[TW slurs] A Friendly Reminder: Don’t Call Out -ists With -isms.
Yes, the GOP political candidates are racist, sexist, classist, ableist, heterosexist, and cissexist bigots. Absolutely. But let’s not call them out by saying they’re “idiots”, “batshit crazy”, “delusional”, “lame”, “stupid”, “retarded”, etc.
Let’s not call out racist women by calling them “dumb bitches.”
Let’s not call out cissexist feminists by calling them “morons.”
Let’s not call out heterosexist poc by calling them “welfare queens.”
Let’s not call out sexist men by calling them “fags.”
Let’s not call out ableist people by calling them “selfish sluts.”
Let’s not call out classist people by calling them “crazy rich people.”
It’s called intersectionality. And trying to combat -ists with -isms will never be okay. Few people are privileged on every single axis, oppressions can’t be compared, and your oppression doesn’t make you incapable of being oppressive on another axis. Someone said something -ist? By all means take them down. But no one needs to engage in -isms to do it. You’re hurting other people when you do that. And their oppression, perpetuated by you, is no less painful than the fucked up thing you’re angry about. Full stop.
Lastly, garnering solidarity under the guise of -isms isn’t cool either.
You “Stand With Planned Parenthood”? How about you support them instead?
(TW: Forced Sterilization and Rape)
Elaine Riddick was 13 years old when she got pregnant after being raped by a neighbor in Winfall, N.C., in 1967. The state ordered that immediately after giving birth, she should be sterilized. Doctors cut and tied off her fallopian tubes.
Riddick was never told what was happening. “Got to the hospital and they put me in a room and that’s all I remember, that’s all I remember,” she said. “When I woke up, I woke up with bandages on my stomach.”
Her records reveal that a five-person state eugenics board in Raleigh had approved a recommendation that she be sterilized. North Carolina was one of 31 states to have a government run eugenics program. By the 1960s, tens of thousands of Americans were sterilized as a result of these programs.
To read more about this story, click here. Dr. Nancy Snyderman’s full broadcast report, ‘State of Shame’, airs Monday, November 7, at 10pm/9c on NBC’s Rock Center with Brian Williams.
holy fuck.
RAGE.
I recently started learning about the history of eugenics and the correlation between the history of birth control in America. It’s some freaky fucking shit I tell you, full of examples of the classism, racism, and ableism rampant in society. How convenient that only poor people/people of color/mentally disabled people were sterilized! /sarcasm/
P.S. If I remember correctly IQ tests were originally used to determine if someone was “feeble-minded” enough to be sterilized.
![prolongedeyecontact:
stfuprolife:
I posted this status today. This girl and her husband are the worst kind of conservative anti-choicers. She never backs down from a debate so the fact that she never responded is highly amusing. I would unfriend her but catching her when she’s talking out her ass is too much fun. :)
HA! Oh, Jeebus, the bliss of ignorance. #smh. No “L”, whoever you are, there isn’t another nation-wide chain of free/low-cost clinics that could replace Planned Parenthood. Not even close. And the ones that “attempt” to are dogmatic, religiously-affiliated, and notorious for blatant lying and shaming. Your “morals” may feel icky by the thought of abortion, but defunding PP is classist as fuck and I’m not really sure how it’s moral to close down an organization that helps prevent approximately 810,000 abortions per year. When I read this little piece of Facebook drivel I was reminded of an article on RH Reality Check called “All Those Alternatives To Planned Parenthood? In Texas, At Least, They Don’t Exist.”
[…]
Planned Parenthood or not, I’d still need well-woman exams, birth control pills and suchlike, and I wanted to know where I could get these things if I had to spend weeks or months scraping by on a freelancer’s salary without health insurance. So here’s what I did: I spent my own time, money and energy trying to find a health care clinic that anti-choice conservatives, legislators and organizations would approve of—namely, to find a Federally Qualified Health Center or “look-alike” center that, by virtue of federal grant funding, cannot provide abortion services except in cases of rape, incest or threat to a mother’s life, as dictated by the 36-year-old Hyde Amendment. (I know—that amendment also applies to Planned Parenthood, which only uses private, non-taxpayer funds for its abortion services at separate, privately-funded locations, but we’re talking about conservative ideology, not logic, so just go with me here.)
But I thought, I’ll play this game. If it turns out I was wrong—and I really thought maybe I could be, because how could it seriously happen that “pro-life” Texans didn’t want me to get cancer screenings?—I would be the first to admit that you can take Planned Parenthood out of the equation and still find easily accessible, low-cost reproductive health care in a sprawling metropolitan area like Dallas. But I wasn’t wrong. I was, maddeningly, right. Considering the rate at which conservatives are defunding family planning in my state, and for that matter, across the country, I’m very sorry about that. All of this is an ideological, not fiscally conservative, battle. After all, family planning saves taxpayers $4 for every $1 spent. But I was trying to work around family planning dollars, since conservatives seem to think they go straight to gleeful baby-killing cocktail hours, and stick with straight-up FQHC’s. If they’re lucky, Dallas women will be told what I was told: an appointment at an anti-choicer-approved FQHC might be available in May if I called back in three weeks—at a location two cities away and five miles from the closest bus stop.
