"My body, my choice" only makes sense when someone else’s life isn’t at stake.
Fun fact: If my younger sister was in a car accident and desperately needed a blood transfusion to live, and I was the only person on Earth who could donate blood to save her, and even though donating blood is a relatively easy, safe, and quick procedure no one can force me to give blood. Yes, even to save the life of a fully grown person, it would be ILLEGAL to FORCE me to donate blood if I didn’t want to.
See, we have this concept called “bodily autonomy.” It’s this….cultural notion that a person’s control over their own body is above all important and must not be infringed upon.
Like, we can’t even take LIFE SAVING organs from CORPSES unless the person whose corpse it is gave consent before their death. Even corpses get bodily autonomy.
To tell people that they MUST sacrifice their bodily autonomy for 9 months against their will in an incredibly expensive, invasive, difficult process to save what YOU view as another human life (a debatable claim in the early stages of pregnancy when the VAST majority of abortions are performed) is desperately unethical. You can’t even ask people to sacrifice bodily autonomy to give up organs they aren’t using anymore after they have died.
You’re asking people who can become pregnant to accept less bodily autonomy than we grant to dead bodies.
reblogging for commentary
But, assuming the mother wasn’t raped, the choice to HAVE a baby and risk sacrificing their “bodily autonomy” is a choice that the mother made. YOu don’t have to have sex with someone. Cases of rape aside, it isn’t ethical to say abortion is justified. The unborn baby has rights, too.
First point: Bodily autonomy can be preserved, even if another life is dependent on it. See again the example about the blood donation.
And here’s another point: When you say that “rape is the exception” you betray something FUNDAMENTALLY BROKEN about your own argument.
Because a fetus produced from sexual assault is biologically NO DIFFERENT than a fetus produced from consensual sex. No difference at all.
If one is alive, so is the other. If one is a person, so is the other. If one has a soul, then so does the other. If one is a little blessing that happened for a reason and must be protected, then so is the other.
When you say that “Rape is the exception” what you betray is this: It isn’t about a life. This isn’t about the little soul sitting inside some person’s womb, because if it was you wouldn’t care about HOW it got there, only that it is a little life that needs protecting.
When you say “rape is the exception” what you say is this: You are treating pregnancy as a punishment. You are PUNISHING people who have had CONSENSUAL SEX but don’t want to go through a pregnancy. People who DARED to have consensual sex without the goal of procreation in mind, and this is their “consequence.”
And that is gross.
This has been added to since I last saw it, so reblogging again.
Busted wide open.
Impressive comments. Thank you.
When you’re going to rant about how sci-fi is being invaded by women and minorities, make sure you’re not doing it on a public forum..Predictably, a new Tumblr is posting excerpts from the circle-jerk, presumably as a way of highlighting just how real the problems with sexism and discrimination in speculative publishing really are. And spoiler alert: it’s not pretty. Among the participants who are displeased at the recent influx of diversity in their community is award-winning author Raymond Feist, who eyerolled at “fugheads determined to use the organization to further their own agenda.”
Another participant, Sean P. Fodera, ranted about writer Mary Robinette Kowal, painting her feminism as hypocrisy. Why? Because she sometimes takes full-body photographs and wears dresses with low necklines, apparently:
“It just occurred to me that MRK seems to be deeply involved in this whole anti-sexism matter. I remember seeing her posing with Hines and Scalzi on one of their very scary cover parodies, and I know she chimed in with a snipe at the petition signers on the Radish thread. I find it very funny and ironic that she would jump on this bandwagon. For a long time, her website featured an array of photos of her in a diaphanous white outfit, posing on a beach. No metal bikinis or such, but they were not innocuous writer headshots either. One of them, with her recumbent on the sand with legs exposed, made her somewhat attractive. I also recall she’s fond of wearing tight-fitting gowns and plunging necklines when she attends cons and award ceremonies. I’ll have to add “phony” to “incompetent” and “arrogant” in the mental tags I’ve assigned her.”
I can’t believe this guy still has a goddamn job. Holy crap.
BUT REMEMBER, SEXISM IS OVER.
I first read that guy’s name as Sean P. Fedora. It would be more appropriate.Now can we talk about how geek interests claim to be much more welcoming and openminded and supportive of underdogs and outsiders and blah blah blah?
Because that is 100% pure bullshit.
Witness this above phenomena repeating endlessly in sci-fi, fantasy, video games, comics, etc etc etc. “Omg they’re invading our turf and ruining everything” Exhibit fucking A.
I feel like easily a third of my entire article output has been about sexism/marginalization of minorities in geek and tech spaces. I’ve been trying to come up with a canonical tag lately that I can consolidate these kinds of articles under, but there’s just SO MUCH, and “geek culture fail” probably wouldn’t fly well with my editors. So far I’ve used things like “sexism in gaming,” “sexism in comics, “sexism in geek culture,” but really there is such a vast and broad spectrum of things that should go under the umbrella of “geeks and techies being dicks to women and minorities just for showing up” that it gets very overwhelming very fast. And then I crawl under a rock.