Todd Akin - "Women don't get pregnant from "legitimate rape"" (See MOD REMINDER!

southsiderosie

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I'm sorry, but this is absurd whataboutary. The main effect of Jackson-Lee's idiocy is the fact that she looks like an idiot. The main effect of Akin's idiocy is a series of laws meant to restrict women's rights not only to abortion, but to birth control. So please forgive me and the thousands of other women who are more alarmed by the latter than the former.

efb

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It's the EU that has given me my rights by removing a lot of the dogma that was associated with Ireland- and I'm grateful for that

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

jill_valentine

Amerika wrote: »

That should be the end of it from the media trying to tie Romney/Ryan into Akin’s foolish comments. You’d think wouldn’t you. :rolleyes:

You say that like Ryan and Akin weren't both partners in crime on exactly this topic on more than one occasion in the past. Let's not forget, they were both co-sponsors in the "forcible rape" fiasco of some time back too.

Permabear

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

No he wouldn't.

molloyjh

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Sorry, where did I mention the free world!? I made a general statement (which you can tell because I used the word "generally").

Opinions and viewpoints are all well and good, the merits and values of which we can debate. Stupid statements about things that just aren't real are entirely different. That's the issue here.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

karma_

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

This thread is not about Ireland, or the Church. Full marks for bare-faced persistence in fairness.

Black Swan

bluewolf wrote: »

posts deleted - stop bickering and stay on topic please

MOD REMINDER:
Please be advised that this was an in-thread moderator instruction, and continued off-topic discussions violate our charter and that moderator instruction.

This forum and thread pertains to US Politics, not Irish or EU politics. This topic concerns statements made by US House Representative Todd Akin, who made such statements when campaigning as a Republican candidate for the US Senate, as well as what those statements imply. Please read the OP before posting again to ensure that you are on topic.

Amerika

Here’s Akin’s repudiation of his remarks.

"As a member of Congress, I believe that working to protect the most vulnerable in our society is one of my most important responsibilities, and that includes protecting both the unborn and victims of sexual assault. In reviewing my off-the-cuff remarks, it’s clear that I misspoke in this interview and it does not reflect the deep empathy I hold for the thousands of women who are raped and abused every year. Those who perpetrate these crimes are the lowest of the low in our society and their victims will have no stronger advocate in the Senate to help ensure they have the justice they deserve.

"I recognize that abortion, and particularly in the case of rape, is a very emotionally charged issue. But I believe deeply in the protection of all life and I do not believe that harming another innocent victim is the right course of action. I also recognize that there are those who, like my opponent, support abortion and I understand I may not have their support in this election.
"But I also believe that this election is about a wide-range of very important issues, starting with the economy and the type of country we will be leaving our children and grandchildren. We’ve had 42 straight months of unacceptably high unemployment, trillion dollar deficits, and Democratic leaders in Washington who are focused on growing government, instead of jobs. That is my primary focus in this campaign and while there are those who want to distract from that, knowing they cannot defend the Democrats’ failed economic record of the last four years, that will continue to be my focus in the months ahead."

I won’t pretend to know what Akin meant by "legitimate rape" which seems to draw much of the media’s ire, but it should be noted for discussion that in a study that spanned nine years, sociologist Eugene J. Kanin’s findings determined that in the United States, 41% of rape/sexual assault allegations are false. Kanin discovered that most of the false accusers were motivated by a need for an alibi or to seek revenge.

southsiderosie

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Because two Vietnams do not exist. There is no policy that can make them exist. There is no action she can take based on her beliefs that would affect anyone in the real world. Her words have no effect other that to make her look like a buffoon.

Akin's belief that women don't really need access to abortion after being raped because if the rape was 'legitimate' her body will reject her rapist's sperm can plausibly be turned into a policy where rape victims who become pregnant by their attackers will not be able to get an abortion. Akin has voted for policies restricting access to abortion in the past. He has a 100% favorability rating from anti-abortion activist groups. He believes the morning after pill is akin to abortion, and would ban that too. His beliefs can credibly be turned into policy if he and a few more of his ilk win seats in the Senate this November. So given that I am pro-choice and pro-reproductive rights, it somewhat amusing that you think being alarmed by the prospect of this anti-choice moron getting into office isn't logical. My interests, and the interests of other women who share my political beliefs are being credibly threatened. Nobody's interests are being threatened by Jackson-Lee's statement about a fictitious place.

jill_valentine

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Dismissive and obnoxious. It's nothing of the sort.