Or women can call Planned Parenthood, like I did, at lunch time on a Friday, and be told that an afternoon appointment including a full pelvic and breast exam is available that same day for about $100 at a location a few yards from a major public transportation hub that I could easily reach in a half-hour or so.
[…]
I recommend going and reading it in its entirety to see the lengths the author had to go to and the hoops she had to jump through to try to get healthcare comparable to Planned Parenthood. All the while keeping in mind that she is fairly privileged to even have the time or resources to do even a fraction of that investigation. Go read it, then come back and try to tell me defunding PP makes sense on any level.](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lvlx25jy2H1r4wgdzo1_500.jpg)
I posted this status today. This girl and her husband are the worst kind of conservative anti-choicers. She never backs down from a debate so the fact that she never responded is highly amusing. I would unfriend her but catching her when she’s talking out her ass is too much fun. :)
HA! Oh, Jeebus, the bliss of ignorance. #smh. No “L”, whoever you are, there isn’t another nation-wide chain of free/low-cost clinics that could replace Planned Parenthood. Not even close. And the ones that “attempt” to are dogmatic, religiously-affiliated, and notorious for blatant lying and shaming. Your “morals” may feel icky by the thought of abortion, but defunding PP is classist as fuck and I’m not really sure how it’s moral to close down an organization that helps prevent approximately 810,000 abortions per year. When I read this little piece of Facebook drivel I was reminded of an article on RH Reality Check called “All Those Alternatives To Planned Parenthood? In Texas, At Least, They Don’t Exist.”
[…]
Planned Parenthood or not, I’d still need well-woman exams, birth control pills and suchlike, and I wanted to know where I could get these things if I had to spend weeks or months scraping by on a freelancer’s salary without health insurance. So here’s what I did: I spent my own time, money and energy trying to find a health care clinic that anti-choice conservatives, legislators and organizations would approve of—namely, to find a Federally Qualified Health Center or “look-alike” center that, by virtue of federal grant funding, cannot provide abortion services except in cases of rape, incest or threat to a mother’s life, as dictated by the 36-year-old Hyde Amendment. (I know—that amendment also applies to Planned Parenthood, which only uses private, non-taxpayer funds for its abortion services at separate, privately-funded locations, but we’re talking about conservative ideology, not logic, so just go with me here.)
But I thought, I’ll play this game. If it turns out I was wrong—and I really thought maybe I could be, because how could it seriously happen that “pro-life” Texans didn’t want me to get cancer screenings?—I would be the first to admit that you can take Planned Parenthood out of the equation and still find easily accessible, low-cost reproductive health care in a sprawling metropolitan area like Dallas. But I wasn’t wrong. I was, maddeningly, right. Considering the rate at which conservatives are defunding family planning in my state, and for that matter, across the country, I’m very sorry about that. All of this is an ideological, not fiscally conservative, battle. After all, family planning saves taxpayers $4 for every $1 spent. But I was trying to work around family planning dollars, since conservatives seem to think they go straight to gleeful baby-killing cocktail hours, and stick with straight-up FQHC’s. If they’re lucky, Dallas women will be told what I was told: an appointment at an anti-choicer-approved FQHC might be available in May if I called back in three weeks—at a location two cities away and five miles from the closest bus stop.
Or women can call Planned Parenthood, like I did, at lunch time on a Friday, and be told that an afternoon appointment including a full pelvic and breast exam is available that same day for about $100 at a location a few yards from a major public transportation hub that I could easily reach in a half-hour or so.
[…]
I recommend going and reading it in its entirety to see the lengths the author had to go to and the hoops she had to jump through to try to get healthcare comparable to Planned Parenthood. All the while keeping in mind that she is fairly privileged to even have the time or resources to do even a fraction of that investigation. Go read it, then come back and try to tell me defunding PP makes sense on any level.
Prolonged Eye Contact: It has to be said:
[TW: ableism, classism, forced sterilization]
I’m not denying that prochoice conversations can and do have ableism problems, full stop. But people like to counter this with copious amount of classism. Feminists are usually really good at understanding that choices don’t happen in a vacuum,…
Prolonged Eye Contact: [TW: Ableism]
yesterday i read that the abortion rate for a fetus with Down’s syndrome is approximately 93%
and i wanted to cry
because people are idiots.
it made me even more thankful that i met Alexis, and got to know her. And…
All of the comments on this are amazing.
(Source: seeharmoniesandachesoften)
![prolongedeyecontact:
[I’m reformatting this to prevent the post from going totally vertical due to so many speakers.]
rabbleprochoice:
Sex isn’t a contract for pregnancy. When a person has sex, they don’t do so with the intention of upholding any and all consequences that may occur. You could say that people who have sex and get STD’s don’t deserve to have them treated because “they knew what they were getting into”.
