Women's thoughts about the forum

[rickb]

Full disclosure - I'm not a woman.

However, I'm very curious what the few women posters we have (and any female lurkers there may be) think about the forum.

Do you feel comfortable here?

Do the numerous obviously misogynist comments bother you?

Is there anything anyone could do (e.g. moderator intervention) that would increase your participation rate?

I'd suggest the moderators promptly ban any male who interferes in any way with this conversation.  I certainly can't promise that will happen, but I suspect the 3 mods we have (who are, of course, all males - DUH) will support me in this request.

Please say whatever you have to say.  As Fraser says, "I'm listening".

[WiseOne]

Full disclosure - I'm not a woman.

However, I'm very curious what the few women posters we have (and any female lurkers there may be) think about the forum.

Do you feel comfortable here?

Do the numerous obviously misogynist comments bother you?

Is there anything anyone could do (e.g. moderator intervention) that would increase your participation rate?

I'd suggest the moderators promptly ban any male who interferes in any way with this conversation.  I certainly can't promise that will happen, but I suspect the 3 mods we have (who are, of course, all males - DUH) will support me in this request.

Please say whatever you have to say.  As Fraser says, "I'm listening".

I used to feel very comfortable here but the discussions have taken a turn towards...let us say, insensitivity with a couple of frankly misogynist comments.

I had decided to stop posting but continued to lurk a bit to see if things continued in the same vein.  rickb, many many thanks for bringing this up.  Maybe I should have but given the responses I got to my comments in other threads, I felt like I'd be wasting my time.

Be aware that I'm not one of those people who are constantly on the lookout for anti-female rhetoric, or looking for the most imagined slight in innocent comments.  (For evidence of this:  see my avatar!)  The ones I'm complaining about really caught me by surprise.  I didn't expect it in this day and age, even in a right wing forum.  I work in a field that's quite male-dominated, and this issue doesn't ever come up.  If the extreme negative comments are simply treated appropriately by the moderators (deleted with comment about inappropriate posting, warning sent to perpetrator, banning from forum after 3 strikes), then I could go back to not worrying about the problem.  And the person typing the comments would get some useful feedback.

On a not unrelated topic... there are a lot of Republicans out there who could benefit from the same kind of attitude adjustment.  For example, take immigration.  I think most of us agree that opening the floodgates would be a very bad idea on many levels, and that the Obama administration's recent policies are to blame for the current tragedy of thousands of children being sent on a dangerous and fruitless journey by their misinformed parents.  But, the Republicans have painted themselves into a corner on this one:  it's hard for them to argue that immigration should be controlled for economic and social reasons, when they are saddled with a history of being...well, racist.  Similarly, the arguments against abortion because of respect for life just don't fly, when they're coming from the same people who make the kind of comments we've all seen on this forum (plus the Todd Aiken types), and are also vociferously in favor of capital punishment.

Thus, the new conservative movement as typified by this forum would benefit greatly from not falling into the standard Republican stereotype, and make it clear that you're still a member of the club if you're female, black, gay, transgender, Asian, Hispanic etc, as long as you subscribe to the basic economic creed.  The way I see it, the national party has a very long way to go before they get there.

[WiseOne]

OK I'll bite...

To clarify:  my comment does not apply to all abortion opponents.  But clearly some of the motivation has a lot more to do with disrespect for women than it does out of respect for life.  Can people not see that an anti-abortion stance is incompatible with being in favor of capital punishment, IF it's for that reason (thus, it's not for that reason)?  Particularly so when the same posters make obviously misogynist comments - and as I said above, I'm talking about the in-your-face ones, not imagined or obviously unintended slights.

And, consider the implications of an abortion ban.  Do you realize that blocking access to abortion means forcing a woman against her will to accept not only the physical and financial burden of having a child, but also the morbidity and mortality risks that come with it?  Or, let's say she goes and gets a back-alley abortion, in desperation and without carefully considering the risk.  There was a very real death toll from those before Roe v Wade.  Plus, she now runs the additional risk of being convicted and thrown in jail.  How wonderful for her child that would be.

Also have any of you read "Freakonomics"?  There is a very interesting analysis in there of the impact of Roe v Wade on crime.  It would be most interesting to see what happens to crime rates in states like Texas and Louisiana in the next 15-20 years, with the deluge of unwanted children that they are about to experience.

Full disclosure, I am personally opposed to abortion because of the respect for life issue, and I'm against capital punishment for precisely the same reason. However, I'm just as firmly opposed to criminalizing abortion, or trying to insert artificial legal hurdles into what should be a private, personal choice between a woman, physician, and (if relevant) her religion and church/clergy.  Unlike the case with capital punishment, where there is a perfectly workable and less expensive alternative (life in prison with no parole), abortion is a very complicated situation where someone is always going to get hurt - thus there is no "one-size-fits-all" solution.