This is not an abstract philosophical discussion - if you don't understand why this is such an urgently important issue, then you don't understand the significance of reproductive healthcare for women's autonomy and identity in the public sphere.

As a woman, you bet your ass I'm alarmed about this. It's the latest symptom in what I see as a trend among Republicans of trying to restrict the control of American women over their own bodies in a campaign of a thousand cuts. That is something worth being alarmed about. It has real consequences for the women of Missouri, and Missouri doesn't exist in a vacuum away from the rest of the Union.

If it's not trying to redefine rape in order to exclude as many people as possible from aftermath options, it's attempting to rebrand birth control as a luxury or sow innuendos about Planned Parenthood. And now we discover that the people trying to make these pushes don't even think it's worth their time to get a handle on the bare minimum on the subject. That's how little regard, respect or empathy this dunderhead has for his female constituents, and he was on track for the Senate.

Akin didn't materialise yesterday, he's not some harmless anomoly. He's been serving as a rep since 2001 and whatever nonsense he's been fostering in that little noggin of his has inevitably had some effect in that time. He may be a pariah now, but that doesn't work retroactively. Up until a few days ago, the Republican party was just fine with him and his politics until he went media toxic and they had to amputate. He is not the first Republican to simultaneously take an intrusively strong moral line in this area while being shockingly, laughably misinformed about it and I dare not hope he'll be the last.

Dude, this is a big deal, and your suggestion that we're just being hysterical damsels about it... well, it'll probably get you a senate nomination. But it still won't be true or fair or reasonable. This matters because it didn't happen in isolation, either from the rest of the Republican party or from the realities of life for American women, or even their counterparts elsewhere.

southsiderosie

Amerika wrote: »

Here’s Akin’s repudiation of his remarks.


I won’t pretend to know what Akin meant by "legitimate rape" which seems to draw much of the media’s ire, but it should be noted for discussion that in a study that spanned nine years, sociologist Eugene J. Kanin’s findings determined that in the United States, 41% of rape/sexual assault allegations are false. Kanin discovered that most of the false accusers were motivated by a need for an alibi or to seek revenge.

Why should this be noted for discussion? What possible connection does this have to do with the fact that a man who wants to ban abortion apparently does not understand how procreation works in the first place?

B0jangles

Amerika wrote: »

Here’s Akin’s repudiation of his remarks.


I won’t pretend to know what Akin meant by "legitimate rape" which seems to draw much of the media’s ire, but it should be noted for discussion that in a study that spanned nine years, sociologist Eugene J. Kanin’s findings determined that in the United States, 41% of rape/sexual assault allegations are false. Kanin discovered that most of the false accusers were motivated by a need for an alibi or to seek revenge.

You mean the pretty much universally discredited study Kanin carried out based on police reports in 1 small town of 109 complainants? A police department that routinely subjected possible rape victims to lie-detector tests?

From wikipedia:

"Critics of Dr. Kanin's report include Dr. David Lisak, an associate professor of psychology and director of the Men's Sexual Trauma Research Project at the University of Massachusetts Boston. He states, "Kanin’s 1994 article on false allegations is a provocative opinion piece, but it is not a scientific study of the issue of false reporting of rape. It certainly should never be used to assert a scientific foundation for the frequency of false allegations."[10] According to Lisak, Kanin's study lacked any kind of systematic methodology and did not independently define a false report, instead recording as false any report which the police department classified as false. The department classified reports as false which the complainant later said were false, but Lisak points out that Kanin's study did not scrutinize the police's processes or employ independent checkers to protect results from bias.[11] Kanin, Lisak writes, took his data from a police department whose investigation procedures are condemned by the U.S. Justice Department and the International Association of Chiefs of Police. These procedures include the almost universal[10] threat, in this department, of polygraph testing of complainants, which is viewed as a tactic of intimidation that leads victims to avoid the justice process[11] and which, Lisak says, is "based on the misperception that a significant percentage of sexual assault reports are false."[10] The police department's "biases...were then echoed in Kanin’s unchallenged reporting of their findings."[10]"

Nice source.

Amerika

southsiderosie wrote: »

Why should this be noted for discussion? What possible connection does this have to do with the fact that a man who wants to ban abortion apparently does not understand how procreation works in the first place?

I noted it because "legitimate rape" seems to be the buzzword in the Akin debacle. I’m just bringing up something regarding the term that might not be mentioned otherwise. Often when the discussion of abortion comes up, there seems to be a general consensus that rape is sometimes regarded as a legitimate and moral reason for abortion. But if 41% of the claims of rape are suspect, it should be brought into the discussion for the rape reasoning. I hope we can agree Akin’s comments are his own. They do not represent the thinking of Republicans as a whole (and if you want to argue that it is, than I could just as easily argue that Democrats favor killing a baby that survived an abortion, and should be free to abort her female baby just because test indicated it to be a girl).

