Incels lose it (even more so than usual) after woman jokes about the “aborted girlfriend” meme

Okay I’m confused. I have repeatedly state none of the people I have speaking of want to legislate or restrict abortion in any way because they are intelligent people who realize when you do that you don’t stop abortion you just make it more dangerous and women die. That is not pro-life obviously! Focus on preventing unwanted pregnancy is definitely in their top three goals if not number one. They have sent multiple petitions to the pope and the Vatican trying to get them to loosen their stance on contraception and birth control pills and stuff.

I feel like I’m not expressing this well. Name something I’ve said that any of the people I’ve referred to have done, like please quote me directly and tell me why it is bad action in of itself and you’re not just assuming their motivation and projecting bad actions or intentions on to them please. When I get home I’m going to make a list of answers and refutations I’ve gotten that literally having nothing to do with any specific statements I made they are all referring solely to the current majority pro-life movement in general. As I previously said I think this is a knee-jerk reaction to the term pro-life. I specifically said they are not proselytizing, they do not want to make it illegal or even more difficult. They just think you should take every reasonable precaution against unwanted pregnancies.(and let’s be honest, a lot of people don’t come close to doing that, especially if they are college-age or younger. Isn’t it better to use protection than to eventually kill a zygote? And if not, why?)Obviously if the mother’s health or life is in danger abortion is perfectly reasonable and not immoral in their eyes.

And like Susan, the friend of my mother’s I mentioned it’s not like they see people who had abortions is horrible whores or something like that. They realize that there’s a lot of nuance and shades of grey and like Susan some women just get it into unfortunate situations where abortion is the only truly reasonable course of action. For example if you get pregnant and you truly can’t afford to raise a baby. My mother for example think that was a horribly unfortunate situation but she wouldn’t think that the woman should have a baby that she can’t feed or clothes or raise well because she can’t afford to.

How is that actually pro-life? Just cuz the baby gets born doesnt mean it will have a good life. These people I’m referring to focus on all kinds of life not solely and only birth. What pro-life people are is really just pro birth, 99% of the time. They just have great branding. (I kinda like that, pro birth, that’s exactly what they believe and espouse, it’s perfect! Someone must have said that before now.)But seriously please someone tell me how what these people are doing is wrong and immoral.

Don’t assume their motivations and actions are the same or even always similar to the majority of people who call themselves pro-life. Technically politically yes they are pro-choice. But personally and morally they are pro-life and the people I’m speaking of view this as a substantial part of who they are as a person. So I honestly don’t understand what people here think they should refer to themselves as if not pro-life because by truest definition of the words that’s exactly what they are and much more so than the people who claim the term so often for themselves in my opinion.

So all of the people who are disagreeing with me, what’s your opinion, what should they refer to themselves as? What is the concept that encompasses the good things and activism they do in service of life? What would be a better phrase to convey it? I’m being totally sincere, this is not sarcasm or snark. I know I’m oversensitive and maybe I’m being irrational but I feel like since this topic is so polarizing it may be bringing out hostility in people that is unwarranted and my feelings are a bit hurt because I don’t feel like I’m just being disagreed with. I truly feel like some of my words are being twisted and or cherry-picked and/or taken out of context.

If you judge them by actions and not a word or a phrase what are the actions that they are doing that people here find so reprehensible? Or even a bit reprehensible and not just something you happen to disagree with? Again they do not want to legislate abortion or make it more difficult for anyone they would probably prefer the opposite in a bunch of cases because it’s much better in their eyes(now this is an assumption on my part to kill a bunch of cells that’s only 20 days old then when it’s 20 weeks old.)

I personally feel ambiguous about abortion, obviously women should be able to choose what to do with their own bodies. If you want to have 18 abortions that’s your uterus and that’s your right but it would make me personally uncomfortable. I am not trying to push this on anyone I never said any one of these people is trying to push this on anyone because they’re not. They consider their views to be pro-life by the strictest definition. All life is sacred therefore you should do all you can to make sure as many people live as possible and their lives are as pleasant as you can theoretically help them be. So what are they actually do it that is hurting anyone or immoral in any way? That is what I don’t get what are people objecting to? Please no one bring up the great majority of the current pro-life movement for the billionth time. Please I am so far beyond confused at this point I’m begging anybody to please tell me what are these specific people are doing that is so wrong? Thank you in advance for any responses.

