AIBU to be shocked by these American views on women's bodily autonomy?

[WhatTheHellJustHappened]

If you have time, please read this thread.

boards.askmen.com/showthread.php?130715-Then-End-of-a-relationship-before-and-after-an-Abortion&p=1311666#post1311666

The OP is a boy who regrets not supporting his girlfriend through her abortion.

The thread turns into an abortion debate around page two. There is one female poster making very valid agreements about a woman's right to make choices about her own body and is being flamed by the others.

One male poster actually says "So fucking what if it's her body?"
The worst part is that the women themselves are not speaking in support of a woman's right to choose:(

There are repeated references to how depressed men feel when their SO aborts, but nobody stops to think about how women feel when they are forced to give birth and endure 37-42 weeks of pregnancy. I completely sympathise with men who may feel helpless in such a scenario but I can't really support the idea of a man being able to prevent a woman from terminating a pregnancy.

I'm all for couples making decisions together, but surely the final decision about an abortion should lie with the woman?

...but then as a woman and an Irish citizen I was forever being told that I should feel horribly oppressed by the Irish law on abortion, even though I didn't.

but where you ever in a situation where you NEEDED an abortion somewherewest as if not that may be why you didnt feel opressed by the law?

forkintheforeheid abortion is already legal in the UK to term, in certain situations

whatthehell the vast vast majority of abortions in the UK are carried out before 12 weeks

somewherewest "The elephant in the room is that there is a very easy way to avoid becoming pregnant when one isn't ready to become pregnant, and that is (gasp!) to do without PIV sex until one can deal with the possible consequences of PIV sex. But thats pretty much unsayable in our culture." yes that's true however if people don't stop having PIV sex in countries where there is a very high risk of maternal mortality and abortion is not available then how do you think it is going to be stopped in the UK.

somewherewest

The thing is, that all the organs are not fully developed by 12 weeks. In fact, the baby's lungs for example may not even be developed as late as 37 weeks which is why doctors are so hesitant to do a planned Caesarian prior to 39 weeks.

While the fetus does have a heartbeat by 18 days, it does not have a spinal cord until 7 weeks or so and a brain until much later on. The nervous system and sensory reflexes take a long time to develop- until 18-20 weeks I think and continue developing late into the pregnancy.

I'm agreeing with your idea that it's irresponsible to have indiscriminate, unprotected sex but even birth control isn't 100% safe.

It could be around 10 weeks waiting time unless you choose to go private and then it could be tomorrow if you find the right place.

You are wrong but we do know without doubt that at around 20-24 weeks it has a developed sensory system that enables it to feel pain.

Most medical scientist believe around 30 weeks is the earliest when all systems are sufficiently developed to perhaps allow a sensation of pain in a foetus.

"..but then as a woman and an Irish citizen I was forever being told that I should feel horribly oppressed by the Irish law on abortion, even though I didn't."

Plenty of NI women and girls have been horribly oppressed by this law though.

I think it is disgusting that the rules in NI are different to the rest of the UK on this matter.

The theocrat anti-abortion squad will try all the emotive language and pseudo science they can invent from non peer reviewed self funded groups to halt the right to abortion because in reality they want it to be that a life begins with their superstition at the moment of conception.

It is not an elephant in a room about people having sex PIV or however. Woman can have sex whenever where they like at the time of there choosing or not and no man has the right to say you must now have a baby.

Whether a woman refers to her pregnancy as carrying a baby is just a common semantic and is not based on actual science. It does not mean that because a woman calls it baby then she can't abort her pregnancy. Her choice

Your logic is not logic about dependance based personhood. I suspect your view are just a religious superstition based view.

I have read the American thread, and unfortunately am not shocked, as I have read a lot about the states and their attempts to restrict abortion rights for women recently. I really hope that common sense will prevail and the hard line right wingers won't succeed, but tbh I'm not very optimistic! It is depressing that the USA is the most powerful country in the world and is so backwards in some respects.

I've only read this to page 2, so sorry if I've missed stuff, but I'd like to point out that the huge majority of abortions carried out at the later stages are because of foetal abnormality. If the anomaly scan is not carried out until 20 weeks, it may take another couple of weeks for there to be more tests, then you will be around the 22, 24 week mark possibly before the termination can take place.

These late abortions do not sit well with many people, and although I'm very pro-choice I understand the feeling. The reality is that when a woman has to undergo a late termination it is usually tragic for them, as it will generally be a wanted baby that won't survive either the pregnancy or for long after birth. It is simply a matter of when the foetus dies, it isn't a casual whim as some people seem to think.

If they can't identify these conditions until 20 weeks, how can they reduce the limit for late abortions?

why are you publicising a thread with these views?

whats next, a BNP-link thread?

I really don't have a problem with abortion up till the moment of birth. Simply because nearly all late abortions are performed for medical reasons, and if there is a percentage of women who will, oh I don;t know, suddenly decide they don't want to have the baby because there's something good to watch on TV that night, then that percentage is so fucking tiny that it is not in any way worth using it as a justification for denying all women bodily autonomy.

And remember, anti-choice activism and all this crap about 'personhood for foetuses' is not, and never has been, about the welfare of babies. It's about controlling women and reducing their legal status to walking incubators.

