COVID-19 RESOURCES
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

A woman's rights to her own life, her own body

Why are people talking about manspreading? That's not even in the same ballpark. Manspreading is wrong toe the extent that it is because your inconveniencing ME. You're rights end where mine begin. It's the same reason you can't smoke in doors or blast loud music at 1 am in the morning despite Freedom of Speech.

LadyVer said:
What Walker doesn't get is that a man will never be in the position of being pregnant. And yet, he speaks for women, their reproductive systems, and their lives. Women have abortions for a lot of reasons. What women will do, and are doing, especially the poor, is go back alley to do what they need to do. Whether it's buying or finding abortifacients to take at home, or going to someone who will provide an abortion, which is what women were doing for thousands of years before Roe vs. Wade.
Click to expand...

Women really don't get abortions for a lot of reasons. I support their right to choose and all that but I've read plenty of stats and while they phrase it like six different ways it mostly comes down to economics. I think the top three reasons are like 1) I can't afford a baby right now. 2) I want to finish school so I'll be able to support my child. 3) I want to advance my career so I'm better able. (or something to those measures.

The rest of that I completely agree with.
 
Sean Renaud said:
Why are people talking about manspreading? That's not even in the same ballpark. Manspreading is wrong toe the extent that it is because your inconveniencing ME. You're rights end where mine begin. It's the same reason you can't smoke in doors or blast loud music at 1 am in the morning despite Freedom of Speech.

Women really don't get abortions for a lot of reasons. I support their right to choose and all that but I've read plenty of stats and while they phrase it like six different ways it mostly comes down to economics. I think the top three reasons are like 1) I can't afford a baby right now. 2) I want to finish school so I'll be able to support my child. 3) I want to advance my career so I'm better able. (or something to those measures.

The rest of that I completely agree with.
Click to expand...

1) Manspreading does not equal mansplaining, although I'm starting to wonder exactly how much Walker has been manspreading, and where.

2) The stillbirth I had at 5 months occurred "naturally," well, with a little help with Heparin to stop the hemorraging, which resulted in clots the size of my two hands, and nothing for the extreme pain that made me beg. If the pregnancy had continued and tests showed the fetus was dead or had dangerous health issues, or that my health was at risk, I would have chosen abortion. Women in this position today are having to wait 48 and 72 hours to get the abortion they need. And not all women abort spontaneously. I could have been carrying a dead fetus for a while before they decided to induce labor. Do men know what it's like to carry a dead fetus? It isn't pleasant. I prefer sponataneous abortion to carrying a dead fetus for a while. And if I had a choice between carrying a dead fetus or having an abortion? Abortion wins. But, Walker and his ilk want the right to tell women how and when they can make these decisions. They see abortion as only a matter of women deciding on a whim for economic reasons alone, and we've decided that today is a good day for an abortion. What a bunch of morons. :rolleyes:
 
1) was above your comment because it wasn't directed at you my dear.

2) You were in the grand scheme of things an isolated incident. The majority of abortions are in the first twelve weeks and are done for economics. And I never once accused of you anything as casual as "today is a good day for an abortion." I don't think it's anything like that. I think enough women can look around at what's happened to various members of their friends and family who had kids they weren't in a position to care for and don't want to put themselves of their children through it. God knows I have.
 
Sean Renaud said:
1) was above your comment because it wasn't directed at you my dear.

2) You were in the grand scheme of things an isolated incident. The majority of abortions are in the first twelve weeks and are done for economics. And I never once accused of you anything as casual as "today is a good day for an abortion." I don't think it's anything like that. I think enough women can look around at what's happened to various members of their friends and family who had kids they weren't in a position to care for and don't want to put themselves of their children through it. God knows I have.
Click to expand...

1) You seem kind of defensive about manspreading and mansplaining. I assumed you weren't being serious as manspreading and mansplaining are two different things.

2) I didn't take your statements as today being a good day for abortion. I was referring to Walker and the rest of the tea party morons. Again, you seem defensive.

3) When men start having their reproductive systems regulated by the government, and by women, maybe then men will understand all the nuances involved in pregnancy and abortion, but I'm not holding my breath. Until then, a thread entitled "A Woman's Right to Her Own Life, Her Own Body" will be full of crapola by men mansplaining, or manspreading.
 
Sean Renaud said:
Why are people talking about manspreading?
Click to expand...

