forget creationism in schools....abortion is about to be make illegal in mississippi

[Heathcliffscathy]

\link{http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4743118.stm\in an attempt to overturn roe vs wade}

Er? Are Republicans opposed to divorce?

And I'd be very worried that this, in tandem with the US trend for abstinence only sex education, is going to lead a lot of American girls into horrifying situations. It really is on par with the Taliban as a means of trying to control women's fertility. I wonder if the US will invade itself to free such women from tyranny as they did Afghanistan.

Er, isn't Bush on a family values ticket? The moral majority and all that? Of course there will be liberal republicans in there but they're not the ones pushing these bills throughm are they?

Ah yes, that is in fact one of the Bush traits I'm not quite so keen on. But it isn't necessarily representative of Republicans on the whole.

Family values... I'm sure that phrase (in my interpretation) forbids divorce. I mean, my parents are divorced, but they are still my family.

And for the record, now that I've establishe myself as a life long Republican, I also don't support his decision to forbid stem cell research. That was just plan stupid.

Family Values - as it was pushed over here - definitely discourages divorce, surely? Staying together for the sake of the kids and all that?

You sound like a liberal in denial, Uwila!

Dominic/MT - there are of course plenty of women who aren't actually supportive of women's rights at all. Particularly not of the rights of women who've "got themselves into a mess" by being young, single and pregnant .

Or is that still a dirty word in the states?

Oh, I agree CM. But when it comes to the hierarchical structures of these pressure groups, they're all generally old fashioned patriarchies - that's the whole point of them, to reinstate the 'natural order' of things. Women unfortunate enough to be born into these cultures are indoctrinated from birth, as are the men of course.

slightly off-topic here, but it reminds my of my (Catholic ) Gran railing against Sarah Keys for having an affair with the married Cecil Parkinson - she shouldn't have led him astray, it's always the "other woman's" fault etc etc.

It really shocked me, but I've realised since that this anti-female attitude isn't all that unusual among conservative (small c) women.

Female misogyny is just as common as male misogyny, we just don't like talking about it as it seems like a betrayal and misogynists (both male and female) use it often to cast women as fickle, untrustworthy and duplicitous in general. To balance it out however, it's an established fact than men also hate other men (hence the stats for violent crime) but it's not such a good anti-feminist rhetorical tool.

but do you think men hate the state of maleness in the same way as some women hate womanliness (that's prob not a v good word for it, but I hope ykwim)?

The female version always seems to be accompanied by thinking men do naturally belong in a superior position to women, and therefore that women are inferior and should try and make the best of a bad job by staying on the straight and narrow morally.

Well, if you want to discuss fiscal responsibility and tax rates, you'll see my republican "values".

It's tricky, and not unsurprisingly, very complicated. I tend to find the insights evolutionary theory gives us the most compelling. The way I understand it and very simply put, men's misogyny may stem from the fact that they do not have full control over women’s fertility and hence doubt can always be cast over the paternity of children but never the maternity. The cultural and religious (not to say biological) strategies developed pan culturally and over millennia for the tendency of man {patriarchy) to at least attempt to control women, and hence her and their own fertility, makes for very compelling evidence. Women’s, (and male on male) misogyny stems from the fact that women compete with other women for resources (ie mates) and the same goes for men who compete with each other for access to the best females. As highly evolved animals though, we are not simply subject to our basest instincts and hence we have such things as moral laws. Misogyny isn’t justified by biology – but we can understand it better for it.

Yes please Uwila!

misandry is the name for it!

So it is, thanks Donnie!

hit the nail on the head there MT.

Uwila, I agree with you about one issue voting strategies but one like this would be enough get me looking at other alternatives. I can compromise on alot of things, that being the nature of politcs (although it's not often mooted as such) but not this..

Keep in mind that (I think) we are talking about state laws. And I am only eligible to vote in one state, Illinois as it happens. So, if Mississippi and Saouth Dakota want to make it illegal, I wouldn't have any effect on that anyway.

Now, if we were talking about a Federal law to make it illegal all across the US, then I might change my vote (or refrain from voting).

Furthermore... I wonder who will run for President next? I wonder if this will have died down or if it will be a big campaign issue.

When I was at Uni in Tesax, there was a republican candidate for Governor who was the epitomy of a good old boy. He was quoted on the campaign trail saying "Rape is like rain. I't's inevitable so you might as well sit back and enjoy it."

Needless to say I could not bring myself to vote for this twat, and neither could a lot of people. He lost. But, that year I left myself registered in Illinois and voted ansentee so I could vote for a more respectable Republican.