From: mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson)
Subject: Re: Abortion, Caves, etc.
Date: 10 Jan 93 16:40:59 CST

In article <TODD.93Jan9123948@juno.elcom.nitech.ac.jp> todd@juno.elcom.nitech.ac.jp writes:
>
>>>In article <1992Dec18.113255.23932@hemlock.cray.com> mon@cray.com (Muriel Nelson) writes:
>>>
>>Later in this posting, you delete your _last_ accusation 
>>of selfishness, and my response to it.  Unfortunately, 
>>you misogynist newbie twit, I am somewhat known in this 
>>forum as a mother of three who's been voluntarily sterilized 
>>(or mutilated, if you prefer, Merry Christmas Suzanne).  
>
>If it was voluntary, then you have only done this mutilation to yourself.

I't sort of an inside joke, Todd.  Suzanne equates
voluntary sterilization with mutilation.  I'm happy
with it no matter what you call it.

>I don't see what it has to do with me or this discussion.

You keep calling me selfish as though it were
my own rights I'm fighting for. That's not the case.

>Note: pro-life does not necessarily equal misogyny.

True.  Failure to recognize the bodily autonomy
of women does, though.

[deletia]
>
>>What are YOU willing to give up, Todd?
>
>If or when I become a father, I will either propose or ask
>to be a single father depending on the situation.  I want
>to give a lot to my kids.  I think that's substantial.
>Yes, I want to LIVE with them.  I want to support them,
>play with them, and love them (maybe go camping together), 
>even if they turn out to be complete assholes.

Most women do the same with their kids.  What you
are proposing is still unequal.
>
>>I don't want to give the impression that fetuses should
>>have no rights.  A fetus should have whatever rights
>>the pregnant woman wishes to give up voluntarily.  
>
>Why is this necessarily so?  On what basis?  It's totally
>arbitrary, admit it.  We are all given whatever rights
>society allows us.  No more, no less.

Totally arbitrary that women wish equal status
with men?  That we don't want to end up in a
dark alley on the wrong end of a subject/object
dichotomy?
>
[more deletia]
>>Weren't you the one who said it was
>>'just vanity'?  
>Maybe I was right.
>>Your misogyny is appalling.
>Get real.  You can only see yourself as a victim, and your
>only solution is to take it out on others, namely men and
>fetuses.  Your victim mentality is what lets you get away
>with murder.
>

Huh?  I'm having trouble keeping track of all the things
I'm getting called by men who think I'm just awful for
wanting to preserve reproductive freedom for another
generation of women. What I hope for is to prevent other 
women from being victims of a legal system that annoints 
the fetus with subjectivity in spite of the effect on women,
namely the objectification of our bodies.
 
[deletions]
>>Think, Todd.  In what way is a fetus an individual?
>>This is an unsupported assertion on your part.
>In what way are you an individual?  Individality (and an
>individual's rights) are a perceived thing.  I wish to
>change perceptions.
>>Since you are the one with a legislative agenda that
>>would remove existing rights from half the population,
>>I believe the burden of proof is on you.
>If I want to give rights to a set of heretofore unrecognized
>set of individuals, then I think I have a case.  Adding
>rights to one set of individuals often removing some
>priviledges from another set.  Unfortunate, but hard to
>avoid.

You still have avoided giving evidence that a fetus
is an individual in any practical sense.  I think a
(shudder) definition is in order.
>
[deletions]
>>>and I wish you dead, why should my wishes be considered
>>>inferior?  Your way of thinking would allow me to drive
>>>right over you.
>>>
>>Only if I'm living inside your body.
>Your repulsion to your own child is curious and schocking.

Where do you get this stuff?  You seem to be reading
something that I'm not writing.

>You must really hate yourself a lot.
>
Let's see: I'm a bitter, self-hating, piquant, selfish
victim.  I _do_ hope I haven't left anyone out.

[more deletions]
>Rape is a forced use of a woman's body.  So since I believe
>women have the right to not have their bodies abused grotesquely
>(which rape definitely is) so I support abortion at the expense
>of the fetus.  Not a nice thing to do, but women have rights.
>
How are the two fetuses different?  If this is about 
their rights/personhood, why should it matter?

>Consensual sex leading to pregnancy is a totally voluntary
>action.  It is not grotesque, whether the pregnancy was
>planned or not.  It is consensual, and women should be aware
>that, yes, sex can lead to pregnancy i.e. a long term occupation
>of their bodies.  Or they should abstain if they don't want
>to run the risk.
>
Abstinence is unacceptable to many, including me.
It's hard enough to keep a marriage together these
days without that.

>>>>2. (this is rocker's question, but she's busy these days)
>>>>What equivalent PHYSICAL responsibility do you propose for
>>>>a male who has consensual sex resulting in pregnancy
>>>>for his partner?
>>>How about commitment to the mother and the child, physically
>>>interpreted as participating in child rearing personally, and
>>>doing his utmost to provide properly for the family.  Marriage
>>>is not necessarily requisite.
>>Not even close.  You would require the woman to undergo
>>a great deal of PHYSICAL risk and discomfort, 
>Yup.
>
Nice of you.

>>not to mention
>>damage to our 'shitty careers'.  
>Fuck careers.

Sometimes a woman's career represents livelihood for
several born children.  Nice to know you don't care
about them.
>
>>The man is supposed to stick 
>>around and help raise the kid, see to financial support,
>>and you think this is _equivalent_?  
>Financial support goes on for about 18 years or more.  A woman
>can give birth and she's out of there.
>
If he's supporting the child financially, chances
are she is, too.  As well as working hard ar being
a parent.  If the woman is 'out of there' by giving
the baby up for adoption, the man doesn't have to pay
child support.  Your point?  

muriel
standard disclaimer
Newsgroups: talk.abortion