Feminist Philosophers

News feminist philosophers can use

Fem2.0 explains: Women Are Not Cows and Pigs March 17, 2012

Filed under: Uncategorized — KateNorlock @ 3:30 pm

This powerful piece captures the angry sentiments of many of us quite nicely, regarding the proposal described:

This week the Georgia State legislature debated a bill in the House, that would make it necessary for a woman to carry a stillborn baby until she ‘naturally’ goes into labor just as, according to Representative Terry England, pregnant cows and pigs do.

I know it’s just one state senator, and I know he’s not representative of the U.S.  But this should not be a debate in any state.  Americans can do better than this.  I’m not saying I expect better, because I’ve been given too many reasons not to.  But I’m not lowering my standards, Americans!  Let’s get our acts together, already.

 

17 Responses to “Fem2.0 explains: Women Are Not Cows and Pigs”

  1. Merry Says:

    OH… MY… GOD! I read the whole article and saw the clip. This just makes me apoplectic. The idea that the government could possibly legislate that a woman would have to carry a non viable fetus to term, regardless of any advice her doctor might give her, is frightening and orwelian, but the comparison to farm animals just highlights the mindset of these people. This has got to stop.

  2. j Says:

    I am speechless! How on earth do we combat such malevolent idiocy??

  3. Monkey Says:

    WTF???? What is wrong with these people?

  4. Nemo Says:

    We might add that babies aren’t calves or piglets. That was a bizarre video all around.

  5. Jender Says:

    Holy shit.

  6. Kate Norlock Says:

    Y’know, the first time I saw Leiter Report’s “the more they know, the less they know it” label, I wondered, what exactly does that mean? But this… I’m starting to see what the category’s for.

    I’m trying to keep this news item in perspective, as it’s just a handful of these guys, but GAH!

  7. Hubris so extreme invites an equally extreme fall. Let’s work for that fall as the election nears.

  8. Alan Says:

    What used to be Onion material is now just everyday politics.

    This sickens me to the point of despair.

  9. Michel X. Says:

    That is so, so sick. I wish I had something constructive to contribute to this thread, but I’m too busy reeling.

  10. Alrah Says:

    I think these men are scared that women will get so fed up by our lack of equality, that we’ll start deliberately using our bodies for politics (as they are) and engineer a reduction of men in the general population for a few generations. In the end, playing the numbers game might be the only practical way of ending sexism against women.

  11. Alrah Says:

    Check out these figures… I reckon they are what’s actually fuelling this shed-load of bullshit sexist legislation recently.

    http://www.in-gender.com/XYU/Gender-Preference/#SexSelection

    [Extract]
    MicroSort Sex Selection:
    80% of American families who use MicroSort sperm separation want a girl.
    Gender Requested by U.S. Parents Using MicroSort
    80% Girls, 20% Boys

    I bet these results shrivel the balls of most right wing politicians. What they don’t realise is that by forcing women to have invasive ultrasound – the women that change their minds about abortion are probably going to do so on the news that they’re carrying a girl.

  12. Merry Says:

    Alrah, think of the global implications. The Chinese and Indians want boys and already in China there is a surplus of boys, we’ll have a surplus of girls…the possible outcomes/consequences are quite interesting to think about.

  13. james Says:

    isn’t a higher ratio of women to men good for currently existing, straight men and bad for straight women?

  14. xena Says:

    I take it James didn’t catch Merry’s brilliant but implied point about Republican xenophobia. The very same Good Ol’ Boys who want to reduce women to baby machines are often the people who switch to rants about cracking down on immigrants in the same breath. I’ve seen this argument stated explicitly, to my revulsion, as “‘Those people’ are having x number of children per family, therefore it’s our duty to outbreed them before they outbreed us. Quivering is good.” How little things have changed since the 1860′s!

  15. Alrah Says:

    Merry… Just from a biological point of view… I think genetic diversity is a very good thing and strengthens our species. :D

  16. xena Says:

    Agreed, Alrah. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to clarify my position on that. I have a bad habit of muddling my point with too many prepositions. My revulsion is also directed at the notion that white people should only breed with white people. The entire reconstructionist argument is just one misogynistic, xenophobic stink-bomb after another.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,309 other followers