RE: Should Abortion be banished

A miscarriage is an abortion: a spontaneous abortion.

RE: Should Abortion be banished

It's a live and potentially viable embryo which is removed.

Ectopic pregnancies are aborted because the chances of the mother and child's survival are so slim, and the death of the mother in these cases is not a good one.

But in some very small number of cases, both mother and child survive.

It is an abortion.

Do you begin to see that this subject is fraught with double standards?

We weigh up one, or more lives against one, or more others.

The mother of three, pregnant with a much wanted fourth is offered an abortion of her ectopic pregnancy so she survives and can continue to look after her three children.

The mother carrying sextuplets, or octuplets is offered abortion of all, but two, in the hope of saving at least those two. The mother who can't bear to choose between all her children, loses them all.

The struggling mother of a high needs child and toddler is offered an abortion when a new form of contraception proves statistically unreliable, despite doctors' claims of it's efficacy. Does she preserve the life of her embryo, or meeting the basic needs of the children she already has?

Maybe it's easier to see these harrowing decisions as black and white when you don't actually have to make them, but they are balancing lives against lives. Whichever you choose, there is perhaps something which might be called a double standard.

The biggest double standard, however, is denying mothers support to have their child and then judging them for accepting the offered abortion.

RE: Should Abortion be banished

What would you call allowing a woman with an ectopic pregnancy to die by refusing an abortion?

Is that not murder?

RE: MAJOR CARIBBEAN STORM

$99 may be good if you have $99.

Or $495 for a family of five with three children.

Or a credit card.

And money for somewhere to stay.

But what of the people who don't?

RE: Should Abortion be banished

@Len...

Is abortion empowering for women?

It maybe gives us a choice, but it's a shit choice.

Contraception is empowering for women (although I could put a few arguments against hormonal contraception).

Affordable child care opportunities, a living wage, pay parity, affordable, safe housing, utilities and food...these things are empowering for women.

I've yet to meet a woman who felt empowered by having an abortion, whether for extreme medical, or other reasons.

@Red...

I think it's naive to think a woman needs a medical reason to have an abortion. Being young, single, homeless, unemployed, poor, unsupported, judged...these are not medical reasons. They are social reasons.

The stress these issues put on women make them become medical reasons, but they are not medical reasons in themselves.

Perhaps abortion is most empowering for the people who already have power.

Perhaps we are being duped.

Perhaps we are being shafted in a most insidious way.

dunno

RE: Should Abortion be banished

I've just realised my mistake - the risks for men aren't much the same.

We cannot escape the fact that it's women who do the pregnancy a childbirth thing.

It's quite a big thing, that.

RE: Should Abortion be banished

@Ooby...

In the UK parents and government are obliged to financially support minors until they are 18, or until they finish further education up to the age of 19.

Ideally, parenting should be a joint decision and a joint responsibility, but there are practical issues which cannot be ignored.

A father can have a say, but what next?

A father saying he wants an unborn child, wants to contribute financially, wants to partake in raising the child may influence a woman's decision: that kind of support can make all the difference if a woman is feeling overwhelmed by the enormity of becoming a parent, or having another child. On the other hand, it may make little difference to how she is coping, or will cope in the future depending on her circumstances. Men can say how they feel, but they can't demand that a woman goes through with a pregnancy.

Conversely, a man who says he doesn't want anything to do with a child may influence a woman's decision, but if she's determined to have the child, she can't be forced to abort, nor should an absent father escape all responsibility.

On a practical level, the only way I can see that a man can protect himself from becoming a father, or facing the possibility of his child being aborted is to abstain from sex, or use some serious belt and braces forms of contraception.

For as long as people willingly risk pregnancy, they risk having to accept the consequences of that. Contraception isn't 100% protection, people have mishaps, people deceive.

For women the consequences might be pregnancy, childbirth, becoming a parent maybe on their own, or abortion. (I've yet to meet a woman who hasn't been profoundly affected if they have had an abortion.)

For men, the risks are much the same, but with less control.

Maybe young men and boys would benefit from early education in order to protect themselves with respect to these issues.

RE: Should dirty old men from outside Essex ...

The suffix 'sex' in place names comes from 'Seaxe', an old word for Saxon.

RE: which famous person do you loolk like...?

MikeD12 - Dougal from the Magic Roundabout.

DaMoose - Brian from the Magic Roundabout.

