http://www.alternet.org/reproductivejustice/151504/900_anti-woman_laws_to_appease_conservative_extremists_--_is_abortion_becoming_legal_in_name_only/
How about instead of narrowly enforcing dogmatic and patriarchal views on women, anti-choice supporters worked toward creating a world in which women are less likely to NEED to have abortions?
Ways to do this include:
Ensuring comprehensive sex education for middle and high school students.
Easy and anonymous access to safe, effective, and affordable contraception.
-Availability of free contraception (condoms, sponges, Plan B) in school clinics, discreetly and with no questions asked
-Increased availability of The Pill and other contraceptive methods: lower cost, availability without prescription
More safe and effective contraception options.
-Formulation of contraception for men. C'mon... if scientists can formulate not just one, but several different pills to give a man an erection, surely someone, somewhere could figure out male fertility. Of course, I could speculate on why this hasn't happened, but that's a topic for another day.
-Development of more contraceptive options for women. Sure, women have more contraceptive options today than thirty or forty years ago, but really a lot of these are just variations on the same method; essentially it's either hormones, a barrier method, or nothing, and for some women, none of these options are particularly viable nor desirable. Let me elaborate:
-The Pill, Patch, NuvaRing, Plan B etc, alters a woman's natural hormone levels and often reduces her
desire for sex, defeating the purpose of birth control in the first place. Also, some women don't
particularly care for the idea of screwing with their hormones.
-Condoms can break and some people are allergic to spermicide and latex. Additionally condoms
decrease sensation and enjoyment of sex. Put on a latex glove and note how much you can feel through
it. (Needless to say, condoms are your first and only line of defense against STIs and HIV.)
-Diaphragms, sponges: again, spermicide allergies.
-IUDs: risks of uterine puncture, dislodgment of device, breakthrough bleeding and increased pain and
bleeding with menstruation. Medical procedure.
-DepoProvera
-Tubal ligation (female sterilization): permanent, doctors usually won't perform procedure on younger
women
-Vasectomy: many men unwilling to get procedure, costly
-Natural family planning: fertility awareness method, rhythm method, "pulling out": not always reliable,
requires intense monitoring of body temperature, cycles, must abstain from sex during ovulation (when
most women probably want sex the most), man forgets or "forgets" or doesn't pull out in time.
-Abstinence: this doesn't count! Human beings want to have sex. It's a part of life. It's part of being a
developed, functional adult. You can't expect people to just not have sex. It's natural, it's part of our
biological instinct as a human mammal. You can tell teens not to have sex until you're blue in the face,
but guess what? Teenagers are still going to have sex if they want. Hasn't this been proven time and time
again? Abstinence only education and denying birth control options to teenagers isn't going to stop
anyone, but what it WILL do is increase the instance of sexually transmitted infections if teens don't have
the tools and education to protect themselves and take charge of their own health. Really, widespread
application of abstinence-only sex education is a PUBLIC HEALTH THREAT.
No woman WANTS to have an abortion. Abortion is a painful, uncomfortable, and costly procedure. Ask any woman if she wants a vacuum stuck up her vagina. Ask any woman if she wants the severe cramps, pain, and heavy bleeding that come with taking mifepristone (the "abortion pill"). No woman willingly puts herself through that. No woman wants to be in the position of having to choose whether or not to have an abortion.
Even if abortion were entirely outlawed tomorrow, women would still have abortions. They would just have them clandestinely and under unsterile unsafe circumstances where the risk of infections, complications, and death are high. Outlawing abortion aint gonna stop a damn thing. You think women never tried to end an unwanted pregnancy before Roe v. Wade came along? Banning abortion will just equal more women dying from unsafe "back-alley" abortions. Anti-abortion advocates think they're saving lives when really they're doing the exact opposite... or is it really that the woman's life just isn't important enough?
And speaking of, it is absolutely DISGUSTING that there are some people who value what they term "potential life" over an actual mature living, breathing, existing human being. Whether they realize it or not, by giving precedence to "potential life" over an actual walking, talking, thinking, feeling, learning, loving human being, the anti-choice set is essentially telling women that their only value is as a walking womb.
And clearly they seem to think women are too stupid to know what's best for them, so they need strangers to tell them. No, it's not okay to have an abortion if you can't afford to provide for a baby, if you can't afford prenatal care, if you have no one to support you during your pregnancy or after. No, it's not okay to have an abortion to save your own life or health or sanity- that's just not important. No, it's not okay to have an abortion if you were raped- clearly that's your fault so you should live with the consequences.
This is not okay. Let me say it again. THIS IS NOT OKAY. Anti-choice supporters say they want to create a culture that celebrates life- but I guess not the lives of women, since it seems to be okay for women to be in pain, to die, to live with the consequences of choices they weren't allowed to make all for the cause of "potential life".
And where does it end? If anti-choice advocates have their way and abortion is outlawed to preserve "potential life", will their next crusade be to outlaw birth control since that prevents "potential life"? With that logic I guess women should be pregnant as much as possible, since shedding an egg every month through menstruation is also preventing "potential life". And I'm not even sure that most anti-choicers would be okay with that.
The anti-choice movement says that it cares about the lives of women. Well, if anti-choicers REALLY care about the lives of women, maybe they should stop trying to legislate private, personal, life choices and put their energy to use in a way that really would save the lives of women. Rape, female genital mutilation, sex slavery are all rampant in our world. Imagine if anti-choice activists devoted even half the energy to stopping these attrocities as they do to telling women how to live their lives... what an impact THAT would have.
No comments:
Post a Comment