This is why so many women voted Trump

[BabyLlamaZen]

I’m not saying it’s right, I’m not saying it’s worth the horrors of the Trump administration (and what other women’s rights will be abolished). However, I can also empathise. Books like this are everywhere in baby sections of bookshops in USA. My american friend is naturally more conservative than myself although hated Trump and didn’t vote for him previously (she abstained and then she went Biden although she says she seriously regrets) and this time she voted Trump. She said this stuff is now everywhere and it’s constant. She also showed me a baby’s ABC book which included B for bisexual (and literally then described it as people who are sexually attracted to either gender). For babies.

Yeah, I think there is a really different problem here than what people are pushing this as, and it needs to be addressed urgently.

And because it's being used as a prop around abortion laws, no one is going to do that.

All of the laws passed acknowledge that there is room for appropriate medical decisions around things like ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, enclampsia, and so on. Conservatives don't want to find themselves, or their loved ones, in those situations either - conservative women are not immune to ectopic pregnancies.

Catholics aren't looking for that kind of law either, it's not what Catholic teaching requires.

So, wtf is really going on? Are some persons within the medical system trying to persecute normal medical practice? Is there not a proper framework for triggering when an assessment of a decision should happen? Are doctors afraid of liability, and if so, why - what is the role of insurance companies in that?

This should not be rocket science. There are other cases where there can be potential for medical malpractice that isn't distinguishable for good practice, end of life care being one. There are protocols for that through within medical practice.

There are a few instances I can think of where fear of going outside the recommendations has led to bad practice, like with prescribing opioids.

But these cases in Texas seem to be ones where doing the right thing was easily justifiable medically, and according to the law. And someone should really do a deep dive into what is going on.

The Texas law is bad law. It was written in haste but the real issue is that the people who backed it wanted it to induce fear in doctors and hospital administrators. They had no interest in clearly defining the terms used.

What makes the law unique is that it is enforced exclusively by the actions of private citizens bringing civil lawsuits rather than being directly enforced by the State. This means any person, other than an officer or employee of a state or local governmental entity, can bring a case against any person who “performs or induces an abortion” or any person who “aids or abets the performance or inducement of an abortion” once a ‘fetal heartbeat’ is detected (§171.208). While the woman seeking an abortion cannot be sued, the Act's framing is so broad it could potentially impact health professionals, reception staff at a healthcare clinic, family members and friends who counsel the woman, and Uber drivers who drive women to abortion clinics. Furthermore, the person suing does not need to show any connection to those they are suing, and if they are successful, they will receive a minimum of $10,000 (US dollars) and have their legal fees covered.

No a miscarriage has zero to do with abortion. I actually find this offensive.

It has everything to do with abortion when anti abortion laws prevent women from receiving appropriate medical care.

Interesting to look at it with a class lens. Especially in the supposedly classless US.

This kind of feminist movement that sought freedom from the sexed body, especially as it related to pregnancy and motherhood, is what gave birth to genderism ideology and post modernism; likewise from the elements of the gay liberation movement which sought freedom in gender 'fluidity' ( men not feeling ashamed to display 'feminine' characteristics)

And of course, until more recent times gay men and most lesbians tended not to have children....for obvious reasons.

"Assigning" is a social act. 'Recording' is a factual matter of what is in front of you.

Chromosomes which are male will result in that child going through male puberty even if that someone has been mistakenly recorded as female at birth based on observation of genitalia.

Male and female are biological signifiers, not social ones.

9% of black women voted for Trump. 53% of white women voted for Trump. You can’t frame it as women supporting for Trump, it’s some women supporting Trump.

You cannot create a real vagina or a real functional penis, though. All that can be created are superfcial and fairly crude facsimiles.

Interestingly the left seems to be clinging on to the claim that they are the faction of the working oppressed, but it sure doesn't look like it. And I think fewer and fewer people are buying it.

In the U.K. as well.

So civil suits - the people wouldn't be criminally responsible, and for doctors it would be a matter for insurance.

There's no case law on this I assume, so the first question I'd ask is - would these cases actually win? Would a judge find a doctor guilty for treating a miscarriage where the woman would have died from sepsis?

I'm inclined to think not.

But - it is common, in fact normative, in the US for insurance companies to pay out in civil suits against doctors, without even contesting the case. So it might not matter what a judge thinks, because it might not get that far.

And insurance companies will be telling doctors to stay well away from things that could expose them to financial risk even at the cost of good practice - as they do in other cases like maternity care. If they lose their insurance, they can't practice.

This is speculative obviously but I am not convinced the real issues here is that pro-life people want women to die from miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies.

