GWB hates women

[jOHN rODRIGUEZ]

Originally Posted by dubman

means that masturbation is an abortion, and even more technically, millions of abortions. LOLOLOLOLOLOL.

I'm safe there too as it appears many have been collecting from me for years now.

Wonder how many anti-abortionists change their minds now?

[dubman]

Originally Posted by Sean

This is exactly where I tend to part ways with many on the pro-choice side of things - and please bear in mind that I myself am pro-choice, I just flatly disagree with assertions that this is about a woman's "right to do whatever the hell they want with their own body". The foundation of the argument from the pro-life side of things is built on the idea of providing rights for the unborn baby, not on depriving a woman of her right to do do whatever she wants with her own body. Clearly, the woman's body is involved in the deal, but that doesn't inherently make the position that fetuses have rights a misogynistic one.

it does when you shave the ambiguity-hedging and it boils down to whether women are people enough to decide what to do with a parasite growing in them. the point with that 'tumor' statement in the last post was that fetuses are primarily in development. they're meant to become babies, but could do a lot of things: turn ectopic, become lethal, spontaneously abort. i think as long as its growth is physically dependant on a woman to continue developing in the womb, it should be that woman's choice alone what to do with it. is it the best thing to ever happen to you? cool. are you repulsed by it and want it the fuck out of there? awesome. is this going to be a really hard decision that you'll be torn about? damn. do you want to prevent the whole fucking thing in the first place? fantastic. but whatever the decision is, i think it should be supported by the best medical care available. because otherwise it's telling the women who make the "wrong" decision according to dudely govt. to get fucked.
which is why it's so transparent that this godbag legislation is so unambiguously hateful and misogynistic.

[cacophony]

Originally Posted by dubman

...whether women are people enough to decide what to do...

misogyny - noun: hatred, dislike, or mistrust of women.


QED.

[dubman]

oh and cacophony, i dont know if you really *want* to hear this, but a friend of mine gave birth on the cusp of viability and one year later the kid doing extremely well for itself.
just thought i'd share.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by dubman

it does when you shave the ambiguity-hedging and it boils down to whether women are people enough to decide what to do with a parasite growing in them. the point with that 'tumor' statement in the last post was that fetuses are primarily in development. they're meant to become babies, but could do a lot of things: turn ectopic, become lethal, spontaneously abort. i think as long as its growth is physically dependant on a woman to continue developing in the womb, it should be that woman's choice alone what to do with it. is it the best thing to ever happen to you? cool. are you repulsed by it and want it the fuck out of there? awesome. is this going to be a really hard decision that you'll be torn about? damn. do you want to prevent the whole fucking thing in the first place? fantastic. but whatever the decision is, i think it should be supported by the best medical care available. because otherwise it's telling the women who make the "wrong" decision according to dudely govt. to get fucked.
which is why it's so transparent that this godbag legislation is so unambiguously hateful and misogynistic.

But you're not actually proving any point here about it being inherently misogynistic. All you're doing is giving your stance on abortion and then claiming that this stance is somehow proof that anyone who disagrees must therefore be a misogynist. But the fact is, women simply aren't at the core of the issue in this debate from the pro-life point of view. What's at the core of the issue is the problem that pro-lifers would have with you labeling a fetus as a "parasite". Of course technically, a fetus IS a parasite, but referring to it as such is pretty clearly meant as a means of de-humanizing it, and that's where the difference in ideologies lies - not in feelings towards women.

Pro-choice = the fetus is a lump of cells for a significant enough portion of pregnancy that, if circumstances warrant, we should be allowed to abort.

Pro-life = the fetus is immediately an innocent, human baby who should be protected from being killed.

And to take it a step further, if I followed your logic on the misogyny issue, I could then go ahead and say that clearly, you must hate men. Because all you're talking about here is the rights of a woman, but you're completely ignoring what the fathers of aborted babies may want, so clearly, you have no regard for men and must hate them. Would that be a fair or accurate conclusion for me to reach? Or, to be more direct about it, should pro-lifers conclude that because your concern lies primarily with women, you must hate babies.

[dubman]

Originally Posted by Sean

1. But you're not actually proving any point here about it being inherently misogynistic. All you're doing is giving your stance on abortion and then claiming that this stance is somehow proof that anyone who disagrees must therefore be a misogynist.

2. But the fact is, women simply aren't at the core of the issue in this debate from the pro-life point of view.

3. What's at the core of the issue is the problem that pro-lifers would have with you labeling a fetus as a "parasite". Of course technically, a fetus IS a parasite, but referring to it as such is pretty clearly meant as a means of de-humanizing it, and that's where the difference in ideologies lies - not in feelings towards women.


4. And to take it a step further, if I followed your logic on the misogyny issue, I could then go ahead and say that clearly, you must hate men. Because all you're talking about here is the rights of a woman, but you're completely ignoring what the fathers of aborted babies may want, so clearly, you have no regard for men and must hate them. Would that be a fair or accurate conclusion for me to reach?

1. i cant *prove* misogyny because i'm not a woman. all i have is observations and opinions based off of them. if i'm off then okay i'd like for it to make sense otherwise one day, but two dudes arguing about what it is seems a little ludicrous to me. if you want to logically 'prove' institutionalized discrimination then i bet you can find people of all beliefs using different brands of 'logic' to swing their way. or you could just take the hard truth from those who get it in their face all day. and, i guess, be smart enough to distinguish bullshit from whats real and problematic

2. your aim is productivity, and that these people have legitimate, or at least understandable, grounding and should be heard because theyre here whether we like it or not and the sooner we live together the easier this will be. my ground is that theyre fucking retards holding back all things good and decent and should be the last people given clout or compromised with.

