Welp, it’s official. The Supreme Court voted, 6-3, to eliminate the constitutional right to abortion. Trigger laws have already made abortion illegal in several states, even in the case of rape and incest, with more likely to follow suit.
And if that weren’t bad enough, Justice Thomas wrote a concurring opinion arguing that the Supreme Court should “reconsider” previous rulings on same-sex relationships, same-sex marriage, and contraception.
In my article, Women Don’t Want Abortions, I pointed out that women don’t want to undergo abortions, any more than they want cervical smears or mammograms or hysterectomies. But sometimes they need to in order to live their lives with the same freedom that men enjoy.
Gay and lesbian couples need the right to marry and have intimate relationships in order to live their lives with the same freedom that straight couples enjoy.
And everybody needs access to contraception in order to avoid needing the abortions that were just made illegal!!!
These laws aren’t about religious or ethical or philosophical differences, they’re about creating a society that allows everybody to take equal part. Lisa was more focused on another difference.
Lisa:
Men controlling women in every way that men can conceive of, has been the bane of women through millennia. Not all men but a preponderance of them. They come from all races, religions, countries. They congregate in groups and make decisions about what a woman’s role is in their lives and how they can keep women going towards their benefit.
I’m pro-choice. I would never have had an abortion when I was of child bearing age, so Roe vs Wade was of no consideration to me. And in fact may need improvement as a part of our constitutional rights. But a preponderance of men (and women brainwashed by men) trying to take away a woman’s right to choose , should strike a life threatening dystopic terror in the hearts of any women who value the right to be who they are and control their future. And if LGBTQ people are paying attention , and I’m sure they are, other progress for rights can disappear in a heart beat.
The patriarchal control of life needs to end. Men help create life but only as a catalyst. The vessel for new life resides inside a woman. The ovum are part of women’s bodies and carry the entire weight and consequences of the process. Up to and including death.
Why should an ancillary person who contributes one thing (sperm, whether accepted willing or by force) early in the entire process, have that much say on the impacts women bare?
They shouldn’t!
“Men controlling women in every way that men can conceive of, has been the bane of women through millennia.”
As most of you reading this will know, I don’t think people should “stay in their lane.” Not only does learning about how issues affect other people help us to understand each other better, our lives are way too interconnected to ignore questions until they directly affect our “group.”
But the fact is, abortion rights and their implications affect women.
I will never have to worry about falling pregnant accidentally or because of my partner’s carelessness. I will never need to work up the courage to look at a pregnancy test after being raped. I will never be asked to choose between my child’s life and my own due to complications during pregnancy or labour.
If there was ever a lane that men should stay out of, this is it.
But even if we do, that doesn’t solve Lisa’s problem.
Steve QJ:
But a preponderance of men (and women brainwashed by men) trying to take away a woman’s right to choose , should strike a life threatening dystopic terror in the hearts of any women who value the right to be who they are and control their future.
I agree with you that men shouldn't have a say on abortion law, but I wouldn't dismiss women who are "pro-life" as "brainwashed by men." Not only does this rob women of agency if they disagree with you, it sucks the nuance out of a conversation that deserves it.
I don't think it's hard to understand and even sympathise with the "pro-life" position. As I said, I think most people agree that abortion should be as rare as possible. So the question is, what is the safest, most flexible way to treat abortion with the seriousness it deserves and protect the rights and freedoms of women.
This is an enormous question that, as we probably agree, men have no real part in deciding. But given that the question is, once again, up in the air, it'll be hard to make progress if you dismiss everybody who thinks differently as brainwashed.
Lisa:
Maybe brainwashed is a too harsh a word. I know many of these women who feel their place is In the patriarchy and a helpmate to their husbands and family structure. I consider it brainwashing because it’s an immersive religious structure. Growing up in very conservative Christian populations the overriding thought process is life begins either at conception or , in the religion of my youth, that a spirit is waiting to receive a body. And getting that body is the most important thing for their salvation until they are born. After that it is devout adherence to the religious beliefs and dogma to attain the highest level of a celestial kingdom in the next life. Women have an important place in the structure but will never hold the priesthood because again they are not male.
With that structure and belief, even an unwanted pregnancy , a pregnancy that will not survive outside of the mothers body, and sometimes when the life of the mother is at risk, the mentality of the religious structure favors the birth of the child to ensure that soul gets its body on earth. How does a woman who doesn’t believe in the ideology, contend with the pressure of her nuclear society ever feel like she has any agency to choose. That is really not allowing for free agency which Christian’s Constantly preach was Jesus’s message. You choose your path. The hypocrisy being you can choose as long as you choose what you’ve been taught by the patriarchal structure. That’s where I see far right women. They don’t see themselves as brainwashed but I do because Ive lived in that world.
I’m not anti-male. I know many wonderful men. But within those far right structures, in many male dominated religions, women can suffer if they cannot live under the rules enforced by men.