Galrads in the photo next to the aeroplane - Zebedee from the Magic Roundabout.

giggle

RE: is being over weight unattractive?

I once watched a documentary about obesity.

One chap regularly did triathlons, despite being clinically obese.

Being slender is likewise not necessarily a measure of fitness, or health. Some slender people have fatty tissue round their vital organs where it's most risky to have it.

As for attractiveness, I personally don't differentiate on the basis of weight, or body fat. Some people I find attractive, some I don't and there's probably not a huge amount of rhyme, or reason about it, other than liking someone has a big influence.

Having said that, some people I really like, but I still don't lust after. confused

Oh, f*ck knows. You're all lush, don't worry about it. laugh

RE: which famous person do you loolk like...?

There was a young Aussie lad on the forums a few years back who reckoned I was the spit of Jessica Alba. Couldn't see it myself.

And then there was this fella who was convinced that I was Nylon Jane, aka Stap-on Jane and thought he had some well-established Internet relationship with me. Unfortunately, I do have a facial resemblance to her and I suspect this fella told his mates, because I had a spate of similarly disturbing emails at the time. laugh

I suspect who I actually look like is Mikhail Glinka because my mum does, I look like my mum and we're somehow related.

Err, that's me and my mum are somehow related to Mikhail Glinka. I kinda worked out how me and my mum are related some time ago. laugh

RE: Should Abortion be banished

Father's rights are a difficult nut to crack.

I whole heartedly agree that abortion may, and does in some cases, cause harm to the father.

But, as the woman carries the pregnancy (assuming a binary model of gender for simplicty), equal rights are a bit tricky to divvy out.

It's not like the woman can hand over the pregnancy to someone else.

If a man has the right to say a woman can't have an abortion to protect himself from harm, how would that be managed in practical terms? Would women have to be imprisoned on 24 watch to the make sure they did no harm to themselves, or the unborn child? Could the mother be force fed? How would it be decided how to negotiate the potential harm, or benefit to all three parties?

That's not to say father's rights should be ignored for the sake of simplicity, just that I don't have any answers and it would be interesting to discuss realistic options.

As for maintenance payments for the child, the father saying he wanted the mother to have an abortion, has its difficulties and could easily be abused. It probably opens a bigger can of worms than all the non-paying parents currently do. My daughter is 23, there's a fairly sizeable debt gathering interest and dust at the CSA, but I'm not likely to ever see any of it. Paying for an unwanted child might be an issue, but perhaps one that's circumnavigated all to easily and frequently anyway.

An aspect which wasn't addressed in the father's rights citation was rape. We take into account pregnancy as a result of women and girls being raped with respect to abortion, but not men and boys being raped by women.

Not that it would be ethical to force a woman to have an abortion if she'd become pregnant by raping a man, or a boy, but it does raise paternity issues. I think there might also be a bit more wiggle room for refusing an abortion, but how that might be implemented practically, I do not know.

Hmm, that might lead us back to pregnancies as a result of deception. For example, if a woman stops using contraception without telling her partner, could that technically count as a form of rape, if the man is not making an informed choice in consenting to having sex?

RE: Should abortion threads be banished?

Technological advancement, medical research and social/political/economic issues alter on a daily basis.

This impacts on subjects like the abortion debate.

If some people wish to ignore those subjects, it's okay to ignore those threads.

If some people wish to learn, challenge, be challenged, debate and maybe personally develop within the context of a rapidly changing world, it's okay.

RE: Should Abortion be banished

It's not possible to banish spontaneous abortion.

Assuming we're taking about non-spontaneous abortion, if we own that there are circumstances where abortion is acceptable, then we must own that we are pro-choice, albeit within boundaries.

For example, an ectopic pregnancy being life threatening to the mother: women in this situation should be involved in the decision making process, whether they choose to have potentially life saving surgery, or not. That's pro-choice.

Forcing a mother to have surgery for an ectopic pregnancy, or denying her potentially life saving surgery is not pro-choice.

If we own that there are circumstances where continuing with a pregnancy might be life threatening to the mother, we then have to look at what constitutes a threat to life: is it just physical, or could it include the possibility of suicide, or quality of life? If a pregnancy is likely, or possibly going to have a detrimental effect on the mental health of a woman, or girl, should they be excluded from the decision making process? At what point can someone else decide a pregnancy is more than a woman, or girl can cope with, without their input? What about the future quality of life of the unborn child?

