The cruelty and misogyny of forced birth politics

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro-lifers are never going to stop with a 15 week ban. I’d be shocked if that’s what the Court rules.

They already didn’t because the Texas ban is six weeks.

They are also moving against IVF
And birth control
No control over your reproductive health.
No exceptions.

I would be OK banning "egg" donation and surrogacy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro-lifers are never going to stop with a 15 week ban. I’d be shocked if that’s what the Court rules.

They already didn’t because the Texas ban is six weeks.

They are also moving against IVF
And birth control
No control over your reproductive health.
No exceptions.

I would be OK banning "egg" donation and surrogacy.

I would be OK with forced sterilization of the people pushing these laws, or anyone found forcing their children to go to certain churches.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro-lifers are never going to stop with a 15 week ban. I’d be shocked if that’s what the Court rules.

They already didn’t because the Texas ban is six weeks.

They are also moving against IVF
And birth control
No control over your reproductive health.
No exceptions.

I would be OK banning "egg" donation and surrogacy.

Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro-lifers are never going to stop with a 15 week ban. I’d be shocked if that’s what the Court rules.

They already didn’t because the Texas ban is six weeks.

They are also moving against IVF
And birth control
No control over your reproductive health.
No exceptions.

I would be OK banning "egg" donation and surrogacy.

Why?

The fertility industry targets and exploits low-income woman, increasingly in the developing world, in the quest for the perfect (usually white) baby while children languish in childcare. Commercial surrogacy is banned in most countries for this reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro-lifers are never going to stop with a 15 week ban. I’d be shocked if that’s what the Court rules.

They already didn’t because the Texas ban is six weeks.

They are also moving against IVF
And birth control
No control over your reproductive health.
No exceptions.

I would be OK banning "egg" donation and surrogacy.

Why?

The fertility industry targets and exploits low-income woman, increasingly in the developing world, in the quest for the perfect (usually white) baby while children languish in childcare. Commercial surrogacy is banned in most countries for this reason.

If you believe women should have choice, then women should have all the options. That includes surrogacy and egg donation.
Also: the couples using surrogates want a biological child. The children in foster care not relevant to their family planning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro-lifers are never going to stop with a 15 week ban. I’d be shocked if that’s what the Court rules.

They already didn’t because the Texas ban is six weeks.

They are also moving against IVF
And birth control
No control over your reproductive health.
No exceptions.

I would be OK banning "egg" donation and surrogacy.

Why?

The fertility industry targets and exploits low-income woman, increasingly in the developing world, in the quest for the perfect (usually white) baby while children languish in childcare. Commercial surrogacy is banned in most countries for this reason.

If you believe women should have choice, then women should have all the options. That includes surrogacy and egg donation.
Also: the couples using surrogates want a biological child. The children in foster care not relevant to their family planning.

Too bad! We all want stuff.

Surrogacy is unethical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro-lifers are never going to stop with a 15 week ban. I’d be shocked if that’s what the Court rules.

They already didn’t because the Texas ban is six weeks.

They are also moving against IVF
And birth control
No control over your reproductive health.
No exceptions.

I would be OK banning "egg" donation and surrogacy.

Why?

The fertility industry targets and exploits low-income woman, increasingly in the developing world, in the quest for the perfect (usually white) baby while children languish in childcare. Commercial surrogacy is banned in most countries for this reason.

If you believe women should have choice, then women should have all the options. That includes surrogacy and egg donation.
Also: the couples using surrogates want a biological child. The children in foster care not relevant to their family planning.

No. I don't support prostitution, either. I don't support turning poor women into egg production machines or rent-a-wombs so that, in some cases, wealthy white men or white men and women can have "designer babies" rather than adopting a child with more melanin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro-lifers are never going to stop with a 15 week ban. I’d be shocked if that’s what the Court rules.

They already didn’t because the Texas ban is six weeks.

They are also moving against IVF
And birth control
No control over your reproductive health.
No exceptions.

I would be OK banning "egg" donation and surrogacy.

Why?

The fertility industry targets and exploits low-income woman, increasingly in the developing world, in the quest for the perfect (usually white) baby while children languish in childcare. Commercial surrogacy is banned in most countries for this reason.

If you believe women should have choice, then women should have all the options. That includes surrogacy and egg donation.
Also: the couples using surrogates want a biological child. The children in foster care not relevant to their family planning.

Egg donation has bad long-term health effects and preys on poor young females.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro-lifers are never going to stop with a 15 week ban. I’d be shocked if that’s what the Court rules.

They already didn’t because the Texas ban is six weeks.

They are also moving against IVF
And birth control
No control over your reproductive health.
No exceptions.

I would be OK banning "egg" donation and surrogacy.

Why?

The fertility industry targets and exploits low-income woman, increasingly in the developing world, in the quest for the perfect (usually white) baby while children languish in childcare. Commercial surrogacy is banned in most countries for this reason.

If you believe women should have choice, then women should have all the options. That includes surrogacy and egg donation.
Also: the couples using surrogates want a biological child. The children in foster care not relevant to their family planning.

No. I don't support prostitution, either. I don't support turning poor women into egg production machines or rent-a-wombs so that, in some cases, wealthy white men or white men and women can have "designer babies" rather than adopting a child with more melanin.

