Abortion Support Network- abortion not just a women's issue?

[Doobigetta]

Apologies- I know lots of people are sick of hearing about the trans issue. But I received the following email from the ASN today-

Calling all creative minds
Six and a half years ago we were very fortunate to have someone design a logo for us. Our logo has served us well but ASN has grown and we feel it’s time for our brand to have a bit of a touch up. We are particularly interested in a logo that is more in line with the fact that we sometimes hear from trans people and others who do not consider themselves to be women. At ASN we’ve crowd sourced everything from our first logo to our director’s 2015 salary and we thought we’d do the same with our new logo. Interested? Email us and we'll send you the brief. You don’t even need to be an "official" - if our favourite image is a doodle we can get one of our amazing volunteer designers whip it into a graphic. We can’t wait to see what you come up with!

I've responded to say I'd be very unhappy about them badging abortion rights as anything other than a women's issue, and that I feel conflating it with questions of gender identity weakens and undermines the importance of it as a women's issue. Please, if you feel the same way, could you let ASN know?

VERY I apologise if my comment about laughing at the notion of asking a pregnant person their gender upset you but the fact is only females give birth, xx chromosomes etc.
Anybody can say they are a man, a cat or a rose bush but it's an inescapable fact that only people with the correct genetics can become pregnant therefore it's a question that doesn't or shouldn't needto be asked.

I've read through the 2 Acts. The 2015 Act can't be used to argue that a pregnant trans man could have an abortion.

The 2015 Act , if it were strictly interpreted, potentially makes such a person's situation worse than a pregnant "cis" woman's.

The 2015 Act talks about a change to a "requested sex" . The 2013 Act permits abortion to be performed on a woman meaning a female person of any age.

The 2013 Act makes it an offence to intentionally destroy unborn human life. The 2013 Act permits a woman aka a female person of any age to do so in certain circumstances. If a trans man is a man they are , on a strict interpretation, not protected by the 2013 Act.

But if a person is pregnant, with a foetus in their uterus, then they are female, They have a female body. Soerm has entered their body through their vaginaat the same time that their ovaries have released an ovum. This can only happen to a female. So if a person presents themself as pregnant surely, no matter how they identify, they would ultimately be viewed as female for all intents and purposes because only female bodies can be pregnant.

Or am I confused? I apologise if I've been completely insulting. I think biology must trump self- identification in certain circumstances.

Well quite Kate . The ASN is run by women and funded by donation which I'm guessing are almost if not entirely from women. I'd be astonished if any trans person has volunteered or donated.

That is a great question Kate. It goes to the heart of motivation, I think.

If transactivist lobbying groups are genuinely, wholly motivated to support women (in whatever form they believe that women take), then there should be no problem at all in their tangibly, financially supporting women's charities, or if they feel excluded from women's charities (rightly or wrongly, doesn't matter), by setting up organisations to address the gap that they perceive.

I am not aware that this happens. I am only aware of cases where women's charities have to spend their limited, hard won budgets catering to hypothetical needs, by people who can't take no for an answer (see for example Nixon v. Vancouver Rape Relief, where a transwoman spent 12 YEARS suing a collective run by volunteers because they wanted to work as a rape counsellor and preferred to try to ruin the organisation rather than accept it was not appropriate that they work there).

Actions speak louder than words, I think.

In the case of people like very's child, we have to set the competing interests against each other, it's just the way of the world. It might be upsetting for them to think of themselves as in any way connected to women's biology, but then the women in the position of needing an abortion probably aren't feeling terrific about their women's biology either, and they need to know that they are being supported to help deal with their biological women's stuff. If you start de-sexing it by talking about "people's biology" and not "women's biology", then what impact does that have on them?

Feeling betrayed by your biology is not the prerogative of trans people.

No wanting abortion is not permitted if the feotus has a severe abnormality or defect.
Abortion is permitted if the woman is about to die and doctors have no choice but to intervene.
If a woman says she is suicidal, however she'll need to be seen by 3 senior doctors and if they determine she is suicidal they may permit an abortion.

God honestly LucyBabs - even if the baby will be born dead or something? Does the woman have to go through the pregnancy any way and deliver a dead baby or one that will only live for a matter of days or weeks? How horrible.

Yep wanting doctors will induce labour if the feotus dies in the womb but for as long as it has a heart beat they can't do anything to help. It's barbaric

Even if the woman is suicidal, in one case a refugee who had been a victim of rape was hospitalised for her mental health until the foetus was viable and then either gave birth or had a c section. Just so she couldn't abort the product of her rape.