Reproductive Justice: It’s About More Than Safe Abortion Care


In her response to a recent article in the New York Times, Dawn Laguens, writing on behalf of Planned Parenthood, makes an initial gesture at “inclusiveness,” honoring the history and contributions of women of color—individuals and organizations—who moved beyond “choice” and reproductive rights more than 20 years ago to craft a new paradigm: reproductive justice. But Laguens quickly narrows her focus to this point: choice does not capture the difficulties poor women and women of color have when they try to access abortion services.

Laguens’ persistent focus on the association between “choice” and abortion—the origins of this relationship and some of its impacts—expresses a core present-day mission of Planned Parenthood and other choice-driven organizations: to protect the right and the access to legal abortion and contraception currently under vigorous attack. But that focus in no way expresses or honors the vision or the agenda of reproductive justice advocates.

The reproductive justice framework claims that the right to be pregnant and to be a mother is as profoundly important to women’s lives as the right to constrain fertility and avoid being a mother. If women need access to legal abortion and contraception to accomplish the latter, what resources to do they need if they get pregnant, stay pregnant, and become mothers? The reproductive justice framework shows that these women—and their children—require a healthy environment, decent housing, a living wage, access to medical care and child care to live safely and with dignity, as full persons. The reproductive justice framework incorporates the importance of contraception and abortion and also makes a case that goes far beyond these resources.

As the author of the 14-year-old book cited in the column, I would like to ask why Laguens did not choose instead to name any of the scores of reproductive justice organizations or to quote any of the powerful contemporary voices of women of color, such as Loretta Ross, Sujatha Jesudason, or Toni Bond Leonard, who, having developed the reproductive justice framework, have articulated its vision with clarity and integrity, have worked with unstinting commitment and effort to develop allies in all communities for decades now, and whose engagement Planned Parenthood should no longer appear to avoid?

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

  • StealthGaytheist

    “The reproductive justice framework shows that these women—and their children—require a healthy environment, decent housing, a living wage, access to medical care and child care to live safely and with dignity, as full persons. ”

    This is the part the antichoicers don’t get. They claim to promote life, but they only promote pregnancy and birth. Pro-choice is actually pro-life as we promote the things women and children need for life.

    • Pinkladyapple

      Well they don’t expect women contemplating abortion to actually keep their babies..That’s why they promote adoption so fervently..Which is the reason republicans are so opposed to social safety nets for struggling single mothers. Their agenda is basically single women shouldn’t be having sex and definitely not raising children, so what do we need all these “entitlement” programs for? Gestate and birth the child then hand them over to be raised “properly” by a heterosexual christian white family.

      • Kathryn Ranieri

        Or go the Handmaiden’s Tale route—literally control her whole body.

        • Pinkladyapple

          Never read the book, is it good?

          • lady_black

            EVERYONE should read that book.

          • Kathryn Ranieri

            Written by Margaret Atwood several decades ago, it’s is a disturbing dystopia that, to the best of my recollection, is eerily familiar to our current state of affairs. I’d highly recommend it.

          • fiona64

            It’s one of the most brilliant dystopian novels I’ve ever read. Unfortunately, many of the anti-choice appear to think it’s an instruction manual … and you’ll see what I mean once you read it.

          • goatini

            I initially read it when it was published in 1985, when it actually was a dystopian science fiction novel – though by 1985 there were already signs and portents from the so-called “Religious Right” that their ultimate agenda wasn’t all that far off. The final confirmation for me that the Christian Reconstructionists fully intend to make women’s bodies the property of the (theocratic) State, was that there is now an American state with legislation that required the performance of a macabre scientific experiment on the corpse of Marlise Munoz, violating her own wishes, and the wishes, privacy, and rights of her family to make decisions on behalf of a deceased loved one, because a fetus superseded ALL of these. When I recently re-read it, I am sad to say that I am shocked that not a bit of it seems out of the realm of possibility these days.

          • lady_black

            I’m with you, goatini. What’s going on today makes me glad sometimes that I’m not young anymore. I fear for my granddaughters.

          • StealthGaytheist

            It’s a must-read. It’s also one of the many books that has been banned/challenged in the US.

          • Shan

            Seriously? I didn’t know that.

          • StealthGaytheist

            Yep. BTW, September is Banned Books Month. Google some lists of banned and challenged books. You’ll be amazed what you find on them.

          • Shan

            “September is Banned Books Month. Google some lists of banned and challenged books. You’ll be amazed what you find on them.”

            I’ll do that and also keep an eye out for my librarian-friend’s posts soon.

          • fiona64

            Among the items you’ll find on the list: “The Diary of Anne Frank” (because she talks about getting her period). I am not making this up.

          • Shan

            Oh, of course. Because we all know menarche is SO much more disturbing than genocide.

          • fiona64

            It’s the same reason why “Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret” was banned. Some people seem to really flip out about female pubescence. :-/

          • Shan

            Really? That one, too?

          • fiona64

            Yep.

          • Jennifer Starr

            I never understood why they got so upset over books that mention a normal physical process that all girls go through. Did they think they could stop it by not letting their children read about it?

          • Arekushieru

            Oh, my, GOD. It took me awhile, but now I remember that book! I remember reading it just before I hit puberty! It was one of the reasons why I knew what to expect. Oh. My. God.

          • Mandy

            Also some interesting info, many copies of her diary have been edited to remove at least one passage where she talks in a pretty romantic fashion about wanting to kiss girls.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            Yes. Margaret Atwood is a great writer.

      • lady_black

        Also known as gestational slavery.

      • StealthGaytheist

        Yep. Be a broodsow for the privileged.

    • dudebro

      Exactly.

    • Arab225

      You mean like extorting men and forcing them to pay for your decision to give birth? If it’s your decision, it should also be your responsibility– pro-choice should be a two way street! The woman decides that the child must be here, therefore said child has no right to ask the man for support.

      • StealthGaytheist

        Poor you. Are women stealing your sperm again?

        • Arab225

          Are you menstruating again? Put a sock in it

          • dudebro

            A sock could work, I suppose. If it is made of a suitably absorbent material.

            You are just chock full of ideas!

          • StealthGaytheist

            Nobody invited you here, MRA troll.

          • Jennifer Starr

            And flagged.

      • lady_black

        Actually, YES the child has a right to be supported by the father, too. And the child WILL be awarded support.

        • Arab225

          So what happens to that child’s “right” to support from it’s father when the mother decides to put the child up for adoption without his consent? How many times do I have to tell you about Preston King and father’s like him?

          • Arekushieru

            AW. Only ONE case out of how many MORE examples that have happened TO women???? Besides, we only have HIS side of the story. Has anyone even BOTHERED to ask her side? No, of course not. It’s all about hurting da PWECIOUS MENZ widdle feewings, after all. And, no, they weren’t married or even common-law. So what the FUCK did he expect?

          • Arab225

            So what you’re saying is that the biological father should have no rights to the child if he was not married to the mother? So why then can she ask the man to financially support the child if she chooses to keep it? Why does she get to decide her fate while he doesn’t? Doesn’t that sound a wee bit ridiculous to you?

          • lady_black

            There is NO apostrophe in “fathers.”

          • Arab225

            That’s incorrect, there IS an apostrophe in the word “fathers”. For example, the term father’s day was used by US congress in 1913 during the process to establish the day as an official holiday. As a result, this is now the precedent. Anyway back to Preston King. While I agree that California has some asinine laws that affects both genders, men still by and large get the shitty end of the stick. The judge said that he terminated this kid’s parental rights because he wasn’t married to the mother. All this despite him being excited about the baby and purportedly buying a crib. So with all these laws and loopholes allowing women to opt out of parenthood with no regard for the father’s rights or feelings, why is there this big opposition to financial abortion for men? If woman can walk away, why can’t men?

          • lady_black

            There is NO APOSTROPHE in the word “fathers” as you used it. The plural form of the word father is fathers, without apostrophe. You are using the possessive form of the word when speaking of “Father’s Day” which by the way, is capitalized as a proper noun. The same applies in any use of the possessive form of the word “father.” Father’s chair, father’s tie, father’s hair. And I’m not going to explain California law to you again. It seems from the case of Bode Miller that men do have rights to their children in California. And Bode didn’t even want the kid for most of the pregnancy. And he certainly wasn’t married to the young lady in question. IMHO, Bode Miller is a pig and should have NO rights. BUT he did, because the woman decided to keep the baby. The Preston King case is an entirely different set of facts, having to do more with the adoption in progress.

