Why am I not surprised?
The anti-choice, anti-woman organization CatholicVote.Org has found their own little way to celebrate Earth Day-objectifying women by equating their bodies to pieces of land. They said that they are celebrating Earth Day by "celebrating nature’s greatest gift – human life". They don't mention the word abortion in the ad, but I find that it's always safe to assume that when an anti-choice organization speaks of "celebrating human life" they really mean "destroying women's lives". This is not new, nor is it surprising. I mean, doesn't this look familiar to you?
I also find it interesting to note how, in these types of ads, the woman's existence is not even acknowledged. She is reduced to a pregnant belly. She is portrayed as nothing more than an incubator. She is portrayed as a "thing", not a real person with her own emotions and story in life.
So very pro-woman, eh?
P.S. Please help me support women. I'm trying to raise $100 dollars in ten days for abortion funds. I'm on day 2, so to be on track I need 5 more dollars. Can you chip in that much?
This is the most beautiful ad of a mother and her two children that I have seen in a long time--maybe ever!! What a celebration of Life. I agree that Catholic Vote has outdone themselves. Thanks for spreading the news about who we all know are Nature's Greatest Gift in honor of Earth Day!
ReplyDeleteGod Bless all Mothers and Children!
I can't believe anti-choice organisations claim to be 'pro-woman' then pull shit like this.
ReplyDeleteIs it just me, or is the little girl in the first ad really creepy?
Taylor,
ReplyDeleteYou're not much older than that little girl, are you? Did you know you are part of Nature's Greatest Gifts? You are a beautiful part of our Earth.
In regards to the girl in the ad, it's just you. I find it creepy that you would see an innocent, sweet little smiling girl as creepy. Where does your hatred of little girls come from? Unbelievable. Using the the word 'shit' almost makes you feel all grown up doesn't it?
Is Mom not home tonight to check your homework, give you a hug or tuck you in? I find it VERY creepy that a 15 year old GIRL is so enamored with following a future abortionist's rantings. But also VERY sad.
I also find it MORE creepy that PLG knows your age, knows you follow her but still talks the way she does.
Full body shivers. Super Creepy
Anon, just because you think your children shouldn't be allowed to think for themselves, doesn't mean other parents think that way. PCG has no responsibility to censor herself because of who follows her. PCG is not ranting. She is disgusted by how women are portrayed in the media and by anti-choicers, as am I. I am NOT an incubator! My uterus does not make me important; my contributions to this world make me important. I am glad Taylor knows that already, that she is more than the sum of her parts and capacity to procreate.
ReplyDeleteI love seeing pro-choicers who are even younger than I am. It gives me a lot of hope! :)
ReplyDeleteAs for the things I say, it's not like I'm advertising pornography here. I even refrain from cursing most of the time. I dunno what you're getting all huffy puffy about :)
"Trespassers will be shot."
ReplyDeleteI agree, children with vacant looks like that ad ARE creepy.
ReplyDeleteBut what I find creepier is someone who lacks the backbone to sign even a nickname to their self-righteous drivel stalking a young woman's internet profile and then attempting to use it against her. I also find it creepy when people, particularly those with aforementioned spinelessness, make gross assumptions about others' lives.
I hope, Too Scared To Sign A Name, that you are equally dismissive and equally infantize pro-life teenagers are you've attempted to do to Taylor. Because you're not a raging hypocrite, right?
Seriously though. Pro-life puts pictures of "aborted fetuses" in the hands of very young children at their protests, but call foul when a pro-choice mother brings her children to a protest. Children are only allowed at protests, young adults are only allowed opinions when it's strictly pro-life??? In what fucked up word does THAT makes sense???
(Sorry if I'm offending your "young" ears Taylor...however, having been in high school myself not terribly long ago, I know I certainly heard and used worse at 15.)
Well, clearly, Anon is miffed because [GASP!] there are some people in this world with a shred of moral decency to NOT view women as pieces of land or invisible incubators. Aw, is misogynist recruitment becoming a bigger challenge? Too bad.
ReplyDeleteGreat post, PCG! Keep exposing the truth.
If there is nothing wrong with abortion, please don't fret about the dead fetus pics. Children can handle the truth. Once Abby Johnson stopped fretting at PP she realized she had to quit. The truth was exposed to her and she realized how insane abortion and those who support it really are.
ReplyDeleteKeep exposing the truth of your movement and LARGE proabort following here. Lots of maturity shown on this post alone. LOL
Not too afraid to post my name, just too smart. After all, I'm too old for you to abort. (:
Sweet Dreams Girls.