Part of the decision making process should also be driven by medical knowledge to protect unborn children. If we agree that aborting a day before birth is unacceptable, but agree that early stage ectopic pregnancy is acceptable, there's a whole area in between which is up for debate. This is further complicated by advances in medical technology, where the age of survival of premature babies is now lower than the legal highest age, or pregnancy term for abortion. Should pregnant women, or girls be excluded from that debate?

As has already be said, support for mother's is also an issue. When my daughter became pregnant she sought family planning advice. What they did was get the paper work out to initiate her having an abortion without asking her what she wanted.

What she wanted was support, advice on how to manage her dramatically changed life, a cuddle and to be reassured that everything was going to be okay. She got that from me, but what if she hadn't?

My daughter told me yesterday that the government are introducing changes to the child tax credit system over here. It's there to boost low incomes for people with children. Many women, men and two parent families struggling with zero, or low hour contracts and minimum wage whilst managing child care are reliant on child tax credit subsidies to cope financially with the over inflated rents and utility bills of big business. I'm not sure exactly what the changes are, but my daughter thinks child tax credits are only going to be paid for the first two children in the future.

I can see this being a false saving if it discourages partners with more than two children living together and I can see it having an impact on the rate of abortion.

Personally, I'm pro-choice: women should be involved in the decision making process. However, I think that should be an informed medical choice including the rights of the unborn child, with more options which include practical support for parents.

The ethical goal should be to minimise the need for abortion, protecting the welfare of adults and children. That would involve a lot of social issues.

What is not ethical, is putting people between a rock and a hard place, offering them a poor solution and then judging them for taking desperate measures. That is abusive; it's an abusive relationship between individuals and society.

It's not pro-choice if parents are pushed into accepting abortion in order to survive, or maintain a minimum quality of life for the children they already have.

RE: MAJOR CARIBBEAN STORM

Keep safe, Happy. Keep checking in with us when you can. hug

RE: In My Opiniion Facial Hair Is Not Neecessary What Is YourOpinion?

I've just shaved my unnecessary eyebrows off and drawn them back on with a pencil.

I feel much more sensible now.

RE: Drug overdose any solutions? Even in jail there is no problem obtaining drugs

It's interesting that no one has yet mentioned the self-medication aspect of substance misuse and how society is failing children and young people long before they become addicted to substances, or behaviours.

Gabor Mate has a TEDx talk posted on YouTube, which unfortunately, I can't re-post from my phone. He explains heroine and other addictions honestly and chillingly well.

BC, in your op you don't expand to the outcome of the research into what happens after the life-saving medication is used. Maybe I misunderstood and the question is only beginning to be asked. dunno

RE: Can you like someone if you want to change them?

What's that Mohammed Ali quote...?

A man who thinks the same at 50 as he did when he was 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.

Something like that.

You can't change people, they can only chose to change themselves.

I'd find it very difficult being around someone who wasn:t into developing personally, didn't question and analyse stuff, didn't bring new ideas and information into the relationship.

I need all that because I couldn't do it on my own in a relationship with someone who wanted to stand still.

I like to be a stimulating part of other people's change and for them to be a stimulating part of mine, whatever the type of relationship.

It's like bungee jumping of the mind for me. laugh

RE: Gender equality, you say!

Being above equality implies an inequality.

We're all below equality.

RE: Gender equality, you say!

Everybody should have equality, Mike.

I don't need it, I've survived thus far without it, but I damn well want it.

And of course, some people haven't survived, or won't survive because of inequality.

RE: Gender equality, you say!

I have always said there is only a thin veneer of gender equality in the West.

RE: Gender equality, you say!

I have always said there is only a thin veneer of gender equality in the West.

RE: Suicide ?

@Non...

If life feels intolerable, or overwhelming for some people, perhaps there may be an element of self-preservation in suicide.

Perhaps there are different parts of us which we attempt to self-preserve: we may preserve our physical self, our emotional self, our cognitive self, our spiritual self (if 'spiritual' is a word which is meaningful for some), or any other aspect of the self as some may perceive themselves.

RE: .........come on you muppets vent your anger,,,,,try your luck,,,,, punk......

Can somebody post Miss Piggy singing I Will Survive, please?