          • Arab225

            Excuse me but how did I use the possessive form of the word by saying: “How many times do I have to tell you about Preston King and fathers like him”? And you said that there was no apostrophe in the word “fathers”, so that’s the reason why I corrected you. I also capitalized the f in Father’s Day, here’s the direct quotation of what I said: “For example, the term Father’s Day was used by US congress in 1913 during the process to establish the day as an official holiday”. Now back to the Bode Miller case. From my experience, he is the exception not the rule. What happens to fathers like Preston King is more indicative of what happens on a day-to-day basis as it relates to fathers rights. And I vehemently disagree with what you said about him being a “pig” and that he shouldn’t have any rights. I thought you were all about the best interests of the child? If he has served time for his crime and wants to be apart of his child’s life, why shouldn’t he be allowed to do so? As for the adoption process, why are only women allowed to abdicate their responsibilities through adoption? If the father doesn’t want the child, why can’t he put it up for adoption without the mother’s consent? After all, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander!

          • lady_black

            Reading comprehension difficulties? Home-schooled? An English flunk-out? I said you used the PLURAL form of father, NOT the possessive form. You did NOT “correct me” and you do not pack the gear to correct me. The plural form of the word “father” contains NO apostrophe. There is a HUGE difference between “fathers” and “father’s” and I suggest you ask your ESL or high school/college English instructor to clarify it for you. I charge $15 an hour for tutoring.

          • Arab225

            What did I JUST say?…”Excuse me, but how did I not use the plural form of the word by saying: “How many times do I have to tell you about Preston King and fathers like him”. You either need new glasses or to get off of that medication, because you’re clearly not seeing properly. You need $30 dollars an hour worth of therapy!

          • Jennifer Starr

            I’m going with English flunk-out and from some of his past posts, I’m also betting there are criminal charges in his background, probably for domestic violence.

          • fiona64

            I would guess DV and parental abduction, myself.

          • goatini

            And likely sexual assault as well.

          • fiona64

            In no state is a woman permitted to unilaterally place a child for adoption without the birth father’s consent unless she can prove desertion.

            WIth a loser like you, that probably wouldn’t be hard to do. ::shrug:: After all, you’ve openly advocated for male desertion.

          • Arab225

            Are you just going to keep repeating things hoping that I believe it’s true? Just Google Terry Achane, Preston King, Jeremiah Clayton Jones etc…and you’ll see for yourself that women unilaterally give children up for adoption without the father’s consent.

          • fiona64

            If you’re the one making the assertion, Micro-Man, the burden of proof is on you. I’m not going to do your homework for you.

          • Arab225

            What more burden of proof do you need than the names that I just gave you?

        • Arab225
          • fiona64

            The Daily Fail?

            BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

          • Arab225

            More reputable than RH Reality Check.

        • Arab225

          And by father do you mean any man the mother happens to point a finger at? There are husbands right now in this country being forced to pay child support for their wife’s love child.

          • Arekushieru

            Do you know that in some states rapists can get custody of children and force women to pay THEM child support? Yeah, as we can see, you’re just talking out of your ASS. You don’t care about them, because what do WOMEN’S feelings matter, as long as you poor pwecious MENZ widdle feewings aren’t hurt.

          • Arab225

            That’s ridiculous, of course I don’t support rapists getting child support from their victims. However, the same thing has happened to men. A woman had sex with an unconscious man several times, resulting in the birth of a child. He was then held liable for child support. And the same thing has happened to boys who were raped by adult women. Now you tell me, where’s the justice in that? At least with women, they have the option of putting the kid up for adoption or using safe-haven laws.

          • Arab225
          • Jennifer Starr

            Whine, whine, whine

          • Arab225

            That’s the feminist mantra.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            DNA testing? You live in a box in Mom’s basement and rarely come out, I take it.

          • Arab225

            Sweetheart, you couldn’t afford a month’s rent in my mothers basement.

          • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

            You pay rent to live in her basement? I apologize. You are too dumb to know about DNA.

          • Arab225

            When did I insinuate that I lived in my mother’s basement? Sounds to me like you’re projecting your financial insecurity onto me.

          • Jennifer Starr

            No matter, I’m sure you’ll trade Mommy’s basement for a prison cell in due time.

          • fiona64

            It’s a good thing Mommy lets you live there rent-free, isn’t it? After all, your part-time job washing dishes at the local diner for minimum wage isn’t exactly a job that allows you to get an apartment of your own …

          • Arab225

            You and your mother couldn’t afford to live on my lawn, much less my mother’s basement.

      • Arekushieru

        The child did not ask to be there. Therefore the child has EVERY right to ask for financial support from BOTH parents (even by your OWN ‘logic’). AW. If a man has custody of the children, they ALSO have to pay financial support. OOPSIES?

        As for your comment awaiting moderation, making comments about menstruation just shows your misogynist ASS even more. You really do like to put your (unsocked) foot in your mouth quite REGULARLY, dontcha? From what I gather, it’s probably been in all kinds of shit. Must taste pretty gross. Ew.

        • Arab225

          I am not contesting whether or not the child asked to be here. I am saying that only one person brought said child into the world, and it’s not the father. Just check out this quote from stalwart feminist Karen DeCrow who was also former president of NOW (National Organization for Women). You could learn a thing or two.

          “Justice therefore dictates that if a woman makes a unilateral decision to bring pregnancy to term, and the biological father does not, and cannot, share in this decision, he should not be liable for 21 years of support. Or, put another way, autonomous women making independent decisions about their lives should not expect men to finance their choice.” –

          • lady_black

            The child did not ask to be born and support is the CHILD’S right. Not the mother’s right or the father’s right. The child’s right. Frankly, screw your rights. If you don’t want to pay child support, don’t impregnate anyone. There are way to make sure that doesn’t happen. Or take custody yourself.

          • Arab225

            That’s not true, the child’s “right” isn’t an absolute. This is the case when the biological father is a sperm donor. I, as well as many others think this this needs to be expanded to include men who did not consent to the child being born. In that case, the only one who should be held responsible is the individual who decided that the child MUST be here. You can’t blame men for getting women pregnant, because a woman’s body is not a man’s responsibility. And isn’t it ironic that you say screw my rights, then turn around and chide me for siding with pro-lifers?

          • lady_black

            Oh yes I CAN blame men for getting women pregnant. Last time I checked it takes two to make a pregnancy. And sperm donors are a special case, but ONLY the medical, anonymous kind of sperm donors. That indemnification doesn’t apply to DIY sperm donors or ANYONE who gets a woman pregnant in the usual way.

          • Arab225

            You need to check again, because the baby develops inside of the female’s body. So it does not take two, as you say. And a man does not get a woman pregnant; if she allows sperm to go inside of her body, she has just impregnated herself. A man should never be held responsible for what happens to a woman’s body. And like I’ve been telling you, many feminists actually agree with me that the man should not be held responsible for the woman’s unilateral decision to bring a child into the world. If an unmarried man does not want it, he should be seen as a de-facto sperm donor under the eyes of the law. The fact that women are given so many opportunities to walk away after the child is born, only serves to buttress this argument.

          • Jennifer Starr

            And a man does not get a woman pregnant; if she allows sperm to go inside of her body, she has just impregnated herself.

            I’m betting you flunked Biology right along with English.

          • fiona64

            He also obviously flunked civics.

          • Arab225

            A woman is solely responsible for what she allows to go inside of her body.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yes, you did flunk biology.

          • goatini

            A rape apologist, I see. No surprise.

          • Arab225

            Nice try, but I said I said “allows”.

          • fiona64

            And a man does not get a woman pregnant; if she allows sperm to go inside of her body, she has just impregnated herself.

            BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

          • Arekushieru

            Especially since these people are whining about child support, but when push comes to shove it’s always the person who has CUSTODY that has to pay more.

  • lady_black

    I’ll confess. The reproductive justice issue that has me riled up right now involves the case of the couple from Australia who paid a poor young woman in Thailand to gestate their embryos. She had twins, one healthy and one with Down syndrome (along with the too-often co-morbid heart defects). This charming couple chose to take the healthy twin back home with them and leave the unhealthy baby with the surrogate mother. I have no words to express my disgust at these people for taking advantage of a poor woman in a poor country, and refuse to take responsibility for their own flesh and blood, choosing instead to dump the infant on the poor woman to deal with. Most of us don’t have the luxury of paying someone to gestate for us, much less the option of dumping the ‘merchandise’ that is less than perfect on someone who is ill-equipped to deal with it. Has anyone else read of this case and have any thoughts? Am I off-base in viewing this couple as selfish, greedy opportunists?

