This is an amazingly powerful, clear and well-researched article that exposes how the “pro-life” movement is anything but.
The question I was waiting for in last night’s vice-presidential debate was on abortion (though I wish Martha Raddatz hadn’t asked Biden and Ryan to frame their positions within the context of their Catholicism. Considering the fact that church and state are supposed to be separate, this would seem irrelevant). Still.
And while some were no doubt charmed by Ryan’s earnest if somewhat sanctimonious stroll down memory lane, to the day he and his wife, Janna, saw the seven-week ultrasound of the bean-shaped cluster of cells “with a beating heart!” who would eventually become their daughter …this was when Ryan knew, beyond a doubt, that life begins at conception. Thanks for weighing in, dude, but trust me, that cozy, joyful ultrasound experience is far from universal.
Tell you what: that bean-shaped cell cluster feels way less transcendent to a frightened 17 year-old college freshman sitting alone in her dorm room. And yes, I speak from experience.
And many women who find themselves unintentionally pregnant, most often poor, most often single, can speak from their own individual experiences. If the option of a safe and legal abortion is taken away, these women and their bean-shaped cell clusters face a very different future than happily married millionaire Janna Ryan.
That Republicans, who eschew “big government” should adopt a position that would render government so invasive (as in invading a woman’s body) and so sweeping (as in determining a woman’s destiny, as well as the destiny of her child) seems flagrantly hypocritical.
Romney and Ryan want to take America- specifically, women, back. Back into the cave, by the hair. I intend to start kicking and screaming now.
I can’t even add anything. This is pretty much perfect.
The past year of escalating attacks on reproductive health care—you may remember hits such as the “forced transvaginal ultrasound” and calling a woman a “slut” because she believes insurance companies should cover contraception—have really proved a bridge too far for the anti-choice movement. The various outrages have caused ordinary people who usually tune out of these sorts of things to actually tune in, forcing Mitt and Ann Romney to go on their “I love women” tour. And now the anti-choicers have really done it, provoking a group that can pretty much get anyone’s attention: celebrities.
Today, the Center for Reproductive Rights is releasing a new, star-studded campaign featuring Kevin Bacon, Sarah Silverman, Amy Poehler, Audra McDonald, Bill Crudup, Martha Plimpton and Meryl Streep, all getting irate at the dismissive, misogynist language that’s been pissing a lot of us off for years. The Georgia lawmaker that they mention, who compared women to farm animals, is likely Terry England, who defended forcing women to complete pregnancies, even when the fetus has defects incompatible with life, by saying, “I’ve had the experience of delivering calves, dead and alive—delivering pigs, dead and alive.”
Queen Streep tells you to sign something, you fucking sign it.
I don’t have an American zip code, since I’m Norwegian. But obviously I care about you guys, so I’ll reblog and signal boost instead. Go sign this!
Today in duh-of-course-this-makes-sense Associated Press has an article, “Study: Free birth control leads to fewer abortions.” So yeah, sure that makes sense. Not surprising. Basically no/low income women were offered a variety of forms of birth control. The women flocked to the more expensive ones (IUD, Implanon) because they didn’t have to worry about the expensive upfront fee that many would face if they’re uninsured or underinsured. ANYWAY - clearly this lead to fewer abortions. But the eye rolling started here
Thursday’s data didn’t sway the critics.
Jeanne Monahan of the conservative Family Research Council suggested contraceptive use can encourage riskier sexual behavior.
“Additionally, one might conclude that the Obama administration’s contraception mandate may ultimately cause more unplanned pregnancies since it mandates that all health plans cover contraceptives, including those that the study’s authors claim are less effective,” Monahan said.
How is it RISKIER to be on birth control? Yes there are LESS effective types, but you know what’s LEAST effective? NOT BEING ON BIRTH CONTROL AT ALL. Why do they hate people having sex? How can I have MORE unplanned pregnancies if I am on birth control when I wasn’t before? The research is clear - people don’t stop having sex when they don’t have BC. When people have better access to BC there are fewer unplanned pregnancies and fewer abortions.
You’d think that org would care about fewer abortions, but nope! They care that *gasp* PEOPLE ARE HAVING SEX. grrr.
Confirmation bias(wiki link). When you read something you agree with, your beliefs are confirmed and you believe it even more strongly. When you read something you disagree with (a factual text, I mean), you will confirm what you already thought. It’s a common problem/trait for humans :| And ffs that sucks when we’re talking about politics and making the best possible decisions with what facts we have.
[Image: A picture of several smiling white people lined up in front of a van that says “save the storks” with a picture of a stork on it, underneath a bridge.]
I hear stories of abortion & I see myself falling to the ground in tears begging for the life of the child, desperately offering to adopt it instead.
Then I remember I am nineteen. With no job. No husband to help me raise one. Nothing.
And so I remember to pray earnestly.
This organization—Save the Storks—offers women the opportunity to see their child before aborting it. Three out of five mothers change their mind and do not go through with the procedure.
“We seek to persuade every abortion-minded mother to choose life and to share with them the good news of Jesus.” Amen.
