Re: How gender ideology is undermining the feminist arguments for abortion

[Stephen C. Newberry]

In article <s35eve$os3$2...@neodome.net>
Marilyn Mosby <lying_...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Amazing Answers wrote
>
> Enjoy your Ass Injected Death Sentence.

For years, the pro-abortion rights movement has been a radically
feminist cause. Now, however, many of its proponents can’t even
bring themselves to say the word “woman.”

Take, for example, this Washington Post editorial about the
leaked draft opinion that revealed the Supreme Court might
strike down Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey. The
editorial blasts the decision, which is not final, as “a
grievous blow to freedom” and “the legitimacy of the court
itself” and mourns the potential loss of abortion rights in some
states as an attack on … "pregnant people."

Indeed, not once in the entire 800-word article does the word
“woman” appear. Instead, they are referred to as “pregnant
individuals” or “pregnant people.” This deliberate refusal to
refer to women as women is yet another example of gender
ideology run amok. It is absurd and dishonest, and in this case,
it actually undermines the very cause the editorial is backing.

If the defense of abortion is that it is an issue of women’s
rights, but you can’t even bring yourself to use the phrases
“women’s rights” or “women’s bodies,” then what exactly is the
point? For years, we’ve been told that abortion is the business
of one sex only, but now, we can’t even refer to that sex by its
name. Are women the only people who should get to decide whether
they should remain pregnant, or can men also make that decision
now since they can become pregnant? And are men the ones trying
to legislate women’s bodies, or should we start referring to
them as non-chest-feeding persons since not all men are actually
men?

Gender ideology and the conscious choice not to use gendered
language have turned the abortion debate into a confusing game
of who’s who. It’s no longer clear who the victims or aggressors
are, and the argument that men shouldn’t be able to control
women’s bodies (or, should I say, that non-chest-feeding persons
shouldn’t be able to control pregnant individuals’ bodies) is no
longer compelling.

That’s why many leftists choose to put gender ideology back on
the shelf whenever the abortion debate rears its head. They know
it’s impossible to square the politically correct, gender-
neutral dogma they’ve embraced with the years-old feminist
talking points that have heretofore been successful. Here’s
California Gov. Gavin Newsom, for instance:

And, of course, here was the inevitable rebuke from the Woke
Language Police:

The Left has backed itself into this corner. It has embraced an
ideology so illogical that it can no longer use its own past
rhetoric or state biological facts without being accused of
bigotry. And as a result, the Left has had to take what was
already an unconvincing argument in favor of abortion and poke a
dozen more holes in it.

Now, the debate isn’t really about women or their bodies because
there are plenty of other people besides women who can also get
pregnant and be affected. And no longer is this a battle against
patriarchal oppression since there are plenty of men who were
once women and men who now claim to be women who would be
unfairly smeared by that allegation.

It would be funny if it weren't so damn stupid.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/restoring-america/equality-
not-elitism/how-gender-ideology-is-undermining-the-feminist-
arguments-for-
abortion?utm_c
ampaign=article_rail&utm_source=internal&utm_medium=article_rail

[Stephen C. Newberry]

In article <rq8i3k$1hd2$1...@neodome.net>