The cruelty and misogyny of forced birth politics

[Anonymous]

"It’s not because they hate women, it is because they believe an unborn fetus is a person and thou shalt not kill."

Sorry I don't believe that. There are so many ways in which they cherry pick Christian beliefs.

I'm sure that there are people who believe that, and people who refuse to look any deeper into their own motivations. But taken as a part of the overall picture of our society and our sexual double standards, there IS a deep misogyny at play that you are being intentionally blind to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"It’s not because they hate women, it is because they believe an unborn fetus is a person and thou shalt not kill."

Sorry I don't believe that. There are so many ways in which they cherry pick Christian beliefs.

I'm sure that there are people who believe that, and people who refuse to look any deeper into their own motivations. But taken as a part of the overall picture of our society and our sexual double standards, there IS a deep misogyny at play that you are being intentionally blind to.

There’s deep misogyny in Ukrainians telling men ages 18-60 they can’t leave the country so they can be conscripted to fight the heavily armed Russians while women and children are free to go to other countries and flee. For some reason I don’t hear a single women’s rights group in America complain about this. I wonder why?

If a man sees his girlfriend getting punched in the face by a man there’s a deep misogyny involved in him attacking the man who punched his girlfriend. See where I’m going here? It’s a selective weaponizing of misogyny in very specific situations because you disagree with something on a political level.

[Anonymous]

Your comparisons are not apt.

There isn't a situation in the world I can think of where a group of almost all women is controlling males and suggesting the death penalty for disobedience. If you think of one let us know.

[Anonymous]

NP. For those of you who don’t support abortion rights, how do you feel about the text in Missouri’s proposed new law that does not provide an exception for ectopic?
I had an ectopic pregnancy that fortunately was caught early enough to be treated with methotrexate. Missouri seems to be insinuating that it would be preferable for me to die (leaving my older child motherless), suffer extreme blood loss, and/or possibly lose future fertility rather than abort an unviable pregnancy. Really???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"It’s not because they hate women, it is because they believe an unborn fetus is a person and thou shalt not kill."

Sorry I don't believe that. There are so many ways in which they cherry pick Christian beliefs.

I'm sure that there are people who believe that, and people who refuse to look any deeper into their own motivations. But taken as a part of the overall picture of our society and our sexual double standards, there IS a deep misogyny at play that you are being intentionally blind to.

There’s deep misogyny in Ukrainians telling men ages 18-60 they can’t leave the country so they can be conscripted to fight the heavily armed Russians while women and children are free to go to other countries and flee. For some reason I don’t hear a single women’s rights group in America complain about this. I wonder why?

If a man sees his girlfriend getting punched in the face by a man there’s a deep misogyny involved in him attacking the man who punched his girlfriend. See where I’m going here? It’s a selective weaponizing of misogyny in very specific situations because you disagree with something on a political level.

I mean I think the Ukraine should surrender. I also think we should we helping refugees fleeing Russia. That’s my opinion as a woman, probably not a very popular opinion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An abortion should be a decision between a woman and her primary care physician. No one else. In some states she has to be literally in the act of dying before they can intervene even if the fetuses are not viable. Check out what happened to the woman in Ohio who was pregnant with twins. She had to labor and birth them alone because they couldn't intervene until she was on the brink of death. Even then, two doctors had to agree. Then to make matters worse, one of the twins was born. Dad in Ohio refused to issue a birth certificate to him. Almost like he wasn't a person after all. And never was. The thing is that woman and her husband wanted those babies more than anything in the world but she shouldn't have to risk her life for them. She had other children at home as well.

Period.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"It’s not because they hate women, it is because they believe an unborn fetus is a person and thou shalt not kill."

Sorry I don't believe that. There are so many ways in which they cherry pick Christian beliefs.

I'm sure that there are people who believe that, and people who refuse to look any deeper into their own motivations. But taken as a part of the overall picture of our society and our sexual double standards, there IS a deep misogyny at play that you are being intentionally blind to.

