Politics & Current Events
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Re: Which is more dangerous
I'm sorry but I can't get on board with a conversation that starts at the premise that anyone who supports this legislation must hate women. You do realize that there are many women who support such things?
Pretending that they must be complete and utter morons who have become easy prey to evil, woman hating men is insulting. Are some of these people misogynist? Absolutely. But it stalls the discussion before it can begin when you start with such a shitty, offensive premise.
Also, there is usually, and rightly so, a shitstorm around these parts when prolifers pepper the debate with the notion that prochoicers hate babies. I'm not sure why it's acceptable to use the same tactics in support of the oppositional opinion.
Click me, click me!
See this is why, I sure as hell hope that PP or some other group challenges the constitutionality of these laws. It's just like the poll tax. You can vote IF and only if you pay a fee. You can have an abortion if and only if you aren't past six weeks.
See my example of "omg socialism!" with the invocation of George Orwell novels when it comes to how Democrats hate when Republicans pull this hyperbole shiz. My umbrage was and still is with that (and puhlease, that is not an appropriate way to start a "discussion") and not with the idea that women should have access to abortions.
But whatever HAB you probably didn't even read the book.
So we can remove hate and misogyny. But, I do think we can say that one doesn't necessarily value the woman's ability to make what "they (the legislators)" should be the best decision. Which in the case of these policies, is to force women to have children they may not want. Or, you have to produce documentation saying you were raped. These are problematic and as others have stated, it does place more value on the fetus and basically the woman's uterus than the woman herself.
Above Us Only Sky
Thank you. I'm trying to figure out what purpose there would be for me to "discuss" anything in this thread.
ETA: And on a completely unrelated note, I am so freaking excited over finding the zoom on my laptop! I can actually see these posts now!
Any policy that forces women to wait on a procedure so that they can think it over doesn't value women as capable of independent thought. Any policy that forces women to listen to inaccurate and irrelevant information to attempt to dissuade them from a procedure does not value women as capable of independent thought. Any policy that forces a woman to have a probe stuck up her vag and to hear a heartbeat or see an image in an attempt to change their mind does not value women as capable of independent thought.
Any policy to curtail access to forms of birth control does not value the woman's right to control her own body. Any policy that would force a woman to incubate a fetus against her will does not value the woman's right to control her own body.
Yeah, I see the parallels.
Of course they're not exactly the same. I can buy makeup, porn, and lingerie, and I can take birth control,at least, for now, barring passage of personhood amendments that even Romney has claimed to support. I just think the views about women that led to Handmaid's dystopia are exactly what we see today. Being forced to bear a child you don't want and that you couldn't prevent is exactly what the anti-choice is attempting to turn into reality.
Well, unless it's exactly the same, this is just stupid hyperbole. HTH.
I agree that both sides go too far with their rhetoric. But I believe that some people are also being intentionally obtuse.
I mean for some people depending on where you live and the amount of money you have this already happens every day. This is one of my issues with the term Pro Choice, it implies that everyone actually has a choice when in fact large numbers of women can't afford an abortion or live prohibitively far away or need someone to be there, but have no one to tell or any of a million different barriers.
They're not even remotely the same, but then Margaret Atwood was born in the 1930's and has lived the majority of her life through a time period where women were denied a lot of their rights, including reproductive rights (and died getting back alley abortions), but also many others if not outright but also socially- all of which, together, were important aspects of the commentary she was making.
Draw some comparisons, but a few not even wholly equivalent comparisons does not make the whole god damn book a mirror on our reality, and I'm not sorry for saying that I think anyone who really thinks that is using hyperbole, and being totally absurd. I think it's obtuse to pretend like it isn't hyperbolic to be like "Woah Handmaid's Tale is just like today!1"
So why not say, "well, I think saying it's the same is a stretch, but I can see some parallels/similarities on a lesser scale/whatever" instead of "OMG you are so full of crap" because things aren't the exact same? SBP keeps talking about broader themes and you keep going back to the specifics of the book. That's why it's not "JUST like today." I think there is some merit to the discussion if you think a bit more broadly than that.
There are some parallels, but the hand wringing is like talking to my crazy liberal mother who's never met a rational argument she couldn't turn into something crazy.
Yes, there are people moving to control women's reproductive health. Yes, it is scary. But we're hardly near post nuclear war where we all wear wimples and befriend spiders.
This is totally valid. I don't think we are at the cusp of turning into that, and I think it's fine to say tell people that and tell them to calm down a bit. I just think shutting down conversations because it's not JUST like that is counterproductive. Isn't that like saying we shouldn't be worried until/unless we are in that exact situation?
I've already stated multiple times that I think discussions about the reproductive rights of women are valid and important. I've also simply said, time and time and time again for the duration of this particular shii!t show, that the "handwringing" is polarizing and something I will always frown at/poo poo on, no matter the side. I'm not gonna handle it with kid gloves, either, just because this is a newer screen name or whatever. I'm not the one who ran off to make a new thread about what a dumbass the other person is, either.
I am a TIP ancient, arisen from a bit of a long nest vacay and back with a new screenie because someone crazy cakes was stalking my old one. I posted on PCE quite a bit as well as TIP before I went away for a while.
Above Us Only Sky
This would be fine if this thread was starting point for legitimate conversation. Instead, the header was basically, look at this dumbhor Nerdicorn and isn't it cute how obtuse she is, teehee.
Click me, click me!
Lol, I will.
Sometimes I get a burning in my beaver that only some good online slap boxing can satisfy
You seriously need to put that in your signature line. LMAO!
Come on folks, isn't there some middle ground here?
Now, we're not living in the world of The Handmaid's Tale, but there are some pretty wacky and downright frightening pieces of legislation being discussed (and some passed) in state legislatures all over the country.
It's at least enough to make you sit up and take notice.
Have you seen her ears? Dead sexy. I think she used to pose for ear porn.