Can we opt out of having restrictions on abortion rights?

[lookleft]

Abortions are made illegal in some circumstances by the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. The relevant section (58) refers specifically to "women" who procure their own miscarriage being liable. If that section doesn't apply, for whatever reason, then there is no criminal act taking place.

If "woman" no longer means the biological sex, and instead means a gender identity, surely females who do not have that gender identity (including females who do not have that gender identity because they do not believe in gender ideology) are not included in that section and so aren't subject to the requirement for two doctors to sign off on an abortion.

That's how it works now, right?

Or are we to continue in the vein whereby "woman" means a biological sex when doing so gives you the right to control human females, and "woman" means a gender identity when doing so gives you the right to control human females?

So someone can have an abortion more easily if they identify as a man?

If the word "woman" now means gender identity and nothing more, than yes. Don't even need to go as far as identifying as a man, non-binary ought to do it.

Interesting idea!

That's genuinely an interesting idea

I think given how often gender ideals don't include making things better for women (e.g. younger brothers still inheriting over older transmale siblings) I would imagine the law would suddenly be suspiciously quick to understand the sex based definition of a woman.

I saw a 4W article today which had something along these lines:

Not One Texas Abortion Rights Org Will Use the Word "Woman"

Perhaps the most ironic twist of all is that in Texas (and a few other states), the laws banning abortion actually only apply to women.

SB. 8, the Texas law which bans abortion after the detection of a fetal heartbeat, uses very clear woman-centered language throughout its text. It states, in part:

"Except as provided by Section 171.205, a physician may not knowingly perform or induce an abortion on a pregnant woman..."

The rest of the text is also very woman-centered, with definitions referencing women across the board.

This creates a bizarre loophole in which abortions on individuals who are not legally women may actually still be permitted. Changing your legal sex in Texas is relatively easy. The process is about as complicated as getting your driver's license or getting married, requiring only a form, a note from a mental health provider attesting to your diagnosis (so-called "sex-change surgeries" or medical intervention are not required), a fee (which may be waved), and a trip down to the local office.

In practice, it's unlikely that any doctor would take the risk of performing an otherwise illegal abortion on a woman who has had her sex markers changed on legal paperwork. We have no idea how the courts would handle such a case, and a simple amendment to the law would close the loophole right up. But the trans loophole does prove one thing: women are being targetted in Texas. Not "people who get pregnant" or "uterus havers." Women.

@NecessaryScene That's really interesting thank you

@NecessaryScene That is interesting, thanks for sharing! Realistically it's never going to end up in court, but it would be fascinating to see the Stonewalled CPS arguing in court that the word "woman" means an adult human female in order to prosecute a case.