There’s deep misogyny in Ukrainians telling men ages 18-60 they can’t leave the country so they can be conscripted to fight the heavily armed Russians while women and children are free to go to other countries and flee. For some reason I don’t hear a single women’s rights group in America complain about this. I wonder why?

If a man sees his girlfriend getting punched in the face by a man there’s a deep misogyny involved in him attacking the man who punched his girlfriend. See where I’m going here? It’s a selective weaponizing of misogyny in very specific situations because you disagree with something on a political level.

I mean I think the Ukraine should surrender. I also think we should we helping refugees fleeing Russia. That’s my opinion as a woman, probably not a very popular opinion.

1. Women will keep the kids with them. And hopefully get them to safety. Putin is fine with shooting women AND children, but at least the rest of the world sees them as obvious civilian targets, and an abomination.
2. Since all wars are started by men, and the vast majority of world leaders are men, I’m personally fine with women not being drafted. I don’t want my son drafted either, but since my daughter’s reproductive rights are decided by men, and 95% of corporate boards have one or fewer “diverse” members (meaning one woman, POC, openly gay person, but definitely not two), there’s no need to pay the dues when we’re not members of “The Club.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. For those of you who don’t support abortion rights, how do you feel about the text in Missouri’s proposed new law that does not provide an exception for ectopic?
I had an ectopic pregnancy that fortunately was caught early enough to be treated with methotrexate. Missouri seems to be insinuating that it would be preferable for me to die (leaving my older child motherless), suffer extreme blood loss, and/or possibly lose future fertility rather than abort an unviable pregnancy. Really???

OP here.

It was literally that bill that had me start this thread. It is the suggested law that proves that the whole forced birther political belief is based on hating women and punishing them for existing. There is nothing else to be taken from the suggestion that a woman, with a wanted pregnancy that will kill her and will kill her embryo if it’s not treated, should just die. “For life.”

The women who obediently vote forced birther because they’re not like those women (at least not anymore; statistically speaking, forced birther women voters have abortions at the same rates as normal women) would do well to understand that for misogynists, there are no “good” women, and “good” women will get ground up under the cruelty and misogyny too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain the “if something can’t survive on its own then it is not a big deal to abort its life” philosophy to me? Do you apply the same rationale to newborns, elderly people, and severely disabled people?

I’m not aware of any newborns, elderly people, or severely disabled people that need to be tethered to the bodily systems of another human being to survive. Some require organ transplants or blood infusions, but there is no law requiring their friends or family to give it to them.

Heck, in America, a corpse has more rights to its body than a pregnant woman.

It’s this.

PP who’s feigning stupidity, you know we can see through you, right? We cannot compel people to donate blood, pieces of liver, marrow or kidneys. We can’t even take perfectly good live-saving organs after death without the appropriate permission. But forced birthers want to compel women to stay pregnant, and as the Michigan GOP has demonstrated, they want to take away women’s ability not to get pregnant.

Covid vaccine was developed using fetal cells from an abortion. What about that?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8205255/





This blows the whole “fetuses are not people!” argument away. If fetuses aren’t people, why are we using their cells to help people?

And we are using human cells without any consent; the pp that says she couldn’t use one, a single one, of her father’s cells to save her own life got that wrong. We are definitely using cells from aborted babies to save our lives.

Wow.

Cells from an abortion belong to the mother. Consent was given by the person whose body produced the cells. This really doesn’t even warrant a response but I am feeling generous this morning.

Why didn’t we just use the mother’s cells to develop the covid vaccine? Her body “produced “ these life saving cells?

We did. You are the only person who doesn’t see that clearly.

no, because we could not use the mother’s cells. we used the her cells and the father’s cells combined: the cells of their child.

No, every cell in an embryo was created by the mothers body. The father only provided DNA. DNA is not a living cell. DNA are only the instructions.

If you don’t understand science that is ok but don’t act like you have some secret knowledge and everyone else is just ignorant.

Speaking of science, do you not know sperm is the male reproductive cell?

Did you know that the male sperm cell ceases to exist once an egg is fertilized? The first cell of an embryo is a zygote. A zygote cannot be divided into less than 1 cell. Therefor the zygote is produced by the female body. She doesn’t need consent to do whatever she wants with cells produced by her own body.

Another (weird) lie. It doesn’t cease to exist; it’s half the zygote.

A zygote is a single cell. Two cells cannot makeup one single cell without ceasing to be two independent cells. 1+1 /= 1

In human fertilization, a released ovum (a haploid secondary oocyte with replicate chromosome copies) and a haploid sperm cell (male gamete)—combine to form a single 2n diploid cell called the zygote.

Exactly. One single cell.

Comprised of a cell each from the parents. That’s inconvenient for you, but you don’t seem to
mind be wrong, so full speed ahead!

This is the fallacy of abortion being "a women's choice." It's not a natural choice nor a natural right anymore than stepping on a bug, killing a mouse, or eradicating an internal disease. The only thing that matters in all of this is the legal determination of when this entity is considered a human life. At that point, killing that human life would be the same as killing a newborn, an invalid, an elderly person with dementia or terminal disease, etc. Prior to that point it should be equivalent (legally) to killing a foreign body in the woman's body (germ, virus, parasite, etc.). Scientifically, the argument is that this point is around 20-24 weeks. Some states are trying to make it 15 weeks. Either way that is at least 3 months from time of conception. Is it really that difficult, if you're a woman having sex with one or more partners to monitor your monthly cycle and take a home pregnancy test in those first 3 months if you miss your normal period? If you're positive and don't want a child, then get an abortion immediately. The boyfriend/partner/husband can also participate in this same decision process, with the decision still being the woman's prior to the 15 or 24 week point.

In cases of rape - do the same. Take a pregnancy test early and take action as desired. In case of a dangerous pregnancy (threat of life to mother and/or child) then different laws should apply with protection of mother being the priority with consultation of doctor and spouse (when applicable).

Why is this so hard to comprehend and agree to?

This is such a privileged and simplistic point of view. What’s it like to go through life without an imagination or empathy?

Dumbest counterargument ever. What are you even talking about? Empathy for whom? The woman who doesn’t care enough or is too lazy to take a pregnancy test? Really?

There’s that cruelty and misogyny again!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is it that the same people who wouldn’t wear masks or take vaccines because it was government coercion want to use government coercion to force a pregnant woman to have a baby? Seems inconsistent. Sounds like “personal freedom” only applies to what they prefer. Do I have it wrong?

And why do these people privilege the “life” of the zygote over the life of the mother?

One thing crazy Repubs never seem to realize is that rights are never absolute and are frequently in conflict. Abortion is a case in point. Same with one’s “right” not to wear a mask or get a vaccine vs. public health. Repubs desperately need a civics lesson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There’s that cruelty and misogyny again!

+1
I can’t believe in our year of the lord 2022 there are those people who don’t understand anything. Like:

- it’s all well and good to tell rape victims to “take an early pregnancy test” and then to take appropriate action; that’s an easy thing to say but the reality is that many rape victims compartmentalize and wall off their rapes, try to deny that they even happened. And even if they didn’t have that reaction and took a pregnancy test:

- Texas is trying a six week abortion ban. That’s literally before you some women can even test positive.

- let’s say you “get lucky” and can see your positive pregnancy test. Tough cookies, every abortion provider in Texas is all booked up for the next month and all the nearest states are booked up for three months.

This is all about punishing women. For more evidence that the GOP just really, really hates women and wants to punish them for having the gall to have a vagina and a uterus, this proposed Tennessee law would allow rapists’ family members to sue the abortion provider. https://www.today.com/parents/pregnancy/tennessee-bill-rapists-sue-abortion-rcna20581

It’s about cruelty and misogyny.

[Anonymous]

Pregnancy does not spread undiscriminately in the open air the way a virus does. Hence, the need for vaccine mandates.

[Anonymous]

They’re being very open about the fact that they’re coming for birth control now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP of this thread here and the forced birthers have amply proven the fatuousness of their arguments, basically arguing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin but missing the actual point which is:

You’re overjoyed to punish women. Like you’re clearly giddy about it. The hateful politics of forced birtherism - and yes, it has its roots in the patriarchy and organized, conservative religion - exist to punish women for existing, but especially to punish women for imagining that they should have some say what happens to their body.

Sepsis wards will be back. Children will be left motherless. Women will be maimed and made sterile and families who wanted to have more children will be broken. This is the real deal, not whether or not a zygote is a human.

The state cannot even compel someone to donate blood, yet here it is, compelling women to donate their body and life to a state they don’t want. If you say, “well, they chose to have sex!” I’m willing to play along in your Pollyanna world in which women and girls are always granted bodily autonomy (although your forced birth politics prove that they are not). It doesn’t matter. Humans get to say what happens to their bodies, especially something as life altering as pregnancy and birth.

Carry on with your cruelty though, but be aware that the game is up. No one believes you give a rat’s about life anymore. You just hate women.

You’re simply close minded. You think you know better than everyone else and have shut your mind to the possibility that the issue is NOT about a woman’s choice at all. It’s about something more fundamental… when does human life begin? But, go ahead and hate all men. That is your prerogative.

As far as the state … they can take peoples lives (death penalty) … they can put people in prison. They do this to a lot more men then women too, so does the state hate men too? No, the state is simply a reflection of the people and the people in some states are very religious and elect and vote upon those lines. It’s not because they hate women, it is because they believe an unborn fetus is a person and thou shalt not kill. Funny enough they also believe in an eye for an eye so they vote for the death penalty. Anyhow, you’ll continue to never convince anyone of your point of view due to your strong hatred of men and insistence that pro lifers are so because they hate women. Just a dumb argument.

This. I often see the argument from liberal pro-choice voters that the pro life crowd hates women. I disagree. I am pro-choice and a moderate but grew up in a very conservative, almost fundamentalist society. My impression is that this group of people thinks you’re killing a baby. If anything, the women are ignored. There isn’t anymore hatred of women than from the left. If anything, they think women should be worshipped and that their job of giving birth is an important one. There seemed to be almost an obsession with having babies and raising a family. I truly don’t think they hate women anymore than any other group hates women. If anything it’s just a strong opinion that the fetus is a baby.

I also don’t think that many liberal pro-choice voters understand how many people don’t support killing babies. My own husband is fairly liberal and after recent ultrasounds has talked about how he could never support a woman getting an abortion. That it’s cruel. Objectively, I support abortion fully but I also recognize and understand why people dislike it.

I'm liberal and pro-choice, but grew up in a very religious, conservative, and anti-choice household and community. Worshipping women solely because of their ability to gestate babies is a form of misogyny, reducing us merely to one of the infinite variety of things we are capable of. Ignoring the role of a woman in carrying a pregnancy to term is a way of erasing us as people and minimizing the extreme health risk that every woman takes on by carrying a pregnancy.

I don't know what to tell you, but responses like your DH's from men who see an ultrasound for the first time make me ill. How many ultrasounds has your DH had to experience? How many of them were transvaginal? How many times has he had to look at an ultrasound of what was previously a healthy pregnancy showing a fetus that has stopped developing. Looking at ultrasounds over years of fertility treatments and miscarriages taught me that every single baby who is born healthy is an unlikely miracle. As someone who almost died giving birth to a baby after an otherwise healthy pregnancy, I have exactly zero tolerance for people who would minimize the risk and effort that go into gestating and delivering a baby. I truly hope you don't have a DD, given how little your DH will value her life if she ever becomes pregnant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP of this thread here and the forced birthers have amply proven the fatuousness of their arguments, basically arguing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin but missing the actual point which is:

You’re overjoyed to punish women. Like you’re clearly giddy about it. The hateful politics of forced birtherism - and yes, it has its roots in the patriarchy and organized, conservative religion - exist to punish women for existing, but especially to punish women for imagining that they should have some say what happens to their body.

