fozy tornip
fozympotent
Stodgy, much?
Any chance of a musical interlude?
Any chance of a musical interlude?
Gender again. Sorry!
- Thread starter theclaud
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
fozy tornip
fozympotent
I'm all for stodge - Give us this day our daily bread - but every now and then a gear change would do no harm.
multitool
Guest
By all means, change gear...
fozy tornip
fozympotent
AuroraSaab
Squire
As soon as someone resurrected the thread I knew you'd be along to post your latest KJK obsession and have us believe she's the elected prime minister of UK feminism.
OP
OP
theclaud
Reading around the chip
Can't argue with that. But I'm running out of ideas...
OP
OP
theclaud
Reading around the chip
AuroraSaab
Squire
Any chance of you actually giving your opinion for once? Should it be abortion on demand, right up to the date of birth or not? My impression is that Stock is saying this is an extreme position, as is no abortion allowed whatsoever.
It's a short and lightweight article that says 'Abortion rights aren't simplistic'. You just don't like Kathleen Stock.
To me, the law in the UK strikes the right balance between a woman's right to choose and the increasing rights of the foetus as the pregnancy progresses. It's naive to suggest that there aren't more factors involved (in some cases) than just the woman's right to bodily autonomy.
It's a short and lightweight article that says 'Abortion rights aren't simplistic'. You just don't like Kathleen Stock.
To me, the law in the UK strikes the right balance between a woman's right to choose and the increasing rights of the foetus as the pregnancy progresses. It's naive to suggest that there aren't more factors involved (in some cases) than just the woman's right to bodily autonomy.
Rusty Nails
Country Member
Much easier to pick an enemy and attack everything they say, even if they don't say very much.
Don't blame me, them's the forum roolz. 100% right or 100% wrong, pick a side...even in this non-binary arena.
OP
OP
theclaud
Reading around the chip
Jeez. It's pretty basic stuff, Aurora. There is no point in a pregnancy at which a woman ceases to become a whole person in her own right, and therefore no, there is no point at which the interests of a foetus over-ride hers. All this emotive stuff about abortions right up to the date of birth is precisely that - leveraging outliers and unusual or distressing circumstances to avoid conceding autonomy and therefore full humanity to women.
And no, I don't like Stock, but I didn't start from a position of not liking her - it's grown upon me as she has either become, or revealed herself to be, more conservative and reactionary. I can't prevent people regarding women as so much potting soil for a foetus or as a custodian of a man's issue - indeed, it's a position I expect to hear from the likes of Unkraut, and indeed heard (a little less expectedly) from @icowden upthread. Unkraut doesn't claim to be a feminist, or to be remotely interested in women's rights, though, whereas you are still pretending that Stock is both of these things. If you are equivocating about women's bodily autonomy in the face of a worldwide attack on women's reproductive rights, you can, frankly, get in the fucking sea.
AuroraSaab
Squire
'Get in the f*cking sea' lol. I'd be surprised if your view - which is that a foetus has no rights whatsoever, literally zero - until the moment it appears outside the mother's body at 39 weeks is a common one, even amongst women. Most people seem to acknowledge that a foetus has increasing rights after the stage where they could live independently outside the womb. There's very little difference between a 38 week foetus and a new born.
Yes, late term abortions are rare and their availability is a necessity but suggesting that late stage foetuses might have some rights is not an anti-feminist position. There's an obvious discussion to be had whether these rights should ever override the wishes of the woman.
This position you seem to hold - that if every woman doesn't endorse bodily autonomy in every single situation - it means women will lose all their abortion rights is simply blackmailing women to feel their reproductive rights depend on them endorsing something entirely different than the concensus we have achieved in the UK.
It's also astounding that when it comes to 38 week old foetuses you seem to know for certain they aren't human beings with their own rights, but when it comes to 'What's a woman?' then suddenly you're all 'It's complicated and nuanced but anyone can be one'.
In short, you're just misrepresenting Stocks's position in order to take a pot shot at a woman you don't like.
Yes, late term abortions are rare and their availability is a necessity but suggesting that late stage foetuses might have some rights is not an anti-feminist position. There's an obvious discussion to be had whether these rights should ever override the wishes of the woman.
This position you seem to hold - that if every woman doesn't endorse bodily autonomy in every single situation - it means women will lose all their abortion rights is simply blackmailing women to feel their reproductive rights depend on them endorsing something entirely different than the concensus we have achieved in the UK.
It's also astounding that when it comes to 38 week old foetuses you seem to know for certain they aren't human beings with their own rights, but when it comes to 'What's a woman?' then suddenly you're all 'It's complicated and nuanced but anyone can be one'.
In short, you're just misrepresenting Stocks's position in order to take a pot shot at a woman you don't like.
monkers
Legendary Member
It's always there - the unsubstantiated claim - along with the self-appointment to speak for others - opinion rendered useless.
