This is always how they instill obedience in women, they break up the tribe of ppl that support you. They have been pulling this shit since the patriarchy began, when they gave every man a wife to isolate and brainwash it just got worse. It is their main objective to separate and divide women so that we have to rely on the system for help. That's why they are trying to instill fear over helping someone or traveling and calling in trafficking is so insensitive to those who have actually been trafficked. These clowns as usual are the ultimate losers!
Jessica, Thank you for continuing to remind us that we are not overreacting. In fact, many of us are under reacting. Why? Because it is hard, in the year 2023, to truly comprehend that this is happening. We want to believe that something this awful and dystopian could not happen here. Yet here we are and it gets worse every week.
As you said, this will not happen through one big, sweeping law. Instead it will happen through a relentless chipping away of rights. Much like what happened while Roe was still the law of the land. The timeframe of when abortions was legal kept being limited, waiting periods were enacted, forced ultrasounds were required, building stipulations were enacted on abortion facilities. And on, and on, and on. So, here we are. Now the focus (one of many) is ensuring that women are so frightened that they wouldn’t dare seek an abortion.
One of these frigging days,I'll figure out how to do ap proper link. Luckily Googleing this'll work. I thought it was appropriate with all the comments re: second class citizens
Here’s a link from heather Cox Richardson reporting on this issue. I’m so glad it’s getting so much attn from various sources. She compares this new law to the laws enacted during ska dry and Jim Crow....
Last post, promise !!! This will make you rage, from the WaPo article:
"Asked about the constitutionality of his ordinances, Dickson cites the Mann Act, a federal law from 1910 that makes it illegal to transport “any woman or girl for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, or for any other immoral purpose.” If the Mann Act is constitutional, he says, so is this. "
They chose Llano because it sits at the nexus of a few highways.
I just want to scream. And where's the father in all of this? How about his punishment? This is so dystopian, and there are a lot of women who are complicit.
I hate that pregnant women are seen as the equivalent of registered sex offenders (AL AG Steve Marshall) and prostitutes (or sex slaves, really if they are being transported rather than simply traveling). Not that there is anything wrong with consensual sex work, but in the context of the remarks it is definitely a smear meant to dehumanize women.
Exactly. Only 'bad' women get abortions. 'Good' women care only about their fetuses, and children, and nothing else (well except their husband's needs and desires).
"For well over an hour, the people of Llano — a town of about 3,400 deep in Texas Hill Country — approached the podium to speak out against abortion. While the procedure was now illegal across Texas, people were still driving women on Llano roads to reach abortion clinics in other states, the residents had been told. They said their city had a responsibility to “fight the murders.” "
Feed on this, from the article. So if what's below is correct, it gives the zygote/embryo/fetus legal standing - personhood, right? Am i wrong? Where are the Constitutional lawyers challenging this stuff?
"By Dickson’s definition, “abortion trafficking” is the act of helping any pregnant woman cross state lines to end her pregnancy, lending her a ride, funding, or another form of support. While the term “trafficking” typically refers to people who are forced, tricked or coerced, Dickson’s definition applies to all people seeking abortions — because, he argues, “the unborn child is always taken against their will.”
The "unborn child." These people are CRAZY.
They're mad that abortions are happening outside of their control and they want to imprison the women of their state. Totally sick, fascist.
Establishing fetal personhood is one of the big aims of the forced birthers. If they can establish it at the state level, by laws like this, or allowing tax deductions for a fetus, etc., it’s just a hop skip and jump to putting personhood into federal law, or into the Constitution itself.
Trying to figure out how to word this compliment so it doesn't sound backhanded :) - Every time you post this, you demonstrate the kind of message discipline that our side needs. Short, simple, easy to understand, remember, and repeat. So like the opposite of 99% of my comments ;-D
It is admittedly frustrating how many times I need to say it but I will repeat myself as many times as I need to. People keep arguing fetal personhood has merit. It doesn't if they just take it to its logical conclusion. Really wish Jessica would pick this up.
I agree. The last we heard from them was Grace saying the lawyers had said it was like the idea that if a fetus is a person a woman isn't, and I had replied that's interesting because we thought it was answering how to handle it if a fetus were a person, so almost the opposite of that idea. I'd have to look it up; I have no clue what day it was. But yeah I didn't want to pester. I would like to hear from a lawyer on it myself.
