Friday, 19 February 2010

Attention SUZY ALL-CAPS: your panties are on fire – again.

Sadly, not in any good (or bad-girl) way.

Blob Blogging Wingnut often screeches about feminists who don’t and won’t use the vocabulary employed by The Fetus©™ fetishists in their propaganda. SHE believes that’s a reveal and SHE claims “the refusal to use plain language, the substitution of euphemisms and rhetorical evasions, is an infallible indicator that a speaker or writer feels uncomfortable with the truth”.

Anti-abortionists like SUZY ALL-CAPS believe that their truthiness is the same as the facts.

Those who don’t share HER beliefs know HER claim about feminists is pro-lie truthiness. Consider the following words.

Egg. Sperm. Fertilization. Zygote. Embryo. Fetus.

Spontaneous abortion. Miscarriage.

Unwanted pregnancy. Voluntary termination.

Desired pregnancy. Expectant mother-to-be.

Giving life. Giving birth.

Premature labour. Death in childbirth.

Is that language plain enough for you, SUZY? Those are objective terms that describe clearly the possibilities that potentially fertile women face.

Feminists deal honestly with these plain truths and realities. We don’t gloss over them or pretend they don’t exist.

SAINTE-NITOUCHE – like other pious women – has chosen the comfort of religious doctrines that control HER reproductive potential and choices. Yes, choices. Even though SHE wants other women to be deprived of the right to self-determination. If HER religious beliefs regarding abortion are as universal as SHE maintains, why not leave it to whatever cosmic deity that may (or not) exist to pronounce judgment?

Feminists challenge the domination of religious dogma, whether judaic, christian or islamic and their gynophobic tenets.

Yet Blob Blogging Wingnut blathers on, determined to “prove” that white is black and up is down.

Feminists don't really support abortion as a means to save women from childbirth. After all, childbirth has been rendered pretty safe in this day and age.

They just want abortion, period. Regardless of whether it reduces maternal mortality or not.

There are 4 untruths in those four sentences from SUZY ALL-CAPS. All are predicated on her belief that abortion is an abhorrent and universally evil intervention. Thus anyone who supports access to evil is also abhorrent and evil. In her view, there is no justification for abortion, but any tactic that enforces pregnancy from fertilization to birth is justifiable.

Antonia Zerbisias debunked the misleading interpretations that The Fetus©™ fetishists have concocted in response to research produced by World Economic Forum's recently released Global Gender Gap Report. This makes her the target of attacks by the religiously deranged – such as Blob Blogging Wingnut.

Pregnancy can be fraught with complications ranging from problems with fetal development to medical conditions triggered by the reproductive process. Sometimes unexpected events that occur during labour are life-threatening.

Pregnancy, labour and childbirth have been rendered “pretty safe”? The term “pretty safe” is not a valid scientific observation. There are a number of women for whom pregnancy is not “pretty safe” in Canada and in other countries. Using this expression is cruel, ignorant and a deliberate obfuscation of current trends with respect to women’s reproductive health.


Sparky said...

People who bitch about the use of terminology can't then dictate that 'pro-abortion' be used instead of 'pro-choice'

fern hill said...

Oh yes we can because 'pro-abortion' is incorrect, whereas 'pro-choice' is exactly what feminists are.

You want to have a baby? Fine by me.

You want to use some form of birth control? Okey-dokey.

You want to have a home-birth? Sure.

You don't want to have a baby? All right.

You don't want to have a baby that has no brain? No arguments there.

You see how this works, Sparky? Choice R Us.

Abortion, as Michael Ignatieff recently pointed out, is an essential part of maternal health.

But just a part. Just one choice.

Antonia Z said...

Don't play their game.

By even acknowledging their red herring arguments about ''pretty safe'' pregnancies, not to mention outright falsehoods about cancer and abortion, ignores the fundamental issue.

A woman's ''life, liberty and security of person'' is infringed when she is forced to carry a pregnancy to term. (SCOC 1988.)

End of story.

jmburton said...

I won't wander too far afield, but I am interested in how people who attended the recent "tea party" convention in the U.S. could say that every fetus - even those conceived through rape or incest - is God's choice to be created - and that is the reason that all abortion is wrong. If God didn't want it - it wouldn't happen.

That killing one of God's creations is wrong...

Some of these same "tea party" types also think the solution to the Iran situation is to nuke Tehran. Most of them were thrilled (positively tumescent in my opinion) about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan - and refused to discuss civilian deaths...

The logic of the positions seems odd to me.

Unless you presume that Iranians (including anti-regime activists in Tehran who would also be vapourised) are not God's creations... but fetuses conceived through rape and incest are God's creations.

Or something like that.

Because killing Germans in the Second World War (some of whom were draftees opposed to the war but forced to fight under threat of death - including children near the end of the war in Europe) was justified under "just war theory" because the Nazi regime was evil, but a fetus conceived in violence is a product of God's love - not a violent act perpetrated on an unwilling woman.

But I am rambling.

Yours was an excellent post - thank-you for taking on even one nut and not just standing by silently while extremists rant and rave.

Post a Comment