Driving in a car is not a contract for being in a car accident. Sure, you can wear a seat belt but sometimes that seat belt doesn’t 100% prevent fatal injury, just like a condom or a birth control pill won’t 100% protect from pregnancy. But you got in the car knowing full well that a car accident was a possibility, should we not treat people who are in serious car accidents?
If you go swimming you know that drowning is a possibility and you choose to do it anyway, so should we get rid of all the lifeguards and let you drown because you knew the consequences of swimming? OF COURSE NOT!!!
This argument that people should know what they’re getting into when having sex and should therefore keep their pregnancy is just as absurd as proposing that we don’t send ambulances to help people in car accidents or that we get rid of lifeguards.And then, of course, there’s the little bit about how anti-choicers fightagainst comprehensive sex ed so there are people who have sex who have absolutely NO IDEA what the consequences of sex are.
If someone is having sex and using protection, the understanding is that they do not want to get pregnant but sometimes shit happens and things don’t work out the way we want them to. So if women ARE aware of the consequences of sex and choose to use a contraceptive to protect themselves against such consequences what is the problem? They took precautions, their birth control failed, and so what? They’re supposed to go through a pregnancy and raise a child they never wanted just to live by someone else’s morals? Fuck that.
A child isn’t a flippant addition to one’s life. It’s not like buying a pair of shoes. A childchanges your entire life. Raising a child takes a lifetime, it costs money, it could be seriously ill and need extremely expensive medical treatment, and it takes sacrifices that some people aren’t willing to give up. Like, me, if I got pregnant right now, I would go to Planned Parenthood the second I saw the pregnancy test. I want to be a doctor. There is no fucking way I’m going to go through med school with a fucking kid. There is no way I’m going to go through my pre-med classes pregnant. I wouldn’t even have to think about it what I would do. I want med school too much and I’m not willing to sacrifice any of that for a child.
And what about people who don’t want to have children? Ever? Should I NEVER be allowed to have sex in my life? What if I get married to this super hot guy in my physics class and we don’t want children? Am I NEVER allowed to fuck my husband or consummate our marriage? And for who? So someone ELSE gets to feel better about the future of my unfertilized eggs? I think it’s pretty obvious how ABSURD of an expectation that is.To expect people never to have sex with their husbands or wives or their polyamourous partners or whoever the fuck they want to fuck because of your own personal morals is not only just fucking embarrassingly ridiculous but it’s so juvenile and is so self-centered.
Like, who thinks that way? “I believe people shouldn’t have sex unless it’s to have children therefore EVERYONE EVER should follows these arbitrary rules I have set down for myself.”
Um, WHAT?
No. That’s not how life works.
And then, of course, there’s the most obvious question: What about people who DIDN’T choose to have sex?
Why do rape victims get a pass? Why are their fetuses of less value than the dirty slut’s down the street? They aren’t.
And here we get to the foundation of the anti-choice argument: They are not anti-abortion, they are anti-sex, primarily female sex (or vagina-owner sex). Cis men aren’t given this argument; it’s always the person who gets pregnant. When the cis man doesn’t want the fetus the pregnant person is suddenly the bitch who’s trying to trap him into spousal support or child support.
Okay, well….I’ve rambled enough.
As for your second question, it doesn’t specifically talk about the 12th week but here are three links to reliable sources on when a fetuscan feel pain.
Love,
Rabble
***
feministsoccupyhalloween:
And then, of course, there’s the little bit about how anti-choicers fightagainst comprehensive sex ed so there are people who have sex who have absolutely NO IDEA what the consequences of sex are.
And then, of course, there’s the little bit about how anti-choicers fightagainst comprehensive sex ed so there are people who have sex who have absolutely NO IDEA what the consequences of sex are.
And then, of course, there’s the little bit about how anti-choicers fightagainst comprehensive sex ed so there are people who have sex who have absolutely NO IDEA what the consequences of sex are.
And then, of course, there’s the little bit about how anti-choicers fightagainst comprehensive sex ed so there are people who have sex who have absolutely NO IDEA what the consequences of sex are.
And then, of course, there’s the little bit about how anti-choicers fightagainst comprehensive sex ed so there are people who have sex who have absolutely NO IDEA what the consequences of sex are.
***
littlegoldenapple:
Reblogging because I want to point out the part where it says
“it could be seriously ill and need extremely expensive medical treatment”
It is NOT ok to abort a fetus because the kid could turn out to be sick or disabled. I don’t care how you justify it. I don’t care what you call it. Send me all the hate mail and arguments you want about it. It’s not ok.
It’s such a shame, too, because I was really enjoying this blog until now.
