Pro-choice butter

May 8, 2008 rooroo

There are generally very few things that really tick me off. I meditate on public transport; the most stressful part of my commute (changing from mainline Victoria to to the underground) is a breeze. Boy likes to drink milk straight from the carton – I let it slide. Boy again, breaks wind on purpose while sitting on my lap – I let it slide, and slap his arse.

The following things are guaranteed to make my blood pressure go whoooosh!

* ‘I want to tone up, can you tell me how to tone/sculpt/firm? Weights? I don’t want to look like Arnie! You don’t understand, I’m the sort of person who bulks right up! Would those 0.0002kg pink weights be ok? What about pencils?”

Normally after a deep intake of breath, I can verbally kick arse just by pointing the poor deluded soul in the direction of Stumptuous. The next is probably the one that really gets my bugbear.

* “I’m pro-choice!” Awesome, brilliant, let me set up a fondue in your honour. “I’m pro-choice, but I’m against abortion if it’s over x weeks. And if it’s for y reason. And if the person hasn’t been using z contraceptives. And only if the woman feels really bad about it afterwards. And she must never have one again! What, she’s had one before? Disgusting, someone should sterlise her. In fact, no one should get an abortion!”

I’ve spoken about pro-choice butting before so I don’t really need to rehash that again. One thing I will ask is why Nadine Dorries is claiming to be neither pro-life or pro-choice when she seems to be doing a hell of a lot to convince me it’s the former. Call a spade a spade, if you’re anti, fucking say it.

The Ministry of Truth after some searching have come up with evidence that shows that:

“Dorries is just the clean-skin trojan horse for the evangelical Christian right but the problem with lying is that somewhere, somehow, you’re bound to slip up…

…and Dorries has done just that.”

More here including a screen-shot from the horse’s mouth regarding the upper limit.

You are right about one thing, I do want to go lower than 20 weeks – I would settle for the European average of 13 weeks, but would prefer 9.

It’s clear to see the most recent effort has nothing to do with wanting to reduce the limit to 20 weeks. If you want to chip away at abortion rights, piece by piece, the legal limit is the easiest one to go for, as it’s the one that strikes unease with a lot of people, some pro-choicers included. Throw in some cutesy 4D ultrasound scans, a little pseudoscience (or in Nadine’s case, outright misinformation and lies) and you have a good case for lowering the limit.

A legal limit of 20 weeks won’t be enough. Soon would start the campaigns for ‘cooling off periods’ – enforcing time limits on women (which is against you in pregnancy) between confirming that she wants an abortion and getting that abortion. Then they might want to suggest women have to look at the ultrasound scan prior to having the termination, just so that they’re ‘informed’. That might be a good time to reduce the legal limit from 20 weeks to 16. Then doing away with ‘social abortions’ – and reducing the legal limit for that to 12 weeks. The possibilities are endless.

I sincerely hope my IUD is doing its job.


Entry Filed under: feministing, free range rude, musings

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to comments via RSS Feed

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Pages

    %d bloggers like this: