Mother's blood test reveals baby's sex Blood drawn from expectant mothers could offer parents an earlier sneak peek at their baby's sex than methods currently used in the U.S., researchers said Tuesday.Apparently, this newer test does offer a menu of limited benefits in aid to healthy pregnancies, but that's not the real issue behind it's potentially wider use. What is feared is the rise of gender selection abortions.
The part I relish is the feminists not knowing where to go with this, while their allies seem to those who are holding up it's introduction in this country and worldwide.
The basic feminist pro-abortion stance that all women should have free and easy access to abortion for any reason and at any time will certainly face it's limits should this test become more widespread, knowing that it will be unborn women who will mostly likely bear the brunt of it's results.
Imagine that. Feminism doing it's part to limit women's reproductive rights.
Dilemma:
If women can't be trusted with this choice then what is 'choice' all about?...
or...
How can one call herself a feminist while still allowing the means for the culling of unborn women?
Matters not to to me. I oppose abortion across the board. I also support new methods and tests and intelligence that will help bring forth healthier babies from safer pregnancies. This test is no threat to the values that I hold dear. Bring it on.
I doubt many feminists can say the same. It's called "Hypocrisy".
11 comments:
Abortion is already legal in the US after such time as the sex of a baby can be determined. And there isn't a great deal of evidence that sex-selective abortion occurs here. The only difference this makes is widening the window by a month or two. I'm not aware of a feminist backlash against ultrasounds...are you?
Statistics disagree with you, Brian. Sort of like how honor killings go on in America. It's not a wide spread, because it's a cultural thing-- and the broader American culture is about as likely to kill a boy as a girl so that they have the "right" balance of sexes. Your culture values having a son, there's going to be pressure to get that child. Your culture values having only two children to directly replace the parents....
I've noticed a BIG feminist backlash against ultrasounds where it goes counter their interests-- such as before an abortion, especially in those areas where pro-aborts have been telling women that a fetus is "just a lump of tissue."
(some folks theorize that this sort of test will make it harder to dehumanize the unborn; I disagree because it's easy to dehumanize what you can't see, even if you can't call them "it")
If the "seven weeks into the pregnancy" thing is gestational rather than by fetal age (gestational is standard), then it would be a month after a pregnancy test would come back positive; not as much commitment as being in your second trimester. About the same time most miscarriages happen. Before most folks have told anyone they're expecting. Very easy to dehumanize someone when their fingers and toes are just getting recognizable as such.
Wow, if there was any blog post that ever called to me like a beacon in the night! Is this a late birthday present, Gino?! :) Ok, so here we go:
Feminism is the belief that all humans deserve equal respect and autonomy, regardless of their race or whatever kinds of genitals they happen to have. Feminists are pro-choice (as opposed to "pro-abortion"), because reproductive control is inherent to autonomy, whereas patriarchal control over reproduction forces women into subservient positions in society.
A world that continues to embrace Feminism is a world where women and girls are valued as much as men and boys are valued. Thus, a world that has completely adopted Feminism is not a world where parents would choose to abort a fetus simply because the fetus is female.
Therefore, Feminists do not struggle any more than a person from any type of group about the ethics of blood tests that reveal the sex of the fetus sooner; it doesn't in any way contradict or counteract the continuing struggle to ensure women in our country have free and easy access to abortion.
The trend for certain other countries in the world to abort female fetuses (notably China and India, although it happens everywhere) is something to which Feminists greatly object, but abortion isn't the culprit of this epidemic - misogyny is the culprit. For that and a scourge of other various practices that result in the suffering of women. So Feminists work on misogyny.
Feminists would not regard this test as a dilemma because the notion that women can't be trusted to make health decisions for their bodies is antithetical to the Feminist and the pro-choice movement. That notion is, in fact, the epitome of the anti-choice movement.
so, you trust the women of china and india with making the right choices.
So the actual killing female humans isn't a problem for feminists, dead women are only an issue if they were killed for a reason pro-aborts object to. (And I'll keep saying "pro-aborts" until "pro-choicers" put as much effort into teaching the biology involved as they do into birth control, or they fight as hard for women to be accurately informed about what their abortion involves as they do to force unwilling doctors to perform them.)
This is why I generally just won't talk about abortion.
