The Shaming and Control of Women

meeeeh

Good article by Kitty Holland although I disagree with conclusion. I think it would be better for mothers and in the long term their kids if they would enter the job market.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/why-ireland-is-not-a-welcoming-place-for-single-parents-1.1846542

diveout

meeeeh wrote: »

Good article by Kitty Holland although I disagree with conclusion. I think it would be better for mothers and in the long term their kids if they would enter the job market.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/why-ireland-is-not-a-welcoming-place-for-single-parents-1.1846542

I agree but the only way that can happen is if the courts toughen up on maintenance to get them over the poverty trap. With the costs of childcare, it becomes a question of being able to afford to work.

But I think the the thing with single mothers [notice how that label always applies, a married mother is just a mother...she doesn't always have her marital status attached to her label] is they are still sexual dissidents. It's subtle but it is still there.

meeeeh

diveout wrote: »

I agree but the only way that can happen is if the courts toughen up on maintenance to get them over the poverty trap. With the costs of childcare, it becomes a question of being able to afford to work.

I think that subsidised child care would be probably needed because often father is not even on the cert or alive. That being said the system as it is is not really working and most of the bad stats are higher for one parent families. There is also clear link between non working parents and non working children. I am not a great fan of idea of stay at home mothers in general but at least in two parent families there is bigger chance one parent is working.

diveout

meeeeh wrote: »

I think that subsidised child care would be probably needed because often father is not even on the cert or alive. That being said the system as it is is not really working and most of the bad stats are higher for one parent families. There is also clear link between non working parents and non working children. I am not a great fan of idea of stay at home mothers in general but at least in two parent families there is bigger chance one parent is working.

Yes, there is at least ONE role model for working when there are two parents, also it is just a more affordable lifestyle...can split rents, bills etc.

I might add the economic effects of widespread divorce and split homes is higher demand for housing, which ups rents and house prices. It's a lose lose.

mcmoustache

This thread has really put me in a foul mood. I knew about a lot of these things as I'm in my thirties and they were going on until relatively recently.

What angers me most is that had my sister or my girlfriend (both of them strong, confident, intelligent women) been from earlier generations, there's a good chance that they wouldn't have been able to achieve what they have today. The thought that fathers, brothers and husbands could be complicit in this quite shocking.

Thankfully, we've moved on. We still have our Ronan Mullens and assorted knuckle draggers and there are still some loose ends with regard to sexist legislation but at least we're still moving in the right direction culturally.

RagsOBrien

eviltwin wrote: »

patronising bull****. Isn't Mullen the one who wants hospices for these women so they can carry on their pregnancy in privacy. Where have we heard that idea before?

He is probably the most vitriolic windbag in the Oireachtas with regards to social issues. Politicians who are so extremely conservative thankfully are in the minority nowadays but the likes of him still attempt to hinder progressive legislative changes in areas of equality.

lazybones32

mcmoustache wrote: »

Thankfully, we've moved on. We still have our Ronan Mullens and assorted knuckle draggers and there are still some loose ends with regard to sexist legislation but at least we're still moving in the right direction culturally.

Excuse you, but have you ever met Mr. Mullen? I have and I must say he was very respectful to the women that were there when we met and I have no bad thing to say about him based on actual experience. He didn't appear to be attempting to seem more respectful to women than men, but he was genuinely respectful to us all.

rainbowtrout

lazybones32 wrote: »

Excuse you, but have you ever met Mr. Mullen? I have and I must say he was very respectful to the women that were there when we met and I have no bad thing to say about him based on actual experience. He didn't appear to be attempting to seem more respectful to women than men, but he was genuinely respectful to us all.

But he's not going to be ignorant to your face, and politicians will promise the earth if they think they'll get a vote out of it.

Not saying he wasn't respectful to you but I'd be cynical about his attitude all the same.

meeeeh

lazybones32 wrote: »

Excuse you, but have you ever met Mr. Mullen? I have and I must say he was very respectful to the women that were there when we met and I have no bad thing to say about him based on actual experience. He didn't appear to be attempting to seem more respectful to women than men, but he was genuinely respectful to us all.

I am extremely respectful to my dog but that doesn't mean I treat him as equal. (Ok not really but I am making a point).It's his ideas and what he stands for that is the problem not how nice he is one on one.

lazygal

lazybones32 wrote: »

Excuse you, but have you ever met Mr. Mullen? I have and I must say he was very respectful to the women that were there when we met and I have no bad thing to say about him based on actual experience. He didn't appear to be attempting to seem more respectful to women than men, but he was genuinely respectful to us all.