B0jangles

Amerika wrote: »

I noted it because "legitimate rape" seems to be the buzzword in the Akin debacle. I’m just bringing up something regarding the term that might not be mentioned otherwise. Often when the discussion of abortion comes up, there seems to be a general consensus that rape is sometimes regarded as a legitimate and moral reason for abortion. But if 41% of the claims of rape are suspect, it should be brought into the discussion for the rape reasoning. I hope we can agree Akin’s comments are his own. They do not represent the thinking of Republicans as a whole (and if you want to argue that it is, than I could just as easily argue that Democrats favor killing a baby that survived an abortion, and should be free to abort her female baby just because test indicated it to be a girl).

Your 41% false claim statistic is 100% rubbish. Hope this helps.

southsiderosie

Amerika wrote: »

I noted it because "legitimate rape" seems to be the buzzword in the Akin debacle. I’m just bringing up something regarding the term that might not be mentioned otherwise. Often when the discussion of abortion comes up, there seems to be a general consensus that rape is sometimes regarded as a legitimate and moral reason for abortion. But if 41% of the claims of rape are suspect, it should be brought into the discussion for the rape reasoning. I hope we can agree Akin’s comments are his own. They do not represent the thinking of Republicans as a whole (and if you want to argue that it is, than I could just as easily argue that Democrats favor killing a baby that survived an abortion, and should be free to abort her female baby just because test indicated it to be a girl).

So how is one to determine whether a rape is 'legitimate' or not? Do tell.

Bannasidhe

Amerika wrote: »

I noted it because "legitimate rape" seems to be the buzzword in the Akin debacle. I’m just bringing up something regarding the term that might not be mentioned otherwise. Often when the discussion of abortion comes up, there seems to be a general consensus that rape is sometimes regarded as a legitimate and moral reason for abortion. But if 41% of the claims of rape are suspect, it should be brought into the discussion for the rape reasoning. I hope we can agree Akin’s comments are his own. They do not represent the thinking of Republicans as a whole (and if you want to argue that it is, than I could just as easily argue that Democrats favor killing a baby that survived an abortion, and should be free to abort her female baby just because test indicated it to be a girl).

Even though the study you got 41% has been discredited for the sake of argument let's take that figure - logically that means that 59% of cases are 'legitimate'. Should all of those women who get pregnant as a result be forced to carry the child to full term even if this is not their wish?
That's what Akin wants.

Amerika

B0jangles wrote: »

You mean the pretty much universally discredited study Kanin carried out based on police reports in 1 small town of 109 complainants? A police department that routinely subjected possible rape victims to lie-detector tests?

So you don't like the Kanin study. So what percent do you think it really is then... 5%, 10%, 20%. Still hase bearing on the discussion though.

Amerika

southsiderosie wrote: »

So how is one to determine whether a rape is 'legitimate' or not? Do tell.

Perhaps when such a serious crime comes down simply to he said, she said, maybe a lie detector test by both parties could bring some weight into the charges.

B0jangles

Amerika wrote: »

So you don't like the Kanin study. So what percent do you think it really is then... 5%, 10%, 20%. Still hase bearing on the discussion though.

As I posted before the commonly accepted number is 2% - 8%, thus 92%- 98% of rape claims are almost certainly valid.

southsiderosie

Amerika wrote: »

Perhaps when such a serious crime comes down simply to he said, she said, maybe a lie detector test by both parties could bring some weight into the charges.

Well according to the logic of Representative Akin, perhaps we should just sit back and see if a rape victim becomes pregnant. If she doesn't, then the rape was clearly legitimate, and the perpetrator can be prosecuted accordingly.

Amerika

southsiderosie wrote: »

Well according to the logic of Representative Akin, perhaps we should just sit back and see if a rape victim becomes pregnant. If she doesn't, then the rape was clearly legitimate, and the perpetrator can be prosecuted accordingly.

So that's what he thinks, eh?

Amerika

B0jangles wrote: »

As I posted before the commonly accepted number is 2% - 8%, thus 92%- 98% of rape claims are almost certainly valid.

Accepted by whom? And what happens criminally to someone falsley reporting rape?

B0jangles

Amerika wrote: »

Perhaps when such a serious crime comes down simply to he said, she said, maybe a lie detector test by both parties could bring some weight into the charges.