Yeah I remember that conversation. And we're still having it like a couple months later. Not sure what else to do. I've tried to write out my arguments but it just sounds like an incomprehensible Freudian stream of consciousness.
Yeah I remember that conversation. And we're still having it like a couple months later. Not sure what else to do. I've tried to write out my arguments but it just sounds like an incomprehensible Freudian stream of consciousness.
Where is our federal government? Where is the DOJ? Why do I have to keep sending money to ACLU and NARAL, etc to fight these creeps? Women pay taxes (despite earning less than their male counterparts) and should be protected by their government. More than half our population is under attack and I don’t see ANY attempt by this administration to FIGHT back! The message is loud and clear: Women are disposable in this country.
I don’t think that, since Dobbs, there’s much the federal government can do. They can fight these laws in the courts once they are passed, but unless we have sixty pro-choice senators and a majority in the house, there is a very limited number of things the federal government can do.
I also think they should be doing more to protect us from threats being made to women in politics, the judiciary, healthcare, etc. The GOP is threatening us and there should be a full-throated response from the DOJ that they won’t tolerate the threats as well as some of the restrictions such as travel.
I might replace 'can' with 'is allowed to'. And the thing about 'is allowed to' is that you don't know what you can get away with until you try. Our side tries to follow the rules of the system, and their side couldn't care less. It's certainly possible that if we follow suit it would backfire, but thinking about that is different from ruling it out from the get go. And to her point, the DOJ could at least go ahead and sue everybody and anybody, even if none of them succeed.
This. Just because someone says a state has the right to do this doesn't mean the administration should just fold. I keep repeating it's so much like the 1850s.
Also, they don't know that. If a woman can be willing to sacrifice her life for her child, and they consider that to be so noble and holy and the highest purpose of woman blah blah blah, then an "unborn child" can be willing to sacrifice its life for its mother too. That makes at least as much sense.
I like that concept, Zach. I’m going to let that idea ferment in my brain for awhile. Maybe we can turn it into something we can use - though I’m sure their first counter would be that the fetus isn’t freely volunteering to do so. Their assumption is always that the fetus is an unwilling “victim” of abortion.
The second that egg is fertilized the woman ceases to be a person, incapable of any interest other than that of the fetus. If that's what they want then that's how they should be selling it, and let's see what the people think.
🤦 These silly little men and their silly little egos! Yes to all three of your bullet points. And, since they brought it up, why would the miniature people be in the sperm and not the eggs? I remember learning that a baby girl already has all the eggs she'll ever have when she's born. (Someone please correct me if that's wrong!) So if everything is "pre-formed", it would be in the EGG, which ALWAYS exists, and not the sperm, which are continuously produced and discarded. But then maybe they'd know that if they realized that if there were a God, God would either be a They or a She, certainly not a He; again that's just silly. So you know that as soon as they start with God being He, everything else they say after that is going to be wrong. Honestly sometimes I don't get it. What do we men have that's so compelling, other than, "Man Monkey strong! Beat up other Man Monkey! Grrr!" 😂 Is that really all it comes down to? Maybe so!
I think I learned that about eggs in my first high school biology class 50 years ago. Short of possibly monotremes I think it is true for all warm blooded creatures.
Forgive me if someone has made this point: To say that the law applies to a convicted sex offender the same as it does to a woman who is seeking an abortion is illogical. The sex offender has been found guilty of a crime; the woman has not.
First, isn't it the doctors who are held liable?
Second, if it's the aider and abetter they are after, then how can they be held liable if it's in a state where abortion is legal?
These AGs are making women prisoners of their states!
And these conservatives get mad when we take a knee at the anthem or question the pledge -- are we in a country or is our state our country? And I'm talking our *basic human rights!*
Goliad County? More like Giliad. Oh my stars. When will these hateful people stop? It’s so insane how these ‘freedom’ lovers are so intent on stripping away the most basic freedom of bodily autonomy. Oh, the hypocrisy!
I have sent letters to more than 250 ‘sanctuary of the unborn’ entities inviting them to provide feedback on the basis for their unfounded contentions. Surprise, surprise. No response. I will only interpret that to mean they have none.