Because they think men should sit with the legs cross and in the tiniest fucking space possible for WOMENS convenience. :rolleyes:

Fuck that I'm 6'4" and 230 lbs ...

f1bfed6a5baeb3024318bbeeaa8b305b3414e109abb0dfbfd914d883faa307cb.jpg


if you can't give me 2-5" of space then fuck you.
B7a_1anCAAE8o4K.jpg

attachment.php
 
Last edited:
LadyVer said:
What Walker doesn't get is that a man will never be in the position of being pregnant. And yet, he speaks for women, their reproductive systems, and their lives. Women have abortions for a lot of reasons. What women will do, and are doing, especially the poor, is go back alley to do what they need to do. Whether it's buying or finding abortifacients to take at home, or going to someone who will provide an abortion, which is what women were doing for thousands of years before Roe vs. Wade.
Click to expand...

I doubt that a woman who is twenty weeks pregnant will go to a back alley abortionist. That's what this thread is about. If the reason is economic, she will usually get it done before that time also. If she is carrying a dead fetus, I would think that would come under the emergency exception.

If there is no legal way to get an abortion in the place where she lives, the woman should be able to go to a different state to have it done. There are women's groups who campaign for abortion rights, and they should be willing to put their money where their mouths are and finance the travel, if necessary.

I have never had any close involvement with an AB but, if my daughter or granddaughter were to tell me she was pregnant, I would go with her to the clinic to end the pregnancy if she asked.
 
LadyVer said:
1) You seem kind of defensive about manspreading and mansplaining. I assumed you weren't being serious as manspreading and mansplaining are two different things.

2) I didn't take your statements as today being a good day for abortion. I was referring to Walker and the rest of the tea party morons. Again, you seem defensive.

3) When men start having their reproductive systems regulated by the government, and by women, maybe then men will understand all the nuances involved in pregnancy and abortion, but I'm not holding my breath. Until then, a thread entitled "A Woman's Right to Her Own Life, Her Own Body" will be full of crapola by men mansplaining, or manspreading.
Click to expand...

1) Not defensive at all. I just wasn't actually talking to you with that statement.

2) You responded to me, so I assumed you were talking to me. My apologies.

3.) No arguments here, not a one. The entireity of my argument with you is limited to the fact that when 3/4s of women claim some variant on financial burden and 89% happen in the first 13 weeks. That the conversation should be focused on those subjects. I'm not saying that I want a woman who gets raped to be forced to raise her baby, I'm saying that those are sufficiently rare that I think it's not fair to discuss. Nor are medical reasons when again those aren't the over whelming majority.

I'm a numbers guy. When I see 75% and 89% I think that's where rational people put the energy.

That in NO way diminishes any of your points.

Boxlicker101 said:
I doubt that a woman who is twenty weeks pregnant will go to a back alley abortionist. That's what this thread is about. If the reason is economic, she will usually get it done before that time also. If she is carrying a dead fetus, I would think that would come under the emergency exception.

If there is no legal way to get an abortion in the place where she lives, the woman should be able to go to a different state to have it done. There are women's groups who campaign for abortion rights, and they should be willing to put their money where their mouths are and finance the travel, if necessary.

I have never had any close involvement with an AB but, if my daughter or granddaughter were to tell me she was pregnant, I would go with her to the clinic to end the pregnancy if she asked.
Click to expand...
 
Scott Walkers thinks that every sperm is sacred, and is worth killing a woman

Gov. Scott Walker's idea of equality


Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) said this week that he would sign a ban on abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy that does not contain exceptions for rape and incest victims, if the bill reaches his desk. The measure also contains a less-discussed provision that would allow the father to sue the doctor for "emotional and psychological distress" if he disagrees with the abortion, regardless of his relationship with the woman having the procedure.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/03/wisconsin-abortion_n_7502558.html?utm_hp_ref=politics

Wisconsin Assembly Bill 237 would ban abortions after 20 weeks “postfertilization,” which doctors would measure as 22 weeks of pregnancy since pregnancies are usually measured from the woman’s last menstrual period. If the bill becomes law, doctors who perform an abortion after this time could be charged with a felony and fined up to $10,000, or face up to three and a half years in prison.