I’m sorry if I sound harsh in any way I’m just frustrated and so confused because I’ve known a few of these people since I was a child one of them is my mother and I’ve helped them with so many beautiful things and charitable events since I was little. Though not recently, since I got interested in political activism in the last 3 years starting 2015 I haven’t had the spoons for much of anything else. This is not the only important metric for something like this but if I had to guess the amount of money they have raised and given from their own pocket since I was let’s say 14 because I remember that year and the years after well(junior high is a bit blurry and before junior high is really blurry lol)I’m positive it’s over $1000000 and maybe a lot like maybe three or four million dollars. They are also very careful about the Charities they deal with if at all possible they prefer to handle everything themselves

@Weatherwax

I agree with what you said so much. Because even if the embryo or fetus were a person – as the pro-life crowd are so eager to prove with their pictures and everything – as long as that “person’s” “life” can only be protected by forcing another person to act as incubator? The choice is clear. Overtime pro-lifers go on and on about the fetus/embryo being a human or even feeling pain and stuff? Well, as harsh as it sounds, even if you could scientifically prove that it would change nothing. It would then be a case of “too bad”, because being against abortion would still be forcing another person to give their own body as a kind of incubator or life-sustaining device and that would still be an unacceptable human rights violation because it would be a violation of a person’s bodily autonomy. You have a right to maintain that autonomy. If that is only possible by ending another “person’s” “life”…then that would be “unfortunate collateral damage that can’t be helped”. What I mean to say is, in addition to being dishonest and emotionally manipulative as fuck, those “but they are babies” arguments from the pro-life crowd are also somewhat irrelevant. It doesn’t matter if “they” are “babies”. If “they” can only “live” by taking away another human beings bodily autonomy, then I’m sorry, but as it is now, they can’t live.

And no, I’m not a “baby hating bitch” (ridiculously enough that seems to be where they’re headed with these emotionally manipulative arguments). I would simply put a woman’s (and every human being’s) right to self-determination above their “moral obligation” towards any other life. So even if they could prove it was “a life” it would change nothing for me when it comes to the right to abortion.

And the attempts at emotional manipulation by spreading pictures of aborted fetuses/embryos really pisses me off. I came across that yesterday by researching German pro-life activists after reading this thread. “Warning the pictures are really horrific and could shock you!” Yeah? You know what’s just as shocking to me? The idea of having my body f*cking used to grow something in it that I don’t want there. So I’m not asking anyone else to do that, okay dudes? And btw? I’d personally be ecstatic to have a kid under most circumstances, but somehow I still have enough empathy to imagine how horrific it must be to be forced to carry an unwanted pregnancy.

I also can’t help seeing something of a sexist stereotype behind the whole argument it. As in: “But you are a WOMAN, don’t you care about the cute little BABIES?!” I don’t care about any “baby” more than I care about the human rights and human dignity of living women, no.

I specifically said think don’t think it’s murder I’ve said that three or four times okay everyone is just being reactionary and not reading my words so I’m giving this up. I said they believe it is killing something which is so not murder. If I trip and knock a flower pot out my window and I kill someone is that murder? I also believe it is killing something but I’m on the fence on whether it is immoral or not. I’m also on the fence on whether it is immoral to kill things like mice I catch them and set them free if there ever a problem which is happened twice in my life. Also why is what I said judgy? I said that ideally unwanted pregnancies should be prevented I don’t understand why that’s a controversial stance!

They believe young adults should be educated so they don’t get pregnant when they don’t want to pregnancy can kill you pregnancy can do all sorts of things aside from make a baby which is huge by itself why is it judging to say I would like to prevent unwanted pregnancies as much as humanly possible I don’t get that.

I’m judging from the people I knew in college and high school who were a lot of the time lazy about condom use when they were excited they were going to get laid. Do I understand that? Sure they are horny teenagers! Does that make it brilliant and wise? Of course it doesn’t! Does it make them bad or immoral people? Of course it doesn’t! It was a lapse in judgement which everyone has periodically I have surely had many lapses in judgement and if you are Christian to err is human to forgive divine.

And it just proves my point again everyone saying vague borderline insulting condescending stuff(if it’s not quite insulting and I’m being oversensitive I apologize but I feel insulted.) Why is nobody actually giving a specific answer to anything. Why is it not better to just take 30 seconds and put on a condom then have to go to a clinic to kill the zygote? Even if I was a sociopath, I would rather do that simply for efficiency f*** morality it’s just a better idea.