The article in WaPo had this section that made me even sicker: "Almond says she was thankful when Roe was overturned. A 57-year-old former elementary school teacher, she voted twice for Trump, and says she plans to vote for him again. Her friends call her a “pistol-packing mama.” Every time she gets a text message, her phone spits out the sound of two gunshots."
An elementary teacher! Gunshots as a text message notification. Doesn't she remember Uvalde? How does she call herself "pro-life?" Make it make sense.
With regards to the travel bans, do they apply to airlines, bus companies, Amtrak, car rental companies? Is Hertz going to be liable for renting a car to a woman attempting to travel through or out of one of these zones? What about American Airlines? (Or are companies only viewed as people when it comes to their religious rights to deny staff benefits??) And what about staff of these companies? Do these laws apply to travel agents or airline personnel selling an airplane ticket to an "illegally traveling abortion-minded pregnant person", or the person at the bus or train station selling a ticket to a passenger? What about pilots and train conductors? Are they liable for "trafficking"? And what about the States' own Highway departments or toll takers, who maintain the roads and may even collect monies for illegal passage on them? Who is going to enforce this? Do we need to create new Stasi-style government departments to receive tips about and investigate illicit behaviour? This whole thing is ridiculous. TGIF.
Right now every situation regarding abortion in Texas is intentionally vague creating an atmosphere where no one knows what they are allowed to do even though the ‘aid and abet’ assertion is not prohibiting the funds from paying for pregnant people leaving the state following an injunction prohibiting anyone suing or prosecuting them. The legislature refused to take up a travel restriction bill. They don’t need to when Goliad can assert a specious legal right to do that.
While I appreciate hearing of the possible need to provide support while asserting a religious freedom case for accompanying people who need to leave the state, I think we have to be careful amplifying the impression that prohibitions exist that don’t.
This. Dobbs answered one question and asked a million others. Which is why regardless of what one thinks about abortion it was an incredibly stupid ruling. To quote Paul Westerberg, "God, what a mess."
To paraphrase a Detroit band that my brother used to blast out of his bedroom window- the MC5 ...kick out the assholes, motherfuckers. Weird kid. The only book that he ever read as far as I know was Helter Skelter.
The fucked-up-ed-ness has to fully trickle down to everyone before it will create the necessary amount of outrage. Right now, I see airports as safe travel zones for healthcare because it is a federal function. Notwithstanding those who would use their position to harass travelers.
Amtrak is federal, so it depends.
But I’m female. And I need to pass South of the Border to go to an author event in Maryland. (This is a theme park on the NC/SC border.) I can totally see these fascist theocrats making me prove I’m not pregnant to leave SC. And my husband will be pissed off because we waited however many hours in the car in view of the sombrero to prove that I’m not leaving the state for an abortion. And somehow his anger will matter more than whatever is happening with me.
So enough of this has to happen before enough people will give a shit. Unfortunately. I am so fucking embarrassed to be an American.
More angry husbands would be helpful. Aren't the majority of women seeking abortions already mothers? Can't remember for sure. Of course many of them are probably single mothers, but some may have a male partner. A woman should never need a man to back her up, but until that's the world we live in, every man needs to get off his ass and get angry. It is our responsibility and duty.
Yes, the majority of those seeking abortion care are already parents - 61%, IIRC. But as you rightly point out, that doesn’t mean married, or even partnered.
Women shouldn’t need male back up, but we often do. I have stories that would boggle the mind.
Quick example - I custom ordered some drapes back when I was still working. There was an issue with the fabric length, so I told the curtain guy that I wanted a chocolate brown border on the top and the bottom, with the fabric I’d chosen in the middle. He refused. I’d already paid him half the cost, so I asked him why he was refusing. “You won’t like the curtains, and you won’t pay for them.” Dumbfounded, since I’d designed the curtains I wanted, I said that I would indeed pay for them if he made them the way I requested. He said he’d only do it if my husband approved the design first. I told him I didn’t have a husband, and he was utterly confounded when I told him I owned the house. The only way he would make the drapes was if I paid him the full cost up front.
The GOP is addicted to abusers. If you just trust women, this country would THRIVE. You could have healthy relationships w women. You could have a workforce that is not dealing w chronic trauma. Women are smart, capable, caring, and collaborative. You could pay your workfforce at least a living wage w adequate benefits. You could have healthy intimate relationships w women and not need viagra or to assault or rape them to have sex. You could live a life that's actually fulfilling and satisfying and not need billions of dollars to feel just ok. Women can do what men can do backwards in heels, while dealing w fluctuating hormones and caring for the 10 different people and animals in our care.
