Author Topic: Tale of a 19th-century abortion provider  (Read 49339 times)

Offline serious crayons

  • Moderator
  • The BetterMost 10,000 Post Club
  • *****
  • Posts: 22,757
Re: Tale of a 19th-century abortion provider
« Reply #50 on: June 06, 2009, 07:35:24 pm »
And why should any of this be free? Men have to buy condoms

Not to speak for Mikaela, but by "free" she might have meant "unfettered," as opposed to "no cost."


Offline Mikaela

  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,229
  • Unsaid... and now unsayable
Re: Tale of a 19th-century abortion provider
« Reply #51 on: June 06, 2009, 07:37:06 pm »
This is something that has striked me several times as well. To quote George Carlin on the subject: once you´re out of the womb, they couldn´t care less about you. 
:-\


Another inconsistency that I've never been able to wrap my mind around, is how American conservatives by and large are very anti-choice, citing the sanctity of life, but yet most of them are staunch supporters of capital punishment. Again it seems to me that it's the fact that the "life" is in a woman's womb - a woman who apparently shouldn't be allowed her own informed decisions - that makes it so singularly worthy of support and protection.

At least we Scandinavians don't have this conundrum to juggle -  no-one here publicly advocates the introduction of capital punishment, as far as I know.

Offline milomorris

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,428
  • No crybabies
Re: Tale of a 19th-century abortion provider
« Reply #52 on: June 06, 2009, 07:47:42 pm »
Haven't I seen the conservatives on this board and elsewhere moaning and groaning many a time over those living on welfare and how horrid it is to have to be paying taxes towards their welfare payments etc etc. Many single moms who have to live wholly or partly on welfare might have decided to get an abortion if that was a safe and easily accessible option to them, with no stigma involved. Yet here are those precious now-born lives and their moms, in need of support after they've actually been born and are real living human beings - and the enthusiasm for the value of their lives seem to decline all at once. While the ire and contempt directed at the "welfare moms" increase correspondingly.  ???

Yep. And I've been one of them. Let me make sure to be painfully accurate here: we don't diss welfare "moms," we diss welfare "queens." Women who make a lifestyle out of being on welfare. Its one thing to use public assistance as a support system when in need. That's what its there for. Hell, I ate more than my share of government cheese as a small child. But my mother got off her ass and went back to work when my brothers and I had all finally started school.

Again, this proves to me that it's not about the life of the fetus (or resulting child) at all, but about repressing women and taking away from them both rights and responsibilities surrounding their own bodies, - and heaping guilt, shame and pain on them in the process. I am especially sorry to see women actually buying into this kind of ideology.

I think it depends who you're asking. Some abortion opponents are more into the whole "woman's place/man's will" aspect. But there are most definitely people out there who think that it is an act of premeditated murder.
  The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.

--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Offline Mikaela

  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,229
  • Unsaid... and now unsayable
Re: Tale of a 19th-century abortion provider
« Reply #53 on: June 06, 2009, 07:48:49 pm »
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "denying women contraception." What kind of female contraceptives would have been available back in those days? The herbal preparations?

And why should any of this be free? Men have to buy condoms--unless they happen upon some subsidized non-profit that is handing them out. So women should have to pay for their contraceptive methods too. The cost of abortions should be split between the parents, IMO 

As to the first, I wasn't as much discussing the OP, but rather circumstances today. And today, in many countries and societies, women are denied access to and knowledge of contraception. (Women back in the day did have various herbal remedies that to some extent served as contraceptives. As far as I've read up on the medieval witch hunts, for instance, one of the reasons for the RCC's ire and venom directed at village wise women was that they helped other women with such herbs - and also with herbs inducing abortions. Clearly such women were witches.  :( )

As to the "free", my apologies. I was translating the Norwegian "fri" in my mind - it means "free" as in living in freedom, being at complete liberty. I keep forgetting that "free" in English also means "gratis" - we have a separate word for that. Sometimes my non-English background seeps through.  :P

I did indeed mean "unfettered", as Crayons indicated.


Offline Mikaela

  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • ******
  • Posts: 3,229
  • Unsaid... and now unsayable
Re: Tale of a 19th-century abortion provider
« Reply #54 on: June 06, 2009, 07:56:11 pm »
Let me make sure to be painfully accurate here: we don't diss welfare "moms," we diss welfare "queens." Women who make a lifestyle out of being on welfare.

I guess this is going OT, so maybe I should refrain, but  - how do you distinguish the two? At what point does it become a chosen lifestyle? I must admit that the dissing I've seen many times has seemed to be relatively all-inclusive, ie. everyone living on welfare seemed to be included in the disdain. I'm not at all saying this relates to any posts of yours, though.