Glad we agree that the Earth Day ad is AWESOME.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOh, please. Surgical procedures are understandable and justified, but that doesn't mean pictures of them should be shoved in children's faces. C'mon, now. That'd be silly. :)
ReplyDeleteYou know, maybe there IS a connection to be made in the Earth Day ad. A message about how the domination of the Earth and of women is harmful to both. You know, how we shouldn't assume that we are in the position of interfering with nature or women. I see it now! TOTALLY AWESOME.
I agree, Umbert the Unborn. We need to declare the womb a protected wetland. No anti-abortion fanatics allowed!
ReplyDeleteAnd speaking of keeping out pollution: what's the point of anonymously posting creepy things on a blog that you disagree with? There's a difference between going to a blog with an opposing viewpoint to have a discussion and going there to be a total creep.
What not to do:
1. Criticize the personal lives of the blogger and commentors instead of actually discussing the subject.
2. Capitalize random words.
3. Completely ignore the issue entirely and just go on saying stuff that you know will irritate your opponents.
If you can't be a civil commentor on an opponent's blog then go find one of the millions of blogs that you do agree with and comment there. Oh, and by the way: It's REALLY considered creepy to take that much interest in teenage girls on the internet.
"I find it VERY creepy that a 15 year old GIRL is so enamored with following a future abortionist's rantings."
ReplyDeleteSo... If I were a 15 year old BOY it would be somewhat acceptable? :P
Anonymous- Also, it's interesting how you can write four whole paragraphs about me based on a two-sentence comment.
ReplyDeleteOh no! Taylor was up at 1:30 am Anon! You best call the cops; she should be in bed! :)
ReplyDeleteTaylor, It's also interesting that you are up until at least 1:36 a.m. No school today?
ReplyDeleteA teenager of either gender following PCG is frightening. Why so paranoid and defensive?
Sayna, how come so quick to actually number out and tell others what not to do. Do you claim to support women's lib? Or only if they always follow your silly rules? LOL IN ALL CAPS!!
Sorry if you see my interest in an obviously lonely teenager as something creepy. She is the same age as my daughter and if you see something wrong with legit concern, you are the one who has the problem. You may find it hard to believe, but not everyone is out to prey on teenagers and some of us actually do care about how others prey on them, which includes spreading their hate and lies to them.
Are you hearts so cold that you fail to see the true meaning of this Earth Day poster? Women have the gift of bringing new life into the world. Without us, the human population would be long gone extinct. Fertility is a beautiful and natural thing and definitely something to celebrate on Earth Day. What's so offensive about that?! Goodness. If you hate your female anatomy so much, go have a hysterectomy and be done with it already.
ReplyDeleteQuit putting on airs, Anon. My mother does a perfectly good job taking care of me without strangers on the internet trying to take her place.
ReplyDeleteWell Bekah, considering many women have a hard time convincing their doctors to let them get an IUD or a tubal ligation if they don't have children, I seriously doubt they would be "allowed" to have a hysterectomy. Which is a WHOLE other can of worms.
ReplyDeleteAnon, seriously? Go parent your own child and stop pretending to actually care about Taylor. Maybe you should spend a little less time telling others what to do and focus on your own life.
I agree with Anon.
ReplyDeleteThis is one of the most amazing and beautiful ads I have ever seen!! Pregnant women are beautiful.
EARTH TO BEKAH FERGUSON- I am not a walking vagina and uterus. Really. I promise. Just because I hate being defined by my reproductive organs doesn't mean that I hate my "female anatomy".
ReplyDeleteSo C, what does that say about women who aren't pregnant or don't want to become pregnant? And why is only the woman's belly in the picture? Doesn't really matter what she looks like, only about the baby she is carrying. Thus, she is land.
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't say anything about women who aren't pregnant or don't want to become pregnant. Why should it?
ReplyDeleteIt's kind of like "sex sells," except it's on the "virgin" side of that dichotomy. Tits, ass, and uterus: sums up what misogynists think of women.
ReplyDeleteBabies are our future. They are our greatest natural resource.
ReplyDeleteI know that is hard for you to wrap your brain around but you should try it.
Women are land?? Yeah. Right. Whatevs.
Babies are a "natural resource"? WOW. 'Nuff said.
ReplyDeleteWow, C. Really poor word choice there. No need to wrap my head around that bit of ignorance.
ReplyDeletelol
ReplyDeleteI love coming here. It cracks me up. :)
"It's kind of like "sex sells," except it's on the "virgin" side of that dichotomy. Tits, ass, and uterus: sums up what misogynists think of women."
ReplyDeleteOh that's right, you're the one who had the prego porn on your site so I guess you'd be able to tell because your're the porn pro.
