When one searches for “Feminism Canada” it is surprising that the REAL Women of Canada website comes up so quickly. They indeed must have their google-fu locked and loaded because the shite they are peddling is quite amazing. On abortion, they have the anti-choice playbook covered and pretty much have the standard fetus-fetish boilerplate canardage in spades.
“REAL WOMEN OF CANADA reaffirms that the family is society’s most important unit:[Well, stating one fact is good, it quickly goes downhill from here] we value equally every family member, born or unborn [*sigh* So the stupid assumptions begin. The unborn are just that, unborn therefore not entitled to the rights we grant people]. Reproductive choice is exercised prior to conception, because conception and birth are consequences of choice; not choices in themselves [And condoms never break, nonconsensual sex never happens and frack, once your ladyparts are in incubator mode *your* autonomy is over]. Anyone who is not certain that there is a second human being[we have terms for this, blastocyst, embryo etc. Mislabelling a blastocyst, by calling it a human being is misleading - Most, "what about the baaaabeeee! nonsense origates from shite like this] growing within the pregnant woman[You don't mean incubator with legs here do you?] should clearly give that human life the benefit of the doubt.[*facepalm* Oh you do..]“
The red pen of justice and commentary? Gentle readers, the amount of anti-woman sentiment going in this car-wreck of a “statement on Abortion” deserves nothing less. Appealing to emotion, ignoring reality and eliminating the bodily autonomy of women, all in one paragraph. Amazing.
It is said repeatedly by feminists that society over the years has oppressed women and that feminism is the answer to overturning this oppression. How, then, can the genuine feminist justify, in turn, aborting her unborn son or daughter[actually its quite easy, you forced-birth-douche-bags along with rest who would want to have their say over what goes in my body can go frack-yourselves, you see easy.], the most deadly kind of oppression[A more pernicious type of oppression is a group of people identifying themselves for women's rights but instead promoting patriarchal values and the disenfranchisement of women; essentially subverting the very notion of women's rights.]
In a democracy, there is the acceptance and practice of the principle of equality of rights, opportunity and treatment for all[Nice statement, if it was actually true, you might be able to base your assertions on it.]. The unborn child must be included because we cannot arbitrarily take away the rights[Funny, it seems like you are making the rights of the female go *poof* without any compunction whatsoever.]of one group of human beings without giving assent to the withdrawal of rights from other categories of human beings. Since we are pro-family, we cannot discriminate by allowing an attack on one member of the human family such as the[don't forget unborn sperm & eggs too, I'm guessing 'REAL' women are not much for masturbation or menses either.] unborn child. Doing so has opened the door to attacks on other vulnerable members of the family [citation needed, otherwise your rhetoric is just sympathetic tripe], such as the aged, and the mentally and physically disabled.
Sends shivers deep into the rectal area, doesn’t it? It is always appalling to see this sort of nonsense take root in one’s own country. I shudder to think of what being a woman in the US is like, with rights to one’s bodily autonomy and reproductive choice under constant attack. For instance, Mr.Rick Anal-Froth Sanatorum hates women, observe:
[transcript excerpt] Santorum: You know, the Supreme Court of the Unites States, on a recent case, said that a man who committed rape could not be killed, would not be subject to the death penalty—yet the child [sic] conceived as a result of that rape could be. That to me sounds like a country that doesn’t have its morals correct. That child [sic] did nothing wrong. That child [sic] is— [pauses for audience applause]. That child [sic] is an innocent victim. To be victimized twice would be a horrible thing.
“It is an innocent human life. It is genetically human from the moment of conception—it is a human life—and we in America should be big enough to try to surround ourselves and help women in those terrible situations—they’ve been traumatized already! To put them through another trauma of an abortion I think is, uh, is too much to ask, and I so I would, I would just absolutely stand and say that ONE violence in enough!
“Yes, Rick Santorum, to be victimized twice would be a horrible thing—and many women who get pregnant via rape consider being forced to carry to term a pregnancy caused by rape and bear their rapist’s child a revictimization of their bodies. Which is why women have a choice. No pregnant rape survivor is required to get an abortion; and no pregnant rape survivor should be denied an abortion, either. And if you genuinely believed that to be victimized twice is a horrible thing, you would agree with me, you despicable, body-policing, misogynistic, hypocritical dipshit.”
“I have said before that I ardently believe, by virtue of what giving birth demands of the human body, the anti-choice position to be inherently violent. To take an anti-choice position in the case of a pregnancy resulting from rape is to turn the inherent violence up to 11.
“Let me be blunt: Rick Santorum is suggesting that after a man violates my body without my consent, sticks his penis in my vagina without my consent, ejaculates into my body without my consent, impregnates me without my consent, that he, Rick Santorum, should then have the right to force me to submit my body for nine months to a pregnancy I do not want, force me to submit my body to all that pregnancy can entail, from morning sickness to milk-engorged breasts to stretch marks to potentially life-threatening complications, and then force me to push out a baby I did not consent to conceive through the same vagina that was raped nine months earlier, and then decide whether to parent my rapist’s child or give up my child for adoption.”
Thanks but no thanks Mr.Anal-Froth. Time to take your misogyny marbles and head on home.