While some men are good, their seems to be a preponderance of assholes. If women were in positions of authority, this would be a much better place. We would still have assholes like the sister of the North Koreas ruler, but they would be the exception. Since you mentioned it, why are women still wearing high heels. I know that it makes their calves and legs look better, but considering the temporary and long lasting pain, why???
In my case, I wore heels especially in the workplace because I’m tiny. I found heels lent me more authority. I’m also blonde and feminine in appearance, and especially starting out, heels helped me get taken more seriously.
I can’t wear them now owing to balance issues from MS. I don’t miss the pain, but I miss the extra height, and the authoritative click they make on hard surface flooring.
Our problem is our testosterone. It turns out it's a vital substance, but it's also very dangerous. It seems like the males of most species are very unruly and if they're not kept in line they engage in destructive behavior. At least admitting that fact would be a good start, but the pushback would be something else. Although it's kind of like they're going to say liberals are out to get men anyway, so we might as well say what we want.
Not even following the link and wsj is usually paywalled anyway, but just seeing the headline and I am totally not surprised. I mean, part of the reason I'm here is because I know the jig is up, and it drives me absolutely nuts how the world has everything ass backwards.
It's nice to have supportive male voices on here, especially yours! I have two teenage daughter and hearing voices like yours gives me hope that they will be supported. It's scary out there. It's getting scarier.
Thank you. I do hope that a lot of it is generational, and that young people have grown up in a world with more women in positions of authority, with mothers and fathers being more equal, and with women and their stories being better represented in mainstream culture (movies, TV, etc.), such that they're so much less inclined to even be able to think the old ways. I do admit to some concerns about young people and gender: whether the rise in identification as non-binary means they think they have to get rid of gender altogether, rather than be able to have two different, sometimes complementary, groups who can be treated equally, and, the higher number of biological sex females identifying as trans among teens, which makes me think at least some of it is they feel hopeless that women will ever be treated with respect. But I also remember that, at 45, maybe that's just my old man way of thinking, and that I need to trust the young people even more yet.
Waverly, good for you! One of the proudest parenting moments I had was when my then maybe 8 or 9 year old son came to me with a small fistful of money he had saved, and asked me if I could help him donate it to an abortion rights group. He had seen a news piece on the anti-abortion movement, and he was incensed that anyone thought they had the right to tell women what to do with their bodies.
He’s 35 now, and still a loud and proud feminist. When Trump was inaugurated, I was sick, and couldn’t attend the Women’s March locally. He was living in another state, but he sent me photos of himself at the March where he lived. He texted me that he was marching for me, because he knew I couldn’t.
We could all do with more humility. And if we're doing something as a society to make that hard for men in particular, we should be looking to change it.
I read that county in Texas as Gilead. Might as well be.
This is always how they instill obedience in women, they break up the tribe of ppl that support you. They have been pulling this shit since the patriarchy began, when they gave every man a wife to isolate and brainwash it just got worse. It is their main objective to separate and divide women so that we have to rely on the system for help. That's why they are trying to instill fear over helping someone or traveling and calling in trafficking is so insensitive to those who have actually been trafficked. These clowns as usual are the ultimate losers!
Jessica, Thank you for continuing to remind us that we are not overreacting. In fact, many of us are under reacting. Why? Because it is hard, in the year 2023, to truly comprehend that this is happening. We want to believe that something this awful and dystopian could not happen here. Yet here we are and it gets worse every week.
As you said, this will not happen through one big, sweeping law. Instead it will happen through a relentless chipping away of rights. Much like what happened while Roe was still the law of the land. The timeframe of when abortions was legal kept being limited, waiting periods were enacted, forced ultrasounds were required, building stipulations were enacted on abortion facilities. And on, and on, and on. So, here we are. Now the focus (one of many) is ensuring that women are so frightened that they wouldn’t dare seek an abortion.
Cruelty is the point.