It's funny that PCG says "it's not like I'm advertising pornography here." Nobody accused you of this but now that you mention it this sounds like this is probably what the proaborts here have in common here. Please keep it from the minors. If you didn't know, knowingly exposing minors to porn is still illegal.
And encourage the kids who follow to attend school regularily. Thanks.
You mean “regularly.” You're welcome.
ReplyDeleteGee, somebody likes to talk about porn A LOT . . . .
ReplyDeleteThanx for pointing out my speling. I had two big of a stake for supper and this causes my bodie to work harder to dygest which in turn causes my brane to slow down. But that stake sure tasted awsum. I'll switch to chiken tommorro.
ReplyDeleteYour welkum.
"Gee, somebody likes to talk about porn A LOT . . . . "
ReplyDeleteBe careful PCG, FEMily is on to you now too!
just for the record...I'm NOT the anonymous person posting.
ReplyDeleteNormally I would comment, but I see that everyone is already backed into their corner, so I'm just going to stay out of this one.
Allison
THIS LAND IS YOUR LAND
ReplyDeletewords and music by Woody Guthrie
Chorus:
This Land is your Land, this Land is my Land
From California, to the New York Island
From the redwood forest, to the gulf stream waters
This land was made for you and me
As I was walking a ribbon of highway
I saw above me an endless skyway
I saw below me a golden valley
This land was made for you and me
Chorus
I've roamed and rambled and I've followed my footsteps
To the sparkling sands of her diamond deserts
And all around me a voice was sounding
This Land was made for you and me
Chorus
The sun comes shining as I was strolling
The wheat fields waving and the dust clouds rolling
The fog was lifting a voice come chanting
This land was made for you and me
Chorus
As I was walkin' - I saw a sign there
And that sign said - no tress passin'
But on the other side .... it didn't say nothin!
Now that side was made for you and me!
Chorus
In the squares of the city - In the shadow of the steeple
Near the relief office - I see my people
And some are grumblin' and some are wonderin'
If this Land's still made for you and me.
Cmon Pgl, Taylor, Femily, N.G, Sayna, T.U.
Let's sing all together now!!
Remember not to let anyone misuse your Precious Land and it will not produce what you don't want it to! This Land was given to us by our Creator in order that the smallest among us have a place to live. And He doesn't make mistakes.
This land is your land, but this body is NOT your body.
ReplyDeleteYou asked the question, "Women's bodies are .... pieces of land?" Don't ask the question if you can't handle the answer.
ReplyDeleteWhen my momma made the decision to open up the gate to her Land and allowed me in, she also allowed me to share her Land with her until I was ready to move on.
That's just what good momma's do. Sorry you have such a hard time finding good mommas in your world. There out there, you just look in the wrong places.
'There' in the last sentence should be 'their'. Sorry T.U., still digesting that horse from yesterday.
ReplyDeleteI mean 'they're'. Whew. I better stick with fowl for a couple days. hiccup
ReplyDeleteProChoiceGal, you said: "Just because I hate being defined by my reproductive organs doesn't mean that I hate my 'female anatomy'."
ReplyDeleteYou ladies are making one massive mountain out a mole hill with this poster. There's only so much that can be portrayed in a single poster and the point of this Earth Day one was to celebrate fertility. It's not even specifically a prolife poster - I thought prochoicers celebrate fertility too when it is chosen? If you're really all about choice, then you should celebrate a woman's choice to naturally bring human life into the world. Instead, you seem to be offended by anything to do with fertility in general. I'll bet if this poster was made by a prochoice organization, you'd be all for it. The only reason you have your nose out of joint is because of where the poster came from.
No, I'm not okay with defining women by their body parts, no matter who the hatred is coming from. Celebrating fertility and defining women by their fertility (and thus portraying them as objects) are two completely different things. Like how celebrating sexuality is much different than defining women as sex objects. You anti-choicers define us as reproductive objects. Not people. This ad is not celebrating fertility. It's celebrating objectification, and it's no better than this-
ReplyDeletehttp://elizabethslittleblog.files.wordpress.com/2008/06/bingham300.jpg
or this-
http://responsiblemen.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/dolce-gabbana-ad-sexist.jpg
I'm just sick of sexism, period.
I'm with Bekah. When I was in college I took an honors humanities course that discussed every ear of history from the viewpoint of an archaeologist, a historian, a musician, an architect and an expert on historical fashion. It was a fascinating class.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, one of the most ancient forms of art that still exists to this day are statues of "Earth Mother" fertility goddesses. These small statuettes were considered good omens for both women and for those in the very beginning of agriculture who were looking for the best possible outcome from their farming endeavors.
This is a message that is ancient in its historical richness and speaks of the great power that only women command... the power to bring forth life.
