Women's rights general conversations - Thread 10

It was the perfect storm of the availability of abortion pills and the partial collapse of the nhs during Covid, I think. The response was simply inhumane. It showed up that the laws and their application weren’t fit for purpose.

The woman who took pills for a late abortion didn't realise how far along she was and was utterly distressed when the foetus was delivered. At that point she should have had medical care and emotional support, not been handcuffed and taken to a police station while still bleeding very heavily. Even then, it should never have got to court.

The decriminalisation is only for the woman concerned. Abortion post-24 weeks has not been decriminalised for anyone else involved.

Given that fewer than 10 women have ever been prosecuted in the 150 years since the legislation was passed, I don't see how a prosecution is suddenly in the public interest when it hasn't been for so long.

I appreciate different people have different views, particularly those who have religious beliefs, but we need to be treating women with compassion not punishment.

See, I didn't agree with decriminalising abortion. If it's that easy to get abortion pills without much oversight then I find that worrying.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cje0p1dlzleo

(Although agree that a woman giving herself an abortion over 24 weeks probably needs help.)

The woman who got abortion pills when she was 26 weeks pregnant must have known she was over ten weeks though? She only went to the hospital the day after, which I found a bit disturbing. I know it was back during lockdown, so not much face to face contact with midwives etc.

Speaking from my own experience once I knew I was past the point of a chemical induced abortion the idea of a surgical one made me feel ill, and there was no way I'd have gone through with one unless my baby was going to suffer after being born.

I do wonder how much my views have been tempered by becoming a mother, my own beliefs about life and death and being in a church for 11 years, that although are pro life are more liberal than a lot of other churches in that regard (abortion in cases of rape, the mother's life is at risk or the baby isn't going to survive are 'allowed', but it's not an automatic yes, that's fine. We're told we need to talk to our bishop and pray about it. I'd made up my mind already before my 20 week scan, but all was well.)

One of my friends had an abortion years ago for what I thought were valid reasons, although my ex-H mithered about it. She's still with the same bloke (and in a civil partnership) and has two children now, but she wanted to wait until she was ready for children.

I think any woman who terminates her own pregnancy after 24 weeks needs help rather than a criminal prosecution. Any physician assisting her will still be subject to prosecution.

As it stands, termination up to delivery is legal in certain circumstances, and has been legal since 1967.

There has been a very worrying trend in prosecuting women in the last decade for this, when prior to that, prosecutions under the Offences Against the Person Act 1866 could be numbered on the fingers of one hand in 150 years. It was the right decision to make.

With respect to the Assisted Dying Bill, I have witnessed painful deaths that we would not tolerate in animals. It is compassionate to allow people to decide to die and help them. There are plenty of safeguards, and I am glad that I will have the choice to end my life before any suffering becomes unbearable, if that is what my end will be.

Sometimes you have to question yourself. I read about the decriminalisation of abortion, and thought, yes, that's a good and humane thing, which I should support. And then I read DocStock on the topic, who has given the matter some serious thought obviously, and she is much less keen. And I have to say, she has a point. And I very much share her misgivings about the assisted dying Bill as well. So has she got a point about abortion? It strikes me that the "Don't worry, this legislation will only affect a tiny number of people" argument is one we've heard before... What is surely clear is that we've seen recently legislation rushed through the House without proper debate and oversight, which has caused problems. We shouldn't be repeating the error.

https://unherd.com/2025/06/when-did-our-mps-form-a-death-cult/?tl_inbound=1&tl_groups[0]=18743&tl_period_type=3

Do the sacred caste get a new NI number? We should never have allowed chages to birth certificates, passports, etc. It's madness, and a complete invitation to crime and fraud.

The UK needs a PPSN system. The PPSN does not change after a gender change.

services.mywelfare.ie/en/topics/identity-services/personal-public-service-pps-number/

The SPS/Police Scotland/Scottish Government at it again...

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/lawyer-ask-trans-killers-criminal-35427314?int_source=amp_continue_reading&int_medium=amp&int_campaign=continue_reading_button#amp-readmore-target

Skrimetti won! https://tennesseelookout.com/2025/06/18/u-s-supreme-court-upholds-tennessee-prohibition-on-gender-affirming-care-for-minors/

Well said, Brit! 👏

I put a post on a Substack post by Robert Reich and he liked it!

Dr. Robert Reich liked your comment on The Democrats’ “Great Un-awokening” is a Giant Political Diversion.
Transgender people are entitled to all the human rights the rest of us have - the right to marry any consenting adult who will have them, the right not to be discriminated against in areas such as employment and housing, the right to present themselves in any way that feels comfortable for them, the right to have cosmetic surgery performed to align themselves better with their feelings. What they don’t have is the right to force agreement with the view that they have literally changed their sex. They have not. It is biologically impossible to do so. Transwomen do not have the right to use their own feelings about their identity to enter areas both physical and social reserved for women. Transwomen are men, and as soon as they enter women’s single sex spaces those spaces cease to be single sex. This then excludes many women who have male-related trauma as well as women who for religious reasons cannot be in mixed sex spaces. Every male body in an athletic event deprives a woman of the chance to be there and prevents fair competition. Every male body in a female prison retraumatises many in a population already notable for being on the receiving end of abuse from men. Claims to be oppressed even more than women’s historical oppression is a mockery. I have always voted on the left, but I agree with the majority of Americans on this one.

Thanks bint, that’s very interesting

Interesting piece on the identity trap that applies to genderism at least as much as to veganism.and the other topics it mentions (the writer appears not to have noticiced his 'invemtion' is merely a rediscovery of one of the tenets of Buddhism, but that would be harder to make.into a profitable package)

https://vegoutmag.com/lifestyle/j-i-studied-why-vegans-have-higher-rates-of-depression-and-discovered-a-hidden-psychological-pattern-thats-destroying-careers-and-relationships-for-everyone/

Super interesting thanks for sharing

Really interesting essay from a detransitioner: https://open.substack.com/pub/maiapoet/p/born-in-the-wrong-body-or-born-with?r=l6otf&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email

I imagine it was because of those women who passed as men and didn't want to be challenged

Yes, I agree - my amazement is that anyone thought that justified a change on a passport, one of the most legally important documents anyone can hold.

There was a story fairly recently. A baby girl was put down as male on her birth certificate because the registrar was a fuckwit made a mistake . Unbelievably the parents can't get it corrected. I think the solution her is twofold, don't employ morons and have a process that can correct these mistakes rather than compounding the error.

https://www.nottinghampost.com/news/local-news/our-baby-girl-legally-boy-9719798

I imagine it was because of those women who passed as men and didn't want to be challenged. Maybe even for men who don't pass as women but didn't want to be ridiculed.

Men are very bad at identifying sex. They see breasts and think woman. We see a jawline, hands and gait and think men. Because we have to protect ourselves from men.

Done. I’ve always been baffled about the passport thing, and how anyone, ever, thought it a good idea.

I'm still at a loss why you are legally allowed to change sex markers on your birth certificate. It's an accurate description of what happened at that moment in time when your sex was recorded.

In no other circumstances would you be allowed to erase things from your past on legal documents.

Could also mean an undiagnosed DSD.

Yes, a GRC will mean a falsified birth cert.

It's late ,but reading through that, one thing jumped out at me:

The advice on asking for birth certificates is wrong: they cannot be used as ID and are not reliable on sex.

Really? (I was was just going to say). But I suppose this is a reference to GRCs, is it?

We need to reply to a consultation, folks, and Sex Matters is helpfully providing us with what they recommend we say:

https://sex-matters.org/take-action/respond-to-the-ehrc-consultation-now/