Author Topic: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West  (Read 67977 times)

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23226
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #350 on: December 17, 2021, 07:21:22 AM »
My point is that the pro-abortion crowd

Pro-abortion crowd?

I've never heard anyone saying "Fuck yeah - let's kill those fetuses!  This is awesome!".  Given the choice between someone using birth control and getting an abortion - people who want legal abortion overwhelmingly favour birth control.  Given the choice between someone being better educated about sex/relationships and getting an abortion people who want legal abortion overwhelmingly favour birth control.  Oddly, it tends to be the 'ban abortions' group who wants to prevent education and to make access to birth control more difficult/costly for people - both actions that lead to unwanted pregnancies.  Wanting legal abortion doesn't mean you want more abortions to happen (research has shown that making them illegal doesn't stop them - just makes them a lot safer for the women involved).


If Roe is overturned and some states make most abortions illegal, everyone posting here is still going to be able to drive somewhere to get a legal abortion.  So what you're really doing is attempting to gain status amongst your own kind by pointing out that some poor people won't enjoy the luxury of zapping an accidental pregnancy.  You're putting on an act that you care about these people more than the anti-abortion crowd, but you don't.  Nobody holds more contempt for the poor than those who make a big production about how much they care about them.

I don't care about poor people at all in relation to abortion.

I do care about bodily autonomy.  No person should be required to give up their bodily autonomy and have an unwanted medical procedure forced upon them - even to save the life of another.  If you're dying and need a kidney transplant and I'm a match with two healthy kidneys . . . nobody should be allowed to force me to give you a kidney.  By the same token, a pregnant mother who doesn't want to give her womb to the fetus for 9 months should not be forced to.

Cool Friend

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 535
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #351 on: December 17, 2021, 08:14:49 AM »
Meanwhile, the contemporaneous abstinence campaigns sponsored by religious groups (I recall one called Postponing Sexual Involvement) warned that condoms weren't 100% effective. 

Now I'm being told by the Michael Stipe cool kids that condoms aren't effective, meaning they've aligned themselves with Postponing Sexual Involvement.

What, exactly, is your point? And how does it relate to bodily autonomy for my wife when her POP failed?

My point is that the pro-abortion crowd has controlled American pop culture for decades, always presents its current argument as the end-all-be-all, but sweeps its pivots under the rug.  If you shine a light on those pivots, you're the bad guy, since people (and by people I mean mostly affluent liberals) have constructed so much of their personal identity around this issue, even though it rarely directly affects them. 

If Roe is overturned and some states make most abortions illegal, everyone posting here is still going to be able to drive somewhere to get a legal abortion.  So what you're really doing is attempting to gain status amongst your own kind by pointing out that some poor people won't enjoy the luxury of zapping an accidental pregnancy.  You're putting on an act that you care about these people more than the anti-abortion crowd, but you don't.  Nobody holds more contempt for the poor than those who make a big production about how much they care about them. 

The right feasts on leftists who claim to care about people who they don't actually care about.  The right wingers - as dumb as the leftists think they are - see right through this act, every time.  The "angry" marches that the left will stage should Roe be overturned will drive hardcore right wingers to the polls and we might see the return of Trump in 2024 or worse - the nomination and election of Josh Hawley, who I feel is much, much more dangerous than Trump.

So people - chill the hell out.

Well, I'm convinced.

My years of being a medical professional and working with marginalized populations means nothing. None of my opinions are I formed.

Even though I'm not even American, apparently all of my opinions that I've held for.deacdes are based on some weird US Left-Right insanity that I was never even aware of when I formed these opinions.

Good to know, thank you for enlightening me.

People like this are incapable of imagining why anyone would care about someone other than themselves. They conclude that anyone claiming to must be lying to themselves and/or others. What a bleak way to live.


CodingHare

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 443
  • Age: 32
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #352 on: December 17, 2021, 08:40:07 AM »
My point is that the pro-abortion crowd has controlled American pop culture for decades, always presents its current argument as the end-all-be-all, but sweeps its pivots under the rug.  If you shine a light on those pivots, you're the bad guy, since people (and by people I mean mostly affluent liberals) have constructed so much of their personal identity around this issue, even though it rarely directly affects them. 

If Roe is overturned and some states make most abortions illegal, everyone posting here is still going to be able to drive somewhere to get a legal abortion.  So what you're really doing is attempting to gain status amongst your own kind by pointing out that some poor people won't enjoy the luxury of zapping an accidental pregnancy.  You're putting on an act that you care about these people more than the anti-abortion crowd, but you don't.  Nobody holds more contempt for the poor than those who make a big production about how much they care about them. 

The right feasts on leftists who claim to care about people who they don't actually care about.  The right wingers - as dumb as the leftists think they are - see right through this act, every time.  The "angry" marches that the left will stage should Roe be overturned will drive hardcore right wingers to the polls and we might see the return of Trump in 2024 or worse - the nomination and election of Josh Hawley, who I feel is much, much more dangerous than Trump.

So people - chill the hell out.
So you have decided anyone who disagrees with you is just virtue signaling. No matter what we say, we are already liars to you.  I see no point engaging with someone who thinks I am engaging in bad faith.

GodlessCommie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Location: NoVA
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #353 on: December 17, 2021, 09:17:07 AM »
If Roe is overturned and some states make most abortions illegal, everyone posting here is still going to be able to drive somewhere to get a legal abortion. 

This is fascinating. Total inability - or refusal - to comprehend that people may care about someone who is not them.

OtherJen

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5267
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #354 on: December 17, 2021, 11:55:35 AM »
My point is that the pro-abortion crowd has controlled American pop culture for decades, always presents its current argument as the end-all-be-all, but sweeps its pivots under the rug.  If you shine a light on those pivots, you're the bad guy, since people (and by people I mean mostly affluent liberals) have constructed so much of their personal identity around this issue, even though it rarely directly affects them. 

If Roe is overturned and some states make most abortions illegal, everyone posting here is still going to be able to drive somewhere to get a legal abortion.  So what you're really doing is attempting to gain status amongst your own kind by pointing out that some poor people won't enjoy the luxury of zapping an accidental pregnancy.  You're putting on an act that you care about these people more than the anti-abortion crowd, but you don't.  Nobody holds more contempt for the poor than those who make a big production about how much they care about them. 

The right feasts on leftists who claim to care about people who they don't actually care about.  The right wingers - as dumb as the leftists think they are - see right through this act, every time.  The "angry" marches that the left will stage should Roe be overturned will drive hardcore right wingers to the polls and we might see the return of Trump in 2024 or worse - the nomination and election of Josh Hawley, who I feel is much, much more dangerous than Trump.

So people - chill the hell out.
So you have decided anyone who disagrees with you is just virtue signaling. No matter what we say, we are already liars to you.  I see no point engaging with someone who thinks I am engaging in bad faith.

I've come to the same conclusion. No point wasting further time.

Abe

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2647
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #355 on: December 17, 2021, 09:01:02 PM »
Are talking about guns or abortion? Because I feel like that statement (hard to call it an argument) could just swap out guns and right-wing for abortion and left-wing. It’s like political mad libs! Emphasize on the mad…

Point being that both sides have specific issues they care about. That is fine because that is called being involved in civic society. Some people want to defend us from an overbearing government with guns and others with laws.

The right can’t pretend to be against big government then push through a huge over-reach like this. That is disingenuous. At least us affluent liberals are consistent in our messaging that we know better than everyone and we should use the government to do tell people how to live! /s
« Last Edit: December 17, 2021, 09:10:35 PM by Abe »

PDXTabs

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5160
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Vancouver, WA, USA
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #356 on: December 18, 2021, 12:01:22 AM »
The right can’t pretend to be against big government then push through a huge over-reach like this. That is disingenuous. At least us affluent liberals are consistent in our messaging that we know better than everyone and we should use the government to do tell people how to live! /s

You really think that the GOP can rail about vaccine mandates because of bodily autonomy and medical choice while pushing an abortion ban in the same month? I mean, they can, but I'll call them out on it as fast as Biden begging OPEC to pump more oil at COP26.