In addition to those penalties, the bill would allow the father to sue the doctor for damages, “including damages for personal injury and emotional and psychological distress,” if the doctor performs or attempts to perform an abortion after the 20-week limit. The man does not need to be married to the woman or even in a relationship with her to sue her doctor, as long as the pregnancy is not a result of sexual assault or incest. The bill also says the woman can sue.



http://wonkette.com/587360/wisconsi...d-daddies-sue-if-their-sacred-sperm-is-wasted
 
Last edited:
Boxlicker101 said:
If there is no legal way to get an abortion in the place where she lives, the woman should be able to go to a different state to have it done. There are women's groups who campaign for abortion rights, and they should be willing to put their money where their mouths are and finance the travel, if necessary.
Click to expand...

What a load of bullshit

women's groups shouldnt have to put thier money where their mouths are

because the government that is preventing the abortion in the first place are the ones to blame

women shouldnt have to travel anywhere for a medical procedure that can be performed anywhere


dont try implicate women's groups as the bad guys here
 
Boxlicker101 said:
-snip-​

If there is no legal way to get an abortion in the place where she lives, the woman should be able to go to a different state to have it done. There are women's groups who campaign for abortion rights, and they should be willing to put their money where their mouths are and finance the travel, if necessary.
-snip-​
.
Click to expand...

In addition to what BBS said that they shouldn't have to put their money where their mouths are the government should get the fuck out of the way lets take it one step further. What stops them from being arrested upon returning home? There are plenty of countries with much lower age of consent than America in general but if I go to Thailand to fuck 12 year olds and the government finds out I'm in deep shit when I get back. By the same logic if woman leaves State X pregnant and returns 48 hours later and never goes to visit her doctor again. . .well it doesn't take a genius to find out what happened and she's at best an accomplice to murder at that point.
 
badbabysitter said:
What a load of bullshit

women's groups shouldnt have to put thier money where their mouths are

because the government that is preventing the abortion in the first place are the ones to blame

women shouldnt have to travel anywhere for a medical procedure that can be performed anywhere

dont try implicate women's groups as the bad guys here
Click to expand...

I'd like to see men have to travel to a different state for a vasectomy, with a 72-hour waiting period. Men have no clue.
 
woman's rights

LadyVer said:
I'd like to see men have to travel to a different state for a vasectomy, with a 72-hour waiting period. Men have no clue.
Click to expand...

It was once said, and I don't remember by whom, that if men became pregnant abortion would be a sacrament. No woman should be denied medical treatment because of other's religious views.
 
LadyVer said:
I'd like to see men have to travel to a different state for a vasectomy, with a 72-hour waiting period. Men have no clue.
Click to expand...

We get denied much longer than that my dear. I know myself and many other guys (and in the fifteen years since my opinion hasn't changed) that were told "nope you're too young for a vasectomy. You're gonna want kids someday and until then suck it up and wear a condom." 72 hours is much less than the years men are expected to wait.

However there is no real comparison between the two. That's like saying Group X would change their minds on affordable car insurance if they had to wait to get a pilot license.
 
badbabysitter said:
What a load of bullshit

women's groups shouldnt have to put thier money where their mouths are

because the government that is preventing the abortion in the first place are the ones to blame

women shouldnt have to travel anywhere for a medical procedure that can be performed anywhere


dont try implicate women's groups as the bad guys here
Click to expand...


Sorry BBS....I know this blows your mind and is total PATRIARCHY!! But they should have to go consult a doctor. At least until they figure out the cost/pain/inconvenience free version you want where she just thinks it and it magically happens get's sorted out. Till then they should be done under the supervision of a licensed medical professional.

LadyVer said:
I'd like to see men have to travel to a different state for a vasectomy, with a 72-hour waiting period. Men have no clue.
Click to expand...

I was outright denied one, men have a clue just not all of them so sit and spin you dumb sexist cow.
 
BotanyBoy said:
Sorry BBS....I know this blows your mind and is total PATRIARCHY!! But they should have to go consult a doctor. At least until they figure out the cost/pain/inconvenience free version you want where she just thinks it and it magically happens get's sorted out. Till then they should be done under the supervision of a licensed medical professional.



I was outright denied one, men have a clue just not all of them so sit and spin you dumb sexist cow.
Click to expand...

I got one, but the doctor wanted to talk to my wife and ask her if she were okay with it. In my situation I had been previously married and had two kids. My second wife had no children of her own and was much younger than me. He wanted to make sure she understood she didn't want any kids...

Kind of old school I would think. This was ..hmm....13 years ago give or take.
 
lovecraft68 said:
I got one, but the doctor wanted to talk to my wife and ask her if she were okay with it. In my situation I had been previously married and had two kids. My second wife had no children of her own and was much younger than me. He wanted to make sure she understood she didn't want any kids...