Lie-detector tests have been widely decried as innacurate, misleading and basically a pseudo-science, so right off the bat they are crap.

Also does any other victim group get subjected to the automatic assumption that they are lying?

Imagine you are mugged and you go to the police station to report it - how would you feel if the officer then hooked you up to a machine to check that you weren't lying just to get some guy you know into trouble?

Then imagine that the person who attacked you didn't take your wallet, they forced themselves into you in the most violating and intimate way imaginable. You are traumatised and shocked. After a short period to recover, you go to the police, and to your horror they assume you are a liar and hook you up to a machine to check.

Just like they do routinely to criminals.

B0jangles

Amerika wrote: »

Accepted by whom? And what happens criminally to someone falsley reporting rape?

1. Pretty much universally in the wider community of those researching and investigating sexual assault and rape.

2. They get convicted of a crime and sent to prison. They then get relentlessly wheeled out by people like you who seem to be desperate to believe that rape is rare, liars are more common and rape is not really a big problem.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Amerika

B0jangles wrote: »

1. Pretty much universally in the wider community of those researching and investigating sexual assault and rape.

Sources please.

2. They get convicted of a crime and sent to prison.

Wrong.

They then get relentlessly wheeled out by people like you who seem to be desperate to believe that rape is rare, liars are more common and rape is not really a big problem.

Wrong again. I think rape is a big problem and personally I think forcible rape should get the death penalty. I just want justice, and justice is hard when it comes down to a she said, he said.

jill_valentine

"Forcible rape" is a moronic phrase, stop using it as if it makes sense.

B0jangles

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Not going to respond to most of your stuff since it is mostly irrelevant and, frankly, insulting: vide "hysterical damsel", for example.

But readers of this thread should be aware that since 1991, 70% of clinics which provide abortion services in the U.S. have closed - down to 600 from over 2,000 with some states only having one left.

American women being seriously concerned about the multifarious attacks on their bodily autonomy is not scare-mongering, it is a reasonable response to a very obvious and continuous attack on many hard-won rights.

Amerika

jill_valentine wrote: »

"Forcible rape" is a moronic phrase, stop using it as if it makes sense.

What???

Maybe this will help (but I figure you already knew what I meant)... Always 1st degree rape, most 2nd degree rape, and some 3rd degree rape.

molloyjh

Amerika wrote: »

jill_valentine wrote: »

"Forcible rape" is a moronic phrase, stop using it as if it makes sense.

What???

Rape by definition requires force. To use a phrase like "forcible rape" implies there is another kind. There isn't. It's like saying speedily fast. It's ridiculous.

And why has the conversation about a mans complete ignorance of the human reproductive system suddenly become about rape and false accusations of rape. Can we get back on topic? The whole discussion is based on the assumption that a rape has occurred. Let's proceed on that basis eh?

B0jangles

Amerika wrote: »

Sources please.


Wrong.


Wrong again. I think rape is a big problem and personally I think forcible rape should get the death penalty. I just want justice, and justice is hard when it comes down to a she said, he said.

Source: For one: http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/the_voice_vol_3_no_1_2009.pdf

Conviction of false rape claims:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/jan/25/girl-convicted-rape-allegation

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-17818072

Just after a quick googling.

Amerika

B0jangles wrote: »

Source: For one: http://www.ndaa.org/pdf/the_voice_vol_3_no_1_2009.pdf

Not saying the report is wrong, but something from National Center for the Prosecution of Violence Against Women just might not be considered to be an impartial study.

Conviction of false rape claims:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/jan/25/girl-convicted-rape-allegation

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-17818072

Just after a quick googling.

Maybe in the UK, but not in the US. Here nothing is usually ever done criminally to the person falsely claiming rape.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

jill_valentine

Permabear - your entire response to me assumes that I'm either effectively a Democrat, or somebody simply incapable of making my own objective assessment of the Republican track record, and it's patronising as all hell.

I've no doubt Democrats want to get mileage out of instances like this, but that doesn't diminish or distract from the fact that they occured in the first place. Todd Akin really did believe that some kinds of rape count more than others, and he really didn't understand the bodily functions he wants to legislate for. Just as Henry Aldridge really believed that "the juices don't flow" and Stephen Freind believed that the body "secretes" something resistant to rapist's sperm, and Rush Limbaugh thought you have to take a contraceptive pill more often the more sex you have, and all 227 of the Republicans who co sponsored that bill really didn't see the problem with qualifying the kind of rape they're talking about.