If you have an argument for banning abortion that takes all these things into account and doesn't amount to using the force of law to impose your religious beliefs on others, I'm happy to hear them.

[clacy]

I'm sorry, but I don't see many Todd Aikin types.

[Xan]

Can people not see that an anti-abortion stance is incompatible with being in favor of capital punishment, IF it's for that reason (thus, it's not for that reason)?

I'm not sure how this follows.  You're saying that an innocent baby inside its mother's womb, and a monstrous serial killer duly convicted by a jury of his peers, are equally worthy of protection?

And, consider the implications of an abortion ban.  Do you realize that blocking access to abortion means forcing a woman against her will to accept not only the physical and financial burden of having a child, but also the morbidity and mortality risks that come with it?

Yes, but none of those are the baby's fault.

Or, let's say she goes and gets a back-alley abortion, in desperation and without carefully considering the risk.  There was a very real death toll from those before Roe v Wade.  Plus, she now runs the additional risk of being convicted and thrown in jail.  How wonderful for her child that would be.

Are you similarly against any law that drives any behavior into back alleys?  Extortion shouldn't be illegal, because it's much safer to extort people in broad daylight.

Also have any of you read "Freakonomics"?  There is a very interesting analysis in there of the impact of Roe v Wade on crime.  It would be most interesting to see what happens to crime rates in states like Texas and Louisiana in the next 15-20 years, with the deluge of unwanted children that they are about to experience.

Ah, the eugenics argument for abortion.  The founder of Planned Parenthood thought abortion was a great tool to keep black people from being born.  Is that what you're saying here?

If you have an argument for banning abortion that takes all these things into account and doesn't amount to using the force of law to impose your religious beliefs on others, I'm happy to hear them.

Infanticide was widely practiced and accepted in the Greco-Roman pagan world, before the Christians imposed their religious beliefs on that society.  Why should infanticide be illegal?

[Pointedstick]

Regardless of what our positions on abortion and other women's issues are, I think the key to a reasonable debate must involve the acknowledgement of the following:

1. Abortion is a morally complex issue that reasonable people may disagree on without either one of them being stupid or malicious. People who oppose legal abortion do not necessarily want to shackle women in their own bodies, nor are those in favor of it simply thinly-veiled infanticidal eugenicists. It's complicated.

2. Abortion is not the sum total of all issues that are important to women. Though I am not a woman, I find it rather insulting that it is often presumed that abortion is the ultimate woman's issue, with the implication that supporting legal abortion automatically means supporting women, and opposing it automatically means opposing women. I think it is possible to oppose legal abortion but hold positions on other issues that benefit women, and it is similarly possible to support legal abortion but hold positions on issues that hurt women.

[moda0306]

Regardless of what our positions on abortion and other women's issues are, I think the key to a reasonable debate must involve the acknowledgement of the following:

1. Abortion is a morally complex issue that reasonable people may disagree on without either one of them being stupid or malicious. People who oppose legal abortion do not necessarily want to shackle women in their own bodies, nor are those in favor of it simply thinly-veiled infanticidal eugenicists. It's complicated.

2. Abortion is not the sum total of all issues that are important to women. Though I am not a woman, I find it rather insulting that it is often presumed that abortion is the ultimate woman's issue, with the implication that supporting legal abortion automatically means supporting women, and opposing it automatically means opposing women. I think it is possible to oppose legal abortion but hold positions on other issues that benefit women, and it is similarly possible to support legal abortion but hold positions on issues that hurt women.

I agree with this.  One thing I don't understand is when women think they are grossly, UNIQUELY victimized.  I mean this as respectfully as it can be said.  I think women are way-too-often undermined in certain ways.

Back in 1970, an 18-year-old male had a pretty good chance of being forced, at gunpoint, to go to the jungle to fight men who would stop at almost nothing to kill them.

The ultimate "inequality" is genocide and detainment, IMO, by massive leaps and bounds, and men have fallen victims to this far, far more than women have.  Yet many women think it is a complete violation of their bodies for their EMPLOYER to choose not to cover certain forms of birth control. 

I hope this isn't taken as anti-woman or anti-feminist.  Feminists have moved some VERY important balls forward. They still have some to move.  It is where they have commentary on public policy and rectifying lack of "equality" that I think they lose some perspective, sometimes.



But the abortion debate is a very grey-area one.  If we accept the premise that an unborn baby is a sovereign life (we usually act this way in how we treat pregnant women), then we have some very difficult questions to ask about whether they should be recognized as such by our legal system, and when.  Perhaps men lack some perspective on the topic (in fact, I'm quite certain we do), and surely some men's arguments are going to sound a lot more like woman-hating than life-loving (just like a lot of feminists don't really sound like they want equality as much as they just hate men), but the government regulates our bodies in uncomfortable ways ALL the time, so I don't really see how this topic so-easily monopolizes that excuse without accompanying an anarchist message.

[Benko]

many women think it is a complete violation of their bodies for their EMPLOYER to choose not to cover certain forms of birth control.