***
rabbleprochoice:
That actually wasn’t what my point was. I was talking about already born children, not fetuses in that sentence, hence the, “a child is…”
My point was that children cost money and if they are chronically ill a person has to be in a very privileged financial position to be able to afford quality medial care for their child but if they can’t do that because not everyone can drop a hundred grand on chemotherapy and their insurance won’t cover everything then they are seen as bad parents.
Not all illnesses can be determined in the womb and if someone DID choose to terminate a pregnancy because their fetus had a serious illness, like Tay-Sachs, that would kill the child in two years then that person has every right to make the decision to terminate.
Love,
Rabble
***
littlegoldenapple:
Yea, you don’t have to explain the cost of illness and disability to me. I AM DISABLED. And I’m not exactly well-off, either. But, you know, I don’t see my parents as bad parents because they can’t afford all my medical bills, I see them as bad parents because they kicked me out. But that’s another story.
And all I have to say to people like you who think it’s ok to abort fetuses because they could turn out to be people like me, FUCK. YOU. Our illness is NOT a good enough reason.
***
rabbleprochoice:
You can’t put a qualifier on who’s abortion is justified. Do you not see how that goes against being pro-choice?
Is it ableist for a parent to abort a fetus with Down-Syndrome? Yes, but they still have the right to abort that fetus, even if I don’t like the reason they are doing it. But I also don’t have to raise that fetus so I have no say in which pregnancy gets terminated.
Fetuses with diseases like Tay-Sachs won’t live to see the age of 5 and won’t know anything other than a hospital, is it ableist to terminate? Yes, but it’s also merciful and it allows the family to grieve for their child.
Saying one abortion is justified over another is doing the same thing that people who think rape victims should be the only people allowed to get abortions and no one else do.
Do you not see the problem with that?
I don’t have to like why people terminate their fetuses but I will defend their right to do so for any reason.
Love,
Rabble
***
littlegoldenapple:
You yourself acknowledge that it’s ableism. Don’t try to justify it as “merciful.” It’s not merciful. We don’t need to be “spared,” or any of that prettied-up bullshit that people like you use to justify aborting fetuses that will be disabled. DISABILITY IS NOT A GOOD ENOUGH REASON. EVER.
Call it whatever the fuck you want. Pretty it up however the fuck you want. Tell yourself whatever you want to help yourself sleep sweetly at night. It’s thinly-veiled ableism, and the people who do it think it’s ok because they’re “angels of mercy” who saved the disabled people from a life of suffering. WE DON’T NEED YOU TO SAVE US. So you can just FUCK. OFF.
It is NOT ok. It will NEVER be ok.
***
rabbleprochoice:
Either ALL abortions are justified or none are and should, therefore, be illegal.
Everyone should have access to abortion for whatever reason they want to cite.
That’s not me telling myself something to make myself sleep at night, that’s what it means to be pro-choice, which is what I am, hence the blog title.
If a parent wants to terminate their pregnancy for financial reasons they are completely justified in doing so.
If a parent wants to terminate because their fetus doesn’t have a penis, they are completely justified in doing so.
If a parent doesn’t want to carry a fetus for 10 months that will die at birth, they are completely justified in terminating their pregnancy.
I would rather support a person’s autonomy than support forcing them to give birth unwillingly for whatever reason.
I don’t believe that makes me ableist. Terminating a pregnancy is a complex decision and I won’t judge someone for the reasons they do so and neither should you if you think you’re actually pro-choice.
You’re emotionally invested in this and I understand that, but emotion clouds this argument and makes it more complex than it is. Anti-choicers use emotions to manipulate people and being objective about the realities of abortion and reproduction is important. The reality is that there are not enough resources or support programs for parents of children with disabilities and that’s because society does not value people with disabilities. Which I’m sure you’re already aware of. Its the parent’s decision to terminate a pregnancy, even if you or I disagree with the reasons for it.
Love,
Rabble
***
ME (prolongedeyecontact)
First, the quote that started all this ruckus (at least in my mind) wasn’t even about aborting disabled fetuses. It was more like “I would get an abortion because I have no money and my child could get extremely sick and that would cost money I don’t have, I’m not willing to take that risk, therefore it’s best to abort.” That’s something I can wholeheartedly agree with. If I were to get sick I wouldn’t have the money for treatment, let alone if I had a child who was sick. So there’s that.
I also just want to say, in addition to all of Rabble’s commentary, that there are people with illnesses and disabilities (like myself) who are terrified of passing those genes on because we know what it’s like. I have a right to an abortion, full stop. I also have the right to decide that isn’t the kind of life I want for my future children, and to preemptively prevent that from happening while they’re still an embryo and incapable of awareness or pain. I also have the right to say that due to my disability I cannot care for a child with a disability.
In addition, for every ounce of ableism that may or may not be present in this conversation, you are countering it with absolute classism. Which I highly resent. Some people simply do not have the resources or support for such children. Just because someone feels like they have the money or resources to have a child doesn’t always mean they have the resources to care for a child that will have to live in a hospital or will need 50 surgeries by it’s 5th birthday or needs costly medication for it’s entire life. Let’s not forget that the pregnant person is still the only person in this equation, and it’s not about the fetus, it’s about what the pregnant person can handle, what’s best for them.
