Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Can we agree that women are entitled to bodily autonomy?

195 replies

msrisotto · 20/08/2017 12:13

We are allowed to impose boundaries on who we have sex with, who we get naked in front of, who we spend time with with no justification required. No one is entitled to anything from me. Women's rights are human rights.

OP posts:
PencilsInSpace · 20/08/2017 20:08

I wholeheartedly agree that women are entitled to bodily autonomy and it is shocking that in so many circumstances we don't get it.

I've just come over from the very long trans thread in AIBU. I was struck by the similarity between TAs trying to argue women out of their right to impose boundaries and that thing some men do when they try to argue us into having sex with them.

  • 'No.'
  • 'Yes but ...'
  • 'No.'
  • 'But what about ...'
  • 'No.'
  • 'You're mean'

We should be allowed to just say 'no, these are our spaces, these are our protections, these words refer to us' etc. and have that respected. We shouldn't have to continually justify ourselves and explain over and over why these things are necessary and important, and deal with endless straw men, convoluted hypothetical examples and name calling.

Women are often advised to be very wary of men who won't respect some of our boundaries because it's a very good sign they don't really respect any of them and they are likely to push and push and wheedle and if that doesn't work just take what they want anyway.

I can't work out whether TAs simply can't see what they are doing when they argue like this or whether they know damn well and are doing it because it has been a successful tactic in other contexts.

justicewomen · 20/08/2017 20:09

The importance of ensuring bodily autonomy is a well trodden path in human rights .See for example this essay by former Court of Appeal Judge sirhenrybrooke.me/2015/10/12/my-talk-about-the-conjoined-twins-case/

TwistedReach · 20/08/2017 20:18

Yes but it always gets complicated when someone (could be me) says but what about the baby's right to bodily autonomy. The response is then they don't have that right until they are born and of course legally that is true, but that does not mean it is not morally very murky in my opinion.
The baby at 40 weeks inside the mother and the baby at 40 weeks outside the mother may have no difference in their own level of consciousness, the difference is purely in relation to their mother. Again, Im not saying I think the law should change, but I certainly don't think its morally straightforward at all.

LadyMaryCrawley1922 · 20/08/2017 20:35

I'd like to know how some of you don't think an unborn baby is a human until after birth

We think it because it is a simple fact. The day you are born is the day you become a human person. When asked how old you are you count from the day of your birth. Before that you are a potential human person, part of, dependent on and crucially inside an actual human person.

Does this actually need spelling out?

howthelightgetsin · 20/08/2017 20:35

Yes but it always gets complicated when someone (could be me) says but what about the baby's right to bodily autonomy. The response is then they don't have that right until they are born and of course legally that is true, but that does not mean it is not morally very murky in my opinion.
The baby at 40 weeks inside the mother and the baby at 40 weeks outside the mother may have no difference in their own level of consciousness, the difference is purely in relation to their mother. Again, Im not saying I think the law should change, but I certainly don't think its morally straightforward at all.

Yes I completely agree with this.

Also if a man doesn't want his pregnant partner to smoke or drink whilst pregnant are we saying that that is wrong? He can't order her to not drink or smoke and to snatch the cigarette or glass out of her hand would be wrong, because ultimately it's her choice, but to express a preference because he is considering the health of the unborn child ..?

Only women can make and sustain life, inside and outside of their body. It's not unfeminist to celebrate this process and to understand that the lines do get a bit blurry.

LadyMaryCrawley1922 · 20/08/2017 20:36

but I certainly don't think its morally straightforward at all

Your feelings on the morals of it all are your own affair. They are personal to you, you can make whatever moral choices and judgements you like.
You can keep your morals out of my choices though.

Missymoo100 · 20/08/2017 20:37

Ladymary- that's ridiculous, yes everyone has a birthday- but I was a human before I was born, I was alive. Ur saying that at 40 weeks pregnant that a baby isn't human just because it hasn't passed out of the vagina? Again does a vagina confer personhood. It's not fact you e stated it's your opinion.