If you feel the issue is up in the air on who should make the decision, I’d ask what you believe or feel. I know you are just putting out the question but how invested are you in the outcome when it will never affect you to quite the same extent as the women caught underneath the patriarchy. Who should own my decisions? Me when I follow the laid out plan? Or the men who run our country and most of the world. How many women suffer all over the world at the hands of men? Genital mutilation in Muslim cultures, honor killings, in the same. We may be more advanced here in the US but the success and rising number of women who feel empowered to pursue their destiny beyond being a vessel for creating children seems to be upsetting the male status quo. Can’t have that because that would mean that women could be the better choice for leadership at times. How can we ever reach equality of the sexes, or any type of equality if the balance of power is stacked against you. Men will continue to rape women by any means possible because they feel it is their right as the stronger gender. White men who love their place and identity so much they will kill innocent people of color who are fighting for their right to be seen as equal. These predominantly male people are threatened. Whether it is women, different religions, different cultures or by the color of their skin, the threat to their power in society is threatened. Everyone needs to be afraid if they value their right to anything that group does not agree with. Right now social injustice and women rights are under attack. People who are sleeping through their lives need to wake up and pay attention. Because who knows what will be next.
Steve QJ:
If you feel the issue is up in the air on who should make the decision, I’d ask what you believe or feel.
No, I didn't say that. I said the question of how to "treat abortion with the seriousness it deserves and protect the rights and freedoms of women" is up in the air again. And it's up in the air because Roe seems very likely to be overturned. Not because of my personal feelings one way or the other.
I'm perfectly happy to stay out of that debate. As we've agreed, the male perspective isn't really that relevant (although I'm invested in the outcome of lots of issues that don't directly affect me. Compassion is not limited to areas of self-interest). But regardless, you will find women who aren't handmaidens brainwashed by the patriarchy, some of whom aren't even arguing from a religious standpoint, who firmly believe that elective abortion should be illegal from day 0.
Opposing abortion isn't some male conspiracy. We don't all get together and figure out ways to keep women down. It's worth pointing out that Roe, despite it's flaws, was ruled by 7 men. Most of us are just as horrified by rape and honour killings and FGM [Editor’s note: female genital mutilation] as you are. Male vs female is a simplistic and I think inaccurate lens through which to view this.
Men vs women, trans vs cis, black vs white, we see this dynamic over and over again in the culture wars. But we also see, over and over again, that this is a terrible way to figure out what people think.
Men don’t always agree with other men, women don’t always agree with other women, black people don’t always agree with other black people, etc, etc, etc. If I had a penny for every time I’ve said, “no group is a monolith,” I’d have a lot of pennies.
As political divides become ever more extreme and bitter and uncompromising, we need be smarter about who’s “on our side.” We need to spend more time joining hands instead of pointing fingers. We need to look out for each other, even if we aren't in the same “group.”
Because if Justice Thomas’ opinion is any indication, there’s no telling whose lane will be next.
On balance, I favor legal abortion and have supported that for many decades in many ways. Keep that in mind and please do not falsely impute beliefs to me.
However, I try to understand the thinking on all sides. And in that context, I think that your concept that men have no standing in regard to abortion kind of begs the question. By which I mean assuming one conclusion in a contested issue, as part of the reasoning to support that same conclusion.
Suppose we assume that it has been proven or can be axiomatic that a fetus is just a bundle of cells with no human rights. From there we can reason that the only human being involved in abortion is the mother, and that only females (who might become pregnant) should have any say on whether the mother can abort that non-human bundle of cells or not; males should abstain from discussion or voting on the matter and leave it up to females.
But there are those who in good faith believe that a fetus is already a human with rights even before birth, not just a non-human bundle of cells. So they believe that abortion involves balancing the needs of two humans, not just one. So for such people, there is zero reason for males to avoid discussion or voting on abortion, because protecting the rights of an unborn human is equally the duty of both males and females. - just as both males and females should be able to vote on a bill legalizing infanticide.
So the "males should stay out of this" only makes sense if you have already decided that fetuses are just a bundle of cells. But before that, deciding whether a fetus is a human being or not would be a question in which both males and females would have standing.
Both males and females would have a vote on legalizing infanticide. The sex of the person voting or discussing it, is not relevant to deciding whether that's homicide or not. And that's how the anti-abortion folks see it.
And pro-abortion males mostly do act as if they believe they have standing, whatever they say about it being up to women. They don't in general abstain from the discussion or from voting, to turn the issue over to just women alone to decide.
What I think some pro-abortion folks really want is for pro-abortion men to vote for abortion, but anti-abortion men to abstain. But that's inverting the logic - it's the pro-abortion men whose belief system would suggest their own abstention, and the anti-abortion men whose belief system ethically requires them to participate.
How do I resolve this? I'm pro abortion AND I believe the both sexes have standing to weigh in on the question of whether fetuses are humans or not (but *IF* and after it's decided that they are not human beings, then only the individual pregnant women has a right to decide whether to terminate it - not other women nor men). So I support men and women discuss it, and support both sexes to vote, without any hypocrisy.
We are a representative democracy. I see a great sorting process ahead.
I do not want 9 unelected people deciding matters of great moment. I want them to be judges, supporting the laws of the land, not making them up.
I would contribute to a fund helping a woman who wanted an abortion to cross state lines as needed to get what she needs. I would support leaving states that don’t reflect the type of pregnancy alternatives a woman wants.
I’m not in favor of dismissing swathes of women as ‘brain-washed’ because they believe life begins at conception.
The debate on abortion was halted after 1973. Even as progressive a stalwart as Ruth Bader Ginsburg felt this was wrong. We are likely in a better position (with many more women in power positions) to have the complex debates needed to figure this out.
We do indeed live in interesting times.