One of these frigging days,I'll figure out how to do ap proper link. Luckily Googleing this'll work. I thought it was appropriate with all the comments re: second class citizens
https://www.statnews.com/2023/08/31/miscarriage-rates-research-prevention-treatment/?utm_campaign=weekend_reads&utm_medium=email&_hsmi=272669880&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-_Md9p7FWvEm6Zp4nV-VW3n7L1vS1AR3CRTti1HuFo84Y-s_6fIOpXAMN7hQhsOG-apANkIetSGuTXmqCUbmdfzBTdLdA&utm_content=272669880&utm_source=hs_email
I try to do what I can.
Scary scary scary. Thank you Jessica and Grace, as always.
Here’s a link from heather Cox Richardson reporting on this issue. I’m so glad it’s getting so much attn from various sources. She compares this new law to the laws enacted during ska dry and Jim Crow....
https://open.substack.com/pub/heathercoxrichardson/p/september-1-2023?r=67j4d&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
Last post, promise !!! This will make you rage, from the WaPo article:
"Asked about the constitutionality of his ordinances, Dickson cites the Mann Act, a federal law from 1910 that makes it illegal to transport “any woman or girl for the purpose of prostitution or debauchery, or for any other immoral purpose.” If the Mann Act is constitutional, he says, so is this. "
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/09/01/texas-abortion-highways/
They chose Llano because it sits at the nexus of a few highways.
I just want to scream. And where's the father in all of this? How about his punishment? This is so dystopian, and there are a lot of women who are complicit.
I hate that pregnant women are seen as the equivalent of registered sex offenders (AL AG Steve Marshall) and prostitutes (or sex slaves, really if they are being transported rather than simply traveling). Not that there is anything wrong with consensual sex work, but in the context of the remarks it is definitely a smear meant to dehumanize women.
Exactly. Only 'bad' women get abortions. 'Good' women care only about their fetuses, and children, and nothing else (well except their husband's needs and desires).
You go and post as much as you want. I'm gonna quit for today since it's past 2 a.m. now, but I'll probably add more tomorrow.
Where is the father indeed. Even here we barely ever talk about that, a sign that they've gotten away with it for sure.
"For well over an hour, the people of Llano — a town of about 3,400 deep in Texas Hill Country — approached the podium to speak out against abortion. While the procedure was now illegal across Texas, people were still driving women on Llano roads to reach abortion clinics in other states, the residents had been told. They said their city had a responsibility to “fight the murders.” "
From WaPo article today. Disgusting.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/09/01/texas-abortion-highways/
Feed on this, from the article. So if what's below is correct, it gives the zygote/embryo/fetus legal standing - personhood, right? Am i wrong? Where are the Constitutional lawyers challenging this stuff?
"By Dickson’s definition, “abortion trafficking” is the act of helping any pregnant woman cross state lines to end her pregnancy, lending her a ride, funding, or another form of support. While the term “trafficking” typically refers to people who are forced, tricked or coerced, Dickson’s definition applies to all people seeking abortions — because, he argues, “the unborn child is always taken against their will.”
The "unborn child." These people are CRAZY.
They're mad that abortions are happening outside of their control and they want to imprison the women of their state. Totally sick, fascist.
Establishing fetal personhood is one of the big aims of the forced birthers. If they can establish it at the state level, by laws like this, or allowing tax deductions for a fetus, etc., it’s just a hop skip and jump to putting personhood into federal law, or into the Constitution itself.
If fetuses have personhood, the state is literally saying women are their chattel, though. Which violates 5a, 13a and 14a.
Trying to figure out how to word this compliment so it doesn't sound backhanded :) - Every time you post this, you demonstrate the kind of message discipline that our side needs. Short, simple, easy to understand, remember, and repeat. So like the opposite of 99% of my comments ;-D
It is admittedly frustrating how many times I need to say it but I will repeat myself as many times as I need to. People keep arguing fetal personhood has merit. It doesn't if they just take it to its logical conclusion. Really wish Jessica would pick this up.
I agree. The last we heard from them was Grace saying the lawyers had said it was like the idea that if a fetus is a person a woman isn't, and I had replied that's interesting because we thought it was answering how to handle it if a fetus were a person, so almost the opposite of that idea. I'd have to look it up; I have no clue what day it was. But yeah I didn't want to pester. I would like to hear from a lawyer on it myself.