Offline milomorris

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,428
  • No crybabies
Re: Tale of a 19th-century abortion provider
« Reply #55 on: June 06, 2009, 07:56:44 pm »
I believe that every woman has a right to decide what goes on with her own body,and that no politician or husband or fiance or boyfriend has a right to change that decision about whether or not to bring a life into this world.  

I'm with you up until you get to the point of excluding the baby's father. No way. Not unless he is estranged from the wife, or impregnated her against her will. He has just as much right to decide what to do with that child as she does. And in many, many cases, couples (married or not) make that decision together.
  The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.

--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Offline milomorris

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,428
  • No crybabies
Re: Tale of a 19th-century abortion provider
« Reply #56 on: June 06, 2009, 07:59:25 pm »
I did indeed mean "unfettered", as Crayons indicated.

Thanks for clarifying. Then I agree with you.
  The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.

--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Offline milomorris

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,428
  • No crybabies
Re: Tale of a 19th-century abortion provider
« Reply #57 on: June 06, 2009, 08:15:23 pm »
I guess this is going OT, so maybe I should refrain, but  - how do you distinguish the two?

Its actually pretty easy to spot. And one of the few things I actually applaud Bill Clinton for is making it harder for people to stay on the welfare rolls. Its really about means-testing, and following up on people via social workers. Certain programs expire annually. Recipients are welcome apply for continuing coverage. As long as they still meet the requirements, they can get it. But people out-and-out lie about their circumstances in some cases. Back in the 70s it was kind of a joke, but some women would borrow neighbor's kids when the social worker was coming for a home visit.

But what tells the tale of the welfare queen/king better than anyone else is the men and women themselves. You can't imagine the attitudes I grew up around in the ghetto back in the day. "I ain't workin' for da man as long as da government will pay me to stay home;" "If I get a job, I'll loose my food stamps;" on, and on, and on.
  The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.

--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

Offline Mandy21

  • BetterMost 1000+ Posts Club
  • ******
  • Posts: 2,238
Re: Tale of a 19th-century abortion provider
« Reply #58 on: June 06, 2009, 08:48:23 pm »
I'm with you up until you get to the point of excluding the baby's father. No way. Not unless he is estranged from the wife, or impregnated her against her will. He has just as much right to decide what to do with that child as she does. And in many, many cases, couples (married or not) make that decision together.

Thank you for your thoughts, milomorris.  As I said, this has turned into a very heated discussion.

Perhaps I phrased myself poorly.  When I had my abortion, my boyfriend and I discussed it at length.  He had previously borne two children -- one of them given to adoption, one of them born to a married girlfriend he no longer saw, and then this one which would have been borne out of wedlock and just a few days after we had broken up, for what we thought was for good.  I went on a rather wild rampage, drinking myself silly and taking migraine medication that would definitely not contribute to the health of a fetus.  But at the time, I had no clue I might have been pregnant.  I was on the pill and taking it just as the doctor prescribed.  I only found out later that if you vomit sometimes, for whatever reason, the birth control pills become completely ineffective.  I learned this when the nurse from my ultrasound said the word "viable" to me.  I'd never heard the word before and had to ask her to explain.  She said the life inside of me was "10 week's viable".  Despite the fact that we were broken up, I did get hold of him immediately, saw him in person, told him the state I was in and how far along I was, and what my choice was, considering my/our circumstances, and asked him his opinion.  He agreed with me, and took me to the abortionist a few days later.  We were both torn up to pieces, but looking back, considering I was making next-to-no money, he wasn't my boyfriend at the time, he was living with his mom, and the very strong recommendation from my doctor that I not bring this child into the world, that's what I did.  My girl lost her life, AT MY CHOICE, on Dec 27, 1988.  She'd be 20 now, and there's not a day that goes by that I don't think of what she could have been to me and to herself and to this world.

It's NOT a simple choice.  Terminating a life -- whether it's a fetus or a dying parent or anyone else -- is the hardest choice anyone ever makes.

But I chose, and I'll also never stop being thankful that I live in a state and a country where a woman can choose.  I'm fairly sure I'm a bit too old to get pregnant again, but if I did, I'd be sure I lived in a country that let me make my/our choice.

Again, no offense for your opinion, Shasta, and I hope I made myself clearer, milomorris.  I just have mine as well, hope you don't hold it against me.
Dawn is coming,
Open your eyes...

Offline milomorris

  • BetterMost 5000+ Posts Club
  • *******
  • Posts: 6,428
  • No crybabies
Re: Tale of a 19th-century abortion provider
« Reply #59 on: June 06, 2009, 09:09:37 pm »
and I hope I made myself clearer, milomorris.

Yes. I'm happy to hear that you two handled the situation with the maturity and gravity it deserved.
  The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.

--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.