From: frank@D012S658.uucp (Frank O'Dwyer)
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: A Question for the Pro-Lifers or Anti-Abortionists or whatever
Date: 17 Nov 1992 10:37:34 GMT
Organization: Siemens-Nixdorf AG
NNTP-Posting-Host: d012s658.ap.mchp.sni.de

In article <1992Nov15.151154.9311@rigel.econ.uga.edu> mills@uga.edu (Kathi Mills) writes:
#> Kalb
#>> rocker
#>>> R. Pitts
#>>>If you are pleading on the half of incest or rape victims, that is
#>>>one matter.  However, the MAJORITY do not fall into this and they 
#>>>DO NOT fall into this supposed UNWILLING catagory.  They may and 
#>>>probably do fall into the UNPLANNED or rather LACK OF PLANNING 
#>>>catagory or even into the UNEDUCATED one.  Families needs to teach their 
#>>>children (males and females) how to control their body - don't just let 
#>>>them run wild and then excuse their actions.  The error of thinking
#>>>that pregancy is unwilling is that the action (the sex act) is so 
#>>>trivialized and young girls think they need to give themselves to
#>>>some supposed man to gain acceptance.  Everyone needs to learn self-control
#>>>and self-acceptance.  One doesn't really gain either by having sex.
#
#>>For someone who professes to be a Christian, you sound terribly
#>>full of hate.  Perhaps you should ask yourself why this is so.
#
#>Would you explain how the posting you comment on displays hate?
#
#God, I guess I'll try to limit myself to the top 10 reasons (there are so
#many).

A bit of the kettle calling the pot black here - I had a good old rant at the
same post from Mr. Pitts a while back.  Nevertheless, this text of his which
is being denounced as hateful is not receiving a fair trial - the denouncements
of it drip with more hate and venom than Mr. Pitts post does, truth be told.

For example:

#1.  The reason for allowing rape victims to have abortions, when one wants
#    to ban almost all other abortions, is because in that case the woman
#    did not consent to sex and therefore should not have to bear its
#    consequences.  The converse of this, of course, is that women who have
#    sex willingly should have to bear any bad consequences; i.e., women
#    who willingly have sex are bad and should be punished.

Strawman.  Pitts may well believe this, but it's neither said nor implied by
the text above which is denounced as hateful.

#2.  The above post assumes that anyone who becomes pregnant unwillingly
#    has "run wild" and not controlled her body; that all unwanted
#    pregnancy, except that which results from rape, is the result of 
#    wanton and reckless disreagard for the welfare of the fetus(es) that
#    may result.

The first statement is self-evidently true, even if it is couched in extreme
language.  The second statement is entirely plausible, and not hateful
either.

#3.  The above post assumes that an unwanted pregnancy is somehow the fault
#    of the parents of the partners.  If the couple is assumed to be too
#    young to be responsible for their actions, Richard can always direct
#    his venom at the next convenient scapegoat - their parents. 

Blame = venom?  Is anything ever anybody's fault?

#4.  Richard only acknowledges one reason, in this post, why unwanted 
#    pregnancies occur (besides rape and incest): "young girls think they
#    need to give themselves to some supposed man to gain acceptance."  The
#    fact that this is the only reason that Richard saw fit to mention for 
#    pregnancy (as a result of consensual intercourse), shows that he must
#    think it is a very prevalent reason.  This is another blame-the-woman
#    attitude - the woman shouldn't have had sex.  Of course, Richard fails
#    to mention any wrong reasons for men to have sex; he does not, for
#    instance, say "men should not have sex for the purpose of appearing
#    macho."  Richard may indeed feel that way, but the fact that he chose
#    only to berate WOMEN'S (or rather, girls') reasons for having sex 
#    testifies to a misogynistic viewpoint.

True, he doesn't give mention to wrong reasons for men.  He doesn't mention
jews either - is he an anti-semite?  He does say 'everyone should learn
self-control' above, and 'everyone' includes men. When do we get to the hate
part?

#5.  The above post seems to assume that only children have unwanted 
#    pregnancies ("Families should teach their children ... young girls
#    need ...").  This belies an assumption that unwanted pregnancy is a
#    problem only for immature, irresponsible people; and the converse,
#    that mature, responsible adults do not have unwanted pregnancies.

True, but that's not hateful either.

#6.  Abortion is portrayed as an easy way out of a "LACK OF PLANNING."  It
#    is not shown as the responsible, mature decision that it is.  All women
#    who have made the choice to abort are dismissed as "UNEDUCATED" people
#    who "run wild and then excuse their actions."

If you think that abortion is always a responsible, mature decision you
are as deluded as Pitts is. Still no hate.

#7.  The entire sex act itself is berated, and those who engage in it
#    (presumably for any reason other than procreation) have failed to
#    "control their bodies."  As mentioned above, the only reason Richard
#    mentioned for consensual sex is peer pressure.  He also says, "Everyone
#    needs to learn self-control," i.e., that engaging in sex is fundamentally
#    indecent, and the urge to do so should be controlled.  He sees fit only
#    to mention bad things about sex, without any recognition that sex is
#    most often physically and emotionally beneficial to both partners.  He
#    does not seem to recognize that sex has any good qualities whatsoever.

True, and this is still not hateful.  It's also interesting to note that
pro-abortionists (as distinct from pro-choicers) are full of vim and vigour
when portraying abortion as a triumph over biology.  But to triumph over
sexual biology is primitive and hateful.  Maybe biology isn't all bad.

#8.  Richard claims that "the MAJORITY" of women who have unwanted pregnancies
#    are not incest or rape victims.  How does he know this?  One out of every
#    six (or some number close to that) women in the U.S. is raped in her
#    lifetime.  Millions more women are raped each year than the 1.25 million
#    who have abortions, yet Richard prefers to believe that the majority
#    of unwanted pregnancies result from lack of responsible planning.         

One of you must be wrong, but which one is hateful?

#9.  Richard's writing is unclear at best, but I interpret the sentence, "The
#    error of thinking that pregnancy is unwilling is that the action (the
#    sex act) ..." to mean, "It is an error to think that the woman is 
#    unwilling to become pregnant, since she engaged in the sex act, which
#    itself has become so trivialized ..."  This implies strongly that women
#    who have unwanted pregnancies secretly wished to become pregnant.  This
#    is a very misogynistic assumption.

Your strawman interpretation is - surprise, surprise - palpable nonsense.

#10. It is hateful to assume that many women, or even teenage girls, are a
#    bunch of mindless zombies who cave in to society's "trivialization of
#    sex" without a thought as to the possible consequences.

No it isn't.  And not to entertain the idea is stupid.

#Ferrari (mills@rolf.stat.uga.edu)

-- 
Frank.ODwyer@ap.mchp.sni.de   "You take slaves when you make us free,
                               when you make us free your way"
                             World Party - 'Ain't going to come til I'm ready'
                   
Newsgroups: talk.abortion