    • dudebro

      Fiona linked it the other day. And already pro-liars are on the case, talking about how the evil couple wanted the woman to abort, but she refused, because of her pro-life values. /vomit

      • lady_black

        She had the absolute right not to abort. Plus, I’ve read they didn’t tell her about it early in the pregnancy when it would have been easier on her to abort. They waited until she was seven months along.

        • dudebro

          I also read, on Rawstory, that the guy is a pedo or somesuch.

          And I wasn’t saying that she shouldn’t have had the right to carry to term, just that the entire thing is now being presented as a PL victory. They will try to spin everything as a PL ‘victory for life’, while ignoring the fact that this is about adoption, and how it fucks over those of little mans.

          • lady_black

            I think that Australian couple should be forced to pay child support for THEIR KID, that they stuck with a poor Thai woman, for the rest of the kid’s life. I’ve heard of deadbeat parents before, but this is appalling.

          • fiona64

            I wholeheartedly concur.

      • StealthGaytheist

        Cancel that, I misread your comment.

    • StealthGaytheist

      “Am I off-base in viewing this couple as selfish, greedy opportunists?”

      No. They thought they were entitled to a baby (an already born, older child just wouldn’t do). So they used a poor woman’s body to get what they wanted. Then to make matters worse they decided they were entitled to only a perfect baby, so they rejected the imperfect one, leaving the poor woman saddled with a disabled infant she most certainly can’t afford to raise. But what do they care? It’s not like they’re suffering.

    • Shan

      They should have been as smart as Mitt Romney’s son who had a clause in the contract with his surroge that said:

      “In the event the child is determined to be physiologically, genetically or chromosomally abnormal, the decision to abort or not to abort is to be made by the intended parents. In such a case the surrogate agrees to abort, or not to abort, in accordance with the intended parents’ decision.”

      Read more: http://www.tmz.com/2012/09/20/mitt-romney-son-tagg-abortion-clause-surrogate-birth-agreement-contract-bill-handel/#ixzz39f90h235

      Which is still just as atrocious as the situation you’re describing, LB.

    • Mandy

      Stories like this make me really really wary of supporting surrogacy. It just seems really sketchy to me. Paying a strange women to use their body…just doesn’t sit right with me.

      I think we, as a society, really need to work on changing/challenging this view that having a biological child is such a huge important thing. Why do so many women/families still go to such lengths, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars and years and years to have a biological child when there are thousands of children in the world right now waiting for a home? Why are adopted children not considered “real” enough family?

      • lady_black

        Adopted children are a real enough family.

        • Mandy

          …I know. I’m questing why are there so many people who think they aren’t.

          Why so many people feel the need to ask adopted kids who their “real” parents are. Or families that have biological children and adopted children get dumb questions from strangers asking them if its weird to have actual kids vs adopted kids. Why do people still insist on asking these types of dumb questions? Why do so many women/people feel like they HAVE to have a child and spend thousands of dollars on IVF instead of just working to adopt a child?

    • colleen2

      No. I believe that the government of Australia is also investigating that couple. I feel that anyone who uses reproductive technology in this manner is a selfish, greedy and opportunistic. I am really appalled that women are using other women to gestate their children in this manner, particularly when there are so many children in need of a home.

      • lady_black

        Sorry, I can’t agree. It might be appalling, but no force is being used.

        • colleen2

          It’s not exploitative as long as no force is used?

          • lady_black

            As a technology, no, it’s not exploitive. It’s evil PEOPLE who twist things to be exploitive, take unfair advantage, etc.. Laws need to evolve to address these issues and discourage/punish exploitive behavior. What I’m saying is, you can’t hand-wave away people’s rights to be parents. While I can agree that bringing more children into the foster system to never be adopted and age out by making abortion illegal is wrong-headed, I cannot say that people who choose to have their own children (even through a surrogate) are necessarily “selfish.” That would make the majority of women who give birth also “selfish.” In other words, it’s an anti-choice viewpoint.

          • Arab225

            But they are selfish if they choose to give birth to this child and force the hapless sperm donor to finance their decision to bring said child into the world. Under no circumstances should her unilateral choice equal his responsibility. This is why you feminists are losing credibility every day. More and more men are supporting closing down abortion clinics and they’re not even pro-life. Get the picture?

          • fiona64

            I smell an MRAsshole …

          • Arab225

            I smell a feminist. There’s no worse smell than that.

          • dudebro

            Tell me sweetie, are feminists more evil than the Nazis, Pol Pot, Mao and Stalin combined?

          • Arab225

            Excuse me was I conversing with you?

          • dudebro

            I am sorry Sir, is this not a public forum? Do I need to fellate you first?

          • Jennifer Starr

            You don’t get to choose who talks to you.

          • dudebro

            Stop oppressing him Jennifer!!

          • lady_black

            She was conversing with YOU, smartass. She’s allowed to do that.

          • fiona64

            Looks like someone’s got his man-panties in a twist because he isn’t getting his way. Boo-hoo.

          • Arekushieru

            Nope. Feminists aren’t hypocrites. MRAssholes ARE, however. And nothing smells worse than a hypocrite.

            Btw, sweetie, Hitler was just like you. If he was worse than a feminist, you just agreed with the above statement. Lucky ol’ you!

          • lady_black

            Which will virtually guarantee that a lot MORE men who do not want children will be forced to support a lot MORE children that they didn’t want. Get the picture? You, sir, are an idiot. An expert at cutting off your own nose to spite your face.

          • Arab225

            Really?…I see it differently. Many of these women have no idea who the father is and have no idea how to contact him. They may never see a dime in support money from them. With the proliferation of the pro-life movement, you’ll see more and more of this happening in other states. Now many of you women will feel the despair of being forced into parenthood against your will. As a matter of fact, you feminists wouldn’t have to worry about abortion clinics closing down if you gals learned to become more familiar with cucumbers instead. You tell men to keep it in their pants, now it’s time to do your part and keep your legs closed–despite how difficult that might be.

          • lady_black

            I can’t speak for all women. I always knew who the father of my child was, and if a woman has two or more possibilities, she tests them all. And don’t you worry about “her” having “no way to contact him.” That’s not her job. There are parent locator services for that. You CAN be found, and you had BETTER show up in court to defend a paternity suit. A letter can be sent to your last known address and you are deemed to have been served. Skip court, and you will be adjudicated the father. I don’t think you men REALLY want abortion clinics shut down. You won’t like the results of that. It will not go well for men.

          • Arab225

            Oh please, there are several men who have fathered children and have never been found by the child support collection services. If a woman does not know a man’s real name, address, phone number, place of work, friends, family etc…how can the father of her child possibly be found? After all, many women take what a man tells them at face value. So please, save the histrionics! And yes many men, such as myself, DO want abortion clinics to shut down.

            In states like Texas many women will have to go through with the pregnancy whether they like it or not–and like I said, the pro-life movement is gaining ground in other states. As for this somehow affecting men, let me remind you that men are the one’s with the most reliable form of contraceptive currently available in the form of a vasectomy. And there are new–even more effective–birth control methods on the horizon. One of them is Vasalgel based off of an Indian contraceptive known as RISUG. It lasts for 15 years and is easily reversible. In the thirty years that it has been tested, there have been NO failures, which is why it is touted as 100% effective.

          • Arekushieru

            Then be prepared for MORE women to come forward pointing fingers at men because they need financial support to raise a child. Or are you SERIOUSLY just that fucking ignorant? You’re not opposed to abortion, you’re just a fucking MRA MISOGYNIST.

          • Arab225

            Many women point fingers at a lot of men who are not their child’s father, so why should I be worried? I still support abortion clinics being closed down.

          • fiona64

            So … you think women should be forced to give birth, but not receive any child support?

            In short, you’re just an asshole. Got it.

          • Arab225

            Under NO circumstances should a woman’s unilateral choice be a man’s responsibility. Until these draconian child support laws are reformed, I, as well as many other men, see no reason to support the “pro-choice” movement. You only advocate “choice” for yourself and couldn’t care less when it comes to choice for men. So why on earth should we support you?

          • fiona64

            So, pretty much what I said: women should be forced to give birth but not receive any child support.

            And, as I said, you’re just an asshat

            Once again, I’m sorry about your tiny, angry inch.

            PS: My husband is laughing in your angry, little-boy-having-a-temper-tantrum face.

          • Arab225

            Her body is what creates the child, so I don’t see why men should have to pay a cent in support. This is how it works in mother nature.

          • fiona64

            Then I suggest you remain celibate. Which, I have no doubt, will be a relief to 52 percent of the population.

          • Arab225

            That’s funny, when women are the ones crying about having to remain celibate because employers refuse to pay for their contraception. I suggest you take your own advice–it shouldn’t be too difficult.

          • goatini

            Ah yes, the “no one would fcvk you” ad hominem. What was that some annoying, impotent little gnat was nattering about before, about ad hominems?

          • Arab225

            It’s not ad hominem, it’s the truth. Feminists are known for being unattractive.

          • conversate

            Gloria Steinem = hot.

          • goatini

            The “no one would fvck you” ad hominem is regularly trotted out by impotent sleazebag misogynists.

          • goatini

            Pro tip: have sex only with females with whom you have agreed to procreate. If you can’t keep it in your pants and don’t want to procreate, wear a condom each and every time. No charge for this helpful hint.

          • Arab225

            Yes I wear condoms each and every time. With anti-male laws like these on the books, a man can’t afford not to. I’m still anxiously anticipating the release of Vasalgel though.

          • goatini

            //anti-male laws//

            Bullshit.

          • lady_black

            Closing clinics down isn’t an option for you, and it will not work anyway. Countries where abortion is illegal have higher abortion rates.

          • Arab225

            But prosecuting these women IS an option. And like I previously told you before, back alley abortions and concoctions have killed women before.

          • lady_black

            Dream on. It’s never going to happen. You know what else has killed women before, and in much greater numbers? Pregnancy.

          • Arab225

            I’m telling you pro-lifers are a tenacious bunch, and with more & more men turning against feminism everyday, it’s bound to happen. And pregnancy is a woman’s natural biological function. In many species, the host is killed to be replaced by new life.

          • dudebro

            You’re so ignorant.

            Do you know what fetal resorption is? Did you know that in times of resource scarcity, many species reabsorb their fetuses, and, if there is a live birth, eat them?

            As far as nature is concerned, the mother is far more valuable than a potential life. If she can live, and produce offspring in the future, this is more valuable for the survival and propagation of her genes than dying to produce a fetus that will then die. Oops!

            And pregnancy is a woman’s natural biological function.

            And insemination is a man’s natural biological function. Doesn’t mean we can hook men up to milkers and take their semen.

            People aren’t appliances, kiddo.

            Seriously. You have the reasoning skills of a developmentally disabled toddler. Stop embarrassing yourself.

          • Arab225

            Sure there are plenty of anomalies in nature such as, fetal resorption or miscarriages, however this does not make what I said any less true. In the case where the mother might be killed during child birth, it would actually be better to save the fetus at the mother’s expense. After all, the mother may very well never be able to bring another fetus to term. So as they say, out with the old & in with the new.

            Doesn’t mean we can hook men up to milkers and take their semen.

            Well that’s not quite the same thing is it? I think the vast majority of people would consider a viable fetus far more valuable than copious amounts of sperm.

            And save the ad hominem attacks. It only makes you look like a gormless individual incapable of participating in intelligent discourse.

          • dudebro

            Actually, it made what you said completely false. The only reason a baby can survive nowadays is because of technology and a generous social safety net. Throughout most of history, mom dying in childbirth was basically a death sentence for the baby as well. Much better, evolutionarily, to save the woman and sacrifice the fetus. Which is what people still do – because they judge women to be more valuable than fetuses.

            Well that’s not quite the same thing is it? I think the vast majority
            of people would consider a viable fetus far more valuable than copious amounts of sperm.

            Another invalid rebuttal. But I am not surprised, you’re dumb. People are more than their biological parts. Just because a woman *can* incubate does not mean she should be forced to incubate. Stop confusing biological functions with destiny, and I will stop accusing you of being a nitwit.

            And save the ad hominem attacks. It only makes you look like a gormless individual incapable of participating in intelligent discourse.

            Considering your ignorance and weak rebuttals, it’s pretty clear that you are utterly incapable of participating in any kind of discourse, kiddo.

          • Arab225

            So what happened to babies before these sweeping advances in technology took place? I’m assuming many of them survived due to to the booming population we have today. And I was talking about the natural biological process of childbearing not the rationale behind what people did in the past or what they do today. From a biological stand point, the baby is more important simply because it is new life.

            People are more than their biological parts. Just because a woman *can* incubate does not mean she should be forced to incubate.

            I’m sorry but I don’t see her as being forced to do anything. She’s pregnant and this is simply the biological process at play. Furthermore, look at what former Chief Justice of the United States, the honorable William Rehnquist had to say: “It is truly surprising that the state must assign a greater value to a mother’s decision to cut off a potential human life by abortion than to a father’s decision to let it mature into a live child”.

          • dudebro

            Throughout most of human history infants were not considered people and infanticide was routine. Infant mortality was also high, and wasting resources on an infant when there were other more valuable mouths to feed was a death sentence for the whole family. Better that the woman survive to produce a child again when resources are plentiful.

            And no, the woman dying is a huge huge blow to a families chances of survival. Even today in Africa, where maternal mortality is quite high, if the woman dies, the family suffers, especially if she is the main producer of food for the family. If she dies, its pretty much a death sentence for the fetus and everyone else .

            Have you ever been to a doctor? We override biology all the time. Its what humans do.biology is not destiny.

          • Arab225

            Again, I am talking about the natural biological process of childbearing not the rationale behind what people did in the past or what they do today. And many people–including doctors– see a fetus as being more important than the mother.

          • dudebro

            So? I see my cat as being more important than 99% of people.

            BTW, if the woman dies, so does the prenate.

          • catseye

            Cats rule; MRA’s drool.

          • Arekushieru

            And, if they do consider fetuses more valuable than copious amounts of sperm, why? It’s an arbitrary distinction, and the sperm and egg fulfill the requirements for minimal ‘biological’ personhood.

          • lady_black

            I can never bring another fetus to term. I’m STILL more valuable than a fetus and always have been.

          • fiona64

            it would actually be better to save the fetus at the mother’s expense.

            How “pro-life” of you.

            And absolutely medieval.

          • goatini

            //In the case where the mother might be killed during child birth, it would actually be better to save the fetus at the mother’s expense. After all, the mother may very well never be able to bring another fetus to term. So as they say, out with the old & in with the new.//

            Translation:
            Women are livestock. A cow that can’t successfully breed is nothing but a liability. If your cow dies, get another cow.

            No charge for the translation service.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Actually, developmentally delayed toddlers make this guy look like a genius.

          • lady_black

            Women do not exist to give birth. You can cross that right off your list. It’s never going to happen. Men can’t do bupkiss about it. And I don’t care how tenacious you are. I have a cure for that.

          • fiona64

            This little boy is clearly another one of the “Women are EasyBake ovens” crowd. He’s pitiful.

          • Arab225

            It’s bound to happen whether you like it or not. There’s no panacea for the inevitable.

          • lady_black

            What is “bound to happen?” What is “inevitable?”

          • Arab225

            You women being forced to take responsibility for your actions.

          • lady_black

            Abortion IS taking responsibility for your actions. And as a bonus, no child support worries. Win-win.

          • Arab225

            No, that’s not how I operate. If men don’t get a choice after conception, women shouldn’t either. I’m more open to men using Vasalgel when it hits the US market. That way pregnancy will be avoided and a woman won’t have the power to decide a man’s faith. Now that’s what I call a win-win.

          • Arab225

            No, that’s not how I operate. If men don’t get a choice after conception women shouldn’t either. I’m more open to men using Vasalgel when it becomes available.That way pregnancy can be avoided altogether and a woman won’t have the power to decide a man’s faith. Now that’s what I call a win-win.

          • fiona64

            Anti-choice males are such a joke.

          • goatini

            //more & more men turning against feminism everyday//
            Most men think Paul Elam’s impotent little gang of misogynist crusaders are batshit crazy.

            //pregnancy is a woman’s natural biological function//
            Women are not livestock.

          • Arab225

            Over 70% of Americans are against feminism. In fact, a person is twice as likely to perceive being called a feminist to be an insult rather than a compliment.

          • goatini

            //Over 70% of Americans are against feminism//

            Wrong.

          • fiona64

            You’re quoting Paul Elam, not reality.

            Not that anyone is surprised at this point. Paul Elam and his impotent little gang of man-children are a joke. Were you one of the tens of people who showed up for his big ‘international’ conference held in the VFW hall?

          • fiona64

            And you’re fapping at the very thought of it, aren’t you?

          • goatini

            I’ll bet you’ve fapped to a photo of Geri Santoro’s corpse.

          • Jennifer Starr

            And I support your paycheck being garnished if you can’t keep it in your trousers.