The animosity exhibited here is very telling of your own state of mind and extremely narrow in its focus.
LOL, make that ERA, not ear. I should start proofreading before hitting post.
ReplyDeleteThe whole point of Earth Day is to think about the earth instead of ourselves. Antichoicers didn't seem to get the message. I think that the other reason why this ad offends (besides showing nothing but a woman's belly, basically removing her from the equation)- the one day where everyone agrees to talk about the earth instead of humans, antichoicers break the rules and talk about humans. Isn't every other day good enough for them?
ReplyDeleteI thought the same thing, CP. Us humans can be so self centered. As if we're the greatest thing that has ever happened to the world.
ReplyDeleteThe animosity exhibited here is very telling of your own state of mind and extremely narrow in its focus.
ReplyDeleteI don't think you get where we're coming from, Elisabeth. It's very common for advertisers, whether they're selling jeans or anti-choice rhetoric, to reduce a woman to her parts. Maybe they'll only show her bare belly or her backside or her cleavage. Advertisers don't show her face because it kills the fantasy. Her face personifies her. It's what makes her different from every other woman. People, mainly sexist assholes, just want to consume her body, not deal with the human element. That's the issue here.
I see where you're coming from Bekah, but please consider this:
ReplyDeleteAll we see of the woman is her pregnant belly. Isn't the rest of her worthy of being in the picture? Couldn't the poster just as easily have been made with her full figure? (From an art and design perspective, the answer is yes.) But all we're shown is her pregnant belly because that's all the creator deemed important.
Then we have this little girl with a vacant expression on her face and one finger across her mouth. We have to be quiet? We can't talk to the pregnant woman? Well why not?
Then there's the image of the earth superimposed on the belly. Well yeah, both land and women are fertile, and yeah their fertility should be celebrated...except land is property and is owned by people. Owning land is actually a status symbol for many people. So why is that symbol of ownership on that woman?
You could argue that she's owning herself and taking control of her own body, and I would applaud that. Except that the other visual clues have already suggested she is not in control here and she's being oppressed, being given no choices. That's not acceptable.
InsaneArtGurl, hi. :)
ReplyDeleteI have no idea why the little girl is holding a finger to her lips. But I agree that it doesn't make much sense. As for the vacant look - that's probably the result of the airbrushing (I'll avoid a rabbit trail here, but I have a real problem with airbrushing, especially of children...).
And you're right, they could've shown the whole woman in the poster. Not sure why they didn't. My best guess is they wanted the pregnancy to be the focus, which makes sense if you're celebrating fertility in a single word picture. If it was a video, there would be more options.
As a woman who is greatly opposed to sexism and gender inequality, I have yet to be offended by the celebration of pregnancy and childbirth. I think it's a wonderful and miraculous thing (though of course it can also be a devastating crisis depending on the circumstance), and it was my understanding that prochoicers also celebrate pregnancy and childbirth when it is chosen. Was it not Susan Sarandon marching for "choice" during her 8 month of pregnancy?
My impression here is that PCG and Kushi are grasping at straws with this poster. They talk about the "hatred" of prolifers toward prochoice and then they write hypocritical blogs like this that just drip of hatred and judgment toward prolifers. :/
If anyone wants to know how I feel about the objectification of women, I've written about it extensively in multiple blogs. Here's the link to one of them, entitled "Photoshop Beauty and the Makeup Mask":
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bekahferguson.com/content/view/30/12/
InsaneArtGurl said: Then there's the image of the earth superimposed on the belly. Well yeah, both land and women are fertile, and yeah their fertility should be celebrated...except land is property and is owned by people. Owning land is actually a status symbol for many people. So why is that symbol of ownership on that woman?
ReplyDeleteIn addition to this, women are literally property in many areas of the world, including the United States. Women are still being sold as domestic servants, sex slaves, and wives.
And I would argue that fertility in particular shouldn't be celebrated. That would be like celebrating the sense of smell or having ten fingers and ten toes. You're not particularly special if you can reproduce -- every organism in the world does this, sometimes much more efficiently than humans. I feel that the celebration of fertility is often thinly veiled in the sexist notion that women are the morally superior sex, and as such, are held more responsible for continuing the generations than anybody else. You see it in comments like "Women deserve better than abortion," "Being a stay-at-home-mom is the most important and noblest job in the world," and "Fertility is a beautiful and natural thing." Celebrating fertility also implies that women who cannot or choose not to reproduce are deficient in some way, working against nature (read: God's will), and are denying or hating their womanhood. It's just plain hurtful. This is different from celebrating a pregnancy or a birth of a child. When desired, these things are worth celebrating. But believing that fertility, pregnancy, and childbirth should ALWAYS be celebrated or that women should ALWAYS be happy about pregnancy simply silences and shames the women who cannot or choose not to take part in it and delegitimizes the various feelings that women have regarding pregnancy, childbirth, and parenthood.
