Two out of three support informed consent on abortion
DPF’s “surprised” comment:
I asked a couple of female friends what they thought, as I was puzzled that more women said they supported a law effectively making it more difficult to have an abortion.
The actual poll question?
“Would you support a law that would require a woman considering an abortion to first see a doctor, who is not an abortion provider, to be informed of the medical risks and alternatives to abortion?”
Hmm. Something seems wrong with this picture. TO THE SLUTCAVE!
Your first hint might be that Family First (who have followed the Kiwi Party’s cue in wheeling out a spokeswoman when convenient) immediately state this in their press release:
“Family First NZ is calling for a law which requires informed consent including ultrasound for all potential abortions, and counselling to be provided only by non-providers of abortion services. Parental notification of teenage pregnancy and abortion should happen automatically except in exceptional circumstances approved by the court.”
That’s funny. The poll question didn’t mention any of those things. 1950s-style-Families First wouldn’t be just using a strangely-innocuous poll question to pretend there’s more support for their misogynist bullshit than there really is, would they?
As a sidenote, you’ve got to love that condition on parental notification. Circumstances approved by the court! Because a teen in the kind of situation where it’s in her best interests not to tell her parents she’s getting an abortion totally has time and resources to get a fucking court order without them knowing! “Honey, why do you have a court date to get an injunction against parental notification of an abortion? You’re not going to have an abortion, are you?” “No, possibly abusive parents, of course not!”
The poll also didn’t say anything about how this might make it harder for women to get abortions. Funny, because if DPF were so concerned maybe he could have counselled his clients about how they might not get accurate results with such an open-ended, not-considering-the-consequences question.
Let’s remember that in New Zealand, even women who get abortions often have no fucking idea at the outset how long and how stressful the process is. So it’s no fucking good to say “oh, I guess this majority of people just considered that forcing women to see yet another medical practitioner, in order to check that they do really want to undergo the medical procedure they’ve already had to see two medical practitioners whom they’ve had to convince to liberally interpret the law’s definition of “mental health” grounds in order to get permission to have.”
But that’s hardly the only problem with the question. “Seeing a doctor who is not an abortion provider” is a wonderful little dogwhistle, particularly common to US antichoicers, that somehow Planned Parenthood or Family Planning are just raaaaaaaaaking in the cash, that every Pweshus Embwyo’s life makes them miiiiiillions, that doctors just love facing daily harassment and even the threat of death in order to make the faaaaaaaaaaat dollaaaaaaaaaaaahs out of abortions.
You do realise they could just go into Botoxing women’s faces, right?
DPF’s open-mouthed innocence is brilliant, though:
One salient question I would pose on this issue is whether such a procedure would actually lead to some women not having an abortion due to “better” information, who do currently have an abortion – or would it just be an extra hassle and cost for every woman seeking an abortion, and not actually change anything.
“Salient question”, DPF? Do your clients know that you’re undermining their entire rationale for forcing women to undergo ultrasounds – i.e. “women are stupid and seeing da widdle handies and feeties (which the vast majority of aborted zefs won’t have anyway) will totes change their minds because they must just think they’re pregnant with guppies.”
And a little protip: “informed consent” is not the same fucking thing as “an antichoice doctor shoving a probe into your vagina and saying “look there’s a heartbeat, boy this little guy sure is energetic, and did we mention [insert antichoice lie of preference here]*”” … especially when there is no proof it will change someone’s mind.
And a final note: when antichoicers say “alternatives to abortion”, they mean “adoption“. Because apparently the alternative to not continuing a pregnancy you don’t want to continue is … continuing a pregnancy you don’t want to continue. Presumably as long as your baby is “healthy” and “normal” and white.
*My personal favourite is “you’ll die of breast cancer!!!” and right here I think it’s pretty salient to point out that no New Zealand woman has died due to an abortion since 1980. Out of over 380,000 abortions. Abortion? Safer than pregnancy. But you don’t see Family First arguing that we need to warn women about pre-eclampsia for their own good, that might interfere with The Breeding.
“Jenene” of NZGirl has responded to yet more criticism of that site’s fucked-up marketing campaign on 30 Days of Kate with the following:
No under age girl is allowed to post, nor has posted. I’m happy for you to send me any images that you are concerned about.
Here’s how it is, people.
A site marketed as “for girls and women” encourages its readers to send in pictures of their boobs for public posting.
This site institutes absolutely no safeguards to ensure that the submissions are genuine or legal beyond an absolutely terrifying “I accept the terms and conditions” button.
This site then proceeds to ignore, insult, and defame its critics who try to point out the extreme skeeviness of this campaign.
Pictures submitted end up on porn sites.
The NZGirl editorial team accuses a feminist critic of posting them (in wonderfully passive-aggressive tones).