PeteD01

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1395
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #357 on: December 18, 2021, 07:23:26 AM »
The right can’t pretend to be against big government then push through a huge over-reach like this. That is disingenuous. At least us affluent liberals are consistent in our messaging that we know better than everyone and we should use the government to do tell people how to live! /s

You really think that the GOP can rail about vaccine mandates because of bodily autonomy and medical choice while pushing an abortion ban in the same month? I mean, they can, but I'll call them out on it as fast as Biden begging OPEC to pump more oil at COP26.

You are trying to point out an inconsistency in the GOP propaganda that does not exist when seen through the lens of white supremacism.
The freedom and the bodily autonomy and the problem of government overreach in a world where the natural order of things is the rule of the white male are only concerns as far as they affect the freedom and the bodily autonomy and government action of white males. Using the full force of government, the law and vigilante activism against anyone who is not a white male is perfectly fine with them and logically consistent.

Of course, the ones supposed to be the subject of the white man's lording over are unlikely to give their voluntary consent and need to be deprived from having a voice by suppressing their vote.

The accusation of hypocrisy of the liberal elites often comes along as a reminder of the complicity in supporting racist or misogynistic  structures by benefitting from them or at least not being harmed by their existence is common but often not recognized.

An example from a post above: "If Roe is overturned and some states make most abortions illegal, everyone posting here is still going to be able to drive somewhere to get a legal abortion."

Unfortunately, they do have a point; but they are also acutely aware that movements like BLM and the teaching of structural racism in schools are extreme threats to this acquiescence of affluent liberals.
But herein also lies the fundamental weakness of the extreme right. It is unquestionable that the liberal establishment has benefitted from racist structures while not overtly promoting them, thus becoming an indispensable pillar supporting racist and misogynistic structures.
This pillar can be demolished from within without even taking on any right winger at all and that is what scares them and why they feel that they are out of options short of overturning US democracy as we know it. Liberals also have to acknowledge that, in the eyes of the modern GOP, the goals of eliminating structural racism or establishing universal access to healthcare (abortions) etc. are to remove them from discussion and democratic control (beyond mere administration and budgetary decision making) and they are correct. The strategies are typically to frame such goals as fundamental (constitutional) rights thus formally removing them from the political process or by introducing entitlements which cannot be easily taken away once people have gotten used to them thus removing them effectively if not formally from the democratic process. In the end, the notion that, for example access to abortion and other reproductive health care or elimination of racist structures, cannot be restricted on ideological grounds via the democratic process, is fundamentally a value judgment just like the notion that white male rule should be the law of the land.
That does not mean that these notions are equivalent, but rather that neither emanates from any natural order of things or even the constitution. All the left has is a value judgment whereas large swaths of the right believes that their own value judgment is somehow based in religion and thereby discharging any personal responsibilty for whatever follows.
All that said, following my own judgment, I will not engage in a debate where the other party has already achieved whatever they want to achieve by simply having a debate: Fundamental rights of others are not up for debate but for enforcement, as far as I am concerned, and discussions like the above should be cancelled as they come up so as not to give the extreme right a platform.

Bottom line, once one looks at all that GOP propaganda as a Klan 2.0 strategy, which it is, and everything makes perfect sense with no inconsistencies whatsoever.
« Last Edit: December 18, 2021, 07:26:38 AM by PeteD01 »

PDXTabs

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5160
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Vancouver, WA, USA
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #358 on: December 18, 2021, 10:51:41 AM »
The right can’t pretend to be against big government then push through a huge over-reach like this. That is disingenuous. At least us affluent liberals are consistent in our messaging that we know better than everyone and we should use the government to do tell people how to live! /s

You really think that the GOP can rail about vaccine mandates because of bodily autonomy and medical choice while pushing an abortion ban in the same month? I mean, they can, but I'll call them out on it as fast as Biden begging OPEC to pump more oil at COP26.

You are trying to point out an inconsistency in the GOP propaganda that does not exist when seen through the lens of white supremacism.
The freedom and the bodily autonomy and the problem of government overreach in a world where the natural order of things is the rule of the white male are only concerns as far as they affect the freedom and the bodily autonomy and government action of white males. Using the full force of government, the law and vigilante activism against anyone who is not a white male is perfectly fine with them and logically consistent.
...
Bottom line, once one looks at all that GOP propaganda as a Klan 2.0 strategy, which it is, and everything makes perfect sense with no inconsistencies whatsoever.

Obviously. I just fail to see why I should stop pointing it out, or encouraging my right leaning countrymen to cut it out and consider voting for a more ideologically pure party.

PeteD01

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1395
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #359 on: December 18, 2021, 12:53:20 PM »
The right can’t pretend to be against big government then push through a huge over-reach like this. That is disingenuous. At least us affluent liberals are consistent in our messaging that we know better than everyone and we should use the government to do tell people how to live! /s

You really think that the GOP can rail about vaccine mandates because of bodily autonomy and medical choice while pushing an abortion ban in the same month? I mean, they can, but I'll call them out on it as fast as Biden begging OPEC to pump more oil at COP26.

You are trying to point out an inconsistency in the GOP propaganda that does not exist when seen through the lens of white supremacism.
The freedom and the bodily autonomy and the problem of government overreach in a world where the natural order of things is the rule of the white male are only concerns as far as they affect the freedom and the bodily autonomy and government action of white males. Using the full force of government, the law and vigilante activism against anyone who is not a white male is perfectly fine with them and logically consistent.
...
Bottom line, once one looks at all that GOP propaganda as a Klan 2.0 strategy, which it is, and everything makes perfect sense with no inconsistencies whatsoever.

Obviously. I just fail to see why I should stop pointing it out, or encouraging my right leaning countrymen to cut it out and consider voting for a more ideologically pure party.

But you are pointing out something that appears to be hypocrisy but in reality is not.
An ideologically pure white supremacist party will tout the freedom and bodily autonomy of the white male and at the same time will promote government intervention, law enforcement and voter suppression as their rightly owned tools in the effort to lord it over the undeserving rest.
Today's GOP is acting very transparently as a white supremacist party and accusations of hypocrisy fall flat because they are not hypocritical about it at all.
It really is about criticizing the modern GOP by holding them to a standard they have long left behind and thereby keeping the lie alive that they are a normal party.
The actual reality is that the hypocritical state of accommodation with a system plagued with racist and misogynistic structures that affluent liberal elites have settled in, is under attack - and this is an existential threat to white supremacy.
It may sound odd to propose that something happening on the left could be of such great importance to the extreme right, but the truth is that racist and misogynistic structures have persisted under the decades long ascent of liberal economic and political power, thus ultimately perpetuating supremacist power structures.
This persistence was facilitated by the adoption of extreme meritocratic views among the liberal elites who could disguise their taking advantage of existing white supremacist power structures. This is where accusations of hypocrisy are valid.
In contrast, the new GOP aggressively follows a strategy of usurpation of power by a white supremacist organization which it is, without exhibiting any hypocrisy whatsoever.
Not to belabor the point any longer: Accusing the new GOP of hypocrisy by pointing out that goverment action is seen quite differently depending on who the recipient of such unwanted attention is, really is only possible by holding up the principles the old GOP puportedly was following. Now the old GOP was indeed hypocritical about such things, but the new GOP is not and is quite brazen about it.

To conclude, holding the new GOP to standards it no longer purports to possess and accusing it of hypocrisy obscures the true nature of the new GOP, and manages to reflect the, not unfounded, accusation of hypocrisy on the left, to the right. In an ironic twist, reflecting an accusation right back at the accuser is standard practice on the right - they are experts in that but that does not make it less stupid.

The new GOP should be criticised on the basis that they are a white supremacist organization that seeks to obtain power by overturning democratic processes now that white supremacist and misogynistic power structures, currently in large part under the influence of liberal affluent elites, are under threat.
The waning support, however tacit, for white supremacist structures and the emerging criticism of the meritocratic ideology that is common in the affluent left, puts the extreme right on red alert. This is what they mean when they talk about the Democrats being taken over by radicals, when all that is really happening is an erosion of support for historically determined white male power structures on the left.