And I said as much in response to this article in Time magazine about the high rate of abortions of fetuses with Down’s Syndrome. People that choose to abort such fetuses don’t necessarily do so because the idea of a disabled child repulses them or because they give no value to disabled people. Maybe they have an aversion to suffering (this may be real or exaggerated suffering depending on how much objective information they’ve been given). Maybe they know their own situation better than you and know they couldn’t give such a child the care that it needs. How that is anything but merciful is beyond me. There are those people who feel like that’s the right choice for their current situation and do it freely, yet if they had better resources or less ingrained stigma surrounding children with disabilities they might have carried to term. And I think that should be a goal of prochoicers: that everyone who wants an abortion can get one, and for everyone who wants a pregnancy but can’t see how to make it work with their current situation—we need to make social changes that enable them to do so.
As with sex selective abortion, the procedure isn’t the problem it’s cultural attitudes and societal flaws. Rather than demonizing the procedure or judging the people who have to make these decisions, how about advocating for accessibility, support groups and resources for parents with disabled children, a cultural shift that educates people on the fulfilling lives people with disabilities are capable of having as well as how ableism permeates our daily lives? How about objective, non-biased information?
A really great post from the disability community talks about ableism in the prochoice movement and how we can change our dialogue while maintaining the right to choose, and how being prochoice and pro-disability rights is not a contradiction. The comment section is as useful as the post itself. Here’s another great post; pro-choice but also calling us to task for ableism within our movement. Here are some more posts you might be interested in.
Also, let’s not forget the flip side of the coin: the idea that people with disabilities should not be allowed to have children. This ableism most often comes from the antichoice side. Raising My Boychick also has a great post about this topic here.
Tl;dr No pregnancy and no abortion has to be justified. We can have meaningful and important conversations about ableist language within the prochoice community, and we should. What we shouldn’t have are people drawing arbitrary lines that separate valid from invalid reasons for abortion, nor should we encourage positions which lack nuance and ignore the lived realities of pregnant people whose choices are often influenced by larger societal problems.
****
@Vogueflo also has an amazing response to this post. I don’t want to have to reblog this huge post twice (because most of Rabble’s commentary wasn’t on her post), so I’m going to just link to her post and give a few excerpts below:
[…]
Coming from a country and ingrained with a culture that did not encourage understanding of genetic disorders and disabilities, she would have had a difficult time understanding how to raise and raising us. Furthermore, she and my dad were trying to set up a business of their own in order to support themselves financially, and this endeavor would have been severely stunted were they to be forced to struggle with two special needs children.
Simply, the reason I am fine with and accept her consideration of aborting me and my sister is that it was her choice and her body, and she was merely watching out for herself in the face of an uncertain future.
I find it quite selfish of ME to think it her obligation to have carried out her pregnancy of two children with Down’s when she and my dad weren’t fully capable of raising them and had very little knowledge of what raising such children even entailed. Her circumstances, as I have outlined, did not offer a favorable future for a family with two disabled children.
Really, I would love for someone to come in and explain to me how abortion in my parents’ case is not justified when the other option was bringing a pair of disabled children into a struggling family. I don’t know about other people, but I find it really fucking cruel to knowingly force a child into the world that a parent cannot care for, that a parent would come to resent for being a financial burden, that a parent cannot even begin to offer a good lifestyle to.
Why? Because this is not a discussion of the merit of disabled children.
This is a discussion centered around the quality of life for both the children and their parents. This is a discussion centered around the autonomy over their bodies that people like my mother are entitled to as a human being. This is a discussion centered around how a decision to abort is so much more complex than a simply ignorant ableist view.
[…]
But keep in mind it costs on average $250,000 to raise a child, with a great deal of that cost coming from the early life of the child. A disabled child usually costs even more. Can you, with a clear conscience, demand that of each and every family who happens to come along with a fetus who will be born disabled?
[…]
No. This is about a diverse group of people with diverse circumstances that extends to encompass the worst of conditions and the best of them. Abortion of disabled fetuses is very special set of cases because this involves, of course, a conscious person with unique social, financial, personal, and cultural circumstances carrying that fetus and who may or may not be able to provide that fetus a good life after it’s born, in addition to caring for the various other aspects of his or her life.
How I wish this were a mere question of whether or not disabled people are just as equal as anyone else (answer: yes) but it’s not. It’s far, far more complex than that, which is why your extreme, restrictive, and uni-faceted view on this is, to put it bluntly, wrong.
[BAM! @Vogueflo you said it much better than I ever could! And please go to her tumblr and read her post in full.]
Really long but really good conversation. Bolded and Italisized the Tl;dr note, just so if you don’t feel like reading everything you could get something from the conversation.](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lvgcc6FH7N1qa655no1_1280.png)
[I’m reformatting this to prevent the post from going totally vertical due to so many speakers.]
