Reading though threads on abortion always raises my blood pressure, but it is worth it for gems like this:
Dianne:
“Either it is okay to abort, or it is okay to rape”
Occasionally I shock people by saying that all anti-choice men are, on some level, rapists. Many never complete the act of rape personally*, but they are all of the rapist mentality. There’s no real difference between a man who will tell a woman that she doesn’t have the right to control how her uterus is used and one who will say that she doesn’t have the right to say how her vagina is used.
*Though, of course, if they vote for “pro-life” politicians, they are effectively participating in the sexual assault of numerous women.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
4 comments
November 22, 2012 at 9:38 am
Reneta Scian
I have one thought on this question, and that is “What would this mean for women who vote for, and fight for pro-life agendas? Are these women participating in the sexual assault of themselves and other women whether or not they are now, or at some point involuntarily impregnated?”
I fully agree that taking the rights away from a woman with regards to abortion, contraceptives, et cetera is a sexual violation of her body. However, I don’t know if this statement is so “simple” to sum up in such a way without making logical holes. If it’s not already apparent, I am a little “itchy” about simplifications. It is quite true that women internalize the anti-women attitudes of their culture. And as a few atheists on the web talk about morality, it is something applicable to the topic of women playing a role in their own oppression. There tends to be an attitude to “downplay” such things when women (the oppressed) do it as well, but as Qualia Soup put it (as an extract, not directly to this issue but similar), “The fact that they agree with this is cause for more concern, not less”.
It was part of his series on morality, talking about nations where women aren’t allowed to learn how to read and right, and that was a reference to women supporting that position. Either way, it is essential for us to see positions as moral or immoral irregardless of who is supporting them, and to try to recognize the nuances of a position without getting derailed (something simplifications can do). And in this sense, regardless of who is supporting it, pro-life agendas are sexual assault in a community, and culture that blames women for rape, creates phenomenon in favor of rape (Rape Culture), and furthermore limits a woman’s protections, and recourse for rape. The essential problem with pro-life arguments is that it essentially makes all women forced incubators while liberating men to do sexually and otherwise as they please.
I’d tend to agree with Diane on this, especially after critical thought on this matter. In fact, I’d say it’s the most egregious form of endorsed physical assault, to say that not only can she be raped (because the cultural matrix favors this), but say that if she is she deserved it, or “didn’t try hard enough to fight it” or that “It was God Ordained”, and that she has no right to her body once it’s been trespassed. And that is why “Rape Culture” is so egregious in the first place. It’s control over a woman’s body, sexuality and autonomy on a level that is more than inhumane, it’s an atrocity in my opinion. I can’t believe that in a modern society like ours that this is even an issue we have to deal with. (Note: I’ll also try to keep myself doing walk-through narratives of myself as I am critically thinking through something to a minimum. Yes, I was literally analyzing as I was readying/writing.)
LikeLike
November 22, 2012 at 11:03 am
Syrbal/Labrys
Don’t even get me started. I already had to face a pro-fetus news story this morning. Makes me thankful I am not fertile any more.
LikeLike
November 22, 2012 at 11:51 am
bj
Reproductive Objectification
Amanda Marcotte put it best:
“For anti-choicers, the fact that someone can make a baby means that making babies is what she is for. People mistake the term “objectification” to mean “looking at with lust,” but what it actually means is “reducing someone to an object to be used.” Sexual objectification is assuming that because women turn you on, they are for sex, instead of a person whose sexuality should be an expression of their agency. What anti-choicers engage in is reproductive objectification. Women are among an array of objects to be used. The refrigerator is for storing food. The bookshelf is for holding books. The woman is for making babies. You no more give her a choice in the matter than you would give your refrigerator veto power over what food it hold because it didn’t like your method of shopping.”
LikeLike
November 22, 2012 at 11:55 am
Reneta Scian
That is quite true, BJ. That is a good way to put it.
LikeLike