American bombshell? Roe vs. Wade....

[spen666]

...

I've never come across any man being 'shouted down' for genuinely upholding women's rights..

So long as he's not trying to tell women, how to do it.

...

QED - you have just proved my point
You want men to do/ think as you tell them and if they disagree... or are men not allowed opinions?


you can't have it both ways.
If you want men to take part in the debate, then you have to accept they may have differing views to the one you prefer

 

[mudsticks]

QED - you have just proved my point
You want men to do/ think as you tell them and if they disagree... or are men not allowed opinions?


you can't have it both ways.
If you want men to take part in the debate, then you have to accept they may have differing views to the one you prefer

You want to 'debate' or have 'opinions' about whether or not women should have control over their own bodies??

That doesn't sound much like support for women's rights to me..

 

[winjim]

QED - you have just proved my point
You want men to do/ think as you tell them and if they disagree... or are men not allowed opinions?


you can't have it both ways.
If you want men to take part in the debate, then you have to accept they may have differing views to the one you prefer

It depends what you think the debate is. To my mind the debate is not 'should women have the right to choose?', but rather 'how can we as a society uphold and facilitate women's reproductive rights?'. That possibly does stray into the territory of trying to figure out if and how it might be necessary under certain circumstances to curtail those rights, but as a general principle, it's about enabling and not removing freedom of choice, which is why as a cis man I feel fine about my contribution.

 

[Milkfloat]

I wonder if Biden's Executive Order will actually work.

 

[theclaud]

It's worth noting that, in keeping with the discursive phenomenon of our times - the co-option of progressive-sounding language by reactionary political actors - anti-abortionists with a long history of concern-trolling the women they are harassing have now adopted the language used to understand and identify coercive control.

Here's a good report on this kind of thing, and following the money behind it, by the ever-excellent Vice. And if you want to see how this kind of thing plays out in one context or another, have a read of the copy for this anti-abortion Edinburgh Fringe show, backed by the creeps and perverts at SPUC. Props to the author of the Vice piece, Sophia Smith, for spotting it.

 

[mudsticks]

It's worth noting that, in keeping with the discursive phenomenon of our times - the co-option of progressive-sounding language by reactionary political actors - anti-abortionists with a long history of concern-trolling the women they are harassing have now adopted the language used to understand and identify coercive control.

Here's a good report on this kind of thing, and following the money behind it, by the ever-excellent Vice. And if you want to see how this kind of thing plays out in one context or another, have a read of the copy for this anti-abortion Edinburgh Fringe show, backed by the creeps and perverts at SPUC. Props to the author of the Vice piece, Sophia Smith, for spotting it.

Sigh..

It's just so dull having to reprise the same old stuff over and over again.

To have to defend, thats if we ever achieved, our rights as people with bodily autonomy.

And to have to 'ask nicely now' if we are to receive support in this, even from the supposedly 'good' men.

In many ways it's all tied up with the current backlash against feminism, denying of comprehension of the concept of 'true consent' rape culture, and all the rest of the misogynistic patriachal shizxle seeping up through the cracks.

I might have to go and overnight on the beach,..As its also waayyy too hot 🔥

 

[spen666]

It depends what you think the debate is. To my mind the debate is not 'should women have the right to choose?', but rather 'how can we as a society uphold and facilitate women's reproductive rights?'. That possibly does stray into the territory of trying to figure out if and how it might be necessary under certain circumstances to curtail those rights, but as a general principle, it's about enabling and not removing freedom of choice, which is why as a cis man I feel fine about my contribution.

So you want to control the debate, in which case, there is no debate at all.

That is fine, but don't complain men don't get involved.

 

[winjim]

So you want to control the debate, in which case, there is no debate at all.

That is fine, but don't complain men don't get involved.

I've been absolutely clear from the beginning of this thread that I don't consider a woman's right to choose to be a subject for debate.

 

[mudsticks]

So you want to control the debate, in which case, there is no debate at all.

That is fine, but don't complain men don't get involved.

So do you think that whether or not women get the right to choose is still 'the debate' here.??

You'd not be alone in believing that to be the case..

Many people do still want to have that control over womens bodies, we hear and see it all the time.
That's why this topic has come up.

But let's be clear they are not being helpful to women, or upholding womens rights, by 'debating' whether or not we 'should' have control .

The men who are helpfully involved, and there are some but not enough imo, are those who fully respect womens rights and who are amplifying that message.

If you still have ambivalence over our right to choose, then you can't really be
helpfully involved, as you're basically in opposition to our rights.

So it's best to be clear where you stand.

 

[Unkraut]

So the response to @spen666 is no. You cannot name a US State where (a) full term abortion is permitted and (b) it is illegal to save a foetus aborted alive.

I listened to a small part of Anglican Unscripted again and contacted them. The States that want to continue very liberal abortion laws include New York or Vermont. I looked up both:

New York

https://www.factcheck.org/2019/02/addressing-new-yorks-new-abortion-law/ This discusses trimester abortions in New York. It says killing a baby once born was and is still considered a homicide so my comment on it being illegal to save a foetus that survives abortion was wrong. Further, AU pointed me to the case of Kermit Gosnell who will spend the rest of his life in prison for such killing, the point being that late abortions can entail this kind of thing happening by virtue of it not being banned, even if extremely rarely.

Vermont

https://www.findlaw.com/state/vermont-law/vermont-abortion-laws.html The statutory definition of legal abortion is it is legal for an abortion to be performed in Vermont at any stage of pregnancy for any reason or for no reason.

I still think I have heard someone claim saving a baby that survives late abortion is not allowed, but either they did and were wrong, or I misunderstood - discussing the possibility of such a law? It would be logical to introduce such a law as saving a baby even in these circumstances nullifies the purpose of the abortion.

 

[winjim]

OK, a couple of back of the envelope scribblings and musings about which I'm willing to be corrected:

• Vermont has some of the most liberal abortion regulations in the USA
• Based on this fact alone you might expect the rate of abortion to be greater than its relative population
• The population of Vermont in 2019 was 624,000 which is about 0.2% of the USA population of 328,000,000
• Abortions in Vermont in 2020 represented about 0.1% of total abortions in the USA

Obviously there's a ton of confounding factors, not least that Vermont is one of the states with the lowest population but it looks interesting to me that abortions seem to be lower per population in the state with the most relaxed abortion regulations.

 

[winjim]

Just checked New York. 6% of population, 12% of abortions which might be more in line with expectations.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Vermont

https://www.findlaw.com/state/vermont-law/vermont-abortion-laws.html The statutory definition of legal abortion is it is legal for an abortion to be performed in Vermont at any stage of pregnancy for any reason or for no reason.

I still think I have heard someone claim saving a baby that survives late abortion is not allowed, but either they did and were wrong, or I misunderstood - discussing the possibility of such a law? It would be logical to introduce such a law as saving a baby even in these circumstances nullifies the purpose of the abortion.

Are there any records of late abortions in Vermont, ie third trimester, other than for a non viable foetus?

 

[Fab Foodie]

FFS....
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/n...ortion-time-limit-to-be-reduced-in-uk-329085/

Nadine farking destroy everything Norries....

 

[winjim]

So if a fetus is defined in law as a person then a pregnant woman can use the carpool lane, right?

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/11/us/pregnant-woman-hov-lane/index.html