To think not everything is ‘misogyny’

[Cuppasoupmonster]

… and that the word is massively overused on here?

I’m getting quite tired of it if I’m honest, it feels like every other conversation the ‘misogyny’ card is whipped out and anyone who disagrees has ‘internalised misogyny’ (um no I just have a different opinion).

It’s becoming the ‘BeKind’ of feminism. Overused to the point it’s getting meaningless and irritating, and just used to ‘win’ any kind of nuanced topic without any proper discussion.

AIBU? 🤷🏼‍♀️

... so none of the arguments on here really answer the above and really explain why the above makes me a misogynist.

Because its my body

And I don't believe an unborn life, with no rights, trumps mine.

There are lots of existing lives that you could help. Go preach for one of them

The one you keep repeating about women being responsible for contraception and avoidable abortions.

Yes. They do.

I had consensual sex, oops I got pregnant. Well you knew that was a risk when you had consensual sex. Why does that then give you the right to end the life of the resulting consequences of your chosen actions?
Because to most logical people consenting to sex doesn't equal consenting to be forced to give birth to a baby.

Your position seems to be that if women have sex then they're consenting to have a baby, and regardless of any steps they take to prevent pregnancy, they're still consenting to have a baby because if they weren't happy a baby they wouldn't have had sex.

4 billion owed in unpaid child support until a few years ago when it was cut in half by the government, but sure, let’s pretend they’re forced to face the consequences.

Because forced birth removes women's reproductive choices. It treats women like a birthing vessel. It has little regard for the actual lives of the woman or the babies that are forced into the world.

Anything that removes a woman's autonomy over her health and her body is inherently misogynistic. It is saying that women are less valuable.

£4 billion owed in unpaid child support - and no child benefit for the third and subsequent child is one factor that drove up the abortion rate.

Yes. That's not something I'd considered before.

Waiting for someone to come on and say that those policies are not misogynistic.

Go read the threads on here about all the men who have unprotected sex and then try to force a woman to have an abortion. Men use abortion as a form of contraception frequently, yet that never seems to be mentioned in these discussions, just blame women. Why’s that I wonder?

Men do have consequences - no choice in abortion and potentially 18 years of CMS payments. That’s their consequences

Oh that made me laugh. There is absolutely zero political will to ensure that child maintenance is paid. Zero. 15 years and counting for me and my children.

Although we have a Government that seems perfectly able to put in place legislation that, for example, sees prosecution of non-payers of Council Tax, very swiftly.

Men use stealthing as a form of abuse, I'm not convinced the 'threat' of the CPS chasing them is working.

You have stated you support removing the legal right to abortions. The consequence of this is that women suffer, women die, women are impoverished, women are imprisoned. Look at anywhere in the world where women do not have the right to abortion - the places where your views hold sway - and tell me that this isn't a misogynistic stance. The restriction of abortion is imposed by those who want to control and subjugate women. When women don't have access to safe, legal and timely abortion then the suffering is immense - and it's all endured by women. So your forced birther views are misogynistic, it's impossible to pretend otherwise to make you feel better.

Lifeturns - as I mentioned earlier, the my body, my choice argument doesn't wash with me. I repeat re abortion on demand:

I don't see abortion as just "health care". I think calling it such just pushes the glaringly obvious moral questions around it under the carpet. I'm all for autonomy over your own body, but for me a baby growing inside your body, although dependant on your body, is not part of your actual physical body like your arm or your heart or your ear - it's a separate life in it's own right, so the women's right to autonomy over her own body argument (regarding abortion) falls down for me right there.

I'll bow out at this point as I've said all I want to say and I've got stuff to do. I really appreciate the discussion and think it's an important one to have. Thanks to all of you who have chipped in and replied to my comments, whatever your view.

Fine, it can be taken out and grown in a drawer then right? Because no one has the right to access someone else’s body.

My dad needed a kidney transplant.

I was potentially a match.

Should I have been forced to give him a kidney to save his life?

@niceduvet

You said you are still undecided as to whether a rape victim should have legal access to a termination.

If you decide she should, your argument about life beginning and conception and abortions killing babies who are precious and should be born, falls down.

If you decide she shouldn't, you are literally pro forced birth. No two ways about it. Not allowing a woman to choose whether to continue a pregnancy and give birth is being pro forced birth.

You have a right to your own opinion, but it is misogynistic and you can't claim otherwise.

The percentage doesn't surprise me - a significant number of people are misogynistic and would rather pretend otherwise.

The other thing forced birthers seem to forget is that outlawing women's access to safe and legal reproductive healthcare doesn't prevent people trying to end pregnancies.
Yet again, the women's lives don't matter, or the lives of the mother's existing children.

Then again, I'm sure they'd argue the women who end up critically ill or dead from back street abortions are only getting the consequences they deserve.

only getting the consequences they deserve. Crab bucket mentality. Its encouraged because without it, women woudn't work so hard to hold up the patriarchy.

I don't see abortion as just "health care". I think calling it such just pushes the glaringly obvious moral questions around it under the carpet. I'm all for autonomy over your own body, but for me a baby growing inside your body, although dependant on your body, is not part of your actual physical body like your arm or your heart or your ear - it's a separate life in it's own right, so the women's right to autonomy over her own body argument (regarding abortion) falls down for me right there.

Except in the case of babies deriving from rape. In those cases you are undecided whether you would force the mother to give birth, regardless of the impact on her and her unborn child.

A foetus is not 'a separate life in its own right', and a woman is not a passive incubator.

@niceduvet 's position is perfectly coherent if you are looking at abortion law as a balance of competing interests rather than an inherent right to bodily autonomy.

She thinks that in general the harm caused by killing the life is worse than the harm caused by carrying the baby to term. Also considering the harm to society of being blasé about human life, presumably.

If the baby is conceived by rape, she thinks that the additional stress/emotional harm of carrying a rapist's baby "tips the scales", at least theoretically. For other people, the scales tip based on length of gestation, reasons for abortion (sex/disability selection) etc...

Not hard to understand even if you personally would apply different weightings.

yubgummy

I didn't take her view to be one of competing interests, and I would agree with your assessment where people draw different lines on weighing up.

My issue with that poster's view is they claim that life is precious and starts at conception and argue that a woman consenting to sex is consenting to give birth to a baby.

But then they also say they haven't decided if they would or wouldn't consider the woman's wishes in the event of rape.

They also don't seem to give much consideration to the fact that unplanned pregnancies can happen despite use of contraception. Women should accept giving birth as a consequence of sex.

So either some babies are less precious than others (based on whether a woman consents to sex), or a woman who consents to sex should have less bodily autonomy purely because they consented to having sex.

It doesn't sound like weighing up interests to me. It sounds like they believe a woman's access to safe reproductive healthcare should be restricted purely because they've consented to sex.