RE: Did Feminist supremacy become Narcissism entitlement of righteousness ?

Did feminist supremacy become narcissism entitlement of righteousness?

I think that was the thread title.

Feminism is the movement concerning equal rights for women.

You can't have equal rights for women without having equal rights for men.

If there are two groups, one cannot be more equal than the other, therefore using the phrase 'feminist supremacy' is inaccurate.

If the phrase 'feminist supremacy' is an inaccurate, or a meaningless phrase, it cannot become something else which is meaningful.

I have no idea what 'narcissism entitlement of righteousness' is supposed to mean. It certainly doesn't appear to be grammatically correct in the context of the question. It's also somewhat meaningless.

However, there is some implication I'm going to assume from those words. When there's a movement for social change there is generally an element of perceived extremism: in her book The Female Eunuch, Germaine Greer radically called for women to become freelance secretaries, rather than be 'married' to one male boss all their working lives; during the bus boycott in the US, the activists debated whether to include employing black men as bus drivers in their demands, or whether that level of extremism would damage their campaign.

There will also be a certain level of anger involved in social change. In terms of gender equality, men and women sometimes get angry with each other to the point of chauvinism.

Male and female chauvinism is not the same as feminism.

It's understandable that people get angry with each other. It's also functional to a certain extent, as the last thing oppressors want is the oppressed to get angry. No longer suppressing anger leads to uprising.

The problem with chauvinism and anger is that it's difficult to listen to and difficult to be heard over. It hampers discussion, negotiation and progress.

I applaud the OP for taking responsibility for change by creating an opportunity for men to be heard. It would be splendid if men also took responsibility for being heard, too.

Unfortunately, the thread title may predetermine a rather more hostile dynamic than a progressive one.

RE: Breast feeding in public

@Mike...

I read all of this thread. The woman was not refused service, harassed, or asked to go elsewhere.

One2 described his own experience, but dealt with his inability to deal with the situation by appropriately asking a female member of staff to serve.

Just about everybody who has worked in the service industry will have at one time, or another avoided a customer for some reason and asked a colleague to cover. It's a way of maintaining a professional front when your own personal feelings are being compromised.

I've darted off out the back quicker than Linford Christie when a particular customer arrived and colleagues covered me; in turn, I have covered them. It's team work.

I'm a great advocate of breastfeeding feeding, it was unacceptable the fuss some people made when I was breastfeeding, I value the information about the law you provided, but I still maintain you haven't got a leg to stand on in terms of prosecution.

For one thing, you have no evidence: somebody presenting a scenario on a dating website forum doesn't mean the event actually took place.

@One2...

My dad's a very decent sort of a chap who is very easily embarrassed. He didn't bat an eyelid when I fed his granddaughter in front of him. If he felt at all uncomfortable, he was jolly decent in not letting it show, don't you think?

RE: Breast feeding in public

@Mike...

The customer wasn't refused service at the establishment, so no law was broken there.

The customer was not harassed, or asked to move somewhere else, so no law was broken there, either.

One2 refused to serve her himself because he felt embarrassed and awkward. He asked a female member of staff to serve her which was appropriate action.

One2 is entitled to his feelings. They are his. They are just feelings. He is entitled to discuss his feelings on these forums without harassment...or being told to go elsewhere. grin

@the posters who expressed that discreet breastfeeding is acceptable...

Discretion be damned. When baby needs food, out come the baps. If you don't like it, tough titties.

It's not the easiest maneuver in the world, especially with a new born/first child/a belly full of stitches/under a shawl/etc. I reiterate: the only mum obliged to look after you is your own.

@Dedovix...

Your mamma called you pecker Mrs. Twiggywinkle and it's smaller than your partner's ex's. grin

RE: Breast feeding in public

Unless they have colic, then it can take all night to wind them up.

RE: Breast feeding in public

I wasn't aware of the law and I should be as a service provider.

I'm glad it's changed since I was a breastfeeding mother. It's not nice being made to feel like a social pariah just because you need to feed your child.

I'll look for an appropriate moment to raise the issue with my management.

RE: Breast feeding in public

Good post, Mike.

Thanks for the info.

This is a list of forum posts created by jac_the_gripper.

back to top
"PLAY NOW: Sushi Pairs"(meet us in the games)
 
We use cookies to ensure that you have the best experience possible on our website. Read Our Privacy Policy Here