Sepsis wards will be back. Children will be left motherless. Women will be maimed and made sterile and families who wanted to have more children will be broken. This is the real deal, not whether or not a zygote is a human.

The state cannot even compel someone to donate blood, yet here it is, compelling women to donate their body and life to a state they don’t want. If you say, “well, they chose to have sex!” I’m willing to play along in your Pollyanna world in which women and girls are always granted bodily autonomy (although your forced birth politics prove that they are not). It doesn’t matter. Humans get to say what happens to their bodies, especially something as life altering as pregnancy and birth.

Carry on with your cruelty though, but be aware that the game is up. No one believes you give a rat’s about life anymore. You just hate women.

You’re simply close minded. You think you know better than everyone else and have shut your mind to the possibility that the issue is NOT about a woman’s choice at all. It’s about something more fundamental… when does human life begin? But, go ahead and hate all men. That is your prerogative.

As far as the state … they can take peoples lives (death penalty) … they can put people in prison. They do this to a lot more men then women too, so does the state hate men too? No, the state is simply a reflection of the people and the people in some states are very religious and elect and vote upon those lines. It’s not because they hate women, it is because they believe an unborn fetus is a person and thou shalt not kill. Funny enough they also believe in an eye for an eye so they vote for the death penalty. Anyhow, you’ll continue to never convince anyone of your point of view due to your strong hatred of men and insistence that pro lifers are so because they hate women. Just a dumb argument.

This. I often see the argument from liberal pro-choice voters that the pro life crowd hates women. I disagree. I am pro-choice and a moderate but grew up in a very conservative, almost fundamentalist society. My impression is that this group of people thinks you’re killing a baby. If anything, the women are ignored. There isn’t anymore hatred of women than from the left. If anything, they think women should be worshipped and that their job of giving birth is an important one. There seemed to be almost an obsession with having babies and raising a family. I truly don’t think they hate women anymore than any other group hates women. If anything it’s just a strong opinion that the fetus is a baby.

I also don’t think that many liberal pro-choice voters understand how many people don’t support killing babies. My own husband is fairly liberal and after recent ultrasounds has talked about how he could never support a woman getting an abortion. That it’s cruel. Objectively, I support abortion fully but I also recognize and understand why people dislike it.

I'm liberal and pro-choice, but grew up in a very religious, conservative, and anti-choice household and community. Worshipping women solely because of their ability to gestate babies is a form of misogyny, reducing us merely to one of the infinite variety of things we are capable of. Ignoring the role of a woman in carrying a pregnancy to term is a way of erasing us as people and minimizing the extreme health risk that every woman takes on by carrying a pregnancy.

I don't know what to tell you, but responses like your DH's from men who see an ultrasound for the first time make me ill. How many ultrasounds has your DH had to experience? How many of them were transvaginal? How many times has he had to look at an ultrasound of what was previously a healthy pregnancy showing a fetus that has stopped developing. Looking at ultrasounds over years of fertility treatments and miscarriages taught me that every single baby who is born healthy is an unlikely miracle. As someone who almost died giving birth to a baby after an otherwise healthy pregnancy, I have exactly zero tolerance for people who would minimize the risk and effort that go into gestating and delivering a baby. I truly hope you don't have a DD, given how little your DH will value her life if she ever becomes pregnant.

It makes you ill that my husband saw his little girl moving around in the womb and couldn’t imagine ending her life? Sorry, but what’s wrong with you? Would it be better if he saw his little girl and wanted to harm her? I would think that most pregnant women would want their partner to love the child and care about its wellbeing. What happened to you that you have such a hatred towards a baby in the womb? I can practically feel the anger seething from what you wrote.