Woman uploads abortion video - goes viral

I Heart Internet

eviltwin wrote: »

I think its unfair to say that women who have abortions are "c*nts"

I don't think that's what he said.

Penny Tration

Grayson wrote: »

I was actually pro life at one stage. I grew up in a catholic household. I went to a catholic school where Youth Defence recruited.
But my whole reason for being pro life was religious. As religion left me so did my opinions about abortion. I can understand that one doesn't need to be religious to be anti abortion but for me the two were tied.

I'm just saying that sometimes people can change their minds about it.

Although most of the time they won't and it will turn into a horrible argument.

Same as myself, I grew up Catholic and pro-life.

Muise...

Muise... wrote: »

I think he says that because he is angry that he has no power over us.

Not at all. That's a little silly

eviltwin

I Heart Internet wrote: »

I don't think that's what he said.

"pity you didn't chose not to be a ****"

What else could it mean?

eviltwin

eviltwin wrote: »

"pity you didn't chose not to be a ****"

What else could it mean?

It meant that people who only think about "My body, my choice" without considering the impact that it might have on others is a bit of a ****.

Also I spelled "choose" wrong. Urgh

Muise...

Deleted User wrote: »

Yeah, on re-reading my post, I didn't clarify enough and apologies for that. I am only referring to the women who are not in consultation with the fathers. It's the women who have the attitude of "well it's my body and that is all that matters" without any feelings for anyone else that I have issue with.

Apologies for any offense taken by my pretty badly written post

Unless these women tell you directly and in full detail what they are doing when they have abortions without consulting their partners/ONS, they really only exist in your head and your misreading of slogans. I'm sure it does happen, but you don't have the full story and even if you did, your anger doesn't mean a thing beyond ranting on the internet.

eviltwin

Deleted User wrote: »

Yeah, on re-reading my post, I didn't clarify enough and apologies for that. I am only referring to the women who are not in consultation with the fathers. It's the women who have the attitude of "well it's my body and that is all that matters" without any feelings for anyone else that I have issue with.

Apologies for any offense taken by my pretty badly written post

that makes sense, I still don't know how you deal with that issue though. If he wants the baby and she doesn't who gets the final say in that? If we allow him to abdicate all responsibility towards the child will the tax payer be happy to pick up the tab?

I Heart Internet

eviltwin wrote: »

"pity you didn't chose not to be a ****"

What else could it mean?

Let's include the full line....just for lols

Deleted User wrote: »

My body, my choice feminists.... Pity you didn't choose not to be a ****

It seems he was talking about a certain type of feminist person, not "woman who have had abortions".

But I think most people can see that.

PeteFalk78

eviltwin wrote: »

And that is why it is so important that more women speak out about it and for that I applaud the woman in the video.

You applaud a self-promotional headline grabbing egotistical narcissist? You think she is really doing this for the promotion of pro-choice?

Boombastic

Muise... wrote: »

I think he says that because he is angry that he has no power over us.

it's about power? interesting, like having a god complex? the power to decide whether someone lives or dies

Muise...

Boombastic wrote: »

it's about power? interesting, like having a god complex?

Exactly like that. He thinks certain feminists are c**nts because they do not consult him.

steddyeddy

I keep watching it again and again but she comes across as a bit messed up, not the brightest and a troll.

eviltwin

eviltwin wrote: »

that makes sense, I still don't know how you deal with that issue though. If he wants the baby and she doesn't who gets the final say in that? If we allow him to abdicate all responsibility towards the child will the tax payer be happy to pick up the tab?

I don't have the answers. But on such an emotive issue, I think the blanket "my body, my choice" answer is hugely unfair when there is no protection for the father if he decides that he doesn't want a child.

As I have said before, this is an emotional issue for most so I am not here to rant or judge. The only people that get on my nerves are the ones who seem to think that a man's emotional wellbeing and life isn't changed by such decisions and should be discounted.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

Muise... wrote: »

Have you noticed the way women have bumps before they have babies? Good. Inside this bump is the foetus. You can't see it without technological imaging processes..

The air force are unable to tell if there is human life within solid structures without using technological imaging processes. So what?

Doesn't make those people any less alive. The 'point' you're attempting to make is a nonsense one quite frankly.

..because you see, it is under her skin and flesh, in her womb, not yet a separate entity.