I'm pro-choice although I'm not necessarily pro-abortion. Having suffered a horrible MC at 10 weeks, I felt very strongly that I had lost a baby, however old the fetus was. I feel all fetuses deserve the chance of life.

What makes my mind up is the historical and practical dimension. Women have always, throughout human history, had pregnancies they don't want, for whatever reason. In the olden days, you would see the witch, or the backstreet moonlighting dentist or have a scalding hot bath, a bottle of vodka and a knitting needle. While I don't like abortions and would rather no woman ever had one, I would rather she had one in a hospital with medical professionals on hand to try and minimise the consequences of the process.

Abortion law is irrelevant. Morality is irrelevant. Woman will always try to have abortions if they feel they need one so all civilised society can do is make it as safe and not horrible as it can be.

And that's why I'm pro-choice.

"I'm also a little confused by how someone can possibly take 20-24 weeks to decide whether or not she wants to keep the baby. 12-14 weeks is a decent enough timeframe within which to make that choice. Nowadays you ave pregnancy tests that tell you when you're just five days along! I knew at 2weeks."

Oh FFS.

Couple of points.

1 - I didn't know I was pregnant until I was 7 weeks. I had hugely irregular periods so it was quite normal for me to go that long without bleeding. Also the only reason I found out then was because I had hyperemesis and went to the doctors thinking I had an infection. If I hadn't had hyperemesis then it was entirely possible I wouldn't have found out till much later.

2 - I almost aborted around the 20 week point due to the pregnancy making me so ill (I had already been hospitalised twice by that point), I was terrified and in agony. I didn't feel I could go any further.

Just because you didn't go through shit like that doesn't mean others don't.

Haven't clicked on the link because I'm at work but I do have a huge amount of sympathy with men who want their baby when the woman doesn't.

I don't believe that anything can be done for them because, ultimately, the baby is in the woman's body. BUT - I can understand and fogive any amount of misogynist ranting and raving on the part of the men because they must feel as awful as a woman who miscarries a wanted baby.

Imagine wanting a baby so much and believing that another person is choosing to kill it and you can't stop that happening.

So, the male stance is not right but I can understand and sympathise with it.

empusa

My sincerest apologies. I did not mean to be judgemental or insensitive towards women in your position :( IMO you had a very valid reason for considering abortion. FWIW, I'm pregnant right now and completely miserable with symptoms so I know it's not easy.

I should have said that generally 12 weeks is long enough (which is why most abortions happen by that time), but of course there are some very valid exceptions to the rule- like yours.

Novak

I didn't know that the fetus can only feel pain by 30 weeks or so! I was somehow under the impression it was around 24 weeks. I remeber a story about a premature 23 week old fetus who was saved and is now a healthy toddler. I just sort of assumed that viability implied the ability to feel pain. I learn more about this everyday!

"And remember, anti-choice activism and all this crap about 'personhood for foetuses' is not, and never has been, about the welfare of babies. It's about controlling women and reducing their legal status to walking incubators."

I could not agree more.

I have been thinking a lot about this as there was a similar thread recently where I posted an article from the Huff post.

I have read the first page of that thread and that poster (I think we know who I mean) is astonishing. Women shouldn't be able to choose to have an abortion because the stats on death in childbirth are relatively low, but because their menfolk 'might' get depressed? Women should thoroughly examine contraception or 'keep their legs shut' if they don't want a pregnancy - presumably a man doesn't have to think about keeping it in his pants as he doesn't address this.

Basically, the ball is all in the woman's court until a pregnancy happens and then the man should have a say. Well, I don't disagree with that. A man should have a say. But at the end of the day, as much as we try to eradicate the differences between the genders it remains that only women can carry a baby and give birth, and it is mostly women that stay at home and provide childcare at the detriment to their careers.

There is no middle ground is there? There either is a baby, or there isn't. As only the woman can actually have the baby, then the woman should have the ultimate choice.

My post is all over the place - sorry about that - but this is such an emotive subject and to be frank, it really pisses me off! The article I linked to previously noted how some American law-makers wanted women whose babies had died in utero to carry them to term because 'cows and sheep do'. What a fucking disgusting way to refer to another human being. I am so glad I am not a woman in America - I'm not fucking livestock and I'm not your property.

No man has the right to stop a woman having an abortion. Nor should he have a right to be consulted.

What if the woman doesn't want and abortion and wants to keep the child however the father of the child doesn't want it. Does he then get a choice not to support the child financially?

I was on a USA forum once and I suggested a woman check her cervix to see whether she was near ovulation...the I got from these USA women who thought "only a doctor" should touch you there was astounding!

I explained that if it is an area which you can reach, then it's fine....short nails and washed hands...no problem....the cervix is not some secret and mysterious thing meant only for doctors to touch but a part of a woman's body just like her vagina...they all disowned their cervixes as something only for strangers to know and understand.

crispy no. Because it's not his womb not is it his body doing the growing. If he feels that strongly about no DC then use a condom.

Condoms split.

Here is the article I referred to in my above post.

It's a bit like Animal Farm isn't it - all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.

I tell you now...if they EVER tried to allow men a legal right over whether I or any woman has a baby, I will take out my own fucking womb and smother the bastards with it.