Finally, an editor at NZGirl denies that any of the photos can be underage or used without permission, without explaining what, if any, vetting or investigation they have done to establish this …
And then makes it our fucking job to send her any photos we are concerned about.
Guess what, Jenene?
Your site making your readers unsafe is
Boganette has also updated her most excellent post on the matter with further shenanigans.
The title of this post comes from a comment on the stuff.co.nz article on NZGirl’s “empowering”
marketing ploy pornbait “awareness” campaign.
Apparently, the objections can only be because we feminists, who frequently say fuck and have tags on our blogs like “vagina vagina vagina“, actually hate breasts and think women should go around covered head to foot and we need a (wait for it …) “more european” attitude to breasts.*
And enough people are harping on about this theme (apparently without actually bothering to let the words on the screen process through their brains before hitting “Add Reply”) that apparently this is some kind of logical train of thought to a lot o people.
So let me explain.
Women’s bodies are amazing. Whether they have pert little breasts or full and wonderfully heavy breasts or racks of doom or no breasts at all. Whether their thighs are taut, soft, long, curved, sliding into hips that can be straight, angular, bulging, nipped into a tiny waist or anchoring a proud belly balancing out a butt wide or narrow or apple-shaped. Whether their arms are all muscle or all sinew or all flesh or any combination of the three, whether their hands are “dainty” or “strong” with calluses or painted nails or both, whether they’re in wedding dresses or swimsuits or pyjamas or business-casual or a corset and stockings.
Speaking as a heterosexual woman, women are fucking hot, because their bodies are physical manifestations of their souls and personalities and existence as human beings. And those bodies [and existences] are constantly constrained, criticised, measured, found wanting (no matter which bits of the above paragraph they fall into), labelled, judged according to archaic condescending patriarchal bullshit (and yes, NZGirl, “rating” the photos on your site is pretty much just that).
Women get self image issues because they are constantly being told how much they don’t measure up physically and how much they must suck as human beings because of that. Women get daddy issues because we live in a fucking patriarchy that says “you will be dependent on male authority for everything so you may as well like it”. Women get religious indoctrination issues about not showing their bodies because the religions that preach that kind of bullshit know full fucking well how hard it is to run society without a handy slave class to do the shitwork.
I want women to be able to be proud of their bodies and open about their bodies. I want to live in a world where posting an anonymized photo of your tits isn’t “empowering” or “enlightening” because it isn’t a fucking taboo to say “I like my breasts” or to know what other women’s breasts look like.**
I want all types of cancer research to get enough fucking funding to find a cure as soon as humanly possible – not just the ones we can market really well to a guilt-ridden middle class by saying “think of the babies” or “think of your mother” or “think of your husband”.
In conclusion: I love breasts. I would love to know that any woman [or man] could go topless down the street showing theirs off whenever they wanted. Why I somehow must not feel that way because I think a website encouraging women to post anonymous boob shots for marketing purposes and indirect financial reward =/= empowerment … is kinda beyond me.
*Flashbacks to Jezebel!fail.
**And when ratings and financial incentives get involved, NZGirl editors, you don’t get to claim you’re participating in any kind of activism towards this goal.
And guess what, NZGirl* and others, it’s not because boobs are great!
Boobs are great.
But that’s seriously not the fucking point.
Likewise, I may very well love my partner’s cock, but the reason I will ensure he gets his prostate checked is not because I would miss his cock.** It’s because cancer is bad and can be fatal and I don’t need to justify my concern or “sell” it to anyone by proclaiming that we should Save Fellatio and Get The Boys Out For The Boys and You Shove A Finger Up There Or I Will!
Scuba Nurse has done a most excellent, hard-hitting, [trigger warning for probably NSFW images and discussion of cancer] post about the realities of breast cancer.
Bet you none of those pics make it onto NZGirl’s page of “pretty titties”.
For bonus fail, NZGirl’s stunning strategy to stop their pages being hijacked by bullies, stalkers and vengeful exes is a simple “you must agree to our terms and conditions” button. How quaint.***
For BONUS bonus fail, the terms and conditions likewise notes:
For every 50 completed, qualifying entries of boobs submitted to the nzgirl “Our favourite: Breasts” campaign, nzgirl agrees to donate $1000 to breast cancer research up to a maximum pledge of $5000 (or 250 pairs).
Because when you’re “mobilising” people to “awareness” of breast cancer, you definitely want to assume that everyone’s breasts come in pairs.
*Truly, never has the notion of referring to grown women as “girls” and pretending it’s playful and fun instead of infantilising been better crystallized for me.
**Or lament cock-related complications from prostate cancer.
***One can only assume no one on the NZGirl staff has ever downloaded or installed any piece of software ever.