So Scott Peterson should not have been charged with two counts of murder? Just the one?

Muise...

Muise... wrote: »

Exactly like that. He thinks certain feminists are c**nts because they do not consult him.

Not me. The father of their potential child. I don't want them coming to me. Why the hell would I want to know?

Boombastic

Muise... wrote: »

Exactly like that. He thinks certain feminists are c**nts because they do not consult him.

the psychopath ones with the god complexes or the 'moderate feminists'?

Muise...

Deleted User wrote: »

Not me. The father of their potential child. I don't want them coming to me. Why the hell would I want to know?

Oh I don't know - maybe to back up your ridiculous judgement?

xalot

I'm very strongly pro choice and find this extremely disturbing. It totally belittles the situation that many people find themselves in.
I know women who have had abortions and it was not an easy decision nor was the emotional recovery after.

I cant believe how trivial she makes it seem and I can understand why this kind of thing would enrage pro life activists. It enrages me. Having an abortion is not like getting a flu jab and should not be treated so lightly, especially by somebody who works in the industry.

I suppose videos like this open up discussion and debate and that is something good.

jank

I wonder will the abortion cure her of her obvious narcism.

Muise...

Muise... wrote: »

Oh I don't know - maybe to back up your ridiculous judgement?

I like you. You are silly

Muise...

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

The air force are unable to tell if there is human life within solid structures without using technological imaging processes. So what?

Doesn't make those people any less alive. The 'point' you're attempting to make is a nonsense one quite frankly.



So Scott Peterson should not have been charged with two counts of murder? Just the one?

I mean, how could he murder a non-entity.

The foetus is inside the woman - this is not the same as the born being in a house.

Muise...

xalot wrote: »

I'm very strongly pro choice and find the fact that this woman deliberately got pregnant just to document an abortion extremely disturbing. It totally belittles the situation that many people find themselves in.
I know women who have had abortions and it was not an easy decision nor was the emotional recovery after.

I cant believe how trivial she makes it seem and I can understand why this kind of thing would enrage pro life activists. It enrages me. Having an abortion is not like getting a flu jab and should not be treated so lightly, especially by somebody who works in the industry.

I suppose videos like this open up discussion and debate and that is something good.

She did not get pregnant deliberately.

steddyeddy

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I don't have the answers. But on such an emotive issue, I think the blanket "my body, my choice" answer is hugely unfair when there is no protection for the father if he decides that he doesn't want a child.

As I have said before, this is an emotional issue for most so I am not here to rant or judge. The only people that get on my nerves are the ones who seem to think that a man's emotional wellbeing and life isn't changed by such decisions and should be discounted.

Of course a man's decision matters.

runawaybishop

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't have the answers. But on such an emotive issue, I think the blanket "my body, my choice" answer is hugely unfair when there is no protection for the father if he decides that he doesn't want a child.

Its seems very unfair. The man can have no say whatsoever with regards to their wishes. Whether they want the child or not it is the woman who makes the decision. A man who does not wish to have a child will just have to accept that they have no choice and prepare to pay child support. A woman who decides to abort despite the mans wishes can do so without issue.

xalot

Actually I just read in this article that she is a failed actress and it seems pretty obvious that she just wants some fame and attention. I seriously doubt her intentions were honourable. I hope her five minutes dont last long.

http://www.cosmopolitan.com/advice/health/why-i-filmed-my-abortion

ash23

I'm pro-choice. What she has done, I don't like. Nor do I like the idea of someone using abortion as a means of regular contraception or women using them to control the father etc etc.

However, these are very much minority cases. The majority of people who have abortions do so for, imo, valid and good reason. So I have to accept that for abortion to be available to the majority, it will be available to the minority who abuse it.

Much like social welfare. I hate the idea of social welfare fraud but the alternative of no social welfare is even more unpalatable to me so for the sake of the decent majority we have to accept that there is a minority that isn't so acceptable.


So for every woman like this, there are probably ten thousand women who are having an abortion and need one for various valid reasons. We have to let women like this have access to abortion so that women like my friends and sisters and my daughter also have access to abortion.