That said, the new GOP is on edge because these seemingly internal developments on the left are truly existential threats to a white supremacist organization that relies on baked-in white supremacist power structures to further their interests.
This is what radicalizes them and leads them to see no other option than to seize power, by whatever means, in order to wrest control from the liberal elites before it is too late (and that is the apocalyptic twist in the story lending urgency to the quest). I cannot say that their analysis and their conclusions on what to do about preserving white male privilege are all wrong.

Notwithstanding all that, the liberal affluent elites have to come to terms with their complicity in maintaining white supremacist structures and with the role their ideology of meritocracy played and plays in how we have gotten to the point we are at now. I do not want to go into the meritocracy thing too far. Suffice it to say that meritocratic apologetics for existing inequities have a built-in disdain for the less fortunate by insinuating that there must be a lack of merit on the part of the unfortunate (here is where GOP ideology meets the liberals). The less fortunate of course experience such disdain as disrespect for their labors and will develop resentment, which in turn is the fuel populism runs on. But it is not just right populism that can run on such resentment...

So, we have a situation where major changes on the left are causing the right to experience an existential threat because the old white supremacist gentlemen´s agreement between right and left elites suddenly appears to have an expiration date.
That is what causes the devolution of the GOP into a personality cult willing to do away with democratic norms. It also allows to speculate in how far they are willing to go to thwart the threat.



   
« Last Edit: December 18, 2021, 02:15:54 PM by PeteD01 »

RetiredAt63

  • CMTO 2023 Attendees
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *
  • Posts: 20798
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #360 on: December 18, 2021, 01:19:43 PM »
^^^ One important word in all this is male.  In their own self-interest, women who otherwise fit the description, except for being the wrong gender, should be voting against this.  Are their interests so tightly tied to their husbands and fathers interests?

And as I said earlier, the put-down of any woman's rights is a put-down of my rights, and all women's rights.  Because we are all women, we are all vulnerable.  As this law clearly illustrates.

GodlessCommie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Location: NoVA
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #361 on: December 18, 2021, 02:45:50 PM »
^^^ One important word in all this is male.  In their own self-interest, women who otherwise fit the description, except for being the wrong gender, should be voting against this.  Are their interests so tightly tied to their husbands and fathers interests?

And as I said earlier, the put-down of any woman's rights is a put-down of my rights, and all women's rights.  Because we are all women, we are all vulnerable.  As this law clearly illustrates.

Partially, conservative White women are captives of the system. Partially, they trade a shot at equality for a guaranteed second place in the hierarchy.

OtherJen

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5267
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #362 on: December 18, 2021, 03:55:50 PM »
^^^ One important word in all this is male.  In their own self-interest, women who otherwise fit the description, except for being the wrong gender, should be voting against this.  Are their interests so tightly tied to their husbands and fathers interests?

And as I said earlier, the put-down of any woman's rights is a put-down of my rights, and all women's rights.  Because we are all women, we are all vulnerable.  As this law clearly illustrates.

Partially, conservative White women are captives of the system. Partially, they trade a shot at equality for a guaranteed second place in the hierarchy.

Yes. Many of them adhere to a complementarian form of Christianity in which they are essentially the property of their male headship, whether that is their father, husband, or other oldest male relative. They have promised to obey their husbands in their wedding vows, after being given away by their fathers.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1867
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #363 on: December 18, 2021, 04:00:04 PM »
^^^ One important word in all this is male.  In their own self-interest, women who otherwise fit the description, except for being the wrong gender, should be voting against this.  Are their interests so tightly tied to their husbands and fathers interests?

And as I said earlier, the put-down of any woman's rights is a put-down of my rights, and all women's rights.  Because we are all women, we are all vulnerable.  As this law clearly illustrates.

Partially, conservative White women are captives of the system. Partially, they trade a shot at equality for a guaranteed second place in the hierarchy.

Or...they just have a different opinion than you all...at least if we're still talking about abortion specifically and not some sort of broad-reaching existential paradigm. Or sure, you've got them completely figured out.....

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23226
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #364 on: December 18, 2021, 04:13:54 PM »
^^^ One important word in all this is male.  In their own self-interest, women who otherwise fit the description, except for being the wrong gender, should be voting against this.  Are their interests so tightly tied to their husbands and fathers interests?

And as I said earlier, the put-down of any woman's rights is a put-down of my rights, and all women's rights.  Because we are all women, we are all vulnerable.  As this law clearly illustrates.

Partially, conservative White women are captives of the system. Partially, they trade a shot at equality for a guaranteed second place in the hierarchy.

Or...they just have a different opinion than you all...at least if we're still talking about abortion specifically and not some sort of broad-reaching existential paradigm. Or sure, you've got them completely figured out.....

It's an odd situation.

Conservative women certainly espouse the beliefs that they're expected to have by other conservatives.  But my understanding is that (when available), they actually get abortions at similar rates to Liberal women.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1867
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #365 on: December 18, 2021, 06:49:11 PM »
^^^ One important word in all this is male.  In their own self-interest, women who otherwise fit the description, except for being the wrong gender, should be voting against this.  Are their interests so tightly tied to their husbands and fathers interests?

And as I said earlier, the put-down of any woman's rights is a put-down of my rights, and all women's rights.  Because we are all women, we are all vulnerable.  As this law clearly illustrates.

Partially, conservative White women are captives of the system. Partially, they trade a shot at equality for a guaranteed second place in the hierarchy.

Or...they just have a different opinion than you all...at least if we're still talking about abortion specifically and not some sort of broad-reaching existential paradigm. Or sure, you've got them completely figured out.....

It's an odd situation.

Conservative women certainly espouse the beliefs that they're expected to have by other conservatives.  But my understanding is that (when available), they actually get abortions at similar rates to Liberal women.

I can't speak to that, as I have never heard any statistics on rates given those categories. A quick google didn't yield much in regards to the accuracy or inaccuracy of that idea.

talltexan

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5344
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #366 on: December 18, 2021, 07:27:44 PM »

People will predictably fall into 2 camps. One will say "it's their own fault", the other will react like we do.
The latter will never happen, at least not at scale. Can't beat one of the most basic drives we all have.


Sure, some children are conceived by rapists, and some diseases can be detected in utero, but the overwhelming number of abortions occur because people lack self-control in a modern world where modern, safe contraception is plentiful and inexpensive.

Can you go into more detail about how you came to believe this?

GodlessCommie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Location: NoVA
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #367 on: December 20, 2021, 01:15:19 PM »
Or...they just have a different opinion than you all...at least if we're still talking about abortion specifically and not some sort of broad-reaching existential paradigm. Or sure, you've got them completely figured out.....

Yes, and they came to have this opinion completely independently. Its just a coincidence that it perfectly matches the standard dictated by the male-dominated religious and social circle they were born and raised in.

This is not to suggest that any of us - myself included - is an absolute independent thinker, not influenced by the greater society. But when there is well-know, widely-broadcast, strictly enforced standard to raise you like X, and you end up being exactly X, "just have an opinion" is an extremely poor explanation.

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8895
  • Location: Avalon
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #368 on: December 20, 2021, 02:15:10 PM »

People will predictably fall into 2 camps. One will say "it's their own fault", the other will react like we do.
The latter will never happen, at least not at scale. Can't beat one of the most basic drives we all have.


Sure, some children are conceived by rapists, and some diseases can be detected in utero, but the overwhelming number of abortions occur because people lack self-control in a modern world where modern, safe contraception is plentiful and inexpensive.

Can you go into more detail about how you came to believe this?
Hash Brown has been banned by the mods, so your question is going to be unanswered.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1867
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #369 on: December 20, 2021, 04:51:00 PM »
Or...they just have a different opinion than you all...at least if we're still talking about abortion specifically and not some sort of broad-reaching existential paradigm. Or sure, you've got them completely figured out.....

