In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Tag: Abortion

After-Abortion e-Cards

card

Created by Exhale, a fantastic non-judgmental after-abortion counseling organization. This isn’t one of those “Repent, Sinner!” abortion groups, or even an organization which assumes that all women are “hurt” by abortion. Exhale recognizes that the choice to have an abortion is often a complex one, and that there are many women who feel… something afterwards, but who don’t necessarily want the guilt or the moralizing that religious after-abortion organizations focus on. It’s a great organization, and while e-cards are in general a little bit trite, at least this gives friends and family members some way to extend well-wishes to the women they care about. And the cards themselves recognize the diversity of women who use Exhale’s services — women who feel no regret, women who are religious, women who feel that abortion is a loss, etc. Any recognition that women who terminate pregnancies are diverse individuals with differing needs, wants and reactions is, in my book, a good thing.

Although, I’ll admit, I never thought I’d see the “after-abortion e-card.” How long until Hallmark catches on?

That’s one way to discredit feminist bloggers

Attribute the words of their commenters to the bloggers themselves.

Fox News lies about Feministing

I just found this and I’m pissed the fuck off.

“iFeminist” Wendy McElroy has written a piece for Fox News, Continuing to Defame the ‘Duke 3’ as Rapists, where we’re misquoted:

Even the popular gender feminist site Feministing had conceded “it probably isn’t appropriate to continue calling this the ‘Duke rape case’.”

That’s funny, because I’m pretty sure it was a commenter that wrote this–not us. Congrats, noname: Fox News loves you!

I’d like to think this was a mistake (despite the fact that it’s pretty damn clear who is blogging and who is commenting) so I’ve emailed McElroy about a retraction. But still–ugh.

I’d sure be thrilled if N.’s comments about race or the latest Robert troll’s comments about the need to keep one’s legs shut to prevent abortion were attributed to any of the bloggers here.

And I don’t think for one hot second that it was any kind of “mistake” on McElroy’s part.

While you’re emailing McElroy, might as well cc Fox News online.

Why I Am Pro-Choice

Well.

After my cobloggers’ superlative contributions, I’m not sure I really have much to offer. I was brought up to believe in personal sovereignty. My mother has always been horrified by the idea of anyone dictating another woman’s reproductive decisions, even though she would not consider abortion for herself. Forced pregnancy, as far as she is concerned, is as much a violation as rape, and just as repellent. It is abusive to arrogate that control. It is profoundly dangerous. All attempts to do so have resulted in nothing but grief for women and their children. I am pro-choice because I trust women to determine what is safest and best for themselves, and because I cannot trust myself to make that decision for anyone else. I don’t have the right to steal a woman’s joy in her own freedom, or in her decision to become a parent. I don’t have the right to tell my mother that she became less of a person when she became pregnant with me. It’s that simple.

Thanks, Abby!

As a couple of commenters pointed out in the other thread, my state also (narrowly) rejected restrictions on abortion, namely a parental-notification law:

Similar to a measure on the fall 2005 ballot, Proposition 85 would have required physicians to notify a parent or guardian when an unmarried girl younger than 18 sought an abortion and would have imposed a 48-hour waiting period before the procedure could be performed.

The law would not have required a parent or guardian to consent to the abortion.

This caught my eye:

“We know about 75 percent of Californians support the idea,” said spokesman Albin Rhomberg.

I wonder if this statistic is compromised by the ambivalence that characterizes so many moderate perspectives on abortion, which tend to boil down to, “It’s wrong, and some women (like those serial aborters I keep hearing about) shouldn’t do it, but some women (like my daughter, or myself) should be allowed to terminate pregnancies for the right reasons.” The parental-notification/consent equivalent would sound like, “Of course parents should know, and my daughter would tell me, but of course there are some girls out there who just can’t tell their parents.” Maybe people are figuring out that legislation cannot effectively carry ambivalence. Maybe they’re looking at the ramifications of the law without wishful thinking. I can hope.

Do You Meet the Criteria?

More evidence that the “pro-life” crew would rather see more women have abortions than prevent pregnancy in the first place.

The story is this: Biting Beaver had various problems with hormonal birth control, and switched to using condoms with her partner in order to prevent pregnancy. While they were having sex, the condom broke. She attempted to get EC in rural Ohio, where it is not yet available without a prescription (it will be available over-the-counter nation-wide as of January 1st). Her doctor sent her to the emergency room, where BB had to make a $100 co-pay. Even there, though, she couldn’t get what she needed:

“Well see,” he begins, his voice dropping a little, “the problem is that you have to meet the doctor’s criteria before he’ll dispense it to you.”

