Ms. ‘Autonomy’ uses language that is clearly coercive and inaccurate, violating basic medical ethics. And she either believes those who are pregnant are really entitled to patient autonomy or believe they need patronizing strangers to make those decisions for them. That’s the real choice.
I know I bring it up a lot but...do people who oppose abortion know they don't have to have one? Like if abortion is legal and accessible, that doesn't make it mandatory? I think about this a lot! Like it isn't as though you get knocked up and then you HAVE to have an abortion. I will never understand these people, nor will I understand paying money to troll like we apparently have here now! Exciting!
The anti-abortion people I have met have been indoctrinated at a young age, and seem to think we force it on every pregnant person. They don't understand the need for choice as they often had none.
So far they haven't been too hostile and it gives us a chance to make our case but, yeah, often these things degenerate into talking in circles. I've posted what I've posted for the benefit of everyone else here and not to try to persuade someone who may be unpersuadable. Also I think it's easier for a man to say that men are shit :) because when women say it they get accused of all kinds of character flaws.
Yeah I don't really engage with them because it's exhausting. I'll let dudes do the emotional labor of convincing people we deserve bodily autonomy! 🤣 But I do think my point is extremely valid - abortion should be legal and accessible, not mandatory! That's it.
Yeah it's morning and I've had my caffeine and I'm feeling punchy :) Also, it's absolutely right that women should not be bearing all of the burden of advocating for women's autonomy!
It’s interesting that someone new to this comment section, who self reports that she lives in Canada, a country where anyone over 12 can attain an abortion without parental consent and regardless of their economic status, would want to spend her time on this substack promoting her lens which she cannot vote for or against in the US.
Yes, it is written into their constitution. They do have their trumpy types who want to hurt others, and overturn human rights also. I lived in British Columbia for a couple of years during the Bush jr (shrub) debacle.
And yet, you live in Canada, where women’s choice is in tact. I’m curious how many children you have and how many you have birthed or adopted and whether you have suffered a miscarriage in the 2nd trimester or dealt with a fetal anomaly. No need to respond as there’s no way to fact check your answer.
Your push to fear monger about the end of times due to birth rate, fails to consider how many women have had multiple births in the U.S. after having abortions. Children that likely would not have been born. Abortion is needed healthcare for many who suffer miscarriage. Your lens ignores maternal death rates due to not accessing healthcare and the displacement of those birthed babies and children left behind. The number of babies who could have been birthed by those women had they lived.
I’m not looking to debate you after having read some of your substack and other postings. Regardless of your past trainings, it appears you have chosen to take that knowledge to follow a path that can often be fact checked for a fuller comprehension than what you post. Enjoy your freedom and your healthcare. Those of us living in the U.S. who believe in choice, will continue forward with the goal of attaining ours.
So if women aren't having the children they want..... we need forced pregnancy and forced birth?? Or you could, you know, figure out what's standing in the way. 🤔 Oh, that's right, women don't have the financial and relationship security to raise families. And they have to do all the work and give up the rest of their lives for children, without compensation. And why might that be? 🤔 Oh, that's right, because patriarchy is a shit way to run a civilization and men are allowed to be shit. If anyone really cared about the birth rate - lol - they would focus on THOSE two problems but instead it's let's force women to do what we think is best for them because, you know, girls can't figure that out for themselves! ☺️
Interesting. I read the newsletter and the comments all the time and this is the first time I can remember seeing an anti-abortion commenter (don't they have to subscribe, i.e. pay?) A lot of people are really worried about the future of civilization because every country that isn't shit poor and otherwise fucked up has low birth rates. I have two responses to that.
First, I think it shows a lack of imagination. Are the only two options 1) subjugation and misery for half the population (which has been most of human history) or 2) extinction of civilization and of the species? They're essentially saying progress is impossible and we need to reverse it all or we die. If you're REALLY worried about having more babies, you need to advance the status of women - honestly you need to put women in charge of civilization - because you need to make bearing children something other than slave labor. As usual it's the men that stand in the way of this. Not only would they need to give their power and control over to women, but they'd also need to get off their asses and do their share of the work (and since the woman is already giving her very body, she's starting out with a huge lead in terms of work done).
But second, why is the future of the species so important to anyone who is alive now? We only live once (most of the people worried about this don't believe in reincarnation). Does it really make sense for us to be miserable today just to ensure that there exist future generations who can be just as miserable? I suppose it's hard because it means confronting one's own mortality, contemplating a future in which you do not exist. But that's the reality, regardless of how many people are or are not on the planet after you're gone. What's so wrong with trying to make our lives better today, in the present, right now?