Bekah- If you support the anti-choice cause, then you are not against sexism, gender inequality, and the objectification of women. Sorry, but being against the sexual objectification of women doesn't mean that you're against other types of objectification and other kinds of sexism. Being anti-choice automatically means that you're supporting sexism, gender inequality, and the objectification of women, even if you may not see it.
ReplyDeleteWant to know what rape apologists tell rape victims? That they make mountains out of mole hills. What is the quickest way to silence somebody? To tell them that they are exaggerating and making a big deal out of nothing. Those are tactics men use against women all the time. They belittle their problems, they belittle their interests, and they belittle them. Do NOT belittle me by telling me I am making a mountain out of a mole hill. Sexism, stereotypes and gender norms are so prevalent that you are BLIND to them. Once you take off those rose-coloured glasses, you will see how women are used in advertisements as property and dehumanized.
ReplyDeleteNot sure why you included my name, Bekah, when all I said was that I was upset that antichoicers couldn't take one day off to celebrate the Earth.
ReplyDeleteNot Guilty-
ReplyDeleteDEFINITELY. Like how anti-choicers told me that I was making too big of a deal out of faux news putting the word rape in quotations, as if that girl got pregnant at the age of 10 by having consensual sex. Or like how anti-choicers tell me that I shouldn't speak about my rape experience because that would be playing the "victim card".
Whilst every mole hill may not become a mountain, every mountain came from a mole hill.
ReplyDeleteFEMIly said: "In addition to this, women are literally property in many areas of the world, including the United States. Women are still being sold as domestic servants, sex slaves, and wives."
ReplyDeleteAnd what are fetuses, if not literal property in many areas of the world, including the United States. Women want equality and they seek to achieve this by ... killing their offspring? This is hypocritical.
There was a time, a long time, where women were legal non-persons. Today the fetus is a legal non-person; the property of women.
How can anyone claim to be against sexism and gender equality while defending the very thing that has resulted in the deaths of 100 million fetal females? Abortion makes gendercide incredibly easy and thus doubles and triples and quadruples the numbers...
And what are fetuses, if not literal property in many areas of the world, including the United States. Women want equality and they seek to achieve this by ... killing their offspring? This is hypocritical.
ReplyDeleteIt's not hypocritical. Whether or not abortion is legal, the pregnancy belongs to the woman. Everything in her body belongs to her, whether it's an organ or a fetus. If you're going to make the case that a woman has no control over what is in her body, that makes a huge case for rape and against most birth control options.
There was a time, a long time, where women were legal non-persons. Today the fetus is a legal non-person; the property of women.
Women were property of their fathers until they were married, when they became property of their husbands. They were defined by their relation to the men in their lives. They were never physically attached to these people and using their bodies for their very existence. Women have always existed on their own and had the equal right to define themselves by their own merits. Can you say the same for fetuses, without seriously disrespecting women? No. What you want to do is define women by the contents of their uterus. It's the fetus that is defined by its relation to the woman, not the other way around. It is the fetus that is dependent on the woman, not the other way around. I can't believe I have to explain this to you. I'm sure you're smarter than that.
How can anyone claim to be against sexism and gender equality while defending the very thing that has resulted in the deaths of 100 million fetal females? Abortion makes gendercide incredibly easy and thus doubles and triples and quadruples the numbers...
Where abortion is legal, the vast majority of them occur in the first trimester, well before the sex of the fetus can be determined. I guess you can argue that they're all female then, but that would be extremely ridiculous. Sex-selective abortion in other countries are not legal abortion's fault. This is a societal problem where girls and women are disrespected. Outlawing abortion, even sex-selective abortion, does not change this. In fact, it makes it much worse. The family just waits until the baby is born and starve her, smother her, or drown her when it's found that the baby is a girl. I don't know about you, but I'd rather a woman have a safe abortion, even if she's doing it because the fetus is female, when the fetus does not feel any pain, then have a baby girl feel all the pain of being neglected, abused, suffocated, and drowned. If you sincerely do not see the distinction I'm making, then I really don't know what else to tell you.
FEMIly, you said: "It is the fetus that is dependent on the woman, not the other way around."
ReplyDeleteOf course the fetus is dependent on his/her mother. That goes without saying. But what does that have to do with personhood?
Siamese twins are physically attached to one another and in most cases share one or multiple organs. The fetus shares an organ with his/her mother temporarily. If the fetus is thus not a person, because she temporarily attached to another, does this mean that Siamese twins aren't persons/human beings because they are attached to another and share organs?