👆

Chromosomes which are male will result in that child going through male puberty

No ; this is not always the case.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-61995250.amp

When I was taking my Feminist Political Thought module at Uni (a million years ago) I remember being horrified by Shulamith Firestone et al. who wanted all reproduction and childrearing to be taken off women and responsibility given to the State - so we’re talking artificial wombs and children raised in group homes. I didn’t see how academic women like this could possibly connect with the lives of ordinary women with this proposition or this version of Feminism.

When I was bedazzled away from my more women-centred view of Feminism by the Girl Power/Liberal Feminism of the 2000s (mea culpa, mea maxima culpa) it took me some thought about the lives of ALL women to realise that the type of Feminism that downplays (or at times even despises) Motherhood is not a type of Feminism that speaks to the majority of women.

I don’t know if Harris intended to speak to women in a way that downplayed motherhood or made them feel denigrated for not being interested in Liberal Feminism (or what Harris and the Democrats defined as ‘women’s rights) but that is how a lot of women interpreted Harris’ campaign and they voted (or stayed away from voting) accordingly.

The point here is he gained, and Harris lost.

The black, and much of the Hispanic community used to be very reliably Democrat voters, since about the 1960s.

The Hispanic community has been moving away from that for a while now and are largely pretty even in terms of party support with lots of voters who flip. The Democrats were foolish if they haven't't seen that coming for a while.

The black community hasn't moved nearly as much, but in the last few years, and really since Obama, they seem to be less attacked to the Democrat party. It's very obvious that this is an ongoing thing if you follow black social media or television and podcasts, there is a lot of discussion going on that is really different than what was there even 5 years ago. There have always been some black conservatives, but there seem to be a lot more now, but even more than that, just a lot more people who don't see party loyalty as having served them well.

Black men moved towards the right in a big way, and while a much smaller number, that seems to be the direction of travel for black women. Under Trump, who were are told is the most racist president in decades, with the most racist policies.

Maybe it will end there, but that's what people thought about the Hispanic vote as well.

These insinuations that racism is down to why many white women voted for Trump rathar than Kamala is pretty desperate. Rather I'd say that the reason most black women voted for Kamala is because they still identify themselves, as has been traditional, with the Democrats; and a good number may have voted for Kamala purely because she was also a woman of colour.

I don’t know if Harris intended to speak to women in a way that downplayed motherhood or made them feel denigrated for not being interested in Liberal Feminism (or what Harris and the Democrats defined as ‘women’s rights) but that is how a lot of women interpreted Harris’ campaign and they voted (or stayed away from voting) accordingly.

hiw did she “downplay motherhood”. Isn’t it the republicans who appose the right to IVF? They want to destroy women”s reproductive freedom - can’t get more anti motherhood than that.

and a good number may have voted for Kamalapurely because she was a woman of colour

Or because Trump shares platforms with white supremacists?

I think that's exactly it. Black Americans, by which I mean their historical black populations, did until quite recently tend to vote Democrat, every time, almost regardless of what the policies were. And there was a ton of pressure in the black community to do so, those who didn't were called a lot of awful things.

Most of the movement recently in voting patterns for this group is with people under 30 or so, and if you listen to their stories, they will tell you that most of them grew up in families where no one would ever have voted anything other than Democrat, and many of them may have themselves for their first few elections.

They almost always seem to have changed their thinking post-Obama which I think is super-interesting.

From watching interviews with Harris, the policy information that she made most clear (front and centre) was her support for abortion. I didn’t come away with information that she had policies aimed at supporting women in other ways as significantly as she emphasised her support for abortion. If Harris had social and economic policies that were aimed at transforming and improving the lives of working class women, young women, girls, mothers etc then, in my opinion, she did a poor job of communicating these policies.

Even Democrat advisors state that the Harris campaign went all in in abortion rights (and the threat to Democracy) and that perhaps emphasising these issues rather than other issues that voters were concerned with were a bad idea (see various analyses in various US newspapers).

That was the law placed on the books as a placeholder. It’s still in force though. They’ve added more since then.

am not convinced the real issues here is that pro-life people want women to die from miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies.

Who said it was? Their aim is to prevent access to abortion and contraception. They have no concern for the women involved, just the foetuses.

Ok, I am not sure where you are going here.

Are you saying you think this kind of outcome is what conservative people want? Or,,,?

The choices doctors make aren't always straightforward when there are factors pushing them in different directions.

But I am wondering why people aren't looking at making the outcomes better, in these cases, as they would where other similar problems are happening.

At one rally Trump said "If you give me your vote you vote for me, if you give Harris your vote you are voting for they/them". I think it hit home with a lot of people.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/woman-died-ireland-abortion-ban-warning-americans-roe-v-wade-rcna35431

There’s an easy solution. Savita’s death lead to the legalisation of abortion in Ireland.