TwistedReach · 20/08/2017 20:40

'You can keep your morals out of my choices though' - very thoughtful response, thank you.

LadyMaryCrawley1922 · 20/08/2017 20:42

Being BORN confers personhood. This isn't opinion, it is simple fact.
There is no debate to be had on that, it just IS.

Original poster
msrisotto · 20/08/2017 20:42

Wishing that women act responsibly and look after their bodies during pregnancy, while respecting their ultimate right to bodily autonomy does not blur the lines one iota.

OP posts:
TwistedReach · 20/08/2017 20:45

Its not just wishing that they would look after their bodies. It is wishing that they would look after their unborn baby for the baby's sake, not just for the mother's.

TwistedReach · 20/08/2017 20:47

Lady, where have you got this 'fact' from?

Missymoo100 · 20/08/2017 20:55

it's not fact, just repeating this is a poor argument. there is no difference between the baby physically or mentally just before birth or after. Nothing has changed why is it not human? Please don't just keep saying "fact" cos that's just silly

grasspigeons · 20/08/2017 21:08

It is a legal fact though.
You might feel it's a moral grey area but I think it's not legally speaking.

LadyMaryCrawley1922 · 20/08/2017 21:11

Seriously, folks this is very basic stuff. Before you are born you are not a person. After you are born, you are. This is on a par with water is wet and grass is green. Get a hold of yourselves and go and ask a grown up to explain it to you.

TwistedReach · 20/08/2017 21:18

it's so not basic! As we have heard in NI the law is different. So if you disagree with this it suggests that legal definition is not (iyo) the be all and end all. Who do you think decides the law and do you think they must be right? And what training/ experience do you think they need to get there?

LadyMaryCrawley1922 · 20/08/2017 21:20

No, in NI you are also only a person once born. Hmm
How hard of thinking must you be to not be able to grasp this simplicity.

LadyMaryCrawley1922 · 20/08/2017 21:20

No, in NI you are also only a person once born. Hmm
How hard of thinking must you be to not be able to grasp this simplicity.

Missymoo100 · 20/08/2017 21:21

In law a baby is not a person until it has fully been expelled from the body, I believe the umbilical cord has to be cut- but the baby is no less human. Would it be ok to kill the baby as the head is expelled from the vagina merely because it doesn't fit the legal definition of a person.

Missymoo100 · 20/08/2017 21:25

LadyMary u are not only patronising but seemingly unable to apply any intelligent thought to a complex issue other, just your own simplified opinion.

TwistedReach · 20/08/2017 21:25

hard of thinking? You see no grey area? You don't think what happens in the womb matters at all despite all evidence that it can impact on life expectancy as well as mental and physical health? ?Do you think its fine for newborns to be addicted to heroin? Doesnt matter at all?

LadyMaryCrawley1922 · 20/08/2017 21:27

There IS NO GREY AREA.

Can you try to separate legal and actual reality from your personal feelings and morals? Can you understand that these are 2 completely different things?
There are no grey areas on when a person becomes a person. If you feel there are moral grey areas, that is your opinion, it has no bearing on legal and actual definitions and reality.

Do you understand that?

TwistedReach · 20/08/2017 21:29

No. Absolute rubbish. How on earth do you think that legal definitions come about?! There is not some memo from god, It is all argued by academics.

BertrandRussell · 20/08/2017 21:32

Grey areas are for philosophy and morality.
Grey areas make very bad law.

Missymoo100 · 20/08/2017 21:32

Lady Mary- have you even been reading what has been said, you seem to be just repeating yourself and your argument is rather dull. The law has been made simple because it needs to decide when a person is capable of having a crime committed against it- for the purposes of enforcing the law not because they have decided at only this point is a person human. People write laws, legislation changes- just words on paper, does not mean an unborn child is not human.

Swipe left for the next trending thread