Quote:
Originally Posted by Kobi
What is happening to women via these misguided elected officials is nothing short of disgusting. We seem to all agree on this.
I have a harder time calling the new requirements a rape thing tho. I do see it as a terrible mind fuck morality thing. I do see it as a power gone wonky in service to certain beliefs thing. I do see it as an imposition and a means of a deterrent.
Rape? I cant see that. I cant see the professionals now charged with this requirement as being anything but sensitive to the fact that this is intrusive, unnecessary, and a moral rather than a medical thing. I cant see these professionals being anything but kind and gentle in explaining this to women just as they would explain any other aspect of the process. I cant see them being anything but gentle in doing the actual procedure itself.
I have had one. In my experience it was less uncomfortable than a regular gyn exam. Spectulums are not fun things especially in male hands. If you use a regular dildo device or have sex with a penis.....same thing, same shape, only longer.
I also have in the back of my mind that to do the actual abortion, they have to stick scary looking instruments up the same canal and into the uterus itself.
Consent is something you give to a procedure which includes a process. If you dont consent, I have a hard time envisioning anymore forcing the issue. No consent, no procedure.
So, what am I missing here? Are we reacting to the fucked up requirement being imposed? Are we reacting to the shape of the instrument? I really feel like I am missing something here.
|
I also doubt that the medical professionals forced to meet these requirements will be less than kind and gentle. But personally I don’t think that’s the point. Nor is it the point that the actual abortion requires a procedure, most likely vacuum aspiration, and that will necessitate something inserted in the vagina. Just because one thing has to go up someone’s vagina does not mean it’s a free for all and let’s just see how many things we can force her to have to put up there. Consent is something you give to a procedure that includes a process developed using medical reasoning. That is the point. You may as well add the requirement of forcing the woman to dress in 17th century garb and wear a scarlet letter on her chest. Perhaps she could be required to wear this for nine months. It is about as medically necessary as a vaginal ultrasound. Or really any ultrasound.
The fact that choice is illusionary is where the consent thing falls apart. A woman really has no other option but to do whatever is required no matter how ludicrous. So to me it is not the shape of the instrument, nor is it that it is to be inserted in one’s vagina, although I think this is the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back. To me it is that there is no option for real consent here.
For you it is the word rape in this context that is problematic. And it also seems that you see a woman as still having a choice here. I could give you the rape thing in its most literal sense, I suppose, although I still see it as state sanctioned vaginal violation. But consent is most definitely non existent. To say one still has the choice to consent or not is to misunderstand the meaning of choice. And to totally miss the predicament of a woman who wants or needs an abortion and the urgency as well as the time sensitive nature of the decision a woman has to make. And technically if you remove any real choice, it's a form of coercion. I imagine coercing someone into letting you insert something into her vagina skirts uncomfortably close to rape. So I understand the feeling that it is rape. But I don't think the whole focus needs to be on this. In fact I think it may be counterproductive to focus exclusively on vaginal ultrasounds.
So I do agree that it is not only this vaginal ultrasound that is the issue. It is all the prerequisites being added to make abortion more and more difficult and costly. And since the U.S. Supreme Court, with Roe vs. Wade, declared a pregnant woman is entitled to have an abortion until the end of the first trimester of pregnancy without any interference by the state, this crap violates federal law. That needs to be the focus. Because those in control of the state, while screaming about the horrors of second and third trimester abortions, are focusing all their power on interfering with first trimester abortions. If you are saying that then I agree. Because it seems to me that it is very feasible that what you described with pregnancy tissue not being classified as medical waste would easily be the state’s next move. Women could soon be required to take home the results of their vacuum aspiration and pay for a burial or a cremation. That would certainly make the cost of an abortion out of reach for many.
We can’t afford to be separated over semantics. We need to unite against this very real threat to women’s rights. We need to look no further than Komen’s move against Planned Parenthood to understand the far reaching depth and seriousness of the coordinated forces unified against the contraceptive rights of women. So I do agree that the focus needs to be on stopping this continued chipping away at a woman’s right to control her body. I don’t care what you chose to call it. Call it rape or call it state sanctioned insanity but call it over. It needs to stop now.