Sex isn’t a contract for pregnancy. When a person has sex, they don’t do so with the intention of upholding any and all consequences that may occur. You could say that people who have sex and get STD’s don’t deserve to have them treated because “they knew what they were getting into”.
Driving in a car is not a contract for being in a car accident. Sure, you can wear a seat belt but sometimes that seat belt doesn’t 100% prevent fatal injury, just like a condom or a birth control pill won’t 100% protect from pregnancy. But you got in the car knowing full well that a car accident was a possibility, should we not treat people who are in serious car accidents?
If you go swimming you know that drowning is a possibility and you choose to do it anyway, so should we get rid of all the lifeguards and let you drown because you knew the consequences of swimming? OF COURSE NOT!!!
This argument that people should know what they’re getting into when having sex and should therefore keep their pregnancy is just as absurd as proposing that we don’t send ambulances to help people in car accidents or that we get rid of lifeguards.And then, of course, there’s the little bit about how anti-choicers fightagainst comprehensive sex ed so there are people who have sex who have absolutely NO IDEA what the consequences of sex are.
If someone is having sex and using protection, the understanding is that they do not want to get pregnant but sometimes shit happens and things don’t work out the way we want them to. So if women ARE aware of the consequences of sex and choose to use a contraceptive to protect themselves against such consequences what is the problem? They took precautions, their birth control failed, and so what? They’re supposed to go through a pregnancy and raise a child they never wanted just to live by someone else’s morals? Fuck that.
A child isn’t a flippant addition to one’s life. It’s not like buying a pair of shoes. A childchanges your entire life. Raising a child takes a lifetime, it costs money, it could be seriously ill and need extremely expensive medical treatment, and it takes sacrifices that some people aren’t willing to give up. Like, me, if I got pregnant right now, I would go to Planned Parenthood the second I saw the pregnancy test. I want to be a doctor. There is no fucking way I’m going to go through med school with a fucking kid. There is no way I’m going to go through my pre-med classes pregnant. I wouldn’t even have to think about it what I would do. I want med school too much and I’m not willing to sacrifice any of that for a child.
And what about people who don’t want to have children? Ever? Should I NEVER be allowed to have sex in my life? What if I get married to this super hot guy in my physics class and we don’t want children? Am I NEVER allowed to fuck my husband or consummate our marriage? And for who? So someone ELSE gets to feel better about the future of my unfertilized eggs? I think it’s pretty obvious how ABSURD of an expectation that is.To expect people never to have sex with their husbands or wives or their polyamourous partners or whoever the fuck they want to fuck because of your own personal morals is not only just fucking embarrassingly ridiculous but it’s so juvenile and is so self-centered.
Like, who thinks that way? “I believe people shouldn’t have sex unless it’s to have children therefore EVERYONE EVER should follows these arbitrary rules I have set down for myself.”
Um, WHAT?
No. That’s not how life works.
And then, of course, there’s the most obvious question: What about people who DIDN’T choose to have sex?
Why do rape victims get a pass? Why are their fetuses of less value than the dirty slut’s down the street? They aren’t.
And here we get to the foundation of the anti-choice argument: They are not anti-abortion, they are anti-sex, primarily female sex (or vagina-owner sex). Cis men aren’t given this argument; it’s always the person who gets pregnant. When the cis man doesn’t want the fetus the pregnant person is suddenly the bitch who’s trying to trap him into spousal support or child support.
Okay, well….I’ve rambled enough.
As for your second question, it doesn’t specifically talk about the 12th week but here are three links to reliable sources on when a fetuscan feel pain.
Love,
Rabble
***
And then, of course, there’s the little bit about how anti-choicers fightagainst comprehensive sex ed so there are people who have sex who have absolutely NO IDEA what the consequences of sex are.
And then, of course, there’s the little bit about how anti-choicers fightagainst comprehensive sex ed so there are people who have sex who have absolutely NO IDEA what the consequences of sex are.
And then, of course, there’s the little bit about how anti-choicers fightagainst comprehensive sex ed so there are people who have sex who have absolutely NO IDEA what the consequences of sex are.
And then, of course, there’s the little bit about how anti-choicers fightagainst comprehensive sex ed so there are people who have sex who have absolutely NO IDEA what the consequences of sex are.
And then, of course, there’s the little bit about how anti-choicers fightagainst comprehensive sex ed so there are people who have sex who have absolutely NO IDEA what the consequences of sex are.
***
Reblogging because I want to point out the part where it says
“it could be seriously ill and need extremely expensive medical treatment”
It is NOT ok to abort a fetus because the kid could turn out to be sick or disabled. I don’t care how you justify it. I don’t care what you call it. Send me all the hate mail and arguments you want about it. It’s not ok.
It’s such a shame, too, because I was really enjoying this blog until now.
