More Hell, Fewer Dahlias: The Musings of a Radical Feminist.

Posts Tagged ‘reproductive rights


This has made the rounds in all of my feminist circles and news sources: starting at Feministing, winding its way over all the forums, and finally ending up being posted seven times by different friends on my facebook feed! Reactions range from “Yay!” to “Too late, cute though.”

http://www.feministing.com/archives/021171.html
(I suggest not reading the comments on the Feministing article though, unless you want to see a man be condescending to women in a feminist space and people speak really harshly to each other for no good reason. 😦 Moving on,)

Props to Laura Bush for finally sharing her opinion. Boo for it happening far, far too late and only after her husband had managed to erode rights for both women and the GLBTQ community. I mean, why is she saying this now? If she backed these words up with some work with the HRC or a well placed donation, I’d be a little less suspicious, but I just don’t see why she’s speaking up now.

This also brings up some interesting ideas about the roles of first ladies. People were upset when Hillary Clinton worked on health reform during Bill Clinton’s presidency, people have criticized Michelle Obama for working on her childhood obesity program, etc. What do we expect from these women who are uniquely exposed to the highest level of political office in the United States? Do we want involved, active First Ladies?  When we criticize these women for their role in government, are we promoting the idea that politics are a men’s world? Are we stripping these women of their predefined social place (working on “social” issues, like poverty, nutrition, etc) like many First Ladies have done, in order to get women into a political position with more power? Or are we working for the patriarchy in that we’re trying to silence women who have a position where they can be heard, by saying that they weren’t elected? (Of course they weren’t: NO WOMAN HAS BEEN.) How will this change when a woman is elected, and will our views on what a First Gentleman should do be different, and if so, how?

Today is a question day! If I had answers I’d give ’em to ya.

Advertisements

Okay: Florida just recently passed a bill making women considering abortion undergo an ultrasound.  Oklahoma just tried to pass a similar law. (It is now halted for 45 days while more middle aged white men twiddle their thumbs and consult their religious books.)

Ummmm what?

Is this the newest thing, since recent challenges to Roe vs. Wade haven’t worked?  If you can’t make it illegal, make it more emotionally painful, increase intimidation and government interference, and up the expense? None of these laws, and there are currently twelve involving mandatory or recommended ultrasounds, have anything to do with health or science. There’s no mention of how an ultrasound might increase abortion safety, due to more accurate dating of the pregnancy, or more information on fetal position and other complications. It’s all about convincing a woman to make a decision that the state has decided is the correct one for her, regardless of any of her personal needs.

As written by Cara on Feministe, who says it more eloquently than I could,

“It all seems to be about the poor little woman who doesn’t understand what it means to be pregnant, or who will surely have a change of heart once she sees a blurry, cloudy image that I’ve never been able to personally make out.  It’s about forcing government into the decisions of doctors, trumping science with ideology, and attempting to take away the privacy of women.  Indeed, it’s about taking the focus off of women and their rights and yet again putting the fetus, this time literally, right in the front and center of the picture.”

Yup!

-Radfemles


A question some faithful readers asked recently. I was shocked! Horrified! I was not doing my job as the Local Radical Feminist if you hadn’t seen the IBTC in my presence!

Anna, an all American teenager who just happens to be a lesbian in an accepting, open family, is working at a surgery that provides boob jobs after being rejected from her top choice college. A chance meeting with Sadie, a member of a radical feminist group turns Anna’s life upside down as she finds an outlet to express her unhappiness with the society she lives in and how she is treated by her family, friends, lovers and society as a whole.

Content Warnings: If you don’t like lesbians, transgender issues, blowing shit up, or slightly corny feminist theory, I’d skip this. And probably this blog, too! : )


I’m a little late on this, but…

“The number of children who are born subsequent to a first abortion with handicaps has increased dramatically. Why? Because when you abort the first born of any, nature takes its vengeance on the subsequent children,” said Marshall, a Republican.

