‘Queer’ Women and Abortion

12 Comments for “‘Queer’ Women and Abortion”

  1. posted by Tom Scharbach on

    It is sometimes a good idea to read the entirety of a quote, in context, before ridiculing it:

    Such hurdles and delays could eventually threaten the consistently high level of
    “The people most impacted are the immigrant women already under siege, low-income women, women of color, transgender and queer women,” said Jessica González-Rojas, executive director of the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health, which works with women in the Rio Grande Valley in Texas. “Having a Supreme Court friendly to these restrictive laws makes it a de facto ban on that kind of health care, abortion and contraception. Legal access without real access is not access at all.”

    Reply
    • posted by Matthew on

      And yet again, you miss the point. They are enabling men to steal the mantle of womanhood from women. They are supporting gay and lesbian erasure. And so are you for refusing to challenge it. I’m sick of self-loathing Regressive Leftists like you projecting their thinly veiled homophobia and unveiled self-loathing onto everyone else.

      Reply
  2. posted by Jorge on

    Mr. Miller’s difficulty appears to be in the area of understood or implied words.

    He takes “most impacted” to mean the people who are “most often” impacted. But it is really meant to mean the people who are “most severely” impacted. Of course, if the speaker were that explicit, it’d be easier to dismiss her argument on the merits of it being an acceptable consequence.

    I will dismiss it anyway. What she speaks of is not a matter of the disadvantage having less access to human rights or health care, but the privileged elites who have a greater ability to circumvent the rule of law and social judgment by their greater physical mobility and privacy. They can engage in deviant moral behaviors with fewer consequences. It is a shameful thing to say that just because the privileged people can be expected to get away with something that society judges to be detrimental or indecent, that means we should throw up our hands and make no effort to try to stop it.

    Anyway, the prevalence of abortions is, of course, something that pro-life groups spend a great deal of effort not paying attention to. And I trust no explanation is needed why a transgender or queer woman who actually is in the market for an abortion would experience a greater than average disruption from any restriction.

    Reply
    • posted by Matthew on

      Q***r is a slur, and tr*ns “women” are men.

      The correct word for homosexual women is “lesbian.” Say it. LES-BI-AN.

      Reply
    • posted by Rob McGee on

      the privileged elites who have a greater ability to circumvent the rule of law and social judgment by their greater physical mobility and privacy.

      If that’s what the writer intended, then she should have written “queer people and transgender people,” without using the word women — since queer MEN are also “impacted” by double standards that make it easier for the privileged to get away with deviant behavior.

      And I trust no explanation is needed why a transgender or queer woman who actually is in the market for an abortion would experience a greater than average disruption from any restriction.

      Actually, you kinda do need to explain how a “transgender woman” could possibly be in the market for an abortion in the first place. A “transgender man” who has not yet had his uterus and ovaries removed COULD have an unwanted pregnancy, but not a “transgender woman” who was born with a penis and testicles.

      Of course, I assume that the writer meant to say “transgender man” — i.e., a biological female who socially identifies as a man (but still has the physical organs required for pregnancy). But if so, it was the writer who was confused about the prevailing terminology, and not Miller.

      At any rate, I’m not sure why a low-income cis-lesbian or a low-income transman who desired an abortion would experience a “greater than average restriction” compared with a low-income cis-heterosexual woman. (I certainly appreciate the point that ALL low-income women will tend to be more severely impacted by abortion restrictions than affluent women.)

      Reply
      • posted by Matthew on

        And this is why gay men and lesbians have no business supporting this mess. It’s trying to cure something that isn’t even a disease.

        Reply
  3. posted by David Bauler on

    90% of abortion politics is deep rooted BS. I say that about the organized pro-life and pro-choice camps.

    The number of democratic-developed nations that have tried to outlaw abortion is very small, but most have some restrictions.

    I suspect that greater access to comprehensive sex education and family planning services would probably make abortion rarer. While by no means a perfect system, we can greatly reduce unplanned pregnancies.

    Reply
    • posted by Matthew on

      How many gay babies have been aborted since Roe v. Wade?

      Reply
  4. posted by Kosh III on

    ” greater access to comprehensive sex education and family planning services would probably make abortion rarer”
    Yes but the so-called “pro-life” people are nearly as adamant against this as abortion.
    Hypocrites!

    Reply
    • posted by Matthew on

      How many gay babies have been aborted since Roe v. Wade?

      Reply
  5. posted by david Bauler on

    Unfortunately, you are often correct in this regard. Christopher Hitchens — who was mostly prolife — point this out during one of his lectures. But, most pro-life people choose to live with this hypocrisy.

    Reply
  6. posted by Matthew on

    None of this would be necessary if homosexuality were mandatory like it should be.

    Reply

Leave a Comment