I don’t understand why what you put in the block is controversial I’m sorry. I think people are just being reactionary because this topic is so polarizing. I shouldn’t have brought it up I’m used to people here not being so hostile. I guess it depends on the topic. I’m sincerely asking questions why I don’t understand and everyone is just vaguely telling me I’m wrong and not telling me why and not only is it hurting my feelings but it’s frustrating the s*** out of me

I don’t understand why someone can’t just tell me be like Katie the reason this is wrong is this and this and this and you’re not seeing these gray areas and blah blah blah I’m sincerely asking but people seem to be escalating not getting less hostile even though I’m just asking and since I’m under strict orders of my psychiatrist and primary partner to not stress myself out because I’m very prone to episodes and severe panic attacks right now most people know I was in the hospital for a while after the election and why. This is getting me emotional cuz I’ve never felt so strongly attacked by this community before.

I’m not trying to make people feel guilty I’m not trying to be nasty. If what I’m saying is socially inappropriate I know I can be accidentally tactless and stuff I don’t mean to and if I’m doing it now I sincerely apologize but I don’t understand why everyone’s just being hostile and not just explaining it step-by-step.

If I’m so incredibly wrong just give me the simple facts and reasons why I’m wrong like people have done with every other topic I was ignorant and occasionally even offensive(obviously not purposefully)about? Especially when I first came here I said some really ignorant stuff and people were much nicer about that then they are about me right now just being confused I just don’t get that. Since it seems absolutely no one is willing to do that yeah I guess I will just leave it alone

@KatieKitten,

It sounds like the philosophy you’re trying to describe could be the Consistent Life Ethic / ‘Seamless Garment’ one.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consistent_life_ethic

http://m.ncregister.com/blog/mark-shea/the-seamless-garment-what-it-is-and-isnt#.W1BoiRYpDv5

Those two links should be enough as an introduction to the concept, including some of the criticisms of it in practice.

Does this help you any with what you’re trying to say?

If bodily autonomy isn’t fundamental, then it has to be legally compulsory – and enforced – for everyone to donate a kidney, half a liver, blood and bone-marrow etc. regardless of their state of health or circumstances. If a man says no, that’s just too bad. He gets arrested and taken by force for those life-saving elements to be removed from him; they will save lives and that matters more than a mere man’s wishes doesn’t it? The pain and the risk to his health and to his life don’t matter, his own choice in the matter is irrelevant, the ways in which it could change his life forever don’t matter.

Sometimes I think a lot of people just don’t get how truly fundamental it is when your own body, your own self, isn’t yours to decide on but that somebody else overrules you; now I know a lot of anti-choicers are women, but very many are men who especially don’t get it because they know it can never happen to them.

Not to mention that of course – as others have pointed out – for anti-choicers overall, taking away women’s autonomy and causing them harm/”punishing” them is the whole point.

I’m rather offended by the assertion that all foster-care is genocide, as well. I mean, I suppose that the culture my big sister was taken from, where she was raped by her older brother while her parents knew and let it happen is an important cultural touchstone, and it’s racist to say otherwise. The state had no business profaning her heritage by removing her from their custody and putting her in a soulless orphanage run by horrible cultural imperialists like my mother. Auntiemame is wise to support the ultra-conservatives that gained control of the Kansas legislature and decided that the foster care industry needed to be privatized within an inch of its life, and would have kicked undesired teenagers like my big sister back to their birth families regardless of the reason that they were removed in the first place. Of course, my mother had to fuck it all up by imposing her cultural biases against sibling rape and insisted on adopting her to stop that. Thank you for opening my eyes at how unenlightened my parents were, Auntiemame.

KatieKitten,

While I can’t speak for anyone else, given that the right to an abortion is under severe threat right now it the US, I’m pretty sensitive about it. It’s crucial to push back against any anti-abortion sentiment. Because even though a significant majority of people in the US want at least some abortion rights, those who are anti-abortion are so loud that it gives the impression to the media and politicians that only progressives are pro-choice. Even rhetoric like “I’m not saying it should be illegal, but it is wrong” or “some pro-lifers aren’t anti-woman, they just sincerely want to protect life” endangers women’s rights and women’s lives. It also make this

They just think you should take every reasonable precaution against unwanted pregnancies.(and let’s be honest, a lot of people don’t come close to doing that, especially if they are college-age or younger. Isn’t it better to use protection than to eventually kill a zygote? And if not, why?)Obviously if the mother’s health or life is in danger abortion is perfectly reasonable and not immoral in their eyes.

A lot more difficult. Planned Parenthood prevent far more abortions than it performs because of all the other affordable family planning services they provide. But thanks to anti-abortion rhetoric, even the soft anti-abortion rhetoric like calling it a “necessary evil” gives right wing politicians an excuse to cut funding from them and the “moderate” politicians the impression that that’s what their constituents want.