          • Arab225

            And I support pro-lifers when they tell women to keep their legs closed if they don’t want a child. If they did that there’d be no need for abortions. And trust me, women have tried to have men’s paychecks garnished and it has not ended well. Case in point, Bruno de Souza.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yes, Bruno. In prison for 22 years. Is that where you’ll end up? Is that the kind of behavior you admire and advocate for? Criminals admire criminals.

          • Arekushieru

            It’s also rather ridiculous for him to compare a wage garnishee to a HUGELY expensive and HIGHLY dangerous medical condition that the woman will have to undergo.

          • lady_black

            What makes you think women in Texas (or anywhere else) will go through with pregnancy “whether they like it or not?” Women have never done that before. I’m all for the testing and quick approval of Vasalgel. It’s about time you men took responsibility for contraception. And like I said before, unless a man literally lives underground, he CAN be found. There may be a few men who have gotten away with the tactics you claim. I don’t know any women who take at face value what men tell them.

          • Arab225

            Well I guess they could put their lives at risk by trying to abort via a closet hanger or by taking some kind of concoction, however that isn’t my concern. Like I said, if you can’t provide child support collection services with a man’s real name, address, phone number, place of work etc…you have a very slim chance of ever getting a penny out of him. This gets even worse if the man has citizenship to another country with no child support agreement with the United States. There are women who have been literally searching for their baby daddies for decades. And the vast majority of women I know are quite ditzy and wouldn’t think twice about what a man tells them.

          • lady_black

            “And the vast majority of women I know are quite ditzy and wouldn’t think twice about what a man tells them.” = You need to find better company. You believe that somehow women were sitting around in the late 60s and early 70s waiting for men to give them permission to abort safely. They weren’t. Look up the Jane Collective. Look up “menstrual extraction.” The techniques used were, and remain safe. They are used to this day in places where access to a doctor isn’t available. And instead of “some concoction” we now have misoprostal. There are so many more of us now, and we will teach others, and they will go on to teach even more. You have no chance to roll women’s rights back. Grab a clue. We are NOT going back.

          • Arab225

            And do you really think the pro-lifers are going to stand for that? I reckon that in the near future, women could be serving several years behind bars in states like Texas for aborting. Pro-lifers–which include both men & women– will not stop until abortion is outlawed. Also, consider the fact that there are several conservative justices on the supreme court. I know right off the bat that justices like Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, and maybe even Chief Justice John Roberts, would overturn Roe v Wade in a heart beat.

          • lady_black

            Of course pro-lifers are going to stand for that. Pro-lifers have no choice. Women who utilize menstrual extraction do not do pregnancy tests. They simply use a hand-operated suction device to remove the lining of the uterus (along with anything else that might be in there). You will have no say, because you will never know about it, nor will you be able to prove a thing. And anti-abortion laws have never been used against women in the USA. This isn’t El Salvador, buddy boy. Here in the USA we require actual proof that a crime was committed. You will be in the unfortunate position of having no proof, and having no clue. And misoprostal is undetectable after 12 hours. You will simply see a spike in miscarriages if you see anything at all. Most women using it will simply abort at home safely without needing to see a doctor. And if she does see a doctor, it’s undistinguishable from any OTHER miscarriage. So please, feel free to pull your head out of your ass any time now. There will be no one serving jail time.

          • Arab225

            And you don’t think pro-lifers will do sting operations to catch these miscreant mothers to be and the ones responsible for providing them with these illicit drugs? Catching women in the act, is all the proof they’re going to need. Try to abort at home, and someone may tip you off to the police when they find a positive pregnancy test in your trash, but no pregnancy. If pro-lifers have there way, you may be facing some charges of your own.

          • fiona64

            I’ll bet you claim to be in favor of small government …

          • lady_black

            ROFLMFAO. A positive pregnancy test without a pregnancy doesn’t mean anything at all. It takes quite a while between ‘pregnancy test’ and obvious pregnancy for most women. She may have lost the pregnancy in the meantime. Or knowing how dumb pro-lifers are in general, they would forget about it the first time they see a shiny object. It may have been a false positive. It might not have even been mine. Or maybe I don’t throw it in the trash. You really ARE an idiot, aren’t you? Oh, and misoprostal isn’t “illicit” nor is it hard to get. It’s an ulcer drug that induces miscarriage.

          • Arab225

            Well it isn’t far fetched that pro-lifers might try to charge a woman with a crime, if they found a positive pregnancy test with her DNA on it, misoprostal in her house, and any other damaging evidence they might find via phone calls, email etc. Should this happen, I’m sure a jury in Texas would have no qualms about sending this woman to prison for what they think is the equivalent of murder.

          • dudebro

            Most Texans oppose it, actually. Polls tell a different story – Texans would like for abortion remain legal.

          • Arab225

            Well, it depends on what polls you’ve been looking at. According to this poll from the Texas Tribune, 59% of Texans reject abortion being a matter of personal choice. Here’s the link: http://www.texastribune.org/2013/06/20/uttt-poll-texans-favor-ban-late-term-abortions/

          • lady_black

            I don’t care if 99.95% of them oppose abortion, They can’t do anything about it.

          • Ella Warnock

            They certainly can’t do anything about wealthier women going to private gynos or traveling out of state or country, and of course that reality really drives them crazy. Women who can pay for privacy will have as much of it as they want.

          • dudebro

            Wealthier women are also perceived as being of better stock so are above suspicion. Its the poor who get charged with drug crime s and for miscarriages. No one ever doubts a righteous southern belle or a rich wall street trader snorting coke. Its always the poor who get the short end of the stick.

          • Ella Warnock

            Exactly. And being of ‘better stock’ means that what authoritarians would really love is if they could force that stock to reproduce more of themselves. They’d love to control the breeding of wealthier women, but they’ll never be able to and thus must be satisfied with micromanaging the poor. They still have lots of sad feels about the ones who ‘get away’ with it. Tough shit, I guess.

          • dudebro

            I love Ann Morgan.

            Sad feelies!

          • Ella Warnock

            She’s a goddamn national treasure.

          • Ella Warnock

            Oh, and I didn’t know myintx tried to oops the baby daddy. Gawd, what a pathetic, lying sack of shit she is. I wonder if her kid is aware of just how much its mother resents it. Probably. All that venom and bitterness she spews isn’t contained to online commenting only.

          • dudebro

            Its just speculation based on what Fiona has observed. Ann ran with it. Duno if its true but its def plausible.

          • fiona64

            She has said plenty of things that indicate that this is exactly what happened.

          • dudebro
          • fiona64

            Heh. She’s a fan of Scabby Johnson, Liar Rose … and several brands of toilet paper. Okey-dokey …

          • Arab225

            But wealthy women are in the minority so it doesn’t really matter. The vast majority won’t be able to get abortions.

          • Ella Warnock

            I would, though. Get in a little sightseeing and shopping, to boot.

          • dudebro

            Many middle class will be able to afford travel so it will still be in the millions.

          • Ella Warnock

            Yep, lots and lots, traveling to a vacation destination, doing some sightseeing, shopping, enjoying the regional culture and cuisine. Someone could make a tidy sum by offering to cater to to that niche.

          • goatini

            Torturing innocent females with gestational slavery really gives you a stiffy, I see. Are you into snuff porn too?

          • Arab225

            That’s what you think, but it’s not true.

          • lady_black

            You realize that NONE of what you just described is evidence of a crime, right? The government is NOT going to start running DNA on random discarded pregnancy tests. And I have a more practical solution. Women can start burning their pregnancy tests. How would you like that? Another thing the government won’t bother doing is searching homes for misoprostal. That’s also easily flushed, or dissolved, or put into used kitty litter. How do you like THOSE apples, Big Fella? See, you have a huge problem. May as well admit defeat right now and beat the rush. You will never control women. Never. Ever. Abortion is impossible to prove, unless the person is stupid enough to give a confession. Now run along, little boy. Nobody listens to pro-lifers.

          • dudebro

            Dumber than a box of Gohmerts this kid.

          • Arab225

            If aborting a fetus is becomes a crime, you can bet your bottom dollar that pro-lifers will go to the end of the earth to throw those women in prison. The moment that happens, they’ll treat it just like any other criminal investigations. So many women will be incarcerated despite their efforts to burn pregnancy tests to burn pregnancy tests or flush abortion inducing drugs down the toilet–you can’t beat forensics! SCOTUS has just recently struck down a law banning protesters within 35 feet of abortion clinics(McCoullen v Coakley), and they’ll do more! Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Roberts have all said that Roe V Wade was wrongly decided. If a conservative wins the white house in 2016 and nominates a conservative justice to replace Ginsburg, pro-choicers are all but finished.

          • Ella Warnock

            Gotta catch me first. Ex-law enforcement. I know exactly how to break the law and get away with it. Catch me if you can . . .