Yes, and they came to have this opinion completely independently. Its just a coincidence that it perfectly matches the standard dictated by the male-dominated religious and social circle they were born and raised in.

This is not to suggest that any of us - myself included - is an absolute independent thinker, not influenced by the greater society. But when there is well-know, widely-broadcast, strictly enforced standard to raise you like X, and you end up being exactly X, "just have an opinion" is an extremely poor explanation.

Actually, many of the women I know that have very strong opinions against abortion have stronger opinions on it than their husbands that they are apparently "property" of. I'm sure that if you have kids, it would be a total crapshoot - probably 50/50 as to whether or not they would support abortions /s. Or if not, perhaps it's because your kids are prisoners of your rigidly structured and enforced standard to raise them to support it. Perhaps it's because they're willing to trade being a second-class citizen so they can look down on others lower in the hierarchy.

Of course, women who are against abortion have tie-ins to how they are raised. It's not "just an opinion." However, the comments were insulting and appeared to come from a place where people couldn't see any possibility of someone having a difference of opinion from them, so they grasp at straws and assume the worst in order to maintain the status quo of their own opinions on an issue. In short, the condescension was so thick that I threw in a sarcastic comment.

GodlessCommie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Location: NoVA
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #370 on: December 21, 2021, 08:57:03 AM »
Actually, many of the women I know that have very strong opinions against abortion have stronger opinions on it than their husbands that they are apparently "property" of.

...and child's attachment to abusive parents is proof positive that they are not abused.

Quote
I'm sure that if you have kids, it would be a total crapshoot - probably 50/50 as to whether or not they would support abortions /s. Or if not, perhaps it's because your kids are prisoners of your rigidly structured and enforced standard to raise them to support it. Perhaps it's because they're willing to trade being a second-class citizen so they can look down on others lower in the hierarchy.

As soon as you find an analog of Chastity Balls, an analog to weekly indoctrination sessions, or a doctrine that states that my children are above others (as Christian doctrine has been saying about men and women for millenia, and in many sects still say that), I'll reconsider my thick condescension. I mean, it's not like conservatives - including conservative women - explicitly argued against equality. The argument was - and still is - that inequality is good and beneficial.


« Last Edit: December 21, 2021, 09:10:43 AM by GodlessCommie »

Just Joe

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6792
  • Location: In the middle....
  • Teach me something.
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #371 on: December 21, 2021, 09:48:50 AM »
And that's why I keep coming back here, vocabulary building. Thanks.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1867
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #372 on: December 21, 2021, 05:37:13 PM »
Actually, many of the women I know that have very strong opinions against abortion have stronger opinions on it than their husbands that they are apparently "property" of.

...and child's attachment to abusive parents is proof positive that they are not abused.

Quote
I'm sure that if you have kids, it would be a total crapshoot - probably 50/50 as to whether or not they would support abortions /s. Or if not, perhaps it's because your kids are prisoners of your rigidly structured and enforced standard to raise them to support it. Perhaps it's because they're willing to trade being a second-class citizen so they can look down on others lower in the hierarchy.

As soon as you find an analog of Chastity Balls, an analog to weekly indoctrination sessions, or a doctrine that states that my children are above others (as Christian doctrine has been saying about men and women for millenia, and in many sects still say that), I'll reconsider my thick condescension. I mean, it's not like conservatives - including conservative women - explicitly argued against equality. The argument was - and still is - that inequality is good and beneficial.

Your excessive use of random links doesn't make your argument any more cohesive. The point that was being made was that these poor enslaved women are voting just what their husbands say. My point is that they are against abortion with much more fervor than these husbands that are controlling their views have. Your childhood trauma link is pretty solidly not applicable to this point unless you're implying that most conservative women who are against abortion are victims of childhood abuse, in which case, I'd come prepared with a much better link than the one you added with a basic random explanation.

I'm going to take your lack of addressing one way or the other whether your kids are almost certainly going to believe abortion is fine as an admission that it's true (which of course it is - if they're raised by someone with your strong beliefs on the issue, they're going to have to significantly buck the trend to not believe that). So you agree that how you're raised - with or without "indoctrination" has a huge influence. Is the assumption then that oh, my kids are just learning the right position on the issue, but the only reason why anyone could disagree with you on this issue is that they must be victims of child abuse, indoctrination, or whatever the case may be.

You're throwing things out there about what you assume is happening, but I can almost certainly guarantee you that I have much more practical experience in conservative settings, church settings, multiple different flavors of church settings, etc. than you have. Yes, there are events in some sections of Christianity that you linked. They're more likely now to be frowned upon and ridiculed than embraced. Also, you so wittily link to church in general as weekly indocrination. Churches, even the conservative variety, don't talk about these issues every week or even every month. In fact, even very conservative churches that I've been to or know people that go to might bring up the topic of abortion once in a blue moon. It's not that they're never talking about it or that there's not a common consensus, but no, it's not the Clockwork Orange where they're being brainwashed week in and week out.

You can choose to reconsider your condescension or not at your discretion, of course. However, even if everything that has been said is completely true and taken to the fullest extreme and conservative women are only that way because they have been indoctrinated, brainwashed, are victims and treated like property to only parrot the views of their husbands/fathers, then that's pretty close to something you're probably heard of (/s) called punching down. You're also condescending to people who feel so strongly about an issue they're promoting a restriction that will directly impact them and very few of them are big name authors like your link that are directly benefiting financially from this perspective. Believe what you want, but your condescension towards women who are against everyone (themselves included) being able to have an abortion is pretty gross.

sui generis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3104
  • she/her
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #373 on: December 21, 2021, 07:19:34 PM »
@Wolfpack Mustachian you completely missed the point of the child abuse link and thus largely the rest of the conversation, I believe.

The point is, it's possible for someone to be complicit in and very attached to their own oppression. It's not a claim that those women were abused as children, but that the attachment to their own oppression does not mean it's not oppression (just like children loving their abusers does not make it not-abuse).

Those kinds of things, as well as former slaves saying things were better in slavery or gays against gay rights does not validate, much less add the extra validation, to the oppression that conservatives seem to think it does.

We shouldn't be ok with oppressing certain classes of people simply because an certain percent of those people loudly proclaim how righteous that oppression is.

GodlessCommie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Location: NoVA
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #374 on: December 21, 2021, 07:27:19 PM »
Your excessive use of random links doesn't make your argument any more cohesive. The point that was being made was that these poor enslaved women are voting just what their husbands say. My point is that they are against abortion with much more fervor than these husbands that are controlling their views have. Your childhood trauma link is pretty solidly not applicable to this point unless you're implying that most conservative women who are against abortion are victims of childhood abuse, in which case, I'd come prepared with a much better link than the one you added with a basic random explanation.

No, this is not the point being made. Women operate in a male-dominated world, and learn to be successful in it. You can't be successful, unless you embrace its basic tenets. In conservative circles, it includes being anti-abortion. This is what I mean by them being captive, not that they are literally being told what to do every day.

Quote
I'm going to take your lack of addressing one way or the other whether your kids are almost certainly going to believe abortion is fine as an admission that it's true (which of course it is - if they're raised by someone with your strong beliefs on the issue, they're going to have to significantly buck the trend to not believe that).

You get it wrong. I do not know where they stand on abortion. This is not something we discussed once, although I now think that we should have.

Quote
You're throwing things out there about what you assume is happening, but I can almost certainly guarantee you that I have much more practical experience in conservative settings, church settings, multiple different flavors of church settings, etc. than you have. Yes, there are events in some sections of Christianity that you linked. They're more likely now to be frowned upon and ridiculed than embraced. Also, you so wittily link to church in general as weekly indocrination. Churches, even the conservative variety, don't talk about these issues every week or even every month. In fact, even very conservative churches that I've been to or know people that go to might bring up the topic of abortion once in a blue moon. It's not that they're never talking about it or that there's not a common consensus, but no, it's not the Clockwork Orange where they're being brainwashed week in and week out.