Yeah I remember that conversation. And we're still having it like a couple months later. Not sure what else to do. I've tried to write out my arguments but it just sounds like an incomprehensible Freudian stream of consciousness.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1em0_HLU9lHYjVkyva5QMkOc2aDGkuRyXuyMqTwoRK_Q/edit?usp=drivesdk
Yeah I remember that conversation. And we're still having it like a couple months later. Not sure what else to do. I've tried to write out my arguments but it just sounds like an incomprehensible Freudian stream of consciousness.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1em0_HLU9lHYjVkyva5QMkOc2aDGkuRyXuyMqTwoRK_Q/edit?usp=drivesdk
Where is our federal government? Where is the DOJ? Why do I have to keep sending money to ACLU and NARAL, etc to fight these creeps? Women pay taxes (despite earning less than their male counterparts) and should be protected by their government. More than half our population is under attack and I don’t see ANY attempt by this administration to FIGHT back! The message is loud and clear: Women are disposable in this country.
Lesley,
I don’t think that, since Dobbs, there’s much the federal government can do. They can fight these laws in the courts once they are passed, but unless we have sixty pro-choice senators and a majority in the house, there is a very limited number of things the federal government can do.
You’re right about needing more Dems in Congress to pass new laws, but I am longing for an equal and opposite reaction from the DOJ to laws being created in states that take away women’s rights. Here’s one example: https://www.padilla.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/padilla-colleagues-urge-doj-to-do-more-to-protect-americans-right-to-travel-for-reproductive-health-care/
I also think they should be doing more to protect us from threats being made to women in politics, the judiciary, healthcare, etc. The GOP is threatening us and there should be a full-throated response from the DOJ that they won’t tolerate the threats as well as some of the restrictions such as travel.
I might replace 'can' with 'is allowed to'. And the thing about 'is allowed to' is that you don't know what you can get away with until you try. Our side tries to follow the rules of the system, and their side couldn't care less. It's certainly possible that if we follow suit it would backfire, but thinking about that is different from ruling it out from the get go. And to her point, the DOJ could at least go ahead and sue everybody and anybody, even if none of them succeed.
This. Just because someone says a state has the right to do this doesn't mean the administration should just fold. I keep repeating it's so much like the 1850s.
Also, they don't know that. If a woman can be willing to sacrifice her life for her child, and they consider that to be so noble and holy and the highest purpose of woman blah blah blah, then an "unborn child" can be willing to sacrifice its life for its mother too. That makes at least as much sense.
I like that concept, Zach. I’m going to let that idea ferment in my brain for awhile. Maybe we can turn it into something we can use - though I’m sure their first counter would be that the fetus isn’t freely volunteering to do so. Their assumption is always that the fetus is an unwilling “victim” of abortion.
The second that egg is fertilized the woman ceases to be a person, incapable of any interest other than that of the fetus. If that's what they want then that's how they should be selling it, and let's see what the people think.
🤦 These silly little men and their silly little egos! Yes to all three of your bullet points. And, since they brought it up, why would the miniature people be in the sperm and not the eggs? I remember learning that a baby girl already has all the eggs she'll ever have when she's born. (Someone please correct me if that's wrong!) So if everything is "pre-formed", it would be in the EGG, which ALWAYS exists, and not the sperm, which are continuously produced and discarded. But then maybe they'd know that if they realized that if there were a God, God would either be a They or a She, certainly not a He; again that's just silly. So you know that as soon as they start with God being He, everything else they say after that is going to be wrong. Honestly sometimes I don't get it. What do we men have that's so compelling, other than, "Man Monkey strong! Beat up other Man Monkey! Grrr!" 😂 Is that really all it comes down to? Maybe so!
I think I learned that about eggs in my first high school biology class 50 years ago. Short of possibly monotremes I think it is true for all warm blooded creatures.
Forgive me if someone has made this point: To say that the law applies to a convicted sex offender the same as it does to a woman who is seeking an abortion is illogical. The sex offender has been found guilty of a crime; the woman has not.
First, isn't it the doctors who are held liable?
Second, if it's the aider and abetter they are after, then how can they be held liable if it's in a state where abortion is legal?
These AGs are making women prisoners of their states!
And these conservatives get mad when we take a knee at the anthem or question the pledge -- are we in a country or is our state our country? And I'm talking our *basic human rights!*
Chattel states passing fugitive woman acts to prosecute women trying to travel to free states for healthcare
Goliad County? More like Giliad. Oh my stars. When will these hateful people stop? It’s so insane how these ‘freedom’ lovers are so intent on stripping away the most basic freedom of bodily autonomy. Oh, the hypocrisy!