I feel compelled (in the defense of women) to point out that this has nothing to do with women per se and everything to do with the progressive mindset. 

[moda0306]

many women think it is a complete violation of their bodies for their EMPLOYER to choose not to cover certain forms of birth control.

I feel compelled (in the defense of women) to point out that this has nothing to do with women per se and everything to do with the progressive mindset. 

Well I think any issue is tainted by our race, gender, age, etc. 

But yes, you are right. 


I'm all for cheap contraceptives for all, but not because I think it's a gross violation of the equality of women to not have employers pay for their female employee's birth control.  It would be one thing if it was a $100,000 surgical procedure, but BC falls squarely into the "insurance shouldn't pay for this" realm of expenses, IMO.

[Mountaineer]

OK I'll bite...

To clarify:  my comment does not apply to all abortion opponents.  But clearly some of the motivation has a lot more to do with disrespect for women than it does out of respect for life.  Can people not see that an anti-abortion stance is incompatible with being in favor of capital punishment, IF it's for that reason (thus, it's not for that reason)?  Particularly so when the same posters make obviously misogynist comments - and as I said above, I'm talking about the in-your-face ones, not imagined or obviously unintended slights.

And, consider the implications of an abortion ban.  Do you realize that blocking access to abortion means forcing a woman against her will to accept not only the physical and financial burden of having a child, but also the morbidity and mortality risks that come with it?  Or, let's say she goes and gets a back-alley abortion, in desperation and without carefully considering the risk.  There was a very real death toll from those before Roe v Wade.  Plus, she now runs the additional risk of being convicted and thrown in jail.  How wonderful for her child that would be.

Also have any of you read "Freakonomics"?  There is a very interesting analysis in there of the impact of Roe v Wade on crime.  It would be most interesting to see what happens to crime rates in states like Texas and Louisiana in the next 15-20 years, with the deluge of unwanted children that they are about to experience.

Full disclosure, I am personally opposed to abortion because of the respect for life issue, and I'm against capital punishment for precisely the same reason. However, I'm just as firmly opposed to criminalizing abortion, or trying to insert artificial legal hurdles into what should be a private, personal choice between a woman, physician, and (if relevant) her religion and church/clergy.  Unlike the case with capital punishment, where there is a perfectly workable and less expensive alternative (life in prison with no parole), abortion is a very complicated situation where someone is always going to get hurt - thus there is no "one-size-fits-all" solution.

If you have an argument for banning abortion that takes all these things into account and doesn't amount to using the force of law to impose your religious beliefs on others, I'm happy to hear them.

Thanks for your post, WiseOne.  I do think that abortion arguments sometimes fall along party lines, and thus aren't as fair and useful as the discussions should be.  The stereotype is that the left wants to kill all the babies before they're born (abortion), and the right wants to kill 'em all after they're born (wars and death penalties).  As I stated in another post, I tend to be pro life and anti death (novel concept, I know).  But if there must be death, I'd order it something like this:
1. Old age
2. Death penalty
3. Wars
4. Abortion

In other words, I don't like any of the above, but abortion looks like the worst form of death to me.  And I think I can say that apart from political or religious arguments.  The unborn human appears to be the most innocent and least able to defend itself.  While I'm not thrilled about the death penalty, because it can be administered wrongly, the numbers of lives taken by the death penalty are vanishingly small compared with abortions, and the vast majority are rightfully convicted murderers, not defenseless unborn babies. 

My views do differ from some opposed to abortion, however.  Rather than looking at it as a woman's right, I view abortion as an industry that exploits women; that presents and offers the killing of an unborn baby, wrapped in social acceptability and an almost self-righteous woman's-rights disguise.  I don't think women benefit from abortion; I think they suffer from it.  It's offered as a mere choice, but isn't the morally-neutral choice that it is relentlessly marketed under.  So I think I'm pro-women, pro-babies, and anti death.  I don't care much what the republicans and democrats think about the issue.  And I don't think it's primarily a religious issue.  To me it's a simple case of defending the defenseless, of looking out for "the little guy." 

Anyway, I guess we're getting off track from the original purpose of this thread, but I did appreciate your post, and I hope you'll stick around and continue discussions with us, even if it's on topics a bit lighter than this one!

Desert, great perspective; factual and not emotional on a very emotion charged issue. 

... Mountaineer

[Reub]

I"m hoping that we haven't lost WiseOne because she disagrees with most of us about the Palestinian/Israeli crisis. She adds so much to these forums that it would be a shame to lose her!

[Libertarian666]

My opinion, for what it's worth, is that abortion should be safe, legal and rare.
In addition, so long as abortion is at the sole option of the woman, which I agree with, the man should be free to decide whether to support the baby if the woman decides to have it. That's the only way it is fair; otherwise, the woman can saddle the man with 18 years of child support without the man's having any option, whereas she can abort the fetus if she wishes to without his having any say in that either.