Organized religion, of any variety, requires constant reinforcement. This is what I mean by weekly indoctrination. Aspects sufficiently internalized require less reinforcement.

Quote
You can choose to reconsider your condescension or not at your discretion, of course. However, even if everything that has been said is completely true and taken to the fullest extreme and conservative women are only that way because they have been indoctrinated, brainwashed, are victims and treated like property to only parrot the views of their husbands/fathers, then that's pretty close to something you're probably heard of (/s) called punching down. You're also condescending to people who feel so strongly about an issue they're promoting a restriction that will directly impact them and very few of them are big name authors like your link that are directly benefiting financially from this perspective. Believe what you want, but your condescension towards women who are against everyone (themselves included) being able to have an abortion is pretty gross.

You look at conservative women in your life, and you see people who are strong, independent, have careers, who look very opposite of property of their husbands; and you react with understandable indignity to a suggestion that they are in any way victims. Or that their stance against abortion is a product of indoctrination.

And I invite you to do two things: consider the history of Conservative Christians' opposition to every advance in women's rights, place and role of conservative women in these events; and listen to women who escaped conservative families.

On the former, at least read more carefully about the fight against ERA. You followed the link once, and noticed that Phyllis Schlafly reaped great financial benefits from telling other women that equality was bad for them. What you avoided noticing was the explicit argument against equality, and eventual embrace of that argument by conservative women.

And now try to make an argument against traumatic bonding with understanding that conservative women embraced the explicit argument against them being equal to men. It wasn't hard, btw - it's one of the core tenets of Christian faith (and other Abrahamic religions), after all.

On punching down, you are right. I do let my worse angels take over more often than I should. To the women who may be reading this, I apologize.

So, to recap: this is still a male-dominated world. It's only marginally less male-dominated than in has been. We created all the rules, we started all religions, we ran the country and the church without allowing women anywhere near power in either. Women learned to operate in this world. To be successful in this world was to operate within limitations set by men, including embracing the very explicitly defined position below that of a man. Conservative view on abortion developed before women could vote or be a minister in a church. This is a rule men developed and forced women to accept. You can't ignore this history and claim that modern conservative women, having all the rights won for them by liberal women and men, just have an opinion on abortion that is separate from the well-documented history.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2021, 08:19:29 PM by GodlessCommie »

JoePublic3.14

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 257
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #375 on: December 21, 2021, 07:45:44 PM »

People will predictably fall into 2 camps. One will say "it's their own fault", the other will react like we do.
The latter will never happen, at least not at scale. Can't beat one of the most basic drives we all have.


Sure, some children are conceived by rapists, and some diseases can be detected in utero, but the overwhelming number of abortions occur because people lack self-control in a modern world where modern, safe contraception is plentiful and inexpensive.

Can you go into more detail about how you came to believe this?

Well, if I was to base an opinion only off my personal experience, I would reach a similar position. I have no kids, but have gone through the motions many times. I extrapolate that out and assume anyone who is pregnant didn’t take care of things. I do realize that is not a legitimate extrapolation, so just giving a possible route to that position.

Now, personally, I am baffled by women (and men for that matter) who who are not defenders of their right to make decisions that impact their body*. I am not smart enough to even engage with those types. Fortunately, there is only a single person that I am aware of in my life (an aunt) that is like that, and I rarely have any interaction with her.


* I do not feel vaccines have an ‘impact' on one's body in the manner I am talking about…


Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1867
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #376 on: December 22, 2021, 07:32:04 AM »
Your excessive use of random links doesn't make your argument any more cohesive. The point that was being made was that these poor enslaved women are voting just what their husbands say. My point is that they are against abortion with much more fervor than these husbands that are controlling their views have. Your childhood trauma link is pretty solidly not applicable to this point unless you're implying that most conservative women who are against abortion are victims of childhood abuse, in which case, I'd come prepared with a much better link than the one you added with a basic random explanation.

No, this is not the point being made. Women operate in a male-dominated world, and learn to be successful in it. You can't be successful, unless you embrace its basic tenets. In conservative circles, it includes being anti-abortion. This is what I mean by them being captive, not that they are literally being told what to do every day.

Quote
I'm going to take your lack of addressing one way or the other whether your kids are almost certainly going to believe abortion is fine as an admission that it's true (which of course it is - if they're raised by someone with your strong beliefs on the issue, they're going to have to significantly buck the trend to not believe that).

You get it wrong. I do not know where they stand on abortion. This is not something we discussed once, although I now think that we should have.

Quote
You're throwing things out there about what you assume is happening, but I can almost certainly guarantee you that I have much more practical experience in conservative settings, church settings, multiple different flavors of church settings, etc. than you have. Yes, there are events in some sections of Christianity that you linked. They're more likely now to be frowned upon and ridiculed than embraced. Also, you so wittily link to church in general as weekly indocrination. Churches, even the conservative variety, don't talk about these issues every week or even every month. In fact, even very conservative churches that I've been to or know people that go to might bring up the topic of abortion once in a blue moon. It's not that they're never talking about it or that there's not a common consensus, but no, it's not the Clockwork Orange where they're being brainwashed week in and week out.

Organized religion, of any variety, requires constant reinforcement. This is what I mean by weekly indoctrination. Aspects sufficiently internalized require less reinforcement.

Quote
You can choose to reconsider your condescension or not at your discretion, of course. However, even if everything that has been said is completely true and taken to the fullest extreme and conservative women are only that way because they have been indoctrinated, brainwashed, are victims and treated like property to only parrot the views of their husbands/fathers, then that's pretty close to something you're probably heard of (/s) called punching down. You're also condescending to people who feel so strongly about an issue they're promoting a restriction that will directly impact them and very few of them are big name authors like your link that are directly benefiting financially from this perspective. Believe what you want, but your condescension towards women who are against everyone (themselves included) being able to have an abortion is pretty gross.

You look at conservative women in your life, and you see people who are strong, independent, have careers, who look very opposite of property of their husbands; and you react with understandable indignity to a suggestion that they are in any way victims. Or that their stance against abortion is a product of indoctrination.

And I invite you to do two things: consider the history of Conservative Christians' opposition to every advance in women's rights, place and role of conservative women in these events; and listen to women who escaped conservative families.

On the former, at least read more carefully about the fight against ERA. You followed the link once, and noticed that Phyllis Schlafly reaped great financial benefits from telling other women that equality was bad for them. What you avoided noticing was the explicit argument against equality, and eventual embrace of that argument by conservative women.

And now try to make an argument against traumatic bonding with understanding that conservative women embraced the explicit argument against them being equal to men. It wasn't hard, btw - it's one of the core tenets of Christian faith (and other Abrahamic religions), after all.

On punching down, you are right. I do let my worse angels take over more often than I should. To the women who may be reading this, I apologize.

So, to recap: this is still a male-dominated world. It's only marginally less male-dominated than in has been. We created all the rules, we started all religions, we ran the country and the church without allowing women anywhere near power in either. Women learned to operate in this world. To be successful in this world was to operate within limitations set by men, including embracing the very explicitly defined position below that of a man. Conservative view on abortion developed before women could vote or be a minister in a church. This is a rule men developed and forced women to accept. You can't ignore this history and claim that modern conservative women, having all the rights won for them by liberal women and men, just have an opinion on abortion that is separate from the well-documented history.

You are absolutely right that the conservative women I know fit into that category, and I was frustrated for the reasons you said. I will think on the rest of what you and sui generis said.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2021, 07:35:05 AM by Wolfpack Mustachian »

Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 17603
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #377 on: December 22, 2021, 10:38:25 AM »
Your excessive use of random links doesn't make your argument any more cohesive. The point that was being made was that these poor enslaved women are voting just what their husbands say. My point is that they are against abortion with much more fervor than these husbands that are controlling their views have. Your childhood trauma link is pretty solidly not applicable to this point unless you're implying that most conservative women who are against abortion are victims of childhood abuse, in which case, I'd come prepared with a much better link than the one you added with a basic random explanation.

