Advanced search

To think that just because I'm pro-life doesn't mean I hate feminism?

(813 Posts)
TinkerSailerSoldierSpy Sat 18-May-13 12:38:25

Friend and I were having a discussion, I'm 18 weeks pregnant, and it was a bit of an inconvenient surprise, considering I've started a new job just 2 months ago.I mentioned that it wasn't going to look good, me taking maternity leave after not even being there for a year, and she suggested perhaps considering there was no dad on the scene and my new job, I should terminate. I felt a bit uncomfortable but told her that I could never do that as I'm pro life and view it as killing a child. She then proceeded to stare at me like I had an extra head and ask me why in a shocked voice. I explained my reasons and views and we got into an arguement about it, the usual stuff, what about in cases of rape and if the woman's not financially able to support the child, to which I countered but is it right for a woman to get an abortion just because she wants to continue a party lifestyle? And she stormed out the house shouting that I was misogynistic and women have the right to their own bodies. Let me be clear, I certainly would never stop anyone from making their decision about an abortion, I just can't seem to get over the idea of it, it repulses me. But I wouldn't judge a woman who got one. I understand the other viewpoint but I can't agree with it myself, and in all other respects I would say i was very liberal about womans rights. When I mentioned it to other friend she said it was my views but they were quite outdated and misogynistic. Are they? I need advice, should I apologize to friend A?

mathanxiety Sat 25-May-13 20:35:20

You can't assume anything until you have statistics.

Abortion policy is encapsulated in the current law, which allows late term abortion for reasons that may or may not be medically sound. Attitudes to late term abortions are reflected in the lack of statistics.

mathanxiety Sat 25-May-13 20:36:04

Without statistics you are projecting your own judgements onto the matter.

seeker Sat 25-May-13 20:40:24

OK- so what do you think the breakdown of the 140 post 24 week abortions might be?

megsmouse Sat 25-May-13 20:51:41

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

mathanxiety Sat 25-May-13 20:53:53

I have no idea what the breakdown might be.

BasilBabyEater Sat 25-May-13 20:55:30

What social reasons megsmouse?

ApocalypseThen Sun 26-May-13 07:26:27

I think 'social reasons' is the term used to be flippant about any non-medical reason for abortion. Because women are just to silly to have real reasons.

SolidGoldBrass Sun 26-May-13 12:13:35

Yes Megsmouse, what exactly have you 'witnessed'?

Please remember, everyone, that the squealing about how awful late abortion is is what leads to women dying because of other people's squeamishness and misogyny.

LineRunner Sun 26-May-13 12:39:10

This is MaterFacit's link posted upthread which gives a summary of reasons given for abortion requests post 22 weeks.

The 'social reasons' include plenty of mistakes by GPs in recognising and dating pregnancies. Other factors in the requests are: youth; depression; drug use (methadone dependency); homelessness and poverty; fear.

seeker Sun 26-May-13 13:13:43

Real party animals, those women, aren't they? Especially the 14 year olds.sad

BobblyGussets Sun 26-May-13 17:17:24

Do you argue coherently then SGB, while the rest of us, who aren't so absolutist "squeal" if not in agreement with your pov? Are you as black and white about everything in your life?
I see myself as more misanthropic than mysogynist, if we have to throw labels about wink

seeker Sun 26-May-13 17:23:51

I'm afraid it has to be black and white. Either a woman has control over her body or she doesn't, and somebody else does. There isn't a third way.

neunundneunzigluftballons Sun 26-May-13 18:38:43

There is a 3rd way and it exists across many countries in the world except mine where interestingly the majority of people are as black and white about the issue as you are just in the opposite direction.

LineRunner Sun 26-May-13 19:26:02

There isn't a 3rd way with bodily autonomy.

What you are talking about is compromising the bodily autonomy of women with rules, laws and contingent interpretations, and then calling it a 3rd way.

FrameyMcFrame Sun 26-May-13 19:54:58

Seems quite simple to me, abortions should be granted upon request at any point in pregnancy.
If the fetus/baby/products of conception/whatever you prefer, can live independently then every effort should be made to help them to do so.

neunundneunzigluftballons Sun 26-May-13 21:26:44

No the 3rd way tries to balance the conflicting right to bodily integrity of the woman with the recognised in most countries across the world right to life of the foetus. It is a difficult balancing act to walk since both ends of the spectrum refuse to recognise the others view point making for a highly devisive debate at both ends of the spectrum.

seeker Sun 26-May-13 22:20:26

How does the 3rd way work?

neunundneunzigluftballons Sun 26-May-13 22:36:42

Better to ask how the abortion to birth would really practically work i think given that the 3rd option seems to be already in operation in the uk from what others have written here.

mathanxiety Mon 27-May-13 00:51:59

Very true about the polarisation Neun.

Unfortunately, SGB, abortion being available up to the time of natural birth means viable foetuses dying. I am not sure how this squares with any concept of equality.

eccentrica Mon 27-May-13 07:55:26

Actually Sgb abortion is legal at any gestation if the mother's life is at risk, and i'm confident that no one on this thread would wish that to change, so no, "squeamishness" about late abortion does not lead to women dying.
Just saying it doesn't make it true.

Recognising that these questions are nuanced and difficult does not make people idiots, and treating them with contempt does not win any debates.

eccentrica Mon 27-May-13 07:56:45

framey the reasons that that is not a simple or realistic answer have been discussed at length upthread.

BasilBabyEater Mon 27-May-13 10:44:37

You cannot talk about the "right to life" of the foetus, without acknowledging that you no longer support the bodily autonomy of women once they've reached a certain point in pregnancy.

If your right to life as a human being is dependent on lodging in someone else's body, or even using the body parts of them (for example, forcing them to regularly give you blood every day) then by definition your right is being elevated over their's - you are being given leave to use their body with or without their consent in order to stay alive.

In no other medical situation would this right to life at the expense of another person, be countenanced. It's only pregnant women who lose the right to bodily autonomy for the benefit of another person.

eccentrica Mon 27-May-13 11:30:47

Indeed, Basil, it's almost as if pregnancy is a unique situation creating extremely complex ethical issues, with no obvious parallels in other aspects of life.

Incidentally if I had to give blood every day in order to keep another person alive I'd do it.

neunundneunzigluftballons Mon 27-May-13 11:46:50

I am finding myself saying the same things so I am going to bow out before it looks like I am trying to get the last word in smile. I have found this discussion really interesting but it really has not changed my views at all I am still horrified with the notion of allowing abortion to term as the gold standard of promoting women's rights but I understand others have different views. I do think though that because pregnancy is a fairly unique situation that trying to find other similar examples of medical situations is a pointless exercise.

neunundneunzigluftballons Mon 27-May-13 11:47:30

x post

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now