ETA - obviously when I say things like palatable and acceptable, I am talking about myself and where my own feelings lie on the matter. Everyone else has their own version of what circumstances they think abortion is "acceptable" to them.

steddyeddy

I don't believe an abortion is "nothing". I believe it should be people's choice but I don't believe it's nothing.

sabat

The "incidental music" playing while the actual procedure is carried out is possibly the most tasteless thing I've ever witnessed.

steddyeddy

I think the double standard of some of the pro choice (my own side) really bothers me sometimes.

Reiketsu

Grayson wrote: »

Why is it a big deal?

It just is, to me. I wouldn't fancy it. It's still a medical procedure at the end of the day.

GalwayGuy2

I'm prochoice but she across as quite as having psychopathic tendencies as far as she seemed to enjoy that and not have an emotional response to what she was doing

I actually got an anxiety/depressive vibe off her. Have you ever seen someone with a mental illness in an up/trying too hard phase? It reminded me of her.

These arguments between the pro-lifers and the pro-choicers. It's funny the mental acrobats that go on both sides.

She did not get pregnant deliberately.

Eh, I like you Muise, but she's not an idiot. She didn't use contraception (and there is no mention of checking if her partner was) and she's a sex educator. If she didn't do it on purpose, then she would have been able to make an educated guess as to what would happen.

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller

seenitall wrote: »

If you understand what a parasite is, why do you bring up smashing incubators into it? Is an incubator a living entity?

My point (which was a fairly obvious one) was, and is, that if someone thinks a fetus should be referred to as a "parasite" when in the womb, just because at that point independent life is not possible, then why should all that suddenly change if the baby placed in an incubator instead, where they are still incapable of independent life?

It shouldn't, as nothing has changed but it's location and the source from which the life sustaining nutrients are being derived.

Hence why I would be up on a few murder charges if I did smash up those incubators.

ash23

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

My point (which was a fairly obvious one) was, and is, that if someone thinks a fetus should be referred to as a "parasite" when in the womb, just because at that point independent life is not possible, then why should all that suddenly change if the baby placed in an incubator instead, where they are still incapable of independent life?

It shouldn't, as nothing has changed but it's location and the source from which the life sustaining nutrients are being derived.

Hence why I would be up on a few murder charges if I did smash up those incubators.

A parent, specifically a mother unless she was married, would be able to withdraw medical treatment from a baby if there was a lot of suffering etc. or the chances of the child surviving were slim.
Ultimately the parent has the choice about a child not a stranger with a baseball bat. So your comparison is not really comparable.

What you are suggesting would be akin to taking a baseball bat to a woman to cause her to miscarry, not making the choice as a pregnant woman to have an abortion.

GalwayGuy2

What you are suggesting would be akin to taking a baseball bat to a woman to cause her to miscarry, not making the choice as a pregnant woman to have an abortion.

Would you class that as murder

fullaljackeen

What a disgusting idea. Hope youtube refuse to pay her for all the hits or views she has gotten. This is the dark side of social media. What are we going to see next? A vote system or something.
Some thumbs up or likes or the baby gets it?

I won't watch it.

Splendour

eviltwin wrote: »

If that is what the woman decides I have no issue with that. What would you suggest?

A few suggestions:

1. Not have sex if not able to handle the consequences that may come with it.

2. Use contraception (obviously this can sometimes fail but in which case I refer back to
suggestions no. 1. In the case of the woman in the video she obviously didn't do this.

3. Hand baby over to the Father if he is willing to take responsibility.

4. If no. 4 not an option, hand baby up for adoption; there are plenty of couples willing to
adopt a child.

ash23

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

Would you class that as murder

No it's assault on the woman. As far as I know a pregnancy has to be past a certain stage before it would be considered murder.

seenitall

Wishiwasa Littlebitaller wrote: »

My point (which was a fairly obvious one) was, and is, that if someone thinks a fetus should be referred to as a "parasite" when in the womb, just because at that point independent life is not possible, then why should all that suddenly change if the baby placed in an incubator instead, where they are still incapable of independent life?

It shouldn't, as nothing has changed but it's location and the source from which the life sustaining nutrients are being derived.

Hence why I would be up on a few murder charges if I did smash up those incubators.

A parasite is not an independant living entity. Why should a parasite without the ability for independent life away from the host, have an automatic entitlement to living off the host's resources? (Do you enjoy nurturing headlice on your head, or tapeworm in your bowels? Or would you seek to get rid of them sharpish?)

It shouldn't automatically have that entitlement, which is what most of civilised, first world understands and respects, and which is why abortion should be legal.