I had the same reaction: I misread the name of the county the first time I saw it.
Looks like Goliad needs a literal come to Jesus lesson. We are not in the Middle Ages. These are not ‘babies.’ Period.
This. Every time.
I have sent letters to more than 250 ‘sanctuary of the unborn’ entities inviting them to provide feedback on the basis for their unfounded contentions. Surprise, surprise. No response. I will only interpret that to mean they have none.
The article in WaPo had this section that made me even sicker: "Almond says she was thankful when Roe was overturned. A 57-year-old former elementary school teacher, she voted twice for Trump, and says she plans to vote for him again. Her friends call her a “pistol-packing mama.” Every time she gets a text message, her phone spits out the sound of two gunshots."
An elementary teacher! Gunshots as a text message notification. Doesn't she remember Uvalde? How does she call herself "pro-life?" Make it make sense.
Thank god it says 'former'. I don't know how to make evil make sense. I just know there's a lot of it in these United States of America.
So...guilty until proven innocent. I feel sick.
With regards to the travel bans, do they apply to airlines, bus companies, Amtrak, car rental companies? Is Hertz going to be liable for renting a car to a woman attempting to travel through or out of one of these zones? What about American Airlines? (Or are companies only viewed as people when it comes to their religious rights to deny staff benefits??) And what about staff of these companies? Do these laws apply to travel agents or airline personnel selling an airplane ticket to an "illegally traveling abortion-minded pregnant person", or the person at the bus or train station selling a ticket to a passenger? What about pilots and train conductors? Are they liable for "trafficking"? And what about the States' own Highway departments or toll takers, who maintain the roads and may even collect monies for illegal passage on them? Who is going to enforce this? Do we need to create new Stasi-style government departments to receive tips about and investigate illicit behaviour? This whole thing is ridiculous. TGIF.
Right now every situation regarding abortion in Texas is intentionally vague creating an atmosphere where no one knows what they are allowed to do even though the ‘aid and abet’ assertion is not prohibiting the funds from paying for pregnant people leaving the state following an injunction prohibiting anyone suing or prosecuting them. The legislature refused to take up a travel restriction bill. They don’t need to when Goliad can assert a specious legal right to do that.
While I appreciate hearing of the possible need to provide support while asserting a religious freedom case for accompanying people who need to leave the state, I think we have to be careful amplifying the impression that prohibitions exist that don’t.
This. Dobbs answered one question and asked a million others. Which is why regardless of what one thinks about abortion it was an incredibly stupid ruling. To quote Paul Westerberg, "God, what a mess."
To paraphrase a Detroit band that my brother used to blast out of his bedroom window- the MC5 ...kick out the assholes, motherfuckers. Weird kid. The only book that he ever read as far as I know was Helter Skelter.
The fucked-up-ed-ness has to fully trickle down to everyone before it will create the necessary amount of outrage. Right now, I see airports as safe travel zones for healthcare because it is a federal function. Notwithstanding those who would use their position to harass travelers.
Amtrak is federal, so it depends.
But I’m female. And I need to pass South of the Border to go to an author event in Maryland. (This is a theme park on the NC/SC border.) I can totally see these fascist theocrats making me prove I’m not pregnant to leave SC. And my husband will be pissed off because we waited however many hours in the car in view of the sombrero to prove that I’m not leaving the state for an abortion. And somehow his anger will matter more than whatever is happening with me.
So enough of this has to happen before enough people will give a shit. Unfortunately. I am so fucking embarrassed to be an American.
More angry husbands would be helpful. Aren't the majority of women seeking abortions already mothers? Can't remember for sure. Of course many of them are probably single mothers, but some may have a male partner. A woman should never need a man to back her up, but until that's the world we live in, every man needs to get off his ass and get angry. It is our responsibility and duty.
Yes, the majority of those seeking abortion care are already parents - 61%, IIRC. But as you rightly point out, that doesn’t mean married, or even partnered.
Women shouldn’t need male back up, but we often do. I have stories that would boggle the mind.