And I know the hardcore religious believe 'be fruitful and multiply' is a commandment from their god, but most of the people fretting about the future of civilization seem to present their arguments and concerns as secular, whether they truly are or not. I just think it's helpful to have some good rejoinders when we encounter this, rather than dismissing or ignoring it. But I suppose I could be wrong on that too :)
When I was a teenager, there were all kinds of books and articles about Zero Population Growth because we were concerned that the earth would become overpopulated. Everyone was talking about 11:59 being the time when we would have half the population the earth could support and "one minute later" we would be in crisis. China instituted its one child policy and it was very punitive and cruel. Putting control for reproduction in the hands of the government rather than the hands of the individual is never a good idea. Notice what the Nazis did regarding their Lebensborn program. Horrifying. Or look at the societal pressure in India to kill girl babies because they are "expensive" and won't "contribute" to the family wealth. The case Ruth Bader Ginsburg wanted to use for reproductive rights was actually a case where the Air Force required a pregnant military member to abort or leave the service. That case was settled and became moot because the Air Force changed its rules. The government has also taken upon itself the right to sterilize certain people against their wills. All of these practices are against human rights and all of them involve reproductive freedom. Governments have no business deciding our reproduction.
Absolutely agreed. But I also think it's okay to think about making our societies more woman and child friendly as a matter of public policy. Not to be coercive - which it often is when it comes from conservative nationalist types - but I am sympathetic to the argument that people want more children than they're having, but they don't because it's so fucking hard for most people. And because men aren't doing their part.
Actually many Gen Z young ppl are deliberately choosing NOT to bring any children at all onto our dying planet or into this messed up society we currently live in. Govts talk about slowing or reversing climate change but very few are doing enough, if anything, about it
Yes. Although Gen Z are 25 & under now, so it's early. But probably, and millennials definitely. One thing that's troubling, and which I don't have a good answer for, is that wouldn't it be the most misogynistic societies in which women have the most children, because they have the least ability to do anything to make it otherwise? And it would seem to perpetuate the problem if the most misogynistic societies are the ones with the highest population growth. But to your point, the planet is going to have something to say about that too.
Agreed, for the most part. I will say that we need a huge societal shift in how we talk about human rights. The concept of who we consider a human is super important. Let's take the Violence Against Women Act. I actually have a problem with this on a couple of levels. First, there are far more men who are murdered every year than women. That kind of violence needs to be addressed because men are worth saving just as much as women are. Second, when you target a group for special attention, like women, the suggestion is that they are somehow different and that the government needs to step in because of that difference. I would much prefer that we have an Anti-Violence Against People Act and actually research why so many people are turning to violence. In my idealism, I'm hoping that someday, we will notice differences but not ascribe any particular meaning to them. I was in a discussion with someone who was calling Hillary Clinton a flawed candidate. I asked him how she was any more flawed than any other candidate, given that she won the popular vote despite being sabotaged by Comey and had Russia working against her. He said that she lost to a Black man. I called that a racist comment. I should have expanded on that by saying she also lost to a left-handed man, but somehow no one ever mentions that. It's because being left-handed doesn't get you burned at the stake anymore. People notice but it doesn't mean anything. Someday, Zach. Someday, we will notice our differences but it won't mean anything. They're just differences.
Yes, agreed. Personally I do think sex is tricky, because I think at least some differences are caused by hormones and such. For example, as a man I think managing the effects of one's testosterone is probably the most important thing to learn. I don't think the fact that the vast majority of violence is committed by men can be completely explained by cultural factors. (Although I guess I could be wrong!) And there's talk about 'male brain' and stuff like that. So my own belief is that men and women are different, but I'm also very aware that has been used as an excuse for millennia to treat women badly. Also, I get peeved when efforts to bring about gender equality seem to invariably be telling women to act more like men, rather than the other way around. I think that's a really big problem, and it demonstrates how hard it is to challenge male dominance. But I also admit that my views on gender are too binary and there's a lot to learn. I think increased visibility of transgender people, especially among the younger generations, will teach valuable lessons to all of us about this thing we call gender. I hope that doesn't sound condescending to trans people because I don't mean it to.
“Autonomy dictates that the patient ultimately decides the intended outcome of her pregnancy even if she’s already taken an abortion drug.”
So much anti-abortion language makes it sound like every forced pregnancy is inevitably destined to result in a living child. It's either massively dishonest or profoundly ignorant to conveniently ignore the fact that pregnancy is dangerous and lots of things can go wrong. Loading people up with disinformation actually makes bad outcomes more likely, not less.