          • lady_black

            LOL @ “forensics.”

          • dudebro

            CSI:Abortion

            Tonight at 11!

          • lady_black

            I doubt he knows what forensic doctors do. Or what they generally DON’T do, which is investigate miscarriages.

          • fiona64

            He gets all of his ideas about forensic science from TV, guarantee it.

            Love, a forensic anthro major

          • Ella Warnock

            Oooh, I wanna be the female CSI that prances around in low-cut tops and high heels as I fling my salon-ready hair for dramatic effect AND all the better to check out my flawlessly applied makeup and shiny lip gloss. Schience, schmience. We need SEX to clear crime scenes!

          • Arab225

            Yes, that is how it’s spelled.

          • lady_black

            Yes, you spelled it correctly. But you don’t understand it.

          • Arab225

            Trust me, I understand it well. When Roe v Wade is overturned, pro-lifers in anti-abortion states will go to the ends of the earth to prosecute every woman who surreptitiously aborts her fetus.

          • Guest

            Surreptitiously means no one will know about the little embryos going glug glug glug down the toilet. That’s really sad. :'(

          • Arab225

            Trust me, I understand it well. When Roe v Wade is overturned, pro-lifers in anti-abortion states will go to the ends of the earth to make sure every woman who surreptitiously aborts her fetus is prosecuted.

          • lady_black

            LOL. Sure you will. Except that you’ll never know.

          • goatini

            You have an active masturbatory fantasy life.

          • Arab225

            I’m sure as do you.

          • fiona64

            I reckon that in the near future, women could be serving several years behind bars in states like Texas for aborting.

            ‘fess up; you were typing with one hand when you wrote that.

          • goatini

            I noticed that myself.

          • fiona64

            In the highly unlikely event that Roe is overturned, abortion would not be illegal. There are many states that have enacted laws to guarantee women will still have the right to access a full range of health care, and there are a whole lot of us who would make sure that they did.

            Sucks to be you, Mr. Micro-Manhood …

          • Arab225

            They could very well threaten to cut off funding to states like California if they refused to shut down every last abortion clinic. Also, you’ve got to remember that many pro-lifers are in fact females and they’ll use that fact to negate any claims that what they’re doing is a war on women.

          • dudebro

            So what. Many hardline honor killers are women – they would prefer to see their daughters, victims of rape, die than live.

            That doesn’t mean that honor killing your daughter isn’t misogynistic just because some women support it.

            Nitwit.

          • Arab225

            The vast majority of people who are against abortion don’t see what they are doing as being misogynistic. They believe that abortion is murder and that they have got to put a stop to it. I’m sure many of the female pro-lifers would laugh at any accusations of them being hateful towards their own gender. They simply don’t see it that way.

          • dudebro

            Of course they don’t. And neither do female honor killers who burn their own daughters faces with acid and chop their heads off. They see it as protecting family honour.

          • Arab225

            Hey women have killed men as well, yet many people don’t consider it to be indicative of misandry.

          • dudebro

            Female honor killers view their daughters as property, and they kill them if they are raped because the ‘property’ has been damaged.

          • Arab225

            And in some cultures people believe that women should be given preferential treatment and should go first on a sinking ship.

          • dudebro

            So? That does NOT refute my point and is another non sequitur.

          • Arab225

            You poor fool, you have no idea what non-sequitur is. Misogyny and Misandry are amorphous things that are susceptible to broad interpretation. Some people see honor killings and acts of chivalry as being misognyistic and misandric, while others do not. And the same goes for abortion as well. No matter which side of the issue you’re on, no one holds the corner on truth. Characterizing all pro-lifers as misogynists, is in and of itself a a losing argument

          • dudebro

            No, it had nothing to do with my point, which was that women can hate their own gender as men can hate other men.

            Being a woman does not automatically mean that one is incapable of hating other women.

          • goatini

            But since ALL forced-birthers ARE vicious misogynists, you’re just completely full of woman-hate BS.

          • Arab225

            That’s not true.

          • lady_black

            If they believe abortion is murder, they need never have one. They can’t stop anyone else from having one.

          • fiona64

            The vast majority of people who are against abortion don’t see what they are doing as being misogynistic.

            That’s because they are delusional.

          • lady_black

            Who is going to cut off funding, why, and how would it matter? Reversing Roe doesn’t make abortion illegal. Jane will rise again, you can bet on it.

          • Ella Warnock

            All women around here would have to do is hop the border to Canada, with plenty of us willing and able to drive them there, if necessary.

          • Arab225

            With Roe v Wade gone, there’ll be nothing stopping conservative states from making the proscription of abortion a reality.

          • lady_black

            And it will matter to women just as much as it did back then. That’s to say, not much.

          • Arab225

            Plenty of women are pro-life and despise abortion.

          • Arab225

            There are plenty of women who are pro-life and despise abortion. I guarantee they’d set you straight real quick about what’s important to them.

          • lady_black

            And we would give a shit about what’s important to them, why exactly?? Generally, what’s important to individuals hold sway in their own life. In a stranger’s life, not so much. You people suffer from delusions of grandeur.

          • Arab225

            I’d wager they’d use that same argument against you and say that your right to abort isn’t as important as that child’s right to life.

          • Guest

            They’d be wrong. Boo hoo.

          • lady_black

            It’s not a “child” and there is no “right to life” inside the body of another.

          • Guest

            Family and kids are parasites.

            Sounds like you get it after all, simp ass nigga. That’s why abortion is so awesome.

          • Arab225

            No, women shouldn’t get a choice. You play you pay.

          • Ella Warnock

            Ah, but they do anyway. Too bad, so sad for the poor widdle fetii. Chop chop chop they go.

          • fiona64

            You have a rich fantasy life, I’ll give you that.

            And also no understanding of how the Constitution works. In the event that Roe is overturned, the decision returns to the individual states. Too bad, so sad, Mr. Microphallus.

          • goatini

            hahahahahaha

            California pays the toll for the red states – if California seceded, the red states would be in a world of hurt. Got any more inane BS?

          • Arab225

            Last I heard, people were leaving California in droves and moving to more business friendly states. Texas could very well supplant California in the future as the biggest economy within the United States.

          • goatini

            Right, that’s why real estate values and the job market are booming in California. Texas will never supplant California as an economy.

          • fiona64

            You’re funny. And clearly have no concept of reality.

          • goatini

            Fap away to your beloved fantasy. Was that good for you? Want a cigarette?

          • Arab225

            I don’t smoke.

          • goatini

            //the vast majority of women I know are quite ditzy//

            Persons of quality associate with persons of quality. Thanks for letting us know that you are not a person of quality.

          • Arab225

            There is a difference between knowing someone and associating with them on a regular basis.

          • fiona64

            Thank you for admitting that you do not associate with women on a regular basis.

            And thank you even further, on behalf of all women everywhere, for not doing so.

          • fiona64

            And yes many men, such as myself, DO want abortion clinics to shut down.

            It is *so* easy to be an anti-choice male, isn’t it? After all, you can just wave your big stupid paw and demand that women be forced to risk life and health via gestation (which is not a state of wellness) knowing full well that you’ll never be impacted by what you support.

            How convenient.

            PS: Vasectomies can, and do, fail. However, I sincerely hope (for the sake of future generations) that you have a) already had one and b) not already bred.

          • Arab225

            Well your unilateral “choice” should not be our responsibility. So until you recognize that, I can’t see why you should be given a choice either. Call it convenient if you want.

            PS: Vasectomies are the most effective form of birth control available with a 99% effectiveness rate. So for the vast majority of men, it does not fail. This is far more effective than anything available for women. I also, recommend that you get yourself some form of sterilization for the sake of our posterity. Good day.

          • fiona64

            Oh, sweetie. You’re so funny. I have a 28-year-old son (a pregnancy that nearly killed me, BTW) and a 21-year-old tubal ligation. Should said procedure fail, there will be an abortion so fast that your ugly, misogynistic head will spin right off.

            You’re so angry, sweetie, for no good reason. Trust me; no woman with half a brain wants to steal the jiz out of your Inflate-a-Date. Your genes are just not that valuable.

          • Arab225

            Well considering the fact that you just admitted to almost dying during your pregnancy, I wouldn’t say that its my genes that aren’t valuable. Also, your childish retorts don’t hold weight with me.

          • lady_black

            My second pregnancy almost killed me and it has nothing to do with genes. Some pregnancies do not go well, for reasons beyond anyone’s control. As Fiona told you… pregnancy is NOT a state of wellness.