He told couples who went abroad to terminate for reasons of fatal abnormalities that they had a wider agenda and claimed to know of a case where a child born with ancephaly survived. What do you think he hoped to achieve by telling people who went abroad for termination of pregnancy because their babies wouldn't survive that they had a wider agenda? Was that a respectful comment?

FactCheck

lazybones32 wrote: »

Excuse you, but have you ever met Mr. Mullen? I have and I must say he was very respectful to the women that were there when we met and I have no bad thing to say about him based on actual experience. He didn't appear to be attempting to seem more respectful to women than men, but he was genuinely respectful to us all.

Why were you meeting him?

The actual women from the TFMR group would beg to differ with you.

meeeeh

Speaking of Ronan Mullen. When my son asked me about the election posters I explained that we elect people who decide what can be done with Lego (in our house everything revolves around lego). So when he saw a poster of Ronan Mullen we explained that this is a meanie man who steals children's Lego. So now every baddie in his books has to be called Ronan Mullen.

lazybones32

We met Mr. Mullen in relation to music and there was no lobbying involved (by "we" I mean there were two people talking to him about music and I was just there...bored)

There appears to be discrepancy between the people involved in whether he was 'smirking' and said what he is alleged to have said.
Regarding the "agenda": if these women are members of TFMR then they are a lobby group and have an agenda.

@Meeeeh: that's a fine example of mature behaviour.

lazybones32

lazybones32 wrote: »

Regarding the "agenda": if these women are members of TFMR then they are a lobby group and have an agenda.

@Meeeeh: that's a fine example of mature behaviour.

Oh my.

lazygal

lazybones32 wrote: »

We met Mr. Mullen in relation to music and there was no lobbying involved (by "we" I mean there were two people talking to him about music and I was just there...bored)

There appears to be discrepancy between the people involved in whether he was 'smirking' and said what he is alleged to have said.
Regarding the "agenda": if these women are members of TFMR then they are a lobby group and have an agenda.

@Meeeeh: that's a fine example of mature behaviour.

And what do you think he meant by the group having a wider agenda?

iwantmydinner

lazybones32 wrote: »

We met Mr. Mullen in relation to music and there was no lobbying involved (by "we" I mean there were two people talking to him about music and I was just there...bored)

There appears to be discrepancy between the people involved in whether he was 'smirking' and said what he is alleged to have said.
Regarding the "agenda": if these women are members of TFMR then they are a lobby group and have an agenda.

@Meeeeh: that's a fine example of mature behaviour.

You do know what they're lobbying for, right?

meeeeh

lazybones32 wrote: »

@Meeeeh: that's a fine example of mature behaviour.

Well I would never consider myself mature. In fact I am quite childish and you know what I have fun about it. Will you give out to five year old now too?

Btw I might be childish but I actually do have a bit of compassion. Which is the thing RM lacks. He might be well behaved, polite and well educated but he is also a heartless. I like people who challenge my views, who have different opinions than me but I can't warm myself towards people without compassion.

lazybones32

And what do you think he meant by the group having a wider agenda?

I'd rather let him speak about what he meant, if he said it, rather than me conjecturing.

You do know what they're lobbying for, right?

Yes, I do. That was a response to lazygal, who wrote "He told couples... that they had a wider agenda...What do you think he hoped to achieve by telling people...that they had a wider agenda". If he actually said this, he was telling the truth: they have an agenda so there can be nothing improper about Mullen saying this to the women and there is no reason to use this as a reason to hate him or discredit him.

FactCheck

I don't think you understand the implications of the TFMR campaign.

Their aim is very simple - to allow women whose babies are dying inside them to receive medical treatment in Ireland. They have no plans to increase abortion availability beyond that and indeed some of their members would not support wider availability.

They are involved because their very wanted babies were diagnosed with horrific illnesses and they got no help whatsoever in Ireland.

Ronan Mullen is accusing them - these grieving mothers who had to board a Ryanair flight to get medical treatment and smuggle their dead children home in the boot of their car - of having a secret, extra agenda. They say that he smirked and was unpleasant to them as they discussed one of the most horrific, personal things a person could go through. They aren't politicians, they are ordinary women with no political ambitions beyond trying to make sure nobody else suffers like they had to.