Quick example - I custom ordered some drapes back when I was still working. There was an issue with the fabric length, so I told the curtain guy that I wanted a chocolate brown border on the top and the bottom, with the fabric I’d chosen in the middle. He refused. I’d already paid him half the cost, so I asked him why he was refusing. “You won’t like the curtains, and you won’t pay for them.” Dumbfounded, since I’d designed the curtains I wanted, I said that I would indeed pay for them if he made them the way I requested. He said he’d only do it if my husband approved the design first. I told him I didn’t have a husband, and he was utterly confounded when I told him I owned the house. The only way he would make the drapes was if I paid him the full cost up front.
This was in 2010, IIRC.
🤦🤦🤦😡
The GOP is addicted to abusers. If you just trust women, this country would THRIVE. You could have healthy relationships w women. You could have a workforce that is not dealing w chronic trauma. Women are smart, capable, caring, and collaborative. You could pay your workfforce at least a living wage w adequate benefits. You could have healthy intimate relationships w women and not need viagra or to assault or rape them to have sex. You could live a life that's actually fulfilling and satisfying and not need billions of dollars to feel just ok. Women can do what men can do backwards in heels, while dealing w fluctuating hormones and caring for the 10 different people and animals in our care.
While some men are good, their seems to be a preponderance of assholes. If women were in positions of authority, this would be a much better place. We would still have assholes like the sister of the North Koreas ruler, but they would be the exception. Since you mentioned it, why are women still wearing high heels. I know that it makes their calves and legs look better, but considering the temporary and long lasting pain, why???
Joe,
In my case, I wore heels especially in the workplace because I’m tiny. I found heels lent me more authority. I’m also blonde and feminine in appearance, and especially starting out, heels helped me get taken more seriously.
I can’t wear them now owing to balance issues from MS. I don’t miss the pain, but I miss the extra height, and the authoritative click they make on hard surface flooring.
Not that I know shit about fashion, but how about wearing lifts and long slacks. Seems to work for Cruz and DeSantis.
Our problem is our testosterone. It turns out it's a vital substance, but it's also very dangerous. It seems like the males of most species are very unruly and if they're not kept in line they engage in destructive behavior. At least admitting that fact would be a good start, but the pushback would be something else. Although it's kind of like they're going to say liberals are out to get men anyway, so we might as well say what we want.
That's what I think! You articulated it well and reading it made me smile. Thank you.
Not even following the link and wsj is usually paywalled anyway, but just seeing the headline and I am totally not surprised. I mean, part of the reason I'm here is because I know the jig is up, and it drives me absolutely nuts how the world has everything ass backwards.
It's nice to have supportive male voices on here, especially yours! I have two teenage daughter and hearing voices like yours gives me hope that they will be supported. It's scary out there. It's getting scarier.
Thank you. I do hope that a lot of it is generational, and that young people have grown up in a world with more women in positions of authority, with mothers and fathers being more equal, and with women and their stories being better represented in mainstream culture (movies, TV, etc.), such that they're so much less inclined to even be able to think the old ways. I do admit to some concerns about young people and gender: whether the rise in identification as non-binary means they think they have to get rid of gender altogether, rather than be able to have two different, sometimes complementary, groups who can be treated equally, and, the higher number of biological sex females identifying as trans among teens, which makes me think at least some of it is they feel hopeless that women will ever be treated with respect. But I also remember that, at 45, maybe that's just my old man way of thinking, and that I need to trust the young people even more yet.
Waverly, good for you! One of the proudest parenting moments I had was when my then maybe 8 or 9 year old son came to me with a small fistful of money he had saved, and asked me if I could help him donate it to an abortion rights group. He had seen a news piece on the anti-abortion movement, and he was incensed that anyone thought they had the right to tell women what to do with their bodies.
He’s 35 now, and still a loud and proud feminist. When Trump was inaugurated, I was sick, and couldn’t attend the Women’s March locally. He was living in another state, but he sent me photos of himself at the March where he lived. He texted me that he was marching for me, because he knew I couldn’t.
Wow, he is just awesome. Please tell him I said so. Increase his distribution in your will if you have one.
Joe,
He gets everything. He’s my only child. I’m just hoping I can live long enough to pay off my house for him, without living so long I run out of money!
Thanks for sharing that article! It's not surprising that female surgeons might have less post-op problems.
We could all do with more humility. And if we're doing something as a society to make that hard for men in particular, we should be looking to change it.