It is both. A group that makes up a surgical procedure, that is impossible to perform
(the ectopic implantation guy,) and advocating for a reversal technique, (that has no clinical testing or peer reviewed studies on it) is violating the main tenet of the medical profession "First do no harm." They need to be sued for doing medicine without knowledge and a license.
That statistic about Bristol is just amazing and goes to show how utterly ridiculous having this decided state by state is - perfectly legal in one part of town and then a felony in another. Women's rights should NOT depend on what zip code or state in which they live. Dobbs was such an utterly shut decision.
I was stunned by the California pharmacist stats. Have training and continuing education become nonexistent? Are pharmacists in other states equally ignorant to such a high degree?
People often forget that the northern part of the state has many republicans, as well (Stockton and Modesto) and Orange county in Southern California. Remember, the former house squeaker Kevin McCarthy is from Bakersfield. The pharmacist is the type of idiot that elects jerks like him.
I wouldn't click on the link, but I googled "Birthgap" and as best I can tell it's a "documentary" claiming the world is on the brink of population collapse (it isn't) and that it's the fault of feminists. There seems to be a dose of climate change denial in there as well.
"There is no peace in the streets, EVER, your people have started three wars in the last two years. You kill millions of babies and agitate to kill more babies. You’ve demanded so much money for social justice, we are broke ten times over, and risk a Weimar Germany hellscape. Your repulsive politicians have enabled criminal cartels to loot the public purse. We are being invaded by millions of military-aged men on the border, and at the border, hundreds of thousands of women and children are raped and being sold into sex slavery. Women – most women - have zero consciousness of any of this. Almost one hundred thousand children have vanished into the sex trade. But they want the border open because COMPASSION. Never mind the sharp uptick of crime, sooner or later, honey, you are going to want a gun and a man because the world you created - go girl – is so dangerous.
Uh, "save my wife, or her uterus?" Did they think her uterus would live on autonomously?
Ms. ‘Autonomy’ uses language that is clearly coercive and inaccurate, violating basic medical ethics. And she either believes those who are pregnant are really entitled to patient autonomy or believe they need patronizing strangers to make those decisions for them. That’s the real choice.
I know I bring it up a lot but...do people who oppose abortion know they don't have to have one? Like if abortion is legal and accessible, that doesn't make it mandatory? I think about this a lot! Like it isn't as though you get knocked up and then you HAVE to have an abortion. I will never understand these people, nor will I understand paying money to troll like we apparently have here now! Exciting!
The anti-abortion people I have met have been indoctrinated at a young age, and seem to think we force it on every pregnant person. They don't understand the need for choice as they often had none.
So far they haven't been too hostile and it gives us a chance to make our case but, yeah, often these things degenerate into talking in circles. I've posted what I've posted for the benefit of everyone else here and not to try to persuade someone who may be unpersuadable. Also I think it's easier for a man to say that men are shit :) because when women say it they get accused of all kinds of character flaws.
Yeah I don't really engage with them because it's exhausting. I'll let dudes do the emotional labor of convincing people we deserve bodily autonomy! 🤣 But I do think my point is extremely valid - abortion should be legal and accessible, not mandatory! That's it.
Yeah it's morning and I've had my caffeine and I'm feeling punchy :) Also, it's absolutely right that women should not be bearing all of the burden of advocating for women's autonomy!
It’s interesting that someone new to this comment section, who self reports that she lives in Canada, a country where anyone over 12 can attain an abortion without parental consent and regardless of their economic status, would want to spend her time on this substack promoting her lens which she cannot vote for or against in the US.
Yes, it is written into their constitution. They do have their trumpy types who want to hurt others, and overturn human rights also. I lived in British Columbia for a couple of years during the Bush jr (shrub) debacle.
And yet, you live in Canada, where women’s choice is in tact. I’m curious how many children you have and how many you have birthed or adopted and whether you have suffered a miscarriage in the 2nd trimester or dealt with a fetal anomaly. No need to respond as there’s no way to fact check your answer.
Your push to fear monger about the end of times due to birth rate, fails to consider how many women have had multiple births in the U.S. after having abortions. Children that likely would not have been born. Abortion is needed healthcare for many who suffer miscarriage. Your lens ignores maternal death rates due to not accessing healthcare and the displacement of those birthed babies and children left behind. The number of babies who could have been birthed by those women had they lived.
I’m not looking to debate you after having read some of your substack and other postings. Regardless of your past trainings, it appears you have chosen to take that knowledge to follow a path that can often be fact checked for a fuller comprehension than what you post. Enjoy your freedom and your healthcare. Those of us living in the U.S. who believe in choice, will continue forward with the goal of attaining ours.