No, this is not the point being made. Women operate in a male-dominated world, and learn to be successful in it. You can't be successful, unless you embrace its basic tenets. In conservative circles, it includes being anti-abortion. This is what I mean by them being captive, not that they are literally being told what to do every day.

Quote
I'm going to take your lack of addressing one way or the other whether your kids are almost certainly going to believe abortion is fine as an admission that it's true (which of course it is - if they're raised by someone with your strong beliefs on the issue, they're going to have to significantly buck the trend to not believe that).

You get it wrong. I do not know where they stand on abortion. This is not something we discussed once, although I now think that we should have.

Quote
You're throwing things out there about what you assume is happening, but I can almost certainly guarantee you that I have much more practical experience in conservative settings, church settings, multiple different flavors of church settings, etc. than you have. Yes, there are events in some sections of Christianity that you linked. They're more likely now to be frowned upon and ridiculed than embraced. Also, you so wittily link to church in general as weekly indocrination. Churches, even the conservative variety, don't talk about these issues every week or even every month. In fact, even very conservative churches that I've been to or know people that go to might bring up the topic of abortion once in a blue moon. It's not that they're never talking about it or that there's not a common consensus, but no, it's not the Clockwork Orange where they're being brainwashed week in and week out.

Organized religion, of any variety, requires constant reinforcement. This is what I mean by weekly indoctrination. Aspects sufficiently internalized require less reinforcement.

Quote
You can choose to reconsider your condescension or not at your discretion, of course. However, even if everything that has been said is completely true and taken to the fullest extreme and conservative women are only that way because they have been indoctrinated, brainwashed, are victims and treated like property to only parrot the views of their husbands/fathers, then that's pretty close to something you're probably heard of (/s) called punching down. You're also condescending to people who feel so strongly about an issue they're promoting a restriction that will directly impact them and very few of them are big name authors like your link that are directly benefiting financially from this perspective. Believe what you want, but your condescension towards women who are against everyone (themselves included) being able to have an abortion is pretty gross.

You look at conservative women in your life, and you see people who are strong, independent, have careers, who look very opposite of property of their husbands; and you react with understandable indignity to a suggestion that they are in any way victims. Or that their stance against abortion is a product of indoctrination.

And I invite you to do two things: consider the history of Conservative Christians' opposition to every advance in women's rights, place and role of conservative women in these events; and listen to women who escaped conservative families.

On the former, at least read more carefully about the fight against ERA. You followed the link once, and noticed that Phyllis Schlafly reaped great financial benefits from telling other women that equality was bad for them. What you avoided noticing was the explicit argument against equality, and eventual embrace of that argument by conservative women.

And now try to make an argument against traumatic bonding with understanding that conservative women embraced the explicit argument against them being equal to men. It wasn't hard, btw - it's one of the core tenets of Christian faith (and other Abrahamic religions), after all.

On punching down, you are right. I do let my worse angels take over more often than I should. To the women who may be reading this, I apologize.

So, to recap: this is still a male-dominated world. It's only marginally less male-dominated than in has been. We created all the rules, we started all religions, we ran the country and the church without allowing women anywhere near power in either. Women learned to operate in this world. To be successful in this world was to operate within limitations set by men, including embracing the very explicitly defined position below that of a man. Conservative view on abortion developed before women could vote or be a minister in a church. This is a rule men developed and forced women to accept. You can't ignore this history and claim that modern conservative women, having all the rights won for them by liberal women and men, just have an opinion on abortion that is separate from the well-documented history.

There's also a HUGE difference between abortion opinions and actual abortion rates.

The stats on that are FAR more informative than what people *say* about abortion.

ETA
"Many abortion patients reported a religious affiliation—24% were Catholic, 17% were mainline Protestant, 13% were evangelical Protestant and 8% identified with some other religion. Thirty-eight percent of patients had no religious affiliation. "

https://www.guttmacher.org/report/characteristics-us-abortion-patients-2014

So it's not godless amoral atheists getting the bulk of abortions.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2021, 10:49:40 AM by Malcat »

OtherJen

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5267
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #378 on: December 22, 2021, 10:48:35 AM »
Your excessive use of random links doesn't make your argument any more cohesive. The point that was being made was that these poor enslaved women are voting just what their husbands say. My point is that they are against abortion with much more fervor than these husbands that are controlling their views have. Your childhood trauma link is pretty solidly not applicable to this point unless you're implying that most conservative women who are against abortion are victims of childhood abuse, in which case, I'd come prepared with a much better link than the one you added with a basic random explanation.

No, this is not the point being made. Women operate in a male-dominated world, and learn to be successful in it. You can't be successful, unless you embrace its basic tenets. In conservative circles, it includes being anti-abortion. This is what I mean by them being captive, not that they are literally being told what to do every day.

Quote
I'm going to take your lack of addressing one way or the other whether your kids are almost certainly going to believe abortion is fine as an admission that it's true (which of course it is - if they're raised by someone with your strong beliefs on the issue, they're going to have to significantly buck the trend to not believe that).

You get it wrong. I do not know where they stand on abortion. This is not something we discussed once, although I now think that we should have.

Quote
You're throwing things out there about what you assume is happening, but I can almost certainly guarantee you that I have much more practical experience in conservative settings, church settings, multiple different flavors of church settings, etc. than you have. Yes, there are events in some sections of Christianity that you linked. They're more likely now to be frowned upon and ridiculed than embraced. Also, you so wittily link to church in general as weekly indocrination. Churches, even the conservative variety, don't talk about these issues every week or even every month. In fact, even very conservative churches that I've been to or know people that go to might bring up the topic of abortion once in a blue moon. It's not that they're never talking about it or that there's not a common consensus, but no, it's not the Clockwork Orange where they're being brainwashed week in and week out.

Organized religion, of any variety, requires constant reinforcement. This is what I mean by weekly indoctrination. Aspects sufficiently internalized require less reinforcement.

Quote
You can choose to reconsider your condescension or not at your discretion, of course. However, even if everything that has been said is completely true and taken to the fullest extreme and conservative women are only that way because they have been indoctrinated, brainwashed, are victims and treated like property to only parrot the views of their husbands/fathers, then that's pretty close to something you're probably heard of (/s) called punching down. You're also condescending to people who feel so strongly about an issue they're promoting a restriction that will directly impact them and very few of them are big name authors like your link that are directly benefiting financially from this perspective. Believe what you want, but your condescension towards women who are against everyone (themselves included) being able to have an abortion is pretty gross.

You look at conservative women in your life, and you see people who are strong, independent, have careers, who look very opposite of property of their husbands; and you react with understandable indignity to a suggestion that they are in any way victims. Or that their stance against abortion is a product of indoctrination.

And I invite you to do two things: consider the history of Conservative Christians' opposition to every advance in women's rights, place and role of conservative women in these events; and listen to women who escaped conservative families.

On the former, at least read more carefully about the fight against ERA. You followed the link once, and noticed that Phyllis Schlafly reaped great financial benefits from telling other women that equality was bad for them. What you avoided noticing was the explicit argument against equality, and eventual embrace of that argument by conservative women.

And now try to make an argument against traumatic bonding with understanding that conservative women embraced the explicit argument against them being equal to men. It wasn't hard, btw - it's one of the core tenets of Christian faith (and other Abrahamic religions), after all.

On punching down, you are right. I do let my worse angels take over more often than I should. To the women who may be reading this, I apologize.

So, to recap: this is still a male-dominated world. It's only marginally less male-dominated than in has been. We created all the rules, we started all religions, we ran the country and the church without allowing women anywhere near power in either. Women learned to operate in this world. To be successful in this world was to operate within limitations set by men, including embracing the very explicitly defined position below that of a man. Conservative view on abortion developed before women could vote or be a minister in a church. This is a rule men developed and forced women to accept. You can't ignore this history and claim that modern conservative women, having all the rights won for them by liberal women and men, just have an opinion on abortion that is separate from the well-documented history.

There's also a HUGE difference between abortion opinions and actual abortion rates.

The stats on that are FAR more informative than what people *say* about abortion.