Do you see how the fact that you (a man) once had a chat with him about music and he was pleasant isn't actually the least bit relevant?

lazybones32

meeeeh wrote: »

Well I would never consider myself mature. In fact I am quite childish and you know what I have fun about it. Will you give out to five year old now too?

Btw I might be childish but I actually do have a bit of compassion. Which is the thing RM lacks. He might be well behaved, polite and well educated but he is also a heartless. I like people who challenge my views, who have different opinions than me but I can't warm myself towards people without compassion.

I wonder would you consider it fun, if some people in your neighbourhood decided to use your name as a 'bad word' and you were to become a symbol of bad things happening? Or if the child soils their pants, would you call it "making a [insert Grandfather's name here]"? That's what I'm calling you on; not that you interact with your child...

It's quite a charge to say someone has no compassion and is heartless - maybe it's true, maybe it's not - but can you justify your hurtful comment?

(And before I'm accused...no, I'm not trying to control you by shame...I'm asking questions)

meeeeh

I was trying to type serious reply but nah... This isn't even fun arguing about.

lazybones32

lazybones32 wrote: »

I wonder would you consider it fun, if some people in your neighbourhood decided to use your name as a 'bad word' and you were to become a symbol of bad things happening? Or if the child soils their pants, would you call it "making a [insert Grandfather's name here]"? That's what I'm calling you on; not that you interact with your child...

It's quite a charge to say someone has no compassion and is heartless - maybe it's true, maybe it's not - but can you justify your hurtful comment?

(And before I'm accused...no, I'm not trying to control you by shame...I'm asking questions)

Can he justify his?

Seriously, take a deep breath. He might have been nice to you but it doesn't make him perfect. People are entitled to form their own opinions on the information available to them.

lazybones32

FactCheck wrote: »

I don't think you understand the implications of the TFMR campaign.

Their aim is very simple - to allow women whose babies are dying inside them to receive medical treatment in Ireland. They have no plans to increase abortion availability beyond that and indeed some of their members would not support wider availability.

They are involved because their very wanted babies were diagnosed with horrific illnesses and they got no help whatsoever in Ireland.

Ronan Mullen is accusing them - these grieving mothers who had to board a Ryanair flight to get medical treatment and smuggle their dead children home in the boot of their car - of having a secret, extra agenda. They say that he smirked and was unpleasant to them as they discussed one of the most horrific, personal things a person could go through. They aren't politicians, they are ordinary women with no political ambitions beyond trying to make sure nobody else suffers like they had to.

Do you see how the fact that you (a man) once had a chat with him about music and he was pleasant isn't actually the least bit relevant?

True, I don't understand the implications of the TFMR campaign (I only learned of its existence about 2 hours ago) but I can understand that other people could be very keen to hi-jack any attempt to loosen legislation to suit their own agenda. Also, not everyone who is a member may have the same ideals and goals in common. This is a reasonable assumption and in light that the information on Savita Hal... was given to pro-abortion groups days before being made Public, further strengthens the case that there is a wider agenda at play. http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/prochoice-activists-got-tipoff-on-tragic-death-28902755.html

The fact that I once met him is relevant. There are people here saying how terrible a person he is; he hates women; a sexist; a "knuckle-dragger" and they've never had any dealing with him to substantiate these claims. I have met him - in the company of women - and none of these attributes were experienced. As I wrote, I was only there listening to them talk...I was acknowledged by a "hello" and "goodbye", so if anything, he ignored me (a man) in favour of the women who were talking music.

SpaceTime

Whether we like it or not, I think it's high time that we face up to the fact that Ireland started out with all sorts of notions about being a liberal, modern democracy it didn't live up to that.

Many of those who were part of the independence movement were women, many were liberals, many were forward thinkers with high ideals for a modern Ireland. They were all basically cast aside and the state became something more like a fascist theocracy.

We don't like to think about ourselves in a negative light but from about 1930-1990 we were one of the most backwards, conservative, ultra religious societies that you could possibly imagine in the context of western European democracies. I'm pretty sure it contributed to our economic stagnation during that period too.

There's an interesting book from researchers in UCC called Ireland through European Eyes that explores how other European countries saw Ireland by examining documents from their governments that are now publically accessible and really they saw us as very strange.

Some of them were wondering if we would be a good addition to the EEC as we were pursuing policies that were basically anti-modern and completely contrary to the progressive trends in post war Europe.

To me Ireland in that period looks like a Northern European version of Franco's Spain with the only difference being that we did have a democratic government. However, social policy was being set by the church and associated ultra right wing individuals and organisations.

We also had a situation where Ireland was (and still is to a degree) a corporatist state that just directly incorporated powerful religious organisations into the fabric of state policy making and delivery of state services.

96% of Irish schools are religious in 2014 and 90% Catholic. We still don't really have a public school system in any kind of true sense of the word.

Ireland's changed a hell of a lot over the past 30 years and more so from the 1990s to today but, we still have a ton of legacy issues to deal with.

In some ways I think we should probably do something dramatic like rewrite the constitution and declare a second Republic with clearly progressive underpinnings but that's probably far too radical for the conservatives.

I think though we do need to learn about our recent past. We treated anyone outside a very narrow, socially conservative view of the world incredibly badly. Women's rights were basically reduced to some bizzare interpretation of Catholic religious teaching on social policy and family value crossed with a good dose of Victorian puritanical obsessions with being perceived as 'respectable'

We banned contraception in a way that when you look at it from today's perspective is either scary or laughable.

The way we banned and censored publications, films and broadcasting was actually terrifying when you look at it too. Yet, we still haven't even removed most of the instruments of censorship we're just let them fade into disuse.

You'd wonder how many progressive, interesting, entrepreneurial people packed their suitcases and never looked back.

I certainly know we basically exiled people who needed to get out of a marriage that went bad, gay, lesbian and bisexuals, athiests and non religious anyone who wasn't prepared to just get married shut up and have babies every 9 months or anyone who dared to question dogma!

You'd have to wonder how much of or diaspora were driven out by our backwards, insular, ultra conservative society rather than just plain economic needs in those days.

lazybones32

Candie wrote: »

Can he justify his?

Seriously, take a deep breath. He might have been nice to you but it doesn't make him perfect. People are entitled to form their own opinions on the information available to them.

All I've seen are allegations and a denial of those allegations as was supplied in an earlier link.

I'm not stopping anyone from having or expressing their opinion but I don't think balance is welcome here.

SpaceTime

To be honest, one or two conservative politicians in 2014 is neither here nor there. The issue was that in the past the majority in the Dail were extremely conservative. It applied to most or FF and FG at one stage.

The reality is that the NUI senators are elected by a tiny % of those who should be eligible to vote on that panel. Very few NUI graduates actually bother to register.

Irish attitudes have changed enormously and it's the Dail that matters and actually reflects public opinion.

There's still a major issue with that one highly sensitive topic : abortion.

I think public opinion may be a lot more liberal or at least pragmatic than the consensus in FG and FF though and they'll only hold a referendum if forced to.

rainbow kirby

SpaceTime wrote: »

The reality is that the NUI senators are elected by a tiny % of those who should be eligible to vote on that panel. Very few NUI graduates actually bother to register.

I registered for the sake of voting against him, it's embarrassing that NUI graduates keep voting for him :mad:

SpaceTime

I've an NUI vote and the whole system to be honest is a bit of a joke.

Total valid poll: 33,831
27 candidates
8,458 votes is a quota and that's all you'd need to get elected.

That's an absolutely pathetically small % of the total number of NUI graduates out there.

Its actually a valid argument for removing the constituency as it's not being used.

Maybe I should run myself

Freiheit

and I remember receiving NUI Ballot papers, despite not being entitled to vote

sunbeam

rainbow kirby wrote: »

I registered for the sake of voting against him, it's embarrassing that NUI graduates keep voting for him :mad:

Attempting to vote for anyone but Senator Mullen was the only motivation I ever had for using my Seanad vote. Sadly it didn't work...

He was student union president in NUIG when I was there many moons ago and a very popular one at that. Before that he was very active in the Literary and Debating Society. He used to put on a sort of witty but wise village idiot persona and make a lot of humorous contributions during private members time, which no doubt contributed towards his popularity.

I often wonder would he have got the student union presidency if his conservative views had been more well known, but I expect it wouldn't have made much difference. In many ways the university was a pretty conservative place back then. I remember the looks of horror I got during the X case when I casually mentioned that I did not consider myself 'pro-life' and the many people who simply refused to talk to me after that.

There might have been womens studies modules on the curriculum but that hadn't really filtered down much into real life.

SpaceTime

Ireland's changed a LOT in those decades. I mean until 1985 you needed a prescription to buy condoms! You also had to prove it was for bone fide family planning or medical reasons!

Sales didn't become genuinely normalised until 1993.

ivytwine

sunbeam wrote: »

Attempting to vote for anyone but Senator Mullen was the only motivation I ever had for using my Seanad vote. Sadly it didn't work...

He was student union president in NUIG when I was there many moons ago and a very popular one at that. Before that he was very active in the Literary and Debating Society. He used to put on a sort of witty but wise village idiot persona and make a lot of humorous contributions during private members time, which no doubt contributed towards his popularity.

I often wonder would he have got the student union presidency if his conservative views had been more well known, but I expect it wouldn't have made much difference. In many ways the university was a pretty conservative place back then. I remember the looks of horror I got during the X case when I casually mentioned that I did not consider myself 'pro-life' and the many people who simply refused to talk to me after that.

There might have been womens studies modules on the curriculum but that hadn't really filtered down much into real life.

I'm guessing that's Maynooth? Went to NUIG and UL and things are very different there.

sunbeam

No, NUIG or UCG as it was back then, early 90s. Of course it could have been just the people I knew...

ivytwine

sunbeam wrote: »

No, NUIG or UCG as it was back then, early 90s. Of course it could have been just the people I knew...

Maybe it's the timeframe (2010s) but you'd be hard pushed to find people like that in NUIG these days. Of course they exist, and there was an active Christian Society in UL. Maybe it was the people I hung out with too, lol!

I know alot of quite conservative people tended to go to Mary I in Limerick as opposed to UL. Had a mate there and he found the atmosphere a bit repressive at times.

SpaceTime

UCC certainly wasn't like that. Extremely open minded, progressive atmosphere.

It's a completely secular college though without any history of a religious ethos. It was apparently castigated by bishops of all flavours in the 1800s for being a 'godless institution'.

Its also proud of the fact that it had the what was then the UK's first female full professor, was graduating female doctors years before the big British med schools etc etc etc (I'm a bloke BTW but definitely gives me a sense of pride in the place that it can genuinely call itself forward thinking)

It was very strong on things like having an active athiest society, very LGBT friendly and it's a pretty diverse and large student body.

It had a huge range of very active clubs and socs too.

sunbeam

I wouldn't have called UCG repressive back then, just there were a lot less people around who would have been bothered by Senator Mullen's brand of conservatism than there are today. That's of course if they actually knew about it. For most of us he was just the popular funny guy from the Lit and Deb and I suspect he was elected as SU President and thus got his start in politics because of that. I had no idea how conservative he actually was until I read some of his newspaper columns years later.

SpaceTime

I think there needs to be a big campaign to either use it or lose it though for the NUI constituency.

The % registered is making it extremely unrepresentative.

There must be vast numbers of NUI graduates out there.

sunbeam

SpaceTime wrote: »

UCC certainly wasn't like that. Extremely open minded, progressive atmosphere.

It's a completely secular college though without any history of a religious ethos. It was apparently castigated by bishops of all flavours in the 1800s for being a 'godless institution'.

Its also proud of the fact that it had the what was then the UK's first female full professor, was graduating female doctors years before the big British med schools etc etc etc (I'm a bloke BTW but definitely gives me a sense of pride in the place that it can genuinely call itself forward thinking)

It was very strong on things like having an active athiest society, very LGBT friendly and it's a pretty diverse and large student body.

It had a huge range of very active clubs and socs too.

We were one of those godless institutions too.

Alice Perry who was quite possibly the first female engineer in the world graduated from the then Queens College Galway in 1906. I looked her up the college records one day out of boredom and found that she graduated top of her class.

I often wonder what life was like for female students back then. I remember hearing that back in the 30s 'lady' students were supposed to have to ask the academic council for permission to attend dances. :rolleyes:

I have no idea if that was actually enforced but one of the student counsellors (stilll technically employed as the 'lady superintendent' back in the 90s) told me that her predecessor used to police college dances back in the 70s to make sure couples were not getting too amorous.

I don't remember an atheist soc in the early 90s. There was definitely a gay and lesbian soc called PLUTO-people like us totally outrageous. I only remember that because of the unusual name.

As I said I wouldn't have called the place oppressively conservative. There were just a lot more conservative students than you would find today and I suppose that reflected the society of the time.

sunbeam

SpaceTime wrote: »

I think there needs to be a big campaign to either use it or lose it though for the NUI constituency.

The % registered is making it extremely unrepresentative.

There must be vast numbers of NUI graduates out there.

Well supposedly what got Ronan Mullen elected to the seanad wasn't as much the NUIG vote as the Maynooth seminary graduate vote, most of whom would also have degrees from NUI Maynooth. He had previously worked as communications officer for the archdiocese of Dublin.