I don’t feel like searching for the stats right now because I don’t remember where to look, but I do remember that countries where the right to abortion is not controversial or considered immoral actually have the lowest rates of abortion. This is in part because when family planning isn’t constantly under attack and stigmatized, people are more likely to have contraception access and now how to properly use it.

And yes, it is judgy. Contraception isn’t 100% effective, people get pregnant due to rape, sometimes a pregnancy is wanted but has to be terminated for medical reasons. Nearly 2/3 of women who have abortions already have kids https://www.guttmacher.org/united-states/abortion/demographics

Again, the stereotype that it’s irresponsible teenagers who are cavalierly using abortion as birth control is false and threatens access to family planning rather than encourages it.

Katiekitten420

but I don’t understand why everyone’s just being hostile

Because you’re on a misguided mission to get everyone to accept your particular “pro-life” pals as harmless, which you believe because you’re a) sympathetic to their rhetoric, b) ignorant of the consequences that even the supposedly hands-off stance has on abortion access, and c) clinging to a naive understanding of how and why people get abortions.

For example, you ask, “Why is it not better to just take 30 seconds and put on a condom then have to go to a clinic to kill the zygote?” As if it’s ever that simple. As if there aren’t several rather horrible assumptions built into that question. That you would pose that question at all lets us glimpse the rotten premises behind what you’re trying to sell as benevolence.

There’s no reason for anyone whose actual mission is “to make sure as many people live as possible and their lives are as pleasant as you can theoretically help them be” to concern themselves on a moral level with other people’s abortions. Abortions are a necessary part of making people’s lives as pleasant as possible. So why would your buddies disapprove of them at all? There’s something amiss there—something the rest of us know better than to trust.

A chauvinism for “life” puts its adherents in the uncomfortable position of always weighing one life against another. They can’t help but pit “make sure as many people live as possible” against “make sure…their lives are as pleasant as you can theoretically help them be.” Such conflicted people will try their hardest to relieve their discomfort without making themselves choose, which is what’s so dangerous. It leads to motivated reasoning, even in people who genuinely try to prioritize those who are already born. They’re going to falter whenever they think they can have it both ways.

The “nuance and shades of grey” you mentioned? Those are the fruit of your friends’ motivated reasoning. They’re what poison your premises. They’re unnecessary complications that lend themselves to misinformation and myth-making, to judgment and stigmatization—all of which bolster the more deliberately pernicious kind of “pro-life” activism.

No matter how special you think your friends are, it won’t change the fact that there is no way to be “pro-life” that disapproves of abortion yet doesn’t pose a danger to reproductive rights and bodily autonomy. So maybe stop insisting we believe otherwise. This isn’t some academic exercise. Our bodies and lives are at stake here.

@KatieKitten420

We can’t magically know the intentions of the people you are describing. We don’t know them. We can’t read their minds, and we can’t see their actions. We can only operate off of the information that you have provided to us. And what you have provided to us are that these people identify as pro-life and think things like:

they personally feel it’s morally wrong except in cases where the mother’s life or health is in danger

some women just get it into unfortunate situations where abortion is the only truly reasonable course of action. For example if you get pregnant and you truly can’t afford to raise a baby.

Basically that they think that abortions except in the most extreme circumstances are wrong. That they want those other, “frivolous” to not happen any more. Apparently they don’t plan to try to actively coerce people out of getting abortions. Great, good for them, they respect basic bodily autonomy. They get a gold star. I’ll hold them with the same regard that I have for the people who think that gay marriage should be legal and gay people shouldn’t be harassed, but that homosexuality is still a sin. Sounds fair?

But if they decide to hold the label of pro-life, then they should be aware of how people are going to immediately interpret that and make assumptions, because words mean things.

Like how if someone is a part of All Lives Matter, they’re going to be interpreted as being a part of a group that is a reactionary backlash to Black Lives Matter, people who want to minimize the struggle that black people face and people who are frankly pretty racist. Doesn’t matter if the person is really, genuinely someone who believes that ALL lives are important and of course thinks that some of the killings of unarmed black people by police officers are unwarranted, and totally donates to the ACLU and just thinks that life is really important and we shouldn’t be exclusionary about these things! They’ve decided to throw their lot in with the 99% of All Lives Matter folks who are racist jackasses, and therefore are going to be interpreted as supporting the racist jackasses.