Indeed. This article is a few years old but still informative: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/13/whos-driving-high-abortion-rates-religious-right

MasterStache

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2924
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #379 on: December 23, 2021, 07:04:08 AM »
I find this discussion very interesting and informative. I don't really have anything to add. ( :

PDXTabs

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5160
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Vancouver, WA, USA
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #380 on: December 23, 2021, 12:49:30 PM »
I saw this article today, Scientific American: Being Denied an Abortion Has Lasting Impacts on Health and Finances.

The study found that, compared with women who received an abortion, those who wanted the procedure but were denied it fared worse in numerous aspects of their life, including financial situation, education, and physical and mental health.

Psychstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1600
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #381 on: December 23, 2021, 01:01:43 PM »
I saw this article today, Scientific American: Being Denied an Abortion Has Lasting Impacts on Health and Finances.

The study found that, compared with women who received an abortion, those who wanted the procedure but were denied it fared worse in numerous aspects of their life, including financial situation, education, and physical and mental health.

The cruelty is the point, not a side effect.

PDXTabs

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5160
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Vancouver, WA, USA
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #382 on: December 23, 2021, 01:04:48 PM »
I saw this article today, Scientific American: Being Denied an Abortion Has Lasting Impacts on Health and Finances.

The study found that, compared with women who received an abortion, those who wanted the procedure but were denied it fared worse in numerous aspects of their life, including financial situation, education, and physical and mental health.

The cruelty is the point, not a side effect.

I could make an argument that the point is to create/perpetuate an impoverished underclass and that the cruelty is a side effect. But I'm not sure it matters either way.

RetiredAt63

  • CMTO 2023 Attendees
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *
  • Posts: 20798
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #383 on: December 23, 2021, 01:05:50 PM »
I saw this article today, Scientific American: Being Denied an Abortion Has Lasting Impacts on Health and Finances.

The study found that, compared with women who received an abortion, those who wanted the procedure but were denied it fared worse in numerous aspects of their life, including financial situation, education, and physical and mental health.

That is a powerful study.

talltexan

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5344
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #384 on: January 04, 2022, 07:11:16 AM »
@PDXTabs , thanks for sharing the study.

PeteD01

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1395
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #385 on: January 24, 2022, 06:59:16 AM »
From The Guardian:

White nationalists are flocking to the US anti-abortion movement

"...In the current anti-choice and white supremacist alliance, the language of “race suicide” has been supplanted by a similar fear: the so-called “Great Replacement”, a racist conspiracy theory that posits that white Americans are being “replaced” by people of color. (Some antisemitic variations posit that this “replacement” is somehow being orchestrated by Jewish people.)

That the way to combat this, the right says, is to force childbearing among white people, to severely restrict immigration, and to punish, via criminalization and enforced poverty, women of color..."

"...The white supremacist and anti-choice movements have always been closely linked. But more and more, they are becoming difficult to tell apart."


https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/24/white-nationalists-are-flocking-to-the-us-anti-abortion-movement

GodlessCommie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 970
  • Location: NoVA
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #386 on: January 24, 2022, 09:33:31 AM »
The article as a whole is on an unrelated topic, but the link between authoritarianism and misogyny is relevant:

Quote
Dicks found that what dominated among German soldiers, and especially those who liked the Nazis, was a weird relationship with authoritarian, often abusive and frequently absent father figures, with the child simultaneously humiliated by them and yearning for acceptance. The ensuing weak sense of individual agency lead to a search for strong leaders and identification with an all-encompassing, abstract nation-family. Deifying impossibly perfect mother figures, and then attacking any women who failed to live up to that, was a common accompaniment.

PeteD01

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1395
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #387 on: April 09, 2022, 02:08:31 PM »
Allegedly, healthcare worker(s) made the denunciation leading to the imprisonment of this woman.
Something to be followed for sure.



Texas woman charged with murder for ‘self-induced abortion’
Texas Public Radio | By Pablo De La Rosa, Carolina Cuellar, Dan Katz

https://www.tpr.org/news/2022-04-08/texas-woman-charged-with-murder-for-self-induced-abortion
« Last Edit: April 09, 2022, 05:01:26 PM by PeteD01 »

sui generis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3104
  • she/her
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #388 on: April 09, 2022, 04:10:50 PM »
Devastating.  Although I think the article is incorrect to the extent it implies she was arrested for murder because SB8 made abortion effectively illegal.  The only remedy SB8 put into place was the much-derided private right of action to sue.  The "vigilante" aspect. That was the evil-genius part - that by not having it enforced by any state official, SCOTUS basically has shrugged their shoulders to a large extent about who exactly could be sued.  The law did not categorize abortion as murder, so far as I recall, and definitely didn't authorize sheriffs to arrest people for it. 

Quote
Sec. 171.207.  LIMITATIONS ON PUBLIC ENFORCEMENT.
    (a)  Notwithstanding Section 171.005 or any other law, the
    requirements of this subchapter shall be enforced exclusively
    through the private civil actions described in Section 171.208.  No
    enforcement of this subchapter, and no enforcement of Chapters 19
    and 22, Penal Code, in response to violations of this subchapter,
    may be taken or threatened by this state, a political subdivision, a
    district or county attorney, or an executive or administrative
    officer or employee of this state or a political subdivision
    against any person, except as provided in Section 171.208.

However, it is very clearly linked indirectly as it starts to change the culture around what people think is legal vs. illegal and what the laws say.  I'm sure many people do think SB8 changed the law to categorize a fetus as a person and having all the rights of personhood (which, surprisingly, SCOTUS was unanimous about rejecting at oral argument.  It's problematic in a lot of ways that have nothing to do with the abortion debate).  Which is definitely part of the goal of laws like these.  To move the goalposts and constantly subjugate women more and more, creating two classes of citizenship, one lower and with lesser rights for those with wombs and the other being the full class of citizenship the constitution requires.

Abe

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2647
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #389 on: April 09, 2022, 09:02:56 PM »
What is the technical law in Texas and what the police & sheriffs here think it says are two separate things.
The conservatives here are tripping over themselves to subjugate the population to whatever Christian theocratic fantasies they can imagine.
The point is to do something clearly (currently) illegal so it gets all the way to the Supreme Court, who, in their fever dreams, will act like a bunch of Iranian Mullahs and bring about the equivalent of Sharia, except for Christians. Just because it's a so-called "developed" country doesn't mean you can't have a bunch of nuts running the show.
When anyone points out that this is oppressive, they basically say that not being allowed to oppress others is oppressing their freedom of religion, which calls for oppressing others.

Case in point:
1. Abbott sending Texas Rangers to enforce a federal immigration law. Even the Deputies there were wondering what they were doing.
2. Abbot sending Texas Rangers to "monitor" US Army war exercises because it may be a deep state plot to overthrow the government.
3. The current law, which (in addition to banning abortion) tries to create a anarchist state where any right can be quashed, because it's not the state but "private citizens (read: vigilantes)" metting out justice. Any actual legal scholar will tell you this is obviously insane, but here we are, the theocrats in Texas think the Supreme Court will fall for it. Hint: they did not.
4. Abbott telling DPS to investigate medical treatment for gender dysphoria as child abuse.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2022, 09:08:40 PM by Abe »

PeteD01

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1395
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #390 on: April 10, 2022, 06:23:46 AM »
"The result is that in the span of a few short weeks, women’s rights are likely to be snuffed out in vast swaths of the country – from the deep south, across the great plains, and into the mountain west, women will lose the freedom, and the dignity, that comes with the right to choose. The human tragedy of this – the dreams that will be denied, the pain that will be endured, the humiliation and the enforced poverty that will inflicted on women forced to become mothers against their interests and against their will – is incalculable."