RagsOBrien

sunbeam wrote: »

Well supposedly what got Ronan Mullen elected to the seanad wasn't as much the NUIG vote as the Maynooth seminary graduate vote, most of whom would also have degrees from NUI Maynooth. He had previously worked as communications officer for the archdiocese of Dublin.

He targets clergy in particular in the run up to Seanad Election campaigns. They are his core vote and he won't deviate in any way from church teachings in his views on social issues.

Freiheit

I went to Mary I in Limerick and it was very Catholic,late 90's, early 2000's,down to the colour of the walls and seats, At the time I didn't really know myself and accepted it, pretty much,but don't I could tolerate it now. Even now they made it difficult for the now comatosed lgbtq society, and have obstructed the lgbtq community in various ways....

In the 70's I heard that certain parts of the college were gender segregated, as in no men on certain corridors or dining areas, not sure of the exact details but it definitely did happen.....

Tarzana

Jenneke87 wrote: »

I don't know why but this post struck a cord with me.

Me too. How sad she must have felt. And what happened when he went home that day?

Tarzana

eviltwin wrote: »

we only got the MAP a few years ago

Well, over the counter, I got it from the doc in 2001.

Tarzana

username123 wrote: »

How many men and women discovered after marriage that they were not sexually compatible or simply didn't like each other after living together? It was a breeding ground for frustration and abuse. Locked together in a loveless marriage with no legal repercussions for rape, no property ownership for the woman, no earning power, no accepted role in society except wife/mother/nun.

Graham Linehan said the idea of people in Ireland remaining in marriages for far longer than they should or indeed never splitting up was his reason for creating the characters of John and Mary.

FactCheck

Tarzana wrote: »

Well, over the counter, I got it from the doc in 2001.

Nope, it was only made legal in 2003.

What they would have given you back then was an extra-large dose of regular contraception.

iguana

lazybones32 wrote: »

The fact that I once met him is relevant. There are people here saying how terrible a person he is; he hates women; a sexist; a "knuckle-dragger" and they've never had any dealing with him to substantiate these claims.

Yeah and there are many reports of Rolf Harris been a lovely charming guy to many people who he met. Meeting someone and only experiencing a teeny tiny part of their behaviour doesn't mean you know them and what they are like.

Neyite

lazybones32 wrote: »

Excuse you, but have you ever met Mr. Mullen? I have and I must say he was very respectful to the women that were there when we met and I have no bad thing to say about him based on actual experience. He didn't appear to be attempting to seem more respectful to women than men, but he was genuinely respectful to us all.

Haven't met him, but when he is on record as suggesting that women who want a termination for medical reasons should go to a nice Home for the duration of their pregnancy and to birth full term there, I really have no desire to meet him. Ever.

There is a name for homes like these. Oh, he called it a perinatal hospice, but I'm sure you can understand why a suggested solution in the form of a mother and baby home would leave a sour taste in any woman mouth.

And there is a name for a man who would suggest that we should be rounded up at our most tragic vulnerable, separated from the love and support of our partners, our other children and wider family and friends, and shut away to suffer for months only to give birth alone to our dead or dying baby.

Dress it up with pretty soothing words all you like, but it's a suggestion that tells me all I need to know about the man.

eviltwin

I haven't met Mullins either, I'm sure on a day to day basis he is nice enough but I know from talking to some of the women who met him to discuss their journey to the UK to have a termination that he was smug and came across as less than emphatic. One woman described him as "cold". I would hope that someone who was dealing with personal testimony of a woman who had lost her child could have a least managed to show some respect for her story even if he didn't personally agree with her decision or the cause she was representing.

Tarzana

FactCheck wrote: »

Nope, it was only made legal in 2003.

If it WAS just extra strength contraceptive, well, does it matter? If it did the job then it was emergency contraception for my purposes anyway. So it's untrue, in my view, to say that emergency contraception wasn't available before 2003. Of course, it should have been OTC but at least it is now.

FactCheck

Tarzana wrote: »

If it WAS just extra strength contraceptive, well, does it matter?

Well it mattered because it came with a ton of extra side effects and was less effective than an actual emergency contraceptive. And the IMB was happy to inflict that on women based not on any medical research but on the political philosophical position that Levonelle was an "abortifacient".

I just think it underscores eviltwin's point that Irish women have been discriminated against in our very recent history.