“Criteria?” I question.

“Well,” the nurse sounds decidedly nervous as though what he really wanted to do was hang up the phone completely, “Yes, his criteria. I mean…ummm…well, are you ok? Is there any, ummm….trauma?” he asks me.

My face changes expression and I hurry to explain, “No, no” I said, “No. I haven’t been raped. This was consensual sex.”

“Oh…” he trails off.

I wait expectantly.

“Well, ummm….*clears throat*…So you haven’t been raped?” he asks again.

“No. I have not been raped. The condom broke”. I state, becoming very frustrated at this point and wondering what the hell is going on.

“Ok, well ummm….Are you married?” he mumbles the words so low I can barely hear them.

Suddenly I get this image of the poor nurse standing at the hospital reading from a cue card that was given to him by a doctor.

“No.” I state plainly. “I am not married. I’ve been in a relationship for several years and I have three children, I don’t want a fourth.” I respond tersely.

“Oh, I see.” He says and then he hurries on, “Well, see. *I* understand. I want you to know that I understand what you’re saying. But see, the problem is that we have 4 doctors here right now but only one of them ever writes EC prescriptions. But see, the thing is that he’ll interview you and see if you meet his criteria. Now, I called the pharmacy but I also talked to him and well….*clears throat*….you can come down and try to get it. You know, if you meet his criteria he’ll give you a prescription, I mean, there’s really no harm in trying.” the nurse trails off, his voice falters as I realize what I’m being told.

Read More…Read More…

South Dakotans Not So Hot On Abortion Ban

Well, looky here. A statewide poll conducted by the Sioux Falls Argus-Leader and KELO-TV of Sioux Falls shows that more South Dakotans than not oppose the ban on abortion that was signed into law earlier this year (but has not taken effect pending the outcome of a referendum this November).

According to the statewide poll, conducted for the Argus Leader and KELO-TV in Sioux Falls, 47 percent of voters polled would vote to reject the ban, compared with 39 percent who would vote to keep it. Another 14 percent were undecided.

Support for the current form of the abortion ban came equally from men and women and matched the statewide 39 percent. The political breakdown showed only 23 percent of Democrats support the proposed law, while 51 percent of Republicans and 43 percent of independents back it.

Gov. Mike Rounds earlier this year signed the ban that the 2006 Legislature passed. It would outlaw all abortions except to save the life of a pregnant woman. Opponents circulated a petition and got enough signatures to prevent the law from taking effect until after a November vote.

However, more of the likely voters surveyed would support a ban if it included rape and incest exceptions:

The poll indicated the ban would have broader overall support if it included an exception for cases involving rape or incest. Those undecided or against the current form of the abortion ban were asked if they would favor the proposed law if it included those exceptions. Statewide, 59 percent said they would support that form of an abortion restriction.

Those voters could be the key to the ban’s fate, said Brad Coker, Mason-Dixon’s managing director.

“It looks like that there’s no exception made for rape and incest seems to be the factor that could sink this,” he said. “That’s the hook the opponents can really build their argument on. If you’re trying to defeat something that’s on the ballot, you have an easier campaign to run to be successful by raising little seeds of doubt.”

Oddly enough, I have a lot more respect for people like this guy who support a total ban (with an exception for the mother’s life) than for those who would ban all abortions except in the case of rape and incest:

Gordon Geick of Sioux Falls, who is voting for the ban, said he’s had his mind made up on the issue for some time.

“Primarily, I think it’s murder,” said Geick, 75. “To start with, I don’t think there’s anything in the U.S. Constitution that gives anybody the right to kill another human being.”

Now, I happen not to agree with Mr. Geick, but at least he’s got some convictions. If you believe that abortion is murder, then you support a ban for any reason other than the mother’s life (because then it would be murder to let her — and most like the fetus as well — die). Why? Because you believe it’s murder, and murder’s wrong no matter how the fetus got there.

However, if you think that abortion allows women to escape the punishment of their loose ways, you support a ban for any reason other than rape and incest. Because if a woman was raped or a victim of incest, you can tell yourself that she didn’t have teh sex for her own sake. That she’s not someone who has to bear the consequences of her actions.

H/T Atrios.