So if women aren't having the children they want..... we need forced pregnancy and forced birth?? Or you could, you know, figure out what's standing in the way. 🤔 Oh, that's right, women don't have the financial and relationship security to raise families. And they have to do all the work and give up the rest of their lives for children, without compensation. And why might that be? 🤔 Oh, that's right, because patriarchy is a shit way to run a civilization and men are allowed to be shit. If anyone really cared about the birth rate - lol - they would focus on THOSE two problems but instead it's let's force women to do what we think is best for them because, you know, girls can't figure that out for themselves! ☺️
👏👏👏👏🎯
🤣🤣🤣 ok buddy
Interesting. I read the newsletter and the comments all the time and this is the first time I can remember seeing an anti-abortion commenter (don't they have to subscribe, i.e. pay?) A lot of people are really worried about the future of civilization because every country that isn't shit poor and otherwise fucked up has low birth rates. I have two responses to that.
First, I think it shows a lack of imagination. Are the only two options 1) subjugation and misery for half the population (which has been most of human history) or 2) extinction of civilization and of the species? They're essentially saying progress is impossible and we need to reverse it all or we die. If you're REALLY worried about having more babies, you need to advance the status of women - honestly you need to put women in charge of civilization - because you need to make bearing children something other than slave labor. As usual it's the men that stand in the way of this. Not only would they need to give their power and control over to women, but they'd also need to get off their asses and do their share of the work (and since the woman is already giving her very body, she's starting out with a huge lead in terms of work done).
But second, why is the future of the species so important to anyone who is alive now? We only live once (most of the people worried about this don't believe in reincarnation). Does it really make sense for us to be miserable today just to ensure that there exist future generations who can be just as miserable? I suppose it's hard because it means confronting one's own mortality, contemplating a future in which you do not exist. But that's the reality, regardless of how many people are or are not on the planet after you're gone. What's so wrong with trying to make our lives better today, in the present, right now?
And I know the hardcore religious believe 'be fruitful and multiply' is a commandment from their god, but most of the people fretting about the future of civilization seem to present their arguments and concerns as secular, whether they truly are or not. I just think it's helpful to have some good rejoinders when we encounter this, rather than dismissing or ignoring it. But I suppose I could be wrong on that too :)
When I was a teenager, there were all kinds of books and articles about Zero Population Growth because we were concerned that the earth would become overpopulated. Everyone was talking about 11:59 being the time when we would have half the population the earth could support and "one minute later" we would be in crisis. China instituted its one child policy and it was very punitive and cruel. Putting control for reproduction in the hands of the government rather than the hands of the individual is never a good idea. Notice what the Nazis did regarding their Lebensborn program. Horrifying. Or look at the societal pressure in India to kill girl babies because they are "expensive" and won't "contribute" to the family wealth. The case Ruth Bader Ginsburg wanted to use for reproductive rights was actually a case where the Air Force required a pregnant military member to abort or leave the service. That case was settled and became moot because the Air Force changed its rules. The government has also taken upon itself the right to sterilize certain people against their wills. All of these practices are against human rights and all of them involve reproductive freedom. Governments have no business deciding our reproduction.
Absolutely agreed. But I also think it's okay to think about making our societies more woman and child friendly as a matter of public policy. Not to be coercive - which it often is when it comes from conservative nationalist types - but I am sympathetic to the argument that people want more children than they're having, but they don't because it's so fucking hard for most people. And because men aren't doing their part.
Actually many Gen Z young ppl are deliberately choosing NOT to bring any children at all onto our dying planet or into this messed up society we currently live in. Govts talk about slowing or reversing climate change but very few are doing enough, if anything, about it
Yes. Although Gen Z are 25 & under now, so it's early. But probably, and millennials definitely. One thing that's troubling, and which I don't have a good answer for, is that wouldn't it be the most misogynistic societies in which women have the most children, because they have the least ability to do anything to make it otherwise? And it would seem to perpetuate the problem if the most misogynistic societies are the ones with the highest population growth. But to your point, the planet is going to have something to say about that too.