***
That actually wasn’t what my point was. I was talking about already born children, not fetuses in that sentence, hence the, “a child is…”
My point was that children cost money and if they are chronically ill a person has to be in a very privileged financial position to be able to afford quality medial care for their child but if they can’t do that because not everyone can drop a hundred grand on chemotherapy and their insurance won’t cover everything then they are seen as bad parents.
Not all illnesses can be determined in the womb and if someone DID choose to terminate a pregnancy because their fetus had a serious illness, like Tay-Sachs, that would kill the child in two years then that person has every right to make the decision to terminate.
Love,
Rabble
***
Yea, you don’t have to explain the cost of illness and disability to me. I AM DISABLED. And I’m not exactly well-off, either. But, you know, I don’t see my parents as bad parents because they can’t afford all my medical bills, I see them as bad parents because they kicked me out. But that’s another story.
And all I have to say to people like you who think it’s ok to abort fetuses because they could turn out to be people like me, FUCK. YOU. Our illness is NOT a good enough reason.
***
You can’t put a qualifier on who’s abortion is justified. Do you not see how that goes against being pro-choice?
Is it ableist for a parent to abort a fetus with Down-Syndrome? Yes, but they still have the right to abort that fetus, even if I don’t like the reason they are doing it. But I also don’t have to raise that fetus so I have no say in which pregnancy gets terminated.
Fetuses with diseases like Tay-Sachs won’t live to see the age of 5 and won’t know anything other than a hospital, is it ableist to terminate? Yes, but it’s also merciful and it allows the family to grieve for their child.
Saying one abortion is justified over another is doing the same thing that people who think rape victims should be the only people allowed to get abortions and no one else do.
Do you not see the problem with that?
I don’t have to like why people terminate their fetuses but I will defend their right to do so for any reason.
Love,
Rabble
***
You yourself acknowledge that it’s ableism. Don’t try to justify it as “merciful.” It’s not merciful. We don’t need to be “spared,” or any of that prettied-up bullshit that people like you use to justify aborting fetuses that will be disabled. DISABILITY IS NOT A GOOD ENOUGH REASON. EVER.
Call it whatever the fuck you want. Pretty it up however the fuck you want. Tell yourself whatever you want to help yourself sleep sweetly at night. It’s thinly-veiled ableism, and the people who do it think it’s ok because they’re “angels of mercy” who saved the disabled people from a life of suffering. WE DON’T NEED YOU TO SAVE US. So you can just FUCK. OFF.
It is NOT ok. It will NEVER be ok.
***
Either ALL abortions are justified or none are and should, therefore, be illegal.
Everyone should have access to abortion for whatever reason they want to cite.
That’s not me telling myself something to make myself sleep at night, that’s what it means to be pro-choice, which is what I am, hence the blog title.
If a parent wants to terminate their pregnancy for financial reasons they are completely justified in doing so.
If a parent wants to terminate because their fetus doesn’t have a penis, they are completely justified in doing so.
If a parent doesn’t want to carry a fetus for 10 months that will die at birth, they are completely justified in terminating their pregnancy.
I would rather support a person’s autonomy than support forcing them to give birth unwillingly for whatever reason.
I don’t believe that makes me ableist. Terminating a pregnancy is a complex decision and I won’t judge someone for the reasons they do so and neither should you if you think you’re actually pro-choice.
You’re emotionally invested in this and I understand that, but emotion clouds this argument and makes it more complex than it is. Anti-choicers use emotions to manipulate people and being objective about the realities of abortion and reproduction is important. The reality is that there are not enough resources or support programs for parents of children with disabilities and that’s because society does not value people with disabilities. Which I’m sure you’re already aware of. Its the parent’s decision to terminate a pregnancy, even if you or I disagree with the reasons for it.
Love,
Rabble
***
ME (prolongedeyecontact)
First, the quote that started all this ruckus (at least in my mind) wasn’t even about aborting disabled fetuses. It was more like “I would get an abortion because I have no money and my child could get extremely sick and that would cost money I don’t have, I’m not willing to take that risk, therefore it’s best to abort.” That’s something I can wholeheartedly agree with. If I were to get sick I wouldn’t have the money for treatment, let alone if I had a child who was sick. So there’s that.
I also just want to say, in addition to all of Rabble’s commentary, that there are people with illnesses and disabilities (like myself) who are terrified of passing those genes on because we know what it’s like. I have a right to an abortion, full stop. I also have the right to decide that isn’t the kind of life I want for my future children, and to preemptively prevent that from happening while they’re still an embryo and incapable of awareness or pain. I also have the right to say that due to my disability I cannot care for a child with a disability.
In addition, for every ounce of ableism that may or may not be present in this conversation, you are countering it with absolute classism. Which I highly resent. Some people simply do not have the resources or support for such children. Just because someone feels like they have the money or resources to have a child doesn’t always mean they have the resources to care for a child that will have to live in a hospital or will need 50 surgeries by it’s 5th birthday or needs costly medication for it’s entire life. Let’s not forget that the pregnant person is still the only person in this equation, and it’s not about the fetus, it’s about what the pregnant person can handle, what’s best for them.