You said: "Where abortion is legal, the vast majority of them occur in the first trimester, well before the sex of the fetus can be determined. I guess you can argue that they're all female then, but that would be extremely ridiculous."
I would never argue that they're "all female" then, because it's not scientifically accurate. Gender is determined at conception, not later on when the organs become visibly developed.
You said: "Sex-selective abortion in other countries are not legal abortion's fault. This is a societal problem where girls and women are disrespected. Outlawing abortion, even sex-selective abortion, does not change this."
I agree that gendercide is a societal problem, predominate in countries such as India and China. I also agree that outlawing abortion won't change this.
You said: "In fact, it makes it much worse. The family just waits until the baby is born and starve her, smother her, or drown her when it's found that the baby is a girl."
This is certainly much more horrific; however abortion makes sex-selection killing easier and therefore more prevalent. More females die in abortion than they do in newborn abandonment and/or infanticide.
You said: "I don't know about you, but I'd rather a woman have a safe abortion, even if she's doing it because the fetus is female, when the fetus does not feel any pain, then have a baby girl feel all the pain of being neglected, abused, suffocated, and drowned. If you sincerely do not see the distinction I'm making, then I really don't know what else to tell you."
I understand the distinction you're making and I too would rather the baby not have to suffer any pain and be consciously aware of what is happening to her. Unfortunately, whether the female is killed prior to birth or after birth, it is the exact same female in either case who has lost her life due to gender inequality.
Gendercide is a crime against women and whether you're prochoice or not, no one should turn a blind eye to sex-selection abortion just because it isn't a problem in the U.S.
Of course the fetus is dependent on his/her mother. That goes without saying. But what does that have to do with personhood?
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't. Personhood has nothing to do with the abortion debate at all. People have absolutely no right to use another person's body without their consent.
Siamese twins are physically attached to one another and in most cases share one or multiple organs. The fetus shares an organ with his/her mother temporarily. If the fetus is thus not a person, because she temporarily attached to another, does this mean that Siamese twins aren't persons/human beings because they are attached to another and share organs?
Conjoined twins who share vital organs have an interest in staying conjoined. But when one dies, so does the other. The same doesn't go for pregnant women.
I would never argue that they're "all female" then, because it's not scientifically accurate. Gender is determined at conception, not later on when the organs become visibly developed.
This isn't necessarily true. Besides, sex can only be determined by ultrasound. It doesn't make a difference when sex is determined genetically. Women only have sex-selective abortions when they find out they're pregnant with a female.
This is certainly much more horrific; however abortion makes sex-selection killing easier and therefore more prevalent. More females die in abortion than they do in newborn abandonment and/or infanticide.
This might be true, but outlawing sex-selective abortion isn't worth the risk of more baby girls being neglected, abused, and murdered. It's a cost-benefit. I might disagree with a woman's reasons for having an abortion, but her right to have one should not be infringed. The costs are too great, both for women and children.
Unfortunately, whether the female is killed prior to birth or after birth, it is the exact same female in either case who has lost her life due to gender inequality. Gendercide is a crime against women and whether you're prochoice or not, no one should turn a blind eye to sex-selection abortion just because it isn't a problem in the U.S.
Nobody is saying that this shouldn't be a topic of discussion because it's not a problem in the United States. I compared sex-selective abortion in countries where abortion is legal and where abortion is illegal. We can agree that gender inequality causes the deaths of millions of women and girls and that outlawing abortion won't stop sexism. Which begs the question: Why do you want abortion to be made illegal?
Bekah,
ReplyDeleteI'm fascinated by the use of "offspring" to describe fetuses. It should be obvious to all that a fetus has not offsprung anywhere.
"I would never argue that they're 'all female' then, because it's not scientifically accurate. Gender is determined at conception, not later on when the organs become visibly developed."
1) Gender is not the same as sex.
2) Sex is not determined at conception. Zygotes are not sexually-differentiated.
3) "Nevertheless, even the sex-dichotomous differences are not absolute in the human population, and there are individuals who are exceptions (e.g., males with a uterus, or females with an XY karyotype), or who exhibit biological and/or behavioral characteristics of both sexes." (ibid; emphasis added)
As with homicide, "gendercide" does not apply to fetuses.
I agree with Femily that the proscription of sex-selective abortion has no practical benefits.
Why do you want abortion to be made illegal?
ReplyDeleteI feel that, with the important exception of the mother's health, abortion for any reason other than health is the deliberate killing of another human being (an innocent human being), which I find morally appalling. Legally, I can not call it murder, but if the fetus is a human being, then what can it be other than murder? (Again, with the exception of the mother's health). Of course this is the where the self-defense debate usually begins and I certainly understand that perspective.