Agreed, for the most part. I will say that we need a huge societal shift in how we talk about human rights. The concept of who we consider a human is super important. Let's take the Violence Against Women Act. I actually have a problem with this on a couple of levels. First, there are far more men who are murdered every year than women. That kind of violence needs to be addressed because men are worth saving just as much as women are. Second, when you target a group for special attention, like women, the suggestion is that they are somehow different and that the government needs to step in because of that difference. I would much prefer that we have an Anti-Violence Against People Act and actually research why so many people are turning to violence. In my idealism, I'm hoping that someday, we will notice differences but not ascribe any particular meaning to them. I was in a discussion with someone who was calling Hillary Clinton a flawed candidate. I asked him how she was any more flawed than any other candidate, given that she won the popular vote despite being sabotaged by Comey and had Russia working against her. He said that she lost to a Black man. I called that a racist comment. I should have expanded on that by saying she also lost to a left-handed man, but somehow no one ever mentions that. It's because being left-handed doesn't get you burned at the stake anymore. People notice but it doesn't mean anything. Someday, Zach. Someday, we will notice our differences but it won't mean anything. They're just differences.
Yes, agreed. Personally I do think sex is tricky, because I think at least some differences are caused by hormones and such. For example, as a man I think managing the effects of one's testosterone is probably the most important thing to learn. I don't think the fact that the vast majority of violence is committed by men can be completely explained by cultural factors. (Although I guess I could be wrong!) And there's talk about 'male brain' and stuff like that. So my own belief is that men and women are different, but I'm also very aware that has been used as an excuse for millennia to treat women badly. Also, I get peeved when efforts to bring about gender equality seem to invariably be telling women to act more like men, rather than the other way around. I think that's a really big problem, and it demonstrates how hard it is to challenge male dominance. But I also admit that my views on gender are too binary and there's a lot to learn. I think increased visibility of transgender people, especially among the younger generations, will teach valuable lessons to all of us about this thing we call gender. I hope that doesn't sound condescending to trans people because I don't mean it to.
Lol
“Autonomy dictates that the patient ultimately decides the intended outcome of her pregnancy even if she’s already taken an abortion drug.”
So much anti-abortion language makes it sound like every forced pregnancy is inevitably destined to result in a living child. It's either massively dishonest or profoundly ignorant to conveniently ignore the fact that pregnancy is dangerous and lots of things can go wrong. Loading people up with disinformation actually makes bad outcomes more likely, not less.
It is both. A group that makes up a surgical procedure, that is impossible to perform
(the ectopic implantation guy,) and advocating for a reversal technique, (that has no clinical testing or peer reviewed studies on it) is violating the main tenet of the medical profession "First do no harm." They need to be sued for doing medicine without knowledge and a license.
That statistic about Bristol is just amazing and goes to show how utterly ridiculous having this decided state by state is - perfectly legal in one part of town and then a felony in another. Women's rights should NOT depend on what zip code or state in which they live. Dobbs was such an utterly shut decision.
I was stunned by the California pharmacist stats. Have training and continuing education become nonexistent? Are pharmacists in other states equally ignorant to such a high degree?
People often forget that the northern part of the state has many republicans, as well (Stockton and Modesto) and Orange county in Southern California. Remember, the former house squeaker Kevin McCarthy is from Bakersfield. The pharmacist is the type of idiot that elects jerks like him.
Jessica, did you hear about this case? https://www.tribtoday.com/news/local-news/2023/11/womans-abuse-of-corpse-case-heads-to-grand-jury/
Sorry all! Comments were shut off for some reason! All back on and good :)
🤡
I do hope they posted this on the wrong article, because otherwise it is apropos of nothing. And needs Twilight zone music accompanying it.
I took a look at some of her articles, trying to figure out if this is satire. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear so.
*sigh* How sad! We really need to fund more mental health programs. And teach critical thinking skills early in education.
I wouldn't click on the link, but I googled "Birthgap" and as best I can tell it's a "documentary" claiming the world is on the brink of population collapse (it isn't) and that it's the fault of feminists. There seems to be a dose of climate change denial in there as well.
Here's a taste of one her articles:
"There is no peace in the streets, EVER, your people have started three wars in the last two years. You kill millions of babies and agitate to kill more babies. You’ve demanded so much money for social justice, we are broke ten times over, and risk a Weimar Germany hellscape. Your repulsive politicians have enabled criminal cartels to loot the public purse. We are being invaded by millions of military-aged men on the border, and at the border, hundreds of thousands of women and children are raped and being sold into sex slavery. Women – most women - have zero consciousness of any of this. Almost one hundred thousand children have vanished into the sex trade. But they want the border open because COMPASSION. Never mind the sharp uptick of crime, sooner or later, honey, you are going to want a gun and a man because the world you created - go girl – is so dangerous.
YOU ARE THE STUPIDEST WOMEN WHO EVER LIVED."
Just so we know where we're all at, lol.
I hope you scrubbed your browser afterward! That sounds like the kind of stuff that gives you a nasty trojan virus after you click on it.
Agreed.