Again, babies in incubators are not parasites...

I Heart Internet

seenitall wrote: »

A parasite is not an independant living entity. Why should a parasite without the ability for independent life away from the host, have an automatic entitlement to living off the host's resources? (Do you enjoy nurturing headlice on your head, or tapeworm in your bowels? Or would you seek to get rid of them sharpish?)

It shouldn't automatically have that entitlement, which is what most of civilised, first world understands and respects, and which is why abortion should be legal.

Again, babies in incubators are not parasites...

You're right that much of the western world allows for abortion, to a greater or lesser extent. But almost all of the people who support that would have far more class than to compare a foetus to a headlice or tapeworm. Way, way more class.

gruenchen

I think it's sad that "advertisement" for abortion are needed In the first place. And it's easy to judge her for beeing to lazy to use contraception. Reality is; she knows best what she is capable of dealing with at this point on her life and the only one who should make this decision. So after shaking my judgements off, I find this brave also because I hope it will make other women who went through the same less alone.

My name is URL

Some of the pathetic arguments going on here are probably doing as much damage to the pro-choice side as the dumb **** in the video did.

Comparing foetuses to parasites? =/

Pretty damn weak, really

Muise...

Splendour wrote: »

A few suggestions:

1. Not have sex if not able to handle the consequences that may come with it.

2. Use contraception (obviously this can sometimes fail but in which case I refer back to
suggestions no. 1. In the case of the woman in the video she obviously didn't do this.

3. Hand baby over to the Father if he is willing to take responsibility.

4. If no. 4 not an option, hand baby up for adoption; there are plenty of couples willing to
adopt a child.

A suggestion:

Stop telling women what they should or shouldn't do with their own bodies. Especially not 4-point facile advice that shows no understanding of real lives and relationships.

fullaljackeen

seenitall wrote: »

A parasite is not an independant living entity. Why should a parasite without the ability for independent life away from the host, have an automatic entitlement to living off the host's resources? (Do you enjoy nurturing headlice on your head, or tapeworm in your bowels? Or would you seek to get rid of them sharpish?)

It shouldn't automatically have that entitlement, which is what most of civilised, first world understands and respects, and which is why abortion should be legal.

Again, babies in incubators are not parasites...

Abortion equates with civilisation? Isn't society judged by the way it treats it's most vulnerable?

Grayson

eviltwin wrote: »

My mother in law was very pro life until her mid 70's, she would have been a regular at pro life marches and vigils, was on first name basis with a lot of the pro life advocates. Now she is fully pro choice all because myself and my husband have been in that position. She now knows that abortion happens to people like her son, her daughter in law, real people. And that is why it is so important that more women speak out about it and for that I applaud the woman in the video.

You've made me rethink something.

I was brought up in a catholic household, but it wasn't a prolife one. The topic was hardly mentioned and my mother, when she did mention the topic, never voiced an opinion but never condemned either.
She was and still is very religious, but I believe she's probably pro choice.

Splendour

Muise... wrote: »

A suggestion:

Stop telling women what they should or shouldn't do with their own bodies. Especially not 4-point facile advice that shows no understanding of real lives and relationships.

My post was an answer to a question put by eviltwin. A question was asked, an answer was given.

runawaybishop

Muise... wrote: »

A suggestion:

Stop telling women what they should or shouldn't do with their own bodies. Especially not 4-point facile advice that shows no understanding of real lives and relationships.

There is something wrong with telling someone to use contraception is they don't want a baby is there?

How is saying "use contraception" not understanding real life?

Muise...

Muise... wrote: »

A suggestion:

Stop telling women what they should or shouldn't do with their own bodies. Especially not 4-point facile advice that shows no understanding of real lives and relationships.

Would you agree that a woman should not expect a man to financially support a decision that she alone has made regarding her own body?

Muise...

Deleted User wrote: »

Would you agree that a woman should not expect a man to financially support a decision that she alone has made regarding her own body?

Yes. I'd agree with that.

But that's not what we're discussing.

Muise...

runawaybishop wrote: »

There is something wrong with telling someone to use contraception is they don't want a baby is there?

How is saying "use contraception" not understanding real life?

3. and 4. are the naive ones.

runawaybishop

Muise... wrote: »

3. and 4. are the naive ones.

Why are they naive, they already happen.