YAY THREE OUT OF FIVE PEOPLE ARE SUSCEPTIBLE TO EMOTIONAL MANIPULATION. WOOOOOHOOO!
Save the storks, are you fucking serious? Pregnant people aren’t fucking storks. God mind your own fucking business and stop shoving your Jesus bullshit on people.
“I hear stories of abortion & I see myself falling to the ground in tears begging for the life of the child, desperately offering to adopt it instead.”
What does this mean, you “see yourself” having this melodramatic reaction to other people’s medical decisions? And if you really feel this way, what does your age, employment status and marital status matter? THERE ARE BABIES’ LIVES ON THE LINE! Didn’t you see the ultrasound?
Storks. Who are the “storks” exactly? “Save the storks” doesn’t even make sense. As usual, the women are completely erased from pregnancy.
Also, does the would-be-adoptive-parent OP not see the irony in “Then I remember I am nineteen. With no job. No husband to help me raise one. Nothing.” as the reason they just can’t adopt maybe being the exact same reason a pregnant woman wants to end their pregnancy?
Let me tell you guys something: Before this whole medical school thing, I was a stage manager and I worked on a lot of shows in high school, college, and professionally. I dealt with a lot of people with different personalities and people who were difficult to work with, so I know what it looks like when someone is being over dramatic.
And the OP’s opening line is so on the level of being over dramatic and ridiculous that I cannot even truly describe the level of eye rolling that I just displayed. Like on a scale of 1-10, my level of eye rolling was a 15.
I just experienced a level 15 eye rolling…all directed at you, dripplet.
Also, the bolded is pretty much what I thought, too. The cognitive dissonance present in the anti-choice movement never fails to astound me.
Here’s what really pisses me off about this (besides, you know, all of it): the OP could be doing so much to help babies and children that are already here if she refocused all the energy expended on worrying about other people’s reproductive decisions. She could make hats/blankets/booties for babies in the NICU at a local hospital. She could volunteer with organizations that help children: I know someone who volunteered to watch children at a domestic violence shelter while the mothers were at job interviews or counseling sessions or taking classes. She could help out at a day program for special needs kids. She could volunteer at a children’s hospital. She could work with a program like Big Brothers/Big Sisters. Hell, if she’s passionate about it she could go to school and make a career out of helping kids! She could study to become a teacher, a social worker, any number of careers in the medical field. But instead, she chooses to use all that time and energy to manipulate people into having children that they didn’t want or weren’t in a position to have. I guess that’s easier than doing something that actually helps living, breathing individuals.
It comes as no surprise to me that:
a) all these folks are white, young, and probably middle to upper middle class anti-choice Christians. And that half are people who (at the very least) read as men. Or: the people who have the least to fear when it comes to reproductive justice because whether they have an abortion or not (or whether a partner has an abortion or not), society is going to support them the most when it comes to an unplanned/unwanted pregnancy.
b) That they say “save the storks”. Apparently pregnant people aren’t even PEOPLE. They’re being basically told that they have no part in their own pregnancies. Because instead it’s about saving a stork who delivers the baby rather than dealing with the reality that babies don’t get delivered by storks. They get delivered by people with uteruses who go through A LOT - physically, emotionally, mentally, economically, socially, etc - when that happens and that forcing someone to go through with it by manipulating them and ripping away all options is not “saving a stork”, it’s harming a human being
c) That the entire basis of this is the devaluation of the actual WORK and difficulty that goes into being pregnant. The devaluation of reproductive work done by people with uteruses (OF ALL GENDERS). Because if we valued that work, if we thought it was important and difficult as a society we wouldn’t force people to do it when they didn’t want to.
d) There is no practical benefit or support offered to those who leave this van. There’s no mention that there’s follow up care or support. No referrals to, say, support organizations or therapists for those who are pregnant as the result of rape or incest, no offers of childcare or even free fucking baby gear. Nope. Just emotional manipulation and a pregnant person is sent on their way, dumped back into their problems except now they’ve been guilted into making a complicated situation even harder. Because their problems (lack of money, resources, support, etc) didn’t go away, but one of their possible options was made that much more inaccessible to them.
Fantastic commentary above.
How do you not believe in those things? I mean, an abortion is an abortion no matter what you believe, it’s an act, not a belief. Meh.
Papers are refusing to run this week’s Doonsbury. It should be seen.
I thought these were all really spot-on.
That’s about the size of it.
I’ve been raging on Twitter today about how batshit insane it is that Virginia is proposing that uterus-bearers undergo trans-vaginal ultrasounds before being allowed to have abortions. This means that a doctor, even if he or she knows that it is unnecessary, must probe inside the vagina to obtain an image of the fetus. Forcing an object inside someone, even if their pregnancy is a result of sexual assault.
That’s all it is; insane. No man, no person, nobody has the right to tell you what you can or cannot do with your own body. It’s horrific and ugly and I don’t know how else to describe it. Nobody deserves to be raped because of how they were dressed, or shamed because they are unable to or don’t want to give birth, or told on any level by anyone that they are a lesser person for having sex at all.
Yup. This news from Virginia left me feeling physically ill all day.