3. i dont believe that. i think they might believe superficially that it is, but i'm cynical and really think it stems from a long line of maintaining some form of control. again, opinion. a vehement one, but an opinion nonetheless

4. i think this is only an issue if dad doesnt have the resources to care for the kid and she still wants to have it. how this would happen is a little baffling, since no mom who wants a kid bad enough is also going to want to raise them up with nothing to give them, but who knows. but as far as having a say before a woman gets an abortion, i say it's ridiculous. guys planting one seed out of a lifetime supply compared to months of exhaustive care, risk, and obsessive health monitoring aka: doing the whole fucking thing? gtf-outta here, that's borderline facetious. you haven't done shit and dont pretend you have some conceptual say to bridge the dissonance. i dont hate men, because i dont hate myself, but i'll call a spade if it smells like one, and it's a long road to prove otherwise. i hate many MANY aspects of dudely culture and rationalization that dont sit right with me at all and keep me perpetually malcontent. and i think as long as it's that cuture that sitting comfortably meting out media, priveleges, and graciously allowing everyone else to function like they do, there's going to be problems. it's got nothing to do with gender, but what's running the hideous custerfuck currently running.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by dubman

1. i cant *prove* misogyny because i'm not a woman. all i have is observations and opinions based off of them. if i'm off then okay i'd like for it to make sense otherwise one day, but two dudes arguing about what it is seems a little ludicrous to me. if you want to logically 'prove' institutionalized discrimination then i bet you can find people of all beliefs using different brands of 'logic' to swing their way. or you could just take the hard truth from those who get it in their face all day. and, i guess, be smart enough to distinguish bullshit from whats real and problematic

2. your aim is productivity, and that these people have legitimate, or at least understandable, grounding and should be heard because theyre here whether we like it or not and the sooner we live together the easier this will be. my ground is that theyre fucking retards holding back all things good and decent and should be the last people given clout or compromised with.

3. i dont believe that. i think they might believe superficially that it is, but i'm cynical and really think it stems from a long line of maintaining some form of control. again, opinion. a vehement one, but an opinion nonetheless

Well at least we're at the core of our differences on it now, which is that I think it's important to fairly recognize the motivations behind what people with differing opinions do and say, and you, by your own admission, prefer to assign your own pre-conceived assumptions to people and reach conclusions about them as a result. To be perfectly honest, I think it's fair to say that this basically nullifies your argument, because you're knowingly ignoring facts in favor of your own personal, subjective conclusions.

Originally Posted by dubman

4. i think this is only an issue if dad doesnt have the resources to care for the kid and she still wants to have it. how this would happen is a little baffling, since no mom who wants a kid bad enough is also going to want to raise them up with nothing to give them, but who knows. but as far as having a say before a woman gets an abortion, i say it's ridiculous. guys planting one seed out of a lifetime supply compared to months of exhaustive care, risk, and obsessive health monitoring aka: doing the whole fucking thing? gtf-outta here, that's borderline facetious. you haven't done shit and dont pretend you have some conceptual say to bridge the dissonance. i dont hate men, because i dont hate myself, but i'll call a spade if it smells like one, and it's a long road to prove otherwise. i hate many MANY aspects of dudely culture and rationalization that dont sit right with me at all and keep me perpetually malcontent. and i think as long as it's that cuture that sitting comfortably meting out media, priveleges, and graciously allowing everyone else to function like they do, there's going to be problems. it's got nothing to do with gender, but what's running the hideous custerfuck currently running.

But you're no longer following your own logic here. Suddenly, you're relying on relatively reasonable consideration of facts rather than pre-conceived subjective conclusions about people.

And more importantly and relevant to the point, my second analogy that your logic would lead us to the conclusion that you must hate babies still stands completely firm.

[dubman]

how about "supple" instead of firm. or how about "indifference to fetuses is different from my attitiude towards babies, which is generally favorable yet the idea that they should come at the expense of someones well-being is exteremly questionable." how about "that's a dumb thing to say"

outside of all that, there's a flaw in your casual dismissal there, and it's this:

"pre-conceived"

it's an easy word to say (almost as much as "pretentious"), but it's wrong at this point. it's all conceived. there's nothing 'pre' about it. it's been done again and again and again that we can have a pretty good idea of what the bullshit is about at this point if we can stop dancing around it for two seconds.

"nullify"...

[Sean]

Originally Posted by dubman

there's a flaw there, and it's this:

"pre-conceived"

it's an easy word to say, but it's wrong at this point. it's all conceived. there's nothing 'pre' about it. it's been done again and again and again that we can have a pretty good idea of what the bullshit is about at this point if we can stop dancing around it for two seconds.

"nullify"...

So then you maintain that saying "theyre (pro-lifers) fucking retards holding back all things good and decent and should be the last people given clout or compromised with" is simply a factual statement?

And what exactly am I "dancing around"? I'm breaking down plain and simple points that directly speak to the issue. You still have yet to offer anything even remotely objective to support your conclusion that Bush and/or pro-lifers hate women.

[dubman]

Originally Posted by Sean

1. So then you maintain that saying "theyre (pro-lifers) fucking retards holding back all things good and decent and should be the last people given clout or compromised with" is simply a factual statement?

2, And what exactly am I "dancing around"? I'm breaking down plain and simple points that directly speak to the issue. You still have yet to offer anything even remotely objective to support your conclusion that Bush and/or pro-lifers hate women.

1. my opinion is that it is factual. LOL.

2. they exist and seek control of. your plain and simple points are "dancing around" an issue that is neither plain or simple in its effects (though plain and simple in motivation). you're just engaging in more distraction like any other politics forum does.