          • Arab225

            How do you know that it had nothing to do with genes when it very well might have? I see plenty of happy pregnant women everyday, so I take issue with your remark about it not being a state of wellness.

          • fiona64

            You are welcome to take issue with reality; it just makes you look even more stupid.

          • dudebro

            You really are ignorant. Pregnancy is not safe by ‘design’ ie, evolution.

            The fetus is genetically progarmed to leech as many resources as it can from the woman, which is what causes the health problems of pregnancy:

            http://harvardmagazine.com/2006/09/prenatal-competition.html

            http://edge.org/conversation/genomic-imprinting

            http://content.csbs.utah.edu/~rogers/ant1050/Lectures/mfconflict-2×3.pdf

            Women menstruate precisely to protect themselves from invasive embryos:

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3528014/

            http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/15/health/the-push-to-understand-the-placenta.html?_r=0

            —————

            In a typical pregnancy, the blastocyst implants on the uterine wall and literally drills into the woman’s blood vessels. It then injects her body with hormones that 1) suppress her immune system (which makes her more susceptible to disease and illness, and post-natally can rebound causing her to develop MS or another auto-immune disease) 2) enable it to take most of the sugar in her blood for itself (which can lead to permanent diabetes if it is too successful in this strategy) 3) takes too much iron from her blood, which can lead to anemia 4) causes hypertension as a result of these pressures on her body 5) greedily takes calcium from her bones and teeth, which can lead to osteoperosis

            The above have nothing whatsoever to do with genetics. A woman can have a relatively ‘normal’ pregnancy and then the next one can be catastrophic. It’s a roll of the dice each time.

          • Arab225

            Well that’s just biology–how mother nature intended it. This however does not take away from the fact that many people–both men and women–have serious ethical concerns with abortion and would like to see it outlawed. The sole reason why they’ve been closing down abortion clinics and truncating the time frame in which a woman can get an abortion in Texas, is so that they can move towards making abortion entirely illegal. And with conservatives like Scalia, Thomas, and Roberts (who clerked for Rehnquist) on the supreme court, they may very well be successful should anyone challenge the constitutionality behind what they’re doing.

          • dudebro

            Your rebuttal is a total non-sequitur kiddo.

            Try again.

          • Arab225

            Well I was replying to the broader argument at hand, not solely to your comment.

          • dudebro

            yeah, because you are too stupid to refute my comment.

          • Arab225

            For the majority of women pregnancy is perfectly safe. Only 650 women die each year as a result of pregnancy or delivery complications.

            http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/pregnancy-relatedmortality.htm

          • dudebro

            So? It’s not your place to decide how much risk a person should take on.

            Your chances of getting bitten by a shark are lower than dying from pregnancy, but someone can’t just throw you in the ocean to save a life now, can they?

            And women have a right to life and health. This right isn’t based on percentages. What you are essentially saying that since the odds are in the favour of most women, that they don’t need a RIGHT TO LIVE, because YOU PERSONALLY have decided, for them, what is the appropriate amount of risk.

            And 1.2 million women are permanently injured from pregnancy, per year, in the USA. 250k+ die worldwide from pregnancy, and a further 20 million are permanently maimed or disabled worldwide.

          • Arab225

            Well some people say abortion is unacceptable under any circumstances, I however, think that an exception should be made if the mother’s life is in danger.

          • dudebro

            The woman’s life is always in danger and you can’t predict if or when a pregnancy will go horribly wrong. She could bleed to death at birth, and there is no predicting that.

          • Arab225

            She could also bleed to death if she was excited about keeping the baby. The fact is that no one can predict a mother dying during child birth, so what’s your point?

          • dudebro

            That its not your place to force people to risk dying.

          • fiona64

            That’s so generous of you. /snark

            It’s easy to be blasé about *other people’s lives,* isn’t it?

          • fiona64

            Actually, it’s significantly more than that worldwide, and the latest US stats show 850 deaths per annum from pregnancy-related issues. http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/maternal-deaths-in-childbirth-rise-in-the-us/2014/05/02/abf7df96-d229-11e3-9e25-188ebe1fa93b_story.html

            An abortion is significantly safer for women than gestation.

            Oh, and BTW, if you are the person whose loved one dies, or the person who herself dies of pregnancy-related complications? The rate is 100 percent.

            I know, I know … you don’t care if women die. After all, you won’t die from pregnancy-related complications, and you’re an all-important Dudething.

            Poor child.

          • Arab225

            Like it or not, the state has an interest in the fetus. If the mother’s life is not in immediate danger, there will be no abortion!

          • goatini

            Female US citizens are NOT property of the State. And pregnancy does NOT erase the civil, human and Constitutional rights of female US citizens.

          • Arab225

            Pregnancy is a natural biological process, not something the government is foisting onto women. The fact is that the state has a legitimate interest in the fetus.

          • conversate

            Cancer is a natural biological process, not something the government is foisting on women.

            The state has an interest in the fetus because more births = taxpayers, consumers and soldiers. Basically, future slave labor

          • goatini

            Female US citizens are NOT property of the State. And pregnancy does NOT erase the civil, human and Constitutional rights of female US citizens.

          • fiona64

            In your tiny wet dreams.

            You advocate for female enslavement, which is the bottom line position of MRAssholes like you. Every one of you is a big, angry child, stamping his feet and demanding that he get his way.

            Sucks to be you.

          • lady_black

            How about “because I’m not an idiot like you.” Every pregnancy is different for every woman, and obstetrical emergencies are not caused by the mother’s genes. EVER.

          • dudebro

            OMG I wanted to punch some people when an asshat stated that Savita didn’t deserve to live because her ‘genes were defective’ and that this is why the pregnancy killed her.

          • Jennifer Starr

            What idiot said that?

          • dudebro

            Some random person on a random gamer forum. A few months ago I was researching zygotic personhood or something, and there was a looong thread on a Minecraft forum or some shit. One terrible, terrible *woman* on the forum made the comment that Savita had inferior genes so no big loss!

          • fiona64

            I’m sorry about your tiny penis, sweetie.

          • Arab225

            I’m sorry about yours too, but I won’t call you sweetie.

          • fiona64

            I think you’re just angry that my non-existent phallus is bigger than yours. Poor thing.

          • Arab225

            non-existent?

          • Jennifer Starr

            That would be yours.

          • Arab225

            If it’s so non-existent, why are you feminists constantly talking about it?

          • conversate

            To remind you of what you don’t have

          • Jennifer Starr

            Because something that tiny and shriveled is fun to laugh at. I’m sure it’s a reaction you encounter quite frequently.

          • fiona64

            For the same reason people go to Robert Ripley’s museums; anatomical oddities are entertaining, and sometimes laughter-provoking. I rather imagine you’re accustomed to the latter.

          • fiona64

            You know, sweetie, I’ve needed to say this for a while. Despite your charming invitations, I really must decline. I am only attracted to men; you do not qualify.

          • Arab225

            Oh please, there are several men who have fathered children
            and have never been found by the child support collection services. If a woman doesn’t know a man’s real name, address, phone number, place of work, friends,family etc….how can her child’s father possibly be found? After all, most women
            only take what a man tells them at face value. So please, save the histrionics! And yes many men, such as myself, DO want abortion clinics to close down.

            In states like Texas, many women will have to go through
            with the pregnancy whether they like it or not—and like I said, the pro-life movement is gaining traction in other states as well. As for this somehow having an unfavorable effect on men, let me remind you that men are the ones with the most reliable form of contraception currently available in the form of a vasectomy. And there are new—even more effective—birth control methods on the
            horizon. One of them is a product known as Vasalgel, based off of an Indian product known as RISUG (Reversible Inhibition of Sperm under Guidance). It lasts for 15 years and is easily reversible. In the 30 years that it has been tested, there have been NO failures, which is why it is touted as 100% effective.

          • Arekushieru

            Wrong, the only reason we tell MEN to keep it in their pants is because they do PRECISELY what you do: Blame women for having a uterus by saying they are the only ones who must EVER take responsibility for a biological function, tell them to keep their legs closed, then pay for it if they deny a man his ‘rightful’ entitlement to sex or even if they consent to it or if a man decides to fuck off and leave the woman hanging dry after promising he would be there for her or if SHE decides to have sex with a guy and leaves him hanging dry. But in no way whatsoever should a MAN be inconvenienced in the SLIGHTEST. When these newfangled contraception devices come on board, Pro-Choice will be happy, because MEN will finally have to take responsibility, AS WELL. YOU will be seriously disappointed when you see that no longer will you be able to blame women for not using contraception and making sure her male partner does, as well. Then blaming her for being raped because the guy didn’t like her insisting that he not have sex bareback. Fucking ASS.