Arium, you said: "I'm fascinated by the use of "offspring" to describe fetuses. It should be obvious to all that a fetus has not offsprung anywhere."
ReplyDelete"Fetus" is Latin for "young one, offspring." It's as simple as that.
I feel that, with the important exception of the mother's health, abortion for any reason other than health is the deliberate killing of another human being (an innocent human being), which I find morally appalling. Legally, I can not call it murder, but if the fetus is a human being, then what can it be other than murder? (Again, with the exception of the mother's health). Of course this is the where the self-defense debate usually begins and I certainly understand that perspective.
ReplyDeleteThis isn't so much a reason for abortion to be illegal as it is a reason you might have for not getting one. I just don't think it's possible to believe that outlawing abortion does absolutely nothing to help the status of women, while also believing that abortion should be made illegal, but you're trying to make that case. What would be the benefit of outlawing it completely that can't be done with just letting the women decide for themselves? Outlawing abortion runs the risk of an unintended pregnancy becoming a health problem, as many women who don't have the option of a safe and legal abortion either seek unsafe abortions or commit suicide. Letting the women decide for themselves what's healthy for them and consider their own beliefs when making family planning decisions doesn't have that problem.
Hi again, FEMIly :)
ReplyDeleteYou said, "I just don't think it's possible to believe that outlawing abortion does absolutely nothing to help the status of women, while also believing that abortion should be made illegal, but you're trying to make that case."
I agreed that outlawing abortion won't end gendercide, since that is indeed a societal problem. But in Canada (my country) and the U.S., many abortions are performed for reasons that have nothing to do with the mother's health - and that is my primary concern. For example, I find it extremely unethical and discriminatory that as many as 90% of Down Syndrome babies are aborted these days. We don't go around killing the disabled of any other age group and yet we seem to think it is perfectly acceptable to kill off all the disabled fetuses. Having known many downs individuals in my life, one of which has lived with my parents for ten years now and is a member of the family, they are beautiful, simple people who truly enjoy life.
You said, "Outlawing abortion runs the risk of an unintended pregnancy becoming a health problem, as many women who don't have the option of a safe and legal abortion either seek unsafe abortions or commit suicide."
Prior to Roe v. Wade, the amount of women who died from back alley abortions was around 300 a year. Today (and I'm only using U.S. statistics), 1+ million abortions are performed annually. I believe that fetuses are human beings, just like women. So, why should we sacrifice a million fetuses each year to potentially save the lives of 300 women?
Many prochoicers have come back at me with numbers like "60,000" women will die annually of illegal abortion, but it was never this way prior to Roe; why should it be now? It's like they've just pulled an impressive number out of a hat and expect me to believe it.
You said: "Letting the women decide for themselves what's healthy for them and consider their own beliefs when making family planning decisions doesn't have that problem."
The U.S. birth rate has now dipped lower than the death rate, due to abortion. This means that we aren't replacing ourselves. In time, Caucasians and African Americans will become rare in the U.S. and eventually extinct. This is a grave concern for America. It will eventually change the entire face of our society. I love other cultures, of course, but just consider: what if America became predominately Muslim? What would happen to women's liberty then? What happens if our granddaughters or great-grandaughters grow up under the leadership of an Islamic government?
Another example: Consider Europe, whose death vs. birth rate is in even worse shape than ours. Higher class, educated women are having only 1 child, if even that, while the lower class, uneducated women, continue to have several children. What will the social implications of this be when the next generations that come along are predominately poor and uneducated. What happens to Europe then?
Abortion aids the male-to-female ratio crisis in countries like India and China - but over here in Canada, the U.S., Europe, we're facing a birth-to-death rate crisis which is directly instigated by abortion.
All these long-term consequences need to be taken into serious consideration - and unfortunately, they have not.
Take away women's liberty and force them through pregnancies so we can have more Caucasians and African American people? Uh, no. That is not the answer. That is just misogynistic. You're saying that we have to take away women's rights so that women will have rights. WTFruit? You make absolutely no sense.
ReplyDeletenote- This is another case of an anti who is trying to take away women's rights and calls it protecting women's rights. Seriously, anti-choicers, if you're so ashamed of what you do that you have to pretend that it's something else, why don't you stop doing it? If your cause is so noble, be open about it and admit that you want to take away women's rights.
ProChoiceGal, you said: "You're saying that we have to take away women's rights so that women will have rights. WTFruit? You make absolutely no sense."
ReplyDeleteWTFruit? lol
But seriously . . . I'm not saying abortion should be illegal *because* of the birth-to-death ratio - I'm only saying that it is one of the consequences of abortion in America.