Tell me you don’t know anything about adoption without telling me you don’t know anything about adoption.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nine people in DC charged with civil rights violations. If convicted they each face eleven years in prison. Of the nine, only one could possibly have a viable uterus.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/feds-charged-blocking-dc-reproductive-health-clinic-837684

That link doesn’t work for me so here’s a better one. https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/crime/anti-abortion-protesters-indicted-on-felony-charge-for-blocking-dc-clinic-lauren-handy-william-goodman-jonathan-darnell/65-1f6cd1f5-f5f9-4a05-a640-b0df577f19bd

I think the only woman in the above civil rights case with a functioning uterus kept her own aborted fetuses at home. DC Police did a search warrant on her home and found remains of five preborn children. Was she getting pregnant just so she could abort them? Wow what a nut. She proves how hypocritical the violently pro life group is.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/salvadorhernandez/anti-abortion-activist-fetuses

So are they hers or someone elses? If they are hers, are you allowed to keep your aborted fetuses?

Lauren Handy's anti-abortion group now claims it took 115 fetuses from outside DC clinic
https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/local/dc/anti-abortion-activists-claim-they-took-115-fetuses-from-outside-a-dc-clinic-lauren-handy-progressive-anti-abortion-uprsing-surgi-clinic/65-bd49467d-939c-476b-b3c1-bf6120ec453e

Forced birthers are ignoring this story with all their might.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nine people in DC charged with civil rights violations. If convicted they each face eleven years in prison. Of the nine, only one could possibly have a viable uterus.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/feds-charged-blocking-dc-reproductive-health-clinic-837684

That link doesn’t work for me so here’s a better one. https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/crime/anti-abortion-protesters-indicted-on-felony-charge-for-blocking-dc-clinic-lauren-handy-william-goodman-jonathan-darnell/65-1f6cd1f5-f5f9-4a05-a640-b0df577f19bd

I think the only woman in the above civil rights case with a functioning uterus kept her own aborted fetuses at home. DC Police did a search warrant on her home and found remains of five preborn children. Was she getting pregnant just so she could abort them? Wow what a nut. She proves how hypocritical the violently pro life group is.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/salvadorhernandez/anti-abortion-activist-fetuses

So are they hers or someone elses? If they are hers, are you allowed to keep your aborted fetuses?

Lauren Handy's anti-abortion group now claims it took 115 fetuses from outside DC clinic
https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/local/dc/anti-abortion-activists-claim-they-took-115-fetuses-from-outside-a-dc-clinic-lauren-handy-progressive-anti-abortion-uprsing-surgi-clinic/65-bd49467d-939c-476b-b3c1-bf6120ec453e

Wow.That’s a lot of child trafficking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nine people in DC charged with civil rights violations. If convicted they each face eleven years in prison. Of the nine, only one could possibly have a viable uterus.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/feds-charged-blocking-dc-reproductive-health-clinic-837684

That link doesn’t work for me so here’s a better one. https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/crime/anti-abortion-protesters-indicted-on-felony-charge-for-blocking-dc-clinic-lauren-handy-william-goodman-jonathan-darnell/65-1f6cd1f5-f5f9-4a05-a640-b0df577f19bd

I think the only woman in the above civil rights case with a functioning uterus kept her own aborted fetuses at home. DC Police did a search warrant on her home and found remains of five preborn children. Was she getting pregnant just so she could abort them? Wow what a nut. She proves how hypocritical the violently pro life group is.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/salvadorhernandez/anti-abortion-activist-fetuses

So are they hers or someone elses? If they are hers, are you allowed to keep your aborted fetuses?

Lauren Handy's anti-abortion group now claims it took 115 fetuses from outside DC clinic
https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/local/dc/anti-abortion-activists-claim-they-took-115-fetuses-from-outside-a-dc-clinic-lauren-handy-progressive-anti-abortion-uprsing-surgi-clinic/65-bd49467d-939c-476b-b3c1-bf6120ec453e

Wow.That’s a lot of child trafficking.

I think in the forced birth reckoning it would be grave robbing or some such, but it’s just an absolutely bananas crazy thing to have done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Oklahoma legislature just passed a bill making performing abortion illegal.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/04/05/okla-lawmakers-approve-bill-make-performing-an-abortion-illegal/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like there is room for compromise on this issue. Most abortions occur in the first trimester and most Americans are okay with abortion at that time. 15 weeks is a pretty standard regulation around the world.

I have seen research that suggests that those most likely to have a post-15 week abortion are poor women who couldn’t access care prior to that time or women who have severe medical issues. My personal opinion is that I don’t think we need to ban abortion after 15 weeks because it is already so rare and the ban would affect vulnerable people.

However, many Americans don’t agree with me, so I think an appropriate compromise is around 15 weeks. This is a political argument, not a viability argument or a morality argument.

(Currently 30 weeks pregnant with insomnia and posting on DCUM at 4 am…)

No. I don’t think we need abortion bans at any point. It’s a medical procedure. Regulate it like any other medical procedure and then bow out.

Exactly. It's misogynistic to pretend we need to protect women from late term abortions, as if they are making emotional decisions to get back into a bikini faster or something. Leave it up to the woman and the dr. Neither are making these decisions lightly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pro-lifers are never going to stop with a 15 week ban. I’d be shocked if that’s what the Court rules.

They already didn’t because the Texas ban is six weeks.

They are also moving against IVF
And birth control
No control over your reproductive health.
No exceptions.

I would be OK banning "egg" donation and surrogacy.

Why?

The fertility industry targets and exploits low-income woman, increasingly in the developing world, in the quest for the perfect (usually white) baby while children languish in childcare. Commercial surrogacy is banned in most countries for this reason.

If you believe women should have choice, then women should have all the options. That includes surrogacy and egg donation.
Also: the couples using surrogates want a biological child. The children in foster care not relevant to their family planning.

Too bad! We all want stuff.

Surrogacy is unethical.

Just curious, do you give as much ethical consideration to abortion as you do to surrogacy?