          • Arab225

            First of all, why do you sound so angry? Ad hominem attacks aren’t apart of adult discourse. I’ve heard women tell men to keep it in their pants, so I see nothing wrong in telling a woman to keep her legs closed. It’s that simple. And we’re not blaming women for a biological function. We are simply saying that your body is not our responsibility. So if you get pregnant and decide to bring a child into the world, the onus should be entirely on you. The only exception is if the woman is married, because she is then part of a family unit.

          • lady_black

            A woman with a child is part of a family unit ANYWAY. Married or not. She is not legally related to the father, since she isn’t married to him. But the child is related to him. So. no, the onus is NOT upon her alone. Have you considered that many couples choose not to marry for reasons of their own? And it isn’t as though a husband can keep his wife from having an abortion. Her body is not your responsibility. But YOUR body is your responsibility, and if you use it to impregnate someone, that doesn’t give you any interest in the pregnancy. You cannot order her to either give birth or abort.

          • Arab225

            Well back in the day, a woman having a child out of wedlock wasn’t seen as a part of a family unit; it was seen as an aberration. And the supreme court has even said that states have an aversion to households headed by single mothers. The child may be related to him, but he is not the one responsible for bringing the child into the world. If a woman allows a man to ejaculate inside of her body, it then becomes apart of her and has nothing else to do with him. If she makes the unilateral decision to bring the child into the world, it should look solely to her for support. In fact, a few feminists have said the same thing.

          • Arekushieru

            So, let’s recap, not only do you advocate against abortion, but against child support for the same reason abortion should remain legal AS WELL AS punishing women for being single mothers (which, NO, feminists do NOT support)? Are you KIDDING me? And you wonder why we call you a MISOGYNIST?

          • Arab225

            Well back in the day,
            a woman having a child out of wedlock wasn’t seen as a part of a family unit;
            it was seen as an aberration. And the Supreme Court has even said that states
            have an aversion to households headed by single mothers. The child may be
            related to him, but he is not the one responsible for bringing the child into
            the world. If a woman allows a man to ejaculate inside of her body, it then
            becomes a part of her and has nothing else to do with him. If she makes the
            unilateral decision to bring the child into the world, it should look solely to
            her for support. In fact, a few feminists have said the same thing.

          • Arab225

            Well back in the day,
            a woman having a child out of wedlock wasn’t seen as a part of a family unit;
            it was seen as an aberration. And the Supreme Court has even said that states
            have an aversion to households headed by single mothers.The child may be related
            to him, but he is not theone responsible for bringing the child into the world.
            If a woman allows a man to ejaculate inside of her body, it then becomes a part
            of her and has nothing else to do with him. If she makes the unilateral
            decision to bring the child into the world, it should look solely to her for
            support.In fact, a few feminists have said the same thing.

          • Arab225

            Sorry about the late reply but here it is:
            Well back in the day, a woman having a child out of wedlock wasn’t seen as a part of a family unit; it was seen as an aberration. And the supreme court has even said that states have an aversion to households headed by single mothers. The child may be related to him, but he is not the one responsible for bringing it into the world. If a woman allows a man to ejaculate inside of her body, it then becomes a part of her and has nothing else to do with him. If she makes the unilateral decision to bring the child into the world, it should look solely to her for support. In fact, a few feminists have said the same thing.

          • fiona64

            And the supreme court has even said that states have an aversion to households headed by single mothers.

            Citation needed.

          • Arab225

            Something was going wrong with my computer, hence the 3 discombobulated replies from a guest account.

          • fiona64

            Or, you could ‘fess up that you posted and then tried to delete them three times. Because that’s what we know you did. That’s why they showed up as “guest.”

          • Arab225

            Really?…I see it differently. Many of these women have no idea who the father is and have no idea how to contact him. They most likely will never see a dime in support from them. With the proliferation of the pro-life movement, you’ll see more & more of this happening in other states. Now many of you women will feel the despair of being forced into parenthood against your will. As a matter of fact, you feminists wouldn’t have to worry about abortion clinics shutting down if you gals learned to become more familiar with cucumbers instead. You tell men to keep it in their pants, now it’s time to do your part and keep your legs closed—despite how difficult that might be.

          • lady_black

            Say bye-bye to your comment. Posting the same comment (word for word) that was already deleted isn’t smart, and I hope this time it costs you your account. See ya, and wouldn’t wanna BE ya.

          • Arab225

            We’ll see about that sweetheart. Delete a comment and I’ll just post it again.

          • lady_black

            It’s already been deleted.

          • fiona64

            Keep violating TOS, micro-manhood. :-)

          • Jennifer Starr

            Sounds to me like you need to become familiar with hand, lotion and boxes of tissue. But I’m sure you’re quite familiar with these things anyway.

          • Arab225

            Aaaw how sweet, petulant insults coming from a child. For you, I recommend monistat 7.

          • fiona64

            Trust me, sweetie. No one wants to f*** you.

            Oh, and pro-tip: when someone yells “f*** you,” it is not an invitation for a date.

          • Arab225

            Fiona, I suggest that you take your own advice.

          • dudebro

            I wouldn’t f*** you with a strapon.

          • Ella Warnock

            Or Charlie Sheen’s dick.

            I’ll bet Arab drives a PRV – Penis Replacement Vehicle.

          • fiona64

            I’ll bet he does.

          • Arab225

            Sweetheart, you couldn’t afford a strapon

          • fiona64

            You seem awfully angry with the women here. Is it because we’re unimpressed by the microphallus that you keep waving around?

            Boo-hoo.

          • Arab225

            But they’re selfish if they chose to give birth to this child and forced the hapless sperm donor to finance their decision to bring said child into the world. Under no circumstances should her unilateral choice equal his responsibility. This is why you feminists are losing credibility every day. More & more men are supporting closing down abortion clinics and they’re not even pro-life. Get the picture?

          • lady_black

            Don’t be a “hapless sperm donor” then. You expect me to have sympathy for men who spray their seed all over the place and can’t keep track of it? Say bye-bye to this comment too. It’s been deleted once. And you will probably be banned too, smartass.

          • Arab225

            All of my comments are saved, so I am free to post them as many times as I like. Ban this account and there’ll be another. Her unilateral choice = her sole responsibility. Period.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Stop donating sperm.

          • Arab225

            Her unilateral choice = her sole responsibility.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Nope.

          • Arab225

            Well, that’s quite ironic considering the fact that many women have payed for trying to force this extortion on men. Some guys don’t play with their money, and many women will learn that the hard way.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yes, we already know about your criminal history.

          • Arab225

            Ask Eliza Samudio who payed, after she tried to force Brazilian goalkeeper Bruno de Souza to finance her unilateral decision to have a child.

          • Jennifer Starr

            Yes, we already know that you admire murderers and want to share a jail cell with Bruno.

          • fiona64

            You fap your Little Willie at the idea of women being murdered, and we all know it.

  • Mandy

    Great article. I have to admit I spend much more time considering the repo rights from the side of a person who is all for preventing pregnancy. Thanks for the reminder of how important it is we don’t forget to fight for the flip side of the coin. Pro ALL repo choices.

  • http://plumstchili.blogspot.com/ Plum Dumpling

    To the author of this essay;
    Fuck you. I have been making the point the reproductive choice goes beyond abortion rights for years now. So have other feminists.
    Germaine Greer:
    “Too many women are forced to abort by poverty, by their menfolk, by their parents … A choice is only possible if there are genuine alternatives.”

    • Arekushieru

      Well, I’d like to add that the reason we focus so much on access to abortion is because that’s the option that’s most frequently attacked. Even with regards to women of colour, I would like to point out, that I believe that is most often the case, as well. (I know that as a white woman I am speaking from a position of privilege, but I have had female friends who are black also tell me this, so I am not entirely sure on this matter.) But, I DO think that black women have a MUCH harder time accessing options that will allow them to keep their pregnancies than white women like myself would, absoLUTEly. It’s just that I think people who oppose the term ‘choice’ rather than ‘reproductive justice’ are failing to put the blame on the people responsible for framing the narrative, specifically the anti-choice movement rather than the Pro-Choice movement.

  • Arab225

    Really, you’re just a child.

    • Jennifer Starr

      From your comments,I’m fairly sure that you’re an overgrown child. And really, you’re just boring.

      • Arab225

        If I am so boring, why are you constantly replying to me? Now who’s the petulant one here? Good day Ms Jennifer Starr.

        • fiona64

          Maybe she’s like my cat, and enjoys playing with her food.

          • Arab225

            Maybe she’s like your cat and smells like fish?