The SOLE reason I believe abortion is wrong is because the fetus is an innocent human being who doesn't deserve capitol punishment. It's unjust.
You said, "If your cause is so noble, be open about it and admit that you want to take away women's rights."
My motivation is to speak out for those who cannot speak for themselves: the poor and needy, the unborn. I care about women and babies equally. I want to help them both in whatever way I can.
What you call "women's rights" is women killing innocent fetuses who have no rights at all. Again, I say, it's unjust.
But ProChoiceGal, I don't want to debate with you about this any further or get into the topic of self-defense - which I know is trigger for you. We've come full circle in the past and don't need to do so again. I don't want to cause you any distress.
If anyone would like to continue to discuss this with me, please do so at http://www.bekahferguson.com/content/view/42/12/
Thanks.
Take care.
Is it OK to kill the guilty fetuses?
ReplyDeleteThe U.S. birth rate has now dipped lower than the death rate, due to abortion. This means that we aren't replacing ourselves. In time, Caucasians and African Americans will become rare in the U.S. and eventually extinct. This is a grave concern for America. It will eventually change the entire face of our society. I love other cultures, of course, but just consider: what if America became predominately Muslim? What would happen to women's liberty then? What happens if our granddaughters or great-grandaughters grow up under the leadership of an Islamic government?
ReplyDeleteThe fact that you'd say this racist bullshit makes me not even want to talk to your bigoted ass, but I feel the need to school you. Plus, you still haven't answered my question. First of all, the education of women, not abortion, is what curtails the birth rate in every country. Educated women delay pregnancy, are more likely to use birth control (and, therefore, less likely to have abortions), and have fewer children. Even so, American families on average have slightly more than 2 children, which means they are replacing themselves. Additionally, immigration of all sorts is increasing the US population. Secondly, like I said, you're a fucking racist. I happen to live in one of the most Muslim areas of the United States, and we're all happily represented by progressives who care about our bodily integrity and religious freedom. Which, of course, is much more than I can say for your bigoted ass.
How many Muslims have you known? You talked about all of the people with Down Syndrome you've known. I've only known one person with Down Syndrome, and he groped me at my job. In fact, he had a terrible history of sexual assault. And even though I was told that he'd be transfered to an institution if he assaulted anyone again, that didn't happen. I had to quit my job because of it. Do I think all people with Down Syndrome are a bunch of perverts? Of course not, because that would be stupid. And you are stupid for believing that Muslims are seeking to reproduce more than anybody in the United States so that they can take over the country. But you might be qualified to get your own show on FOX News.
One more thing, asshole. The poor and needy CAN and DO speak for themselves. They're just drowned out by assholes like you. Believe me, they don't need an "advocate" who thinks they can't speak for themselves. So you can add classist to racist and misogynistic to your lovely list of bigoted beliefs. Fetuses, conveniently for you, have no voice. So you can project your own beliefs on them. Instead of making up shit that fetuses say, listen to the women -- ALL OF THEM.
Ok you got me. I want to come clean and confess.
ReplyDeleteI want to take away a woman's legal right to kill her unborn human child.
FEMily, "Muslism" isn't a race, it's a religion.
ReplyDeleteFEMily, you said: "The fact that you'd say this racist bullsh*t makes me not even want to talk to your bigoted *ss ..."
ReplyDeleteAnd since you're no longer being civil, I don't wish to continue this discussion with you either.
But before I go, let me "school you" too:
Islam is a religion, not a race.
Are you an atheist? Does that make you "racist"? No, because Christianity (et al) is a religion, not a race.
I would like to add that I am sorry for causing offense, FEMily.
ReplyDeleteRadical Islam has caused the oppression of women in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, etc., and my concern is for them as human beings. I don't like to see anyone suffer. I have absolutely nothing against any race of people. Islam is a religion comprised of many different races and sects.
But again, I am sorry for any offense caused.
I care very much about women and children and I wish for everyone to have equality, including unborn babies.
I hope Canada and America will always remain a place of liberty.
Oh, so you were being civil when you made those hateful remarks. Okie dokie. And religion and race greatly intersect. Beliefs of racial superiority often go hand-in-hand with beliefs of religious superiority, like the Ku Klux Klan. Racism and ethnocentrism also motivated imperialism in every habitable continent except Europe (who was doing almost all of the colonizing). Part of taking over other people's land and the people themselves was converting them to Christianity. And even today, because people are generally pretty dumb, Muslim has become synonymous with Arab which has become synonymous with Middle Eastern. So there's a great chance that when someone uses disparaging language against Muslims, there's plenty of racist resentment behind it.
ReplyDelete