think it is anti-feminist [although, you may not know that just from the talk shows] so much as men being afraid that they'll have NO RIGHTS to their unborn child. Again, women take on the burden, and ultimately, I believe they carry the power and the rights to make the decision. But, no one likes to be told their opinions are complete irrelevant. And, it doesn't help that there are so many women that are willing to stand up and voice on national TV that women should have to carry to term any pregnancy.
#10 - Ick. This one. Well, I believe the first part is correct. The Supreme Court isn't going to once-and-forever decide these question because, despite supposedly being impartial, they're still people with political and social views and this questions promises hatred no matter what way they rule on which cases [see Citizens United case for latest example {which I disagree with vehemently... corporations are not - fucking - people} and they don't like to get heated on the bench (when they do, you have to read between the lines to see their outrage)].
As to the ERA... well, for me, there is that complication of when "life" as a legal matter begins.
Don't Hate Me. I'm a guy, I can't help it.
Well, you don't have any rights over someone else's body, no. Just like you may feel anguish if a girlfriend or wife has sex with someone else, you may feel anguish if she decides not to carry a pregnancy to term. You don't have any legal say over what she does with her body just because you deposited some sperm in it at some point, though. As long as her body is involved, that woman is free to jump up and down in the shower to get your sperm out, take the morning after pill, or have an abortion, with or without your say.
I mean, I get your ambivalence, but with all due respect, this isn't a men's issue.
The cynical part of me seriously thinks that if "they" get their way with our reproductive rights, they're going to go after sex outside of marriage and infidelity next.
I wish I was exaggerating, but the way things seem to be going...
When DO I have a right to say, "No. I don't want this life. If you want to bring it forth you're on your own." OR "I want this life, and it isn't fair, you're denying me that fatherhood".
Again, personally, as the one who has to carry to term, I believe the woman should have 'veto power' over what happens. But, I can sympathize mightily with men who suddenly have to provide 18 years of financial support for a one-night-stand, or who REALLY want a child, only to be told 'tough shit'.
And, I DID accompany a friend to the clinic and sat while she had the procedure done and believed it was the right thing under the circumstances. But... there is that legitimate concern about "when is too late, too late" that I have.
And, I'd... complete respectfully... disagree that it isn't a men's issue. Whatever happens can have profound effects on a man's life.
{Should I just shut up?}
I mean, I guess my bottom line is how difficult this situation is, and how BOTH parties are affected, no matter what happens. [However, POLITICIANS should have zero say anywhere in this.]
Before sex? If you want a child, discuss it with your partner and come to an accord. If you don't, take precautions. Men don't get pregnant, so that's the extent of their control over that part of reproduction, and that's as far as their rights extend. When men start growing wombs and carrying children at the risk of their own health, life, and financial well-being, then we'll revisit the issue.
And, I'd... complete respectfully... disagree that it isn't a men's issue. Whatever happens can have profound effects on a man's life.
And that's unfortunate. Can I be frank? I don't care. Women's rights - their actual rights, not their feelings - are on the line. Their lives are on the line. I'm in Texas. I'm all set up to be raped by a doctor should I ever need an abortion. This is not a time to bring up a "what about the men" plea.
@harsens:
Convince me, as a guy, I should have zero rights in this at all.
I was reading a comment online the other day that resonated with me and went something like this:
"Before I got pregnant, I was pro-choice because philosophically I believed women should have control over their bodies. The experience of being pregnant (with a planned and very-much-wanted baby) completely changed my perspective. When you are pregnant, your entire body becomes alien to you. Your senses change. The way your body feels and moves changes. In many ways, your body is not the same one you've been occupying for the past however-many years. For me it was difficult and TERRIFYING in a way that you cannot understand, even though I really, really wanted my baby.
I cannot even imagine how much harder the process would be for someone who did not want their child. I would not wish it on my worst enemy. And that is why I am now even more deeply pro-choice."
That is why you should have no say in forcing a woman to carry your child to term or not. You do not have the right to control someone else's body and inflict that upon them. Period.
Regarding the other scenario (when she wants to carry the embryo to term and you don't):
I can theoretically entertain the idea of fathers financially opting out of caring for a child that was conceived against the wishes of both parties (as evidenced by the use and failure of birth control), provided it occurs within a reasonable time window (i.e., immediately, so the woman can use that information in her decision while the embryo is in as early a developmental stage as possible).
However, the practical execution of such an idea is impossible. To be implemented fairly, it would involve so many time-sensitive and context-dependent rules (not to mention evidence gathering / mind-reading with regard to conceptive intent) that it would invariably end up putting an unfair practical burden on the woman when seeking an abortion. Without such rules, it would be an unfair financial burden on women when men decide to opt-out after the fact just to avoid paying.
Thus, you should have no say in either scenario.
I have a step-daughter... emotionally, if not legally.
I have female friendships that mean much to me.
It scares me, too. I loathe the thought of any woman being told she must be forced to turn to the 'back-alley hack' or the 'coat hanger method' or the 'throw myself down the stairs' gambit.
But, I do want to point out that the woman isn't the only one involved, here. How do we decide when the woman isn't invested in carrying to term, but the guy is?
Hey. As far as I'm concerned, the woman has control here. But... saying the guy should shut his pie-hole isn't very equal-rights, either, is it?
Don't hate me. I have lots of testosterone.
In what way is a woman having an abortion an infringement of a man's right? Be specific. Which right is it violating?
Give me an answer now or stop commenting in this post.
My point is that there is a *real* interest in fatherhood. Just as a man should not be allowed to force a woman to give up motherhood, because he shouldn't be allowed to decide that she can't give birth, I'm not sure that it is so simple for a woman to say "You can't be a father, because I don't want it", either.
I guess, this would be more an issue in a committed relationship circumstance. But, it seems to me that both parties have a very real investment. Yes, there should have been discussion of what would happen if this occurred, but that isn't always realistic.
Again, I support the women's right to seek contraceptive and 'morning after' proactive assistance. I'm just not sure that once the fetus develops a brain, that the arguments are equal.
Do you hate me for this? Is the father nuthin' but a sperm-donor in this? Should men's real feelings toward having a child be discounted because they don't have the womb be a justified reason to ignore what they may/may not want?
I'm also freezing this subthread because I'd rather you not pester commenters in this post.
#3: This is very, very true. This is especially, in my mind, true of the current debate over birth control. As you say (so importantly) in #4 and #5, abortion and pregnancy and life is complicated. I am completely pro-choice but...it's complicated. It shouldn't only be considered okay in the case of rape or life threatening problems, but OTOH I can see how discussing that kind of situation can help pro-choice people start to understand why and how it's complicated.
Birth control like the pill, OTOH, IS NOT COMPLICATED. Women often use it to not get pregnant (just like guys often use condoms) and that's okay. Full stop.
#7 is also a very true and disheartening point, and kind of gets at the ways this country is way to the right in general, politically.
*nods*
I'm still all gobsmacked that contraceptive use has become a NATIONAL DEBATE. Really, guys? Really??
Methamphetamine?
(Agree strongly on 1-6, by the way)
I do have a radical liberal card somewhere around here...
Also, did you see this?