We are witnessing the final days of reproductive freedom in America
Moira Donegan

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/apr/08/oklahomas-move-to-ban-abortions-is-a-prelude-of-america-without-roe-v-wade

sui generis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3104
  • she/her
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #391 on: April 10, 2022, 03:05:37 PM »
Good news, the charges are being dropped.

https://www.tpr.org/news/2022-04-08/texas-woman-charged-with-murder-for-self-induced-abortion

Quote
"In reviewing applicable Texas law, it is clear that Ms. Herrera cannot and should not be prosecuted for the allegation against her." [County DA] Ramirez said.

Quote
Steve Vladeck, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law, said that based on the information available, the murder charge didn’t make sense.

“The Texas murder statute does apply to the killing of an unborn fetus," he said, "but it specifically exempts cases where the person who terminated the fetus is the pregnant woman.”

Still, it's depressing as reflected throughout the article by the people who are worried about what this portends, as well as because of this statement in my opinion:

Quote
Ramirez said the Starr County Sheriff's Department "did their duty in investigating the incident brought to their attention by the reporting hospital” but this was not a criminal matter under Texas law.

That DA should be chastisting the sheriff for being so reckless and wanton, or at least not giving him and the dept any plaudits to stand behind.  If it was politically untenable to chastise them in this public statement, they should have at least not commented on their performance.

OtherJen

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5267
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #392 on: April 10, 2022, 04:57:47 PM »
Good news, the charges are being dropped.

https://www.tpr.org/news/2022-04-08/texas-woman-charged-with-murder-for-self-induced-abortion

Quote
"In reviewing applicable Texas law, it is clear that Ms. Herrera cannot and should not be prosecuted for the allegation against her." [County DA] Ramirez said.

Quote
Steve Vladeck, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law, said that based on the information available, the murder charge didn’t make sense.

“The Texas murder statute does apply to the killing of an unborn fetus," he said, "but it specifically exempts cases where the person who terminated the fetus is the pregnant woman.”

Still, it's depressing as reflected throughout the article by the people who are worried about what this portends, as well as because of this statement in my opinion:

Quote
Ramirez said the Starr County Sheriff's Department "did their duty in investigating the incident brought to their attention by the reporting hospital” but this was not a criminal matter under Texas law.

That DA should be chastisting the sheriff for being so reckless and wanton, or at least not giving him and the dept any plaudits to stand behind.  If it was politically untenable to chastise them in this public statement, they should have at least not commented on their performance.

He's a sheriff in Texas. Nothing will happen to him.

talltexan

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5344
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #393 on: April 11, 2022, 07:58:03 AM »
Couildn't the Sheriff's best friend Daryl (I assume he's a private citizen) act to sue the woman under the vigilante law?

sui generis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3104
  • she/her
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #394 on: April 11, 2022, 09:29:49 AM »
Yes, and I am surprised no one has.  In fact, I'm not familiar with any active cases under that law right now (there probably are some, I just haven't heard).  But it just goes to show, this was not really about the actually enforcement of the law, it was about creating a climate where everyone would constantly be afraid and not feel they could take a chance.  Particularly for health care workers.  Of course they probably want to help these people but is this one woman that needs an abortion who is 6 weeks and 2 days along really worth their license to practice medicine? 

So it's been super successful in creating that climate without even clogging up the courts with lots of suits.  Couldn't have asked for a better outcome, if you are them!

PeteD01

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1395
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #395 on: April 11, 2022, 10:26:50 AM »
Yes, and I am surprised no one has.  In fact, I'm not familiar with any active cases under that law right now (there probably are some, I just haven't heard).  But it just goes to show, this was not really about the actually enforcement of the law, it was about creating a climate where everyone would constantly be afraid and not feel they could take a chance.  Particularly for health care workers.  Of course they probably want to help these people but is this one woman that needs an abortion who is 6 weeks and 2 days along really worth their license to practice medicine?

Nothing would have compelled a healthcare worker, if involved, to breach trust and confidentiality in this case. If someone did become an informant because they feared for their license, they still did it for personal gain/avoidance of personal loss and should be punished. Fearing the loss of a professional license does not give you an excuse for breaking federal law. Give the circumstances, the damages could be enormous.

So it's been super successful in creating that climate without even clogging up the courts with lots of suits.  Couldn't have asked for a better outcome, if you are them!

sui generis

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3104
  • she/her
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #396 on: April 11, 2022, 11:15:58 AM »
Yes, and I am surprised no one has.  In fact, I'm not familiar with any active cases under that law right now (there probably are some, I just haven't heard).  But it just goes to show, this was not really about the actually enforcement of the law, it was about creating a climate where everyone would constantly be afraid and not feel they could take a chance.  Particularly for health care workers.  Of course they probably want to help these people but is this one woman that needs an abortion who is 6 weeks and 2 days along really worth their license to practice medicine?

Nothing would have compelled a healthcare worker, if involved, to breach trust and confidentiality in this case. If someone did become an informant because they feared for their license, they still did it for personal gain/avoidance of personal loss and should be punished. Fearing the loss of a professional license does not give you an excuse for breaking federal law. Give the circumstances, the damages could be enormous.

So it's been super successful in creating that climate without even clogging up the courts with lots of suits.  Couldn't have asked for a better outcome, if you are them!

Well, there are two different scenarios going on here.  The one I was talking about is a healthcare professional that decides not to perform an abortion at 6.2 weeks because it's against state law AND could result in losing the ability to practice their profession, even though they may want to help the person if the law were otherwise.  SB8 in TX has created this environment where no one even needs to sue anyone because just the threat of a lawsuit (or, you know, 50 lawsuits, because there's no limit to how many times someone can be sued for a single "violation") is enough to make people worry about losing their livelihoods.

The one you are talking about is a healthcare worker (even possibly the one in this person's case) that breaks confidentiality laws to report on a person that may have self-induced an abortion and *may have* had some concern that if they didn't report, they could get caught up in the mess and lose their license?  I don't know, I agree that the person in this scenario probably has a lot of other motivations happening.  My opinion is that they are not in any danger of losing the ability to practice their profession but they certainly have violated ethical and legal principles in reporting a patient that was seeking care to law enforcement for something that is not even illegal.  That's an extremely dangerous path to travel down as a society.

But both of these are the environments that are being created in TX.  On purpose.  Because that's how they like it.  It's really disgusting.

talltexan

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5344
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #397 on: April 11, 2022, 11:48:18 AM »
I'm not an attorney, but following confidentiality laws so as to cover up a crime that is being committed sounds like legal exposure.

former player

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8895
  • Location: Avalon
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #398 on: April 11, 2022, 12:28:26 PM »
I'm not an attorney, but following confidentiality laws so as to cover up a crime that is being committed sounds like legal exposure.
My understanding is that abortion is not a "crime" even in Texas, just something that an individual can bring a civil action for.  There is no "legal exposure" for not letting someone know they can sue about something.

Even if abortion were a crime there is no obligation on a private citizen to report it to the police - just as there is no obligation to report the driver of a car you are a passenger in for speeding.

OtherJen

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5267
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Re: New laws in Texas: welcome back to the Wild West
« Reply #399 on: April 11, 2022, 01:09:42 PM »
I'm not an attorney, but following confidentiality laws so as to cover up a crime that is being committed sounds like legal exposure.
My understanding is that abortion is not a "crime" even in Texas, just something that an individual can bring a civil action for.  There is no "legal exposure" for not letting someone know they can sue about something.

Even if abortion were a crime there is no obligation on a private citizen to report it to the police - just as there is no obligation to report the driver of a car you are a passenger in for speeding.

So most likely, the medical professional who treated Ms. Herrera called the police on her to deflect a lawsuit (from a colleague, maybe?) against themselves for aiding and abetting a woman seeking abortion.

Maybe it's because I've never had a drive to reproduce, but I cannot imagine what would convince any free-thinking woman (i.e., not someone raised in the Duggar cult or far-right Catholicism) to have children in the US right now. Women will start dying in greater numbers from unexpelled miscarriages and suffering more frequent pain from uterine fibroids and other conditions that are often treated via D&C, because what if a woman goes to the hospital for medical treatment and is arrested because someone thinks that she tried to shove a coat hanger up her cervix? Or what if medical professionals refuse to treat her for fear of being sued?