And I said as much in response to this article in Time magazine about the high rate of abortions of fetuses with Down’s Syndrome. People that choose to abort such fetuses don’t necessarily do so because the idea of a disabled child repulses them or because they give no value to disabled people. Maybe they have an aversion to suffering (this may be real or exaggerated suffering depending on how much objective information they’ve been given). Maybe they know their own situation better than you and know they couldn’t give such a child the care that it needs. How that is anything but merciful is beyond me. There are those people who feel like that’s the right choice for their current situation and do it freely, yet if they had better resources or less ingrained stigma surrounding children with disabilities they might have carried to term. And I think that should be a goal of prochoicers: that everyone who wants an abortion can get one, and for everyone who wants a pregnancy but can’t see how to make it work with their current situation—we need to make social changes that enable them to do so.
As with sex selective abortion, the procedure isn’t the problem it’s cultural attitudes and societal flaws. Rather than demonizing the procedure or judging the people who have to make these decisions, how about advocating for accessibility, support groups and resources for parents with disabled children, a cultural shift that educates people on the fulfilling lives people with disabilities are capable of having as well as how ableism permeates our daily lives? How about objective, non-biased information?
A really great post from the disability community talks about ableism in the prochoice movement and how we can change our dialogue while maintaining the right to choose, and how being prochoice and pro-disability rights is not a contradiction. The comment section is as useful as the post itself. Here’s another great post; pro-choice but also calling us to task for ableism within our movement. Here are some more posts you might be interested in.
Also, let’s not forget the flip side of the coin: the idea that people with disabilities should not be allowed to have children. This ableism most often comes from the antichoice side. Raising My Boychick also has a great post about this topic here.
Tl;dr No pregnancy and no abortion has to be justified. We can have meaningful and important conversations about ableist language within the prochoice community, and we should. What we shouldn’t have are people drawing arbitrary lines that separate valid from invalid reasons for abortion, nor should we encourage positions which lack nuance and ignore the lived realities of pregnant people whose choices are often influenced by larger societal problems.
****
@Vogueflo also has an amazing response to this post. I don’t want to have to reblog this huge post twice (because most of Rabble’s commentary wasn’t on her post), so I’m going to just link to her post and give a few excerpts below:
[…]
Coming from a country and ingrained with a culture that did not encourage understanding of genetic disorders and disabilities, she would have had a difficult time understanding how to raise and raising us. Furthermore, she and my dad were trying to set up a business of their own in order to support themselves financially, and this endeavor would have been severely stunted were they to be forced to struggle with two special needs children.
Simply, the reason I am fine with and accept her consideration of aborting me and my sister is that it was her choice and her body, and she was merely watching out for herself in the face of an uncertain future.
I find it quite selfish of ME to think it her obligation to have carried out her pregnancy of two children with Down’s when she and my dad weren’t fully capable of raising them and had very little knowledge of what raising such children even entailed. Her circumstances, as I have outlined, did not offer a favorable future for a family with two disabled children.
Really, I would love for someone to come in and explain to me how abortion in my parents’ case is not justified when the other option was bringing a pair of disabled children into a struggling family. I don’t know about other people, but I find it really fucking cruel to knowingly force a child into the world that a parent cannot care for, that a parent would come to resent for being a financial burden, that a parent cannot even begin to offer a good lifestyle to.
Why? Because this is not a discussion of the merit of disabled children.
This is a discussion centered around the quality of life for both the children and their parents. This is a discussion centered around the autonomy over their bodies that people like my mother are entitled to as a human being. This is a discussion centered around how a decision to abort is so much more complex than a simply ignorant ableist view.
[…]
But keep in mind it costs on average $250,000 to raise a child, with a great deal of that cost coming from the early life of the child. A disabled child usually costs even more. Can you, with a clear conscience, demand that of each and every family who happens to come along with a fetus who will be born disabled?
[…]
No. This is about a diverse group of people with diverse circumstances that extends to encompass the worst of conditions and the best of them. Abortion of disabled fetuses is very special set of cases because this involves, of course, a conscious person with unique social, financial, personal, and cultural circumstances carrying that fetus and who may or may not be able to provide that fetus a good life after it’s born, in addition to caring for the various other aspects of his or her life.
How I wish this were a mere question of whether or not disabled people are just as equal as anyone else (answer: yes) but it’s not. It’s far, far more complex than that, which is why your extreme, restrictive, and uni-faceted view on this is, to put it bluntly, wrong.
[BAM! @Vogueflo you said it much better than I ever could! And please go to her tumblr and read her post in full.]
Really long but really good conversation. Bolded and Italisized the Tl;dr note, just so if you don’t feel like reading everything you could get something from the conversation.