Kind of old school I would think. This was ..hmm....13 years ago give or take.
Click to expand...

In the military if you don't have 3 kids and/or wifey approval the answer is no. Even if your shit is all fucked up from chemical fires/radiation exposure and you don't want to risk retard baby, NO you have retard baby and you like it!!

This was only 8 years ago and I doubt it's changed. IDK ask LadyVer she is apparently the only one with a clue cuz our penis keeps us from being a functioning human being with any sort of cognitive ability.
 
Autonomy over one's own body is the most fundamental of human rights and the state has no right to intrude.

Nor is there any room for religious dogma to interfere in that space, nor to seek to influence legislation.

Keep your religion to yourselves and keep the state out of the bedroom!
 
Wisc. Sen. Mary Lazich: No medical experts needed to write abortion bills

The end result is that a woman will be punished by having her uterus cut apart.
 
LadyVer said:
1) Manspreading does not equal mansplaining, although I'm starting to wonder exactly how much Walker has been manspreading, and where.

2) The stillbirth I had at 5 months occurred "naturally," well, with a little help with Heparin to stop the hemorraging, which resulted in clots the size of my two hands, and nothing for the extreme pain that made me beg. If the pregnancy had continued and tests showed the fetus was dead or had dangerous health issues, or that my health was at risk, I would have chosen abortion. Women in this position today are having to wait 48 and 72 hours to get the abortion they need. And not all women abort spontaneously. I could have been carrying a dead fetus for a while before they decided to induce labor. Do men know what it's like to carry a dead fetus? It isn't pleasant. I prefer sponataneous abortion to carrying a dead fetus for a while. And if I had a choice between carrying a dead fetus or having an abortion? Abortion wins. But, Walker and his ilk want the right to tell women how and when they can make these decisions. They see abortion as only a matter of women deciding on a whim for economic reasons alone, and we've decided that today is a good day for an abortion. What a bunch of morons. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I'm not getting into this debate, I'm just puzzled why they used heparin to stop a hemorrhage.
 
TheLM said:
I'm not getting into this debate, I'm just puzzled why they used heparin to stop a hemorrhage.
Click to expand...


Maybe I got the name of the drug wrong. Heparin is stuck in my memory for some reason. Is there a drug that starts with H that stops hemorrhaging? I could google it, but I'm exhausted.
 
Heparin

LadyVer said:
Maybe I got the name of the drug wrong. Heparin is stuck in my memory for some reason. Is there a drug that starts with H that stops hemorrhaging? I could google it, but I'm exhausted.
Click to expand...

Heparin does just the opposite, it stops coagulation and blood clots.
 
5th Circuit panel
Each member appointed by George W. Bush

June 9, 2015

Tuesday afternoon, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed most of a lower court decision that kept most of the state's remaining abortion providers open.

The ruling makes the most onerous provision of Texas 2013 anti-abortion law, House Bill 2, enforceable. Every health clinic in the state — except for one — that wishes to provide abortions will be required to be an ambulatory surgical center (ASC). The state of Texas claims that the ASC mandate protects women's health. Women's health advocates and medical professionals have pointed out the safety of a clinical abortion and asserted that limiting access makes women more likely to seek illegal abortions. Throughout the case, the state has denied the obvious, that HB2 is clearly designed to limit access to Texas woman.

http://www.dallasobserver.com/news/...-texas-is-now-almost-impossible-again-7300959

Making women in the Valley travel 3.5 hours to San Antonio is not acceptable, under the court's ruling, but making women in Abilene travel 2.5 hours to Fort Worth is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

jaF0
How Does a Class Become Protected?
Replies
1
Views
139
VinnyVeritas
V
SugarDaddy1
Mother’s Day 2022: The real reproductive rights battle isn’t abortion, it’s to have and raise children
Replies
11
Views
282
YDB95
YDB95
JohnEngelman
A Berkeley Radical Writes a Fair Minded History of the Christian Right (AKA, the Religious Right), by John Engelman
Replies
1
Views
353
PaxNurgle
P
B
From Trump's Executed Baby to Infanticide
Replies
3
Views
518
bodysong
B
gotsnowgotslush
A Woman's Rights to Her Own Body
2 3
Replies
66
Views
7K
BotanyBoy
BotanyBoy
Back
Top