If they don’t care about how they are viewed by both the racist jackasses (who will, at least upon first contact, assume that they’re on the same side) and by the people whose rights are actively under attack by the racist jackasses (who will assume that they are against BLM, and probably still be nasty and accusatory and suspicious of the poor, poor “true” All Lives Matter people, even after being assured that, no, really, they aren’t racist jackasses like 99% of the people who identify as such), then they can keep on their merry way. That’s their right. But if they want to whine about how other people are meaaan and making assumptions about them just because of how they choose to label themselves, then they can suck it up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKetznG0vXs

Here’s a reason people are very emphatic about how pro-life that believes this:

Like they don’t want to legislate abortion but they personally feel it’s morally wrong except in cases where the mother’s life or health is in danger.

Is pro-life.

Assigning a morality judgment to a medical procedure that people will choose to have for a variety of reasons (not only because they were too lazy to put on a condom) (also where are they going to get condoms, pro-lifers have shut down a bunch of planned parenthoods) (also where are they going to learn about condoms/other forms of birth control, pro-lifers have managed to eff that up a bunch as well) (and I know that you claim that your pro-lifers don’t do anything but make people feel like they will go to hell for having an abortion, but it all ties in to the greater pro-life ‘women should just keep their legs closed until they are married and then pop out those babies with no outside controls’ thing) IS BAD.

Based on this quote:

(…) maybe it’s just cuz I was literally raised somewhat by two of these people like they babysat me when I was teeny tiny and I know that their intention at least are truly good. All of their intentions are good that is true even for the people who didn’t babysit me.

Good intentions are, I believe, the paving stone of choice on the road to hell.

You’re going through something that progressive people often go through: The realisation that the people they love and who love them aren’t as good or progressive as we thought. Sorry, it’s shitty, but you’ve got two choices here.

Realise that their version of pro-life IS THE SAME as attempting to outlaw abortion, because it all feeds into the same thing. Or continue to assert that someone evil has co-opted the term, and your friends/family are the real pro-lifers.

Only you can make this call. Sorry for the dissonance, but it is what it is.

I’m sorry that the strong reactions you’ve got have made it difficult for you to understand what people are saying. But I won’t say that anyone was wrong to react this way. This is, like it or not, a war over bodily autonomy for people with a uterus. People will be heavily invested, because lives are literally on the line here.

@KatieKitten420
Someone pointed out earlier that what you’re doing is similar to the incel sympathizers, and I want to expand on that a little further so you can understand why you’re getting the reaction you are. Apologies if I am not coherent this morning; I have a bad headache.

First, you coming in here asking us if we can have any sympathy for some subset of pro-lifers is like when idli came in and was asking us if we can have any sympathy for some incels. In both cases, the term was being used to describe something very different from the mainstream usage of the word. Pro-life is an established philosophy as is incel. In both cases the claim was put forth that the mainstream usage is coopting some more pure, less harmful group but in both cases the movement always was about exactly what people mean when they use the mainstream definition.

Second, even the kinder, gentler usage you both apply to these terms is inherently rooted in misogyny. Just like the belief that, “I’m so ugly I’m undateable, but I don’t blame women for that” is inherently misogynistic, so too is “abortion is wrong and should only be performed if no other option is available, but we shouldn’t legislate against it.” (Apologies if I’m misrepresenting the belief in question; please let me know if I’m misunderstanding. ) People have already gone into what’s wrong with both of those positions, but please let us know if you need some more clarification.

So essentially what you’re doing is asking a bunch of feminists to have sympathy for a misogynistic position. And we’re just not going to do that. You’re not going to convince us we should, and you’re going to get a lot of anger any time you try it.

Oh, and I can’t remember if I’ve mentioned it here before (apologies for the repetition, if so) but I’ve personally used an IUD – supposedly among the most reliable methods of contraception known to woman – and got pregnant, twice.

I’m very pro-abortion, just like I’m pro-appendectomy and pro-antibiotics and pro-dentistry. They’re bloody brilliant when you need ’em.

Plus – though this is purely by the by of course – my kids (born some ten years later) wouldn’t exist today if I hadn’t been able to access safe, free, early, outpatients, non-judgemental (except for one idiot) abortions when I needed them.

One can have an opinion that it’s immoral to get an abortion if you were just careless with contraception, but you should keep that opinion to yourself because it’s not your body, and not your business.

Yeah, but it’s still a shitty opinion to have. “You shouldn’t get surgery for that leg you busted up while skiing. You knew the risks.” It’s still treating abortion like it’s something other than a medical procedure.