Those are the few examples that spring to mind, but I can find more if you've got all day. The fact is, the Republican record speaks for itself - their obsession with chipping away at the progress made in women's health has manifested over and over and over again, and you can't expect anybody with half a brain to treat them as isolated incidents at this point in time.

We can't, we can't pretend that the prevailing ideology among modern Republicans isn't posing a direct and insidious thread to women's liberties in the most influential country of the West. If somebody is able to get as far as a Senate nomination without a basic grasp of procreation, then I defy any of the Republican men mouthing off about contraceptive access for women to tell me the first goddamn thing about, for instance, PCOS, never mind anything more advanced or complicated.

America was once the leading light of the free Western world and I don't take any pleasure in watching anybody within its administrative machinery trying to rollback on work that's already been done. It's an ugly thing to see, and there is nothing hysterical about responding to a very real political phenomenon that is and will continue to affect women trying to live with the conditions that creates.

Amerika

Well I’m hearing Akin’s will probably be dropping out of the race tomorrow. If he does, that should end the debate if we are to stay on topic. Right? (Or will it be allowed to continue as long as the comments that all Republicans want to put women back into the stone ages keep coming?)

20Cent

Amerika wrote: »

Well I’m hearing Akin’s will probably be dropping out of the race tomorrow. If he does, that should end the debate if we are to stay on topic. Right? (Or will it be allowed to continue as long as the comments that all Republicans want to put women back into the stone ages keep coming?)

Depends if they keep up their attempts to ban abortion for rape victims I guess.

Amerika

20Cent wrote: »

Depends if they keep up their attempts to ban abortion for rape victims I guess.

Who is "they?"

matthew8

I doubt Akin will drop out, but I would say at least 95% of republicans want him out of the race.

20Cent

Amerika wrote: »

Who is "they?"

Republicans obviously.

matthew8

Well after reading a few tweets I am convinced Akin will drop out. Blessing in disguise for republicans.

Amerika

20Cent wrote: »

Republicans obviously.

Typical!

southsiderosie

Permabear, in addition to coming across as incredibly patronizing, you posts on this thread seem pretty disingenuous. You, more than anyone else in this forum consistently extol individual rights over all else. And yet you are asking the women on this forum to justify why they feel alarmed by the clear infringement on an individual woman's right to choose what she does with her own body? Hm.

Suryavarman

southsiderosie wrote: »

Permabear, in addition to coming across as incredibly patronizing, you posts on this thread seem pretty disingenuous. You, more than anyone else in this forum consistently extol individual rights over all else. And yet you are asking the women on this forum to justify why they feel alarmed by the clear infringement on an individual woman's right to choose what she does with her own body? Hm.

How does Todd Akin's opinion infringe on a woman's right to choose?

Bannasidhe

Suryavarman wrote: »

How does Todd Akin's opinion infringe on a woman's right to choose?

Because he is a legislator. A legislator who has already sought to change the definition of rape to suit his political agenda - which his opinion is an expression of.

Last year, Akin joined with GOP vice presidential candidate Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) as two of the original co-sponsors of the “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act,” a bill which, among other things, introduced the country to the bizarre term “forcible rape.”
Federal law prevents federal Medicaid funds and similar programs from paying for abortions. Yet the law also contains an exception for women who are raped. The bill Akin and Ryan cosponsored would have narrowed this exception, providing that only pregnancies arising from “forcible rape” may be terminated.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/08/19/712251/how-todd-akin-and-paul-ryan-partnered-to-redefine-rape/?mobile=nc

I'm sure the fact that he personally could never get pregnant as a result of being raped has not influenced his opinion in the slightest.

Suryavarman

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Because he is a legislator. A legislator who has already sought to change the definition of rape to suit his political agenda - which his opinion is an expression of.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/08/19/712251/how-todd-akin-and-paul-ryan-partnered-to-redefine-rape/?mobile=nc

If the man is pro life then it surely makes sense for him to do his best to limit the amount of money the federal government spends on murder.

This isn't infringing on a woman's right to choose anyway. He isn't voting for legislation that would stop women from having abortions just saying that the Federal Government shouldn't be funding it.

Bannasidhe

Suryavarman wrote: »

If the man is pro life then it surely makes sense for him to do his best to limit the amount of money the federal government spends on murder.

This isn't infringing on a woman's right to choose anyway. He isn't voting for legislation that would stop women from having abortions just saying that the Federal Government shouldn't be funding it.

You don't think narrowing the definition of rape infringes on women's rights - really?

You don't think a legislator implying that there may be have been an element of consent in a rape if the victim gets pregnant is a cause for concern? really??

Permabear

This post has been deleted.