Anyone want to talk real life feminist dystopias with me?

[wakemewhenitsallover]

There's currently an assault on language that relates words describing women to reproductive functions and to motherhood.

So we've had women and mothers described as "cervix havers", "birthing parents" , "mentruators", "gestators" etc.

Why? Who does the benefit in the long term?

Let's assume for a moment, that this is very deliberate and funded by a group of people with clear aims in mind.

If so, what would those aims be?

Sorry this might be a stupid question and is off topic, but why is the contraceptive pill always held up as this great revolutionary thing? Is it because it gave control to the women whereas condoms do not and a bunch of men refused to wear condoms (isn't that rapey?) Or is it just because people prefer the feeling of no condom (in which case I think a better breakthrough would be some sort of super condom that felt the same as without).

I just think condoms are better than hormonal birth control in general. I had really bad side effects from the pill and I know I'm not alone in this. My mental health was very, very bad. And the pill doesn't protect against STDs.

Well I guess I feel this is relevant because I actually think the pill is talked about like a great thing for women (because of our biology) when really it worked out better for men. But maybe I don't know enough of the history to understand. I can see how it's great for some women who don't get the bad side effects from it.

This Twitter thread is an excellent summary of the current dystopia:

Until 1900, married women couldn't own property in all states.
Until 1920, women couldn't vote.
Until 1971, states could bar women from practicing law.
Until 1974, women needed a man to get a credit card.

Now politicians pretend sex isn't even real.

twitter.com/Bleedinheart2MD/status/1192947525180899328 [Thread continues with comparable dates from countries including UK and Italy.]

Harriet, I believe it was because women could take it without anyone knowing. Certainly when marital rape was more common and within the law this was important.

It messed up my mental health and brought my thyroid issues to the fore. I won't go on it.

I think it’s significant that the big tech companies in the US will pay for their female employees to freeze and store eggs but provide NO childcare benefit of any kind.

There was a time in the 1980s when major US corporations were providing on-site childcare facilities. Those are long gone — a tentative 2nd wave victory washed away by the 3rd wave turn away from fighting for concrete, material benefits for women.

The other purpose for bringing women into the world still would be for sex if men still fancy real women more than robot women. Also, because the abusive men probably prefer real live women to dominate and bully and a robot won't cut it. Sorry to be so cynical.

I don't really buy into this genetic engineering/designing our own evolution thing. We still understand such a relatively small amount about the complicated interconnected nature of our physical existence, and I suspect any smart arse intervention, however well meant, would just send unexpected ripples and create problems we can't even conceive right now.

I think human ambition is always at risk of the penalties for hubris.

Is it because it gave control to the women whereas condoms do not and a bunch of men refused to wear condoms

This - but what you say about the side effects is also relevant.

Most forms of contraception have some form of side effect, but we are only free to choose the one that suits us to the extent that we live in a country where different forms of contraception are freely available. This isn't something we can take for granted.

However people who believe that artificial wombs are just over the horizon seem to have no idea that many (most?) people in the world have limited access to medical care. IVF has been around for almost 50 years, but for anyone without unlimited wealth access is strictly rationed.

It's only ever a tool, though. On it's own, it is not enough to liberate.

It's a tool that can be rationed, controlled and taken away.