“In the Old Testament, the first born of every being, animal and man, was dedicated to the Lord. There’s a special punishment Christians would suggest.”

Thanks, Delegate Bob Marshall (R (big surprise?)) of Virginia.

Let’s count what’s wrong in these statements! This is one of my favorite games. I know of people who played drinking games to George W. Bush’s State of the Union Addresses. Okay, let’s begin:

-Medically, there is no link between abortion and disabilities or infertility in the future.

-The ableism in this statement is disgusting. Assuming every child who is born with any sort of disability is a punishment is just plain wrong! I’m surprised he went that route, honestly, I thought that school of thought became less popular in Republican circles after the Sarah Palin Experience, where she lugged her disabled son Trig around everywhere. Is he suggestion that the Republic Pundit Goddess is experiencing a punishment for something? Oh no he didn’ttt.

-Who the hell is he to be referencing the Old Testament in regards to law making?! Why should a book that YOUR version of a higher power gave to YOUR people decide laws for all the people who don’t believe in that book, or don’t have the same beliefs about the same book?!  Just seriously, this bugs me so much.  How dare he? When you’re an elected official, your people are your first priority. NOT your higher power, or your book, or anything. The people you are representing are the opinions you should represent. If every single person, or even the majority that Bob Marshall represents feels that way, then he can use it to inform his law making.

Educate someone about abortion, legality, and the assholes that manage to squirm into our legislature today, people!

(Maybe I should start making a WTF (location) series. It is my theme lately.)


Spain loosened their abortions laws considerably earlier this week! Go Spain!!! Women can now abort up to 22 weeks, regardless of the health status of the pregnancy: it doesn’t have to be rape or endangering the woman’s life. Go Spain!!

It’s also really sad that Spain has beaten the US on this, people. Catholic monarchy being more progressive? We’ve got issues here, kids.

Ms. Magazine: “Spain Reforms Abortion Laws”


Okay, so apparently this is the week for everyone to contest Roe vs. Wade! A fter doing more research on Utah’s sad attempt at curtailing women’s rights to their bodies, it’s been discovered that the bill actually REDEFINES what constitutes an abortion.  And so Utah decided to throw itself into the Roe vs. Wade fight.  But it gets better! Florida decided to throw itself into the fray as well. with Rep. Van Zant’s “Right to Life” act contesting the idea that abortion can be regulated by the federal government, a sad attempt at making this a state versus federal issue instead of an “assholes who hate women” vs. human rights issue.

I’ll link you all to an article, but here’s the kicker: “U.S. Supreme Court justices are not qualified to determine, establish, or define the moral values of the people of the United States and specifically for the people of Florida.”

Neither are you, asshole.

How is it defining your moral values to allow others to act within their own? Seriously here. Protecting abortion does not make anyone have an abortion, it does not limit a woman’s options. Criminalizing abortion severely curtails options…that you don’t have to take.  It places a moral judgement (that you don’t have the authority to decide!) on others.

I don’t think I’m quite getting across how much that quote upsets me. It’s just a complete twisting of reality.

Here’s a link.

Please talk to people about this. Reproductive rights get fairly little attention in the news, and  all to often we only learn about them after they’re gone. Talk to three or more people today about why it is important that women in Utah, Florida and elsewhere have access to safe, legal abortions and aren’t criminalized for seeking one. And as always, educate yourself and others about safe, responsible sex!!


Hey ladies, if you’re pregnant and have a miscarriage, you’re going to jail for murder! That’s right, any miscarriage induced by the woman or reckless behavior that induces a miscarriage will be prosecutable.

RH Reality Check: “Utah Passes Bill That Charges Women For Illegal Abortion or Miscarriage”

Good job at putting women with substance abuse problems in jail! Oh, and all those women in abusive situations who can’t bring a child into a safe home, but don’t have the resources to obtain a medical abortion. Good job at criminalizing them and not their abusers!

Keep on “protecting” that baby!