Either you think a fetus is a person, or you don't. If you think a fetus is a person, I don't see how you can be anything other than pro-life/anti-abortion.
I don't, so I'm not. And I guess for the same reason sex-selective abortion doesn't bother me any more than abortion for any other reason.
I really don't see the point of arguing marginal cases. Where you you fall on this ultimately comes down to the what you believe about the personhood of a fetus. I don't see how a particular marginal case is going to change anyone's mind about that.
But, if you want to use a largely hypothetical philosophical dillema to bash feminism, fill your boots...
Gino - Yes. But I am confident that this will decrease as China becomes more democratic, and as both countries become wealthier.
Brian - I don't get into the personhood debates, either. It's utterly pointless.
I'm more than happy to debate abortion in general, however!
Foxfier - I shall parse what is incorrect about each of the statements and inferences above:
So the actual killing female humans isn't a problem for feminists.
Feminists do not force other people to adopt their spiritual beliefs. The statement that ending the growth of a 2-week-old *blastocyst* or a 3-month-old fetus is the same thing as "killing a female human" speaks to a spiritual belief.
"Pro-choice" is literally not the same thing as "pro-abortion," because you can choose to not abort with respect to your own beliefs, and still support others' right to abortion.
dead women are only an issue if they were killed for a reason pro-aborts object to
Which "dead women?" Are you still talking about blastocysts and fetuses? If so, that's a straw argument, because I didn't say that. Systematically aborting girl fetuses speaks to a misogyny that Feminists object to, so in the Feminist mind, misogyny is the problem, not abortion. Pretty certain that I already said that, though.
(And I'll keep saying "pro-aborts" until "pro-choicers"
It's a free country.
put as much effort into teaching the biology involved as they do into birth control
Where do you see Feminists objecting to biology education? This is highly opposite everything I've ever read by any Feminist, ever. Ever!
You are correct that Feminists object to forcing women to undergo ultrasounds at abortion clinics, but not because they think women should be denied education. They object to that because legislating pre-abortion ultrasounds (which has a miniscule effect on influencing women to choose to not abort, by the way) is the same thing as saying "You're too fucking stupid to know that the fetus growing inside of you is going to turn into a real baby someday." For obvious reasons, Feminists object to treating women that way.
put as much effort into teaching the biology involved as they do into birth control
I've got to post that one again because there is more than one wrong thing about it. You seem to be saying both that Feminists object to education (which, citation please?), except birth control education. If you place so much importance on preventing abortion, would you not condone as much birth control education as possible? You're either being contradictory or sex-alarmist (as in, "ooh, birth control is bad").
or they fight as hard for women to be accurately informed about what their abortion involves
Feel free to access the Planned Parenthood website for an accurate, thorough description of everything involved in every kind of abortion that exists.
as they do to force unwilling doctors to perform them.)
Lolz! HUGE WTF. Citation please?!
The statement that ending the growth of a 2-week-old *blastocyst* or a 3-month-old fetus is the same thing as "killing a female human" speaks to a spiritual belief.
No, it is a statement of biological fact. An embryonic human has sex, and is a human, as do fetal humans; thus, abortions kill female humans.
Saying that it is killing a person, would be closer to a spiritual belief-- more philosophical, since you don't need to believe in anything spiritual to believe in personhood, nor to reason that all members of the human species are persons.
Most of your other "corrections" are an outstanding illustration of the fight against simple biological facts.
"An embryonic human is a human, therefore an embryo is a human!"
Yeah, difficult to argue with that.
Most of your other "corrections" are an outstanding illustration of the fight against simple biological facts.
So for example, my suggestion for you to look up a thorough description of all the details involved in an abortion on the Planned Parenthood website in response to your accusation of the pro-choice movement's supposed fight to maintain ignorance of how abortions are completed is an illustration of the fight against "simple biological facts?!"
Now that's a noodle-twister.
You said:
The statement that ending the growth of a 2-week-old *blastocyst* or a 3-month-old fetus is the same thing as "killing a female human" speaks to a spiritual belief.
I pointed out that basic biology would inform you that a human embryo or fetus has a sex, and thus an abortion will kill female humans even if they are not being selected.
Thus, actual dead female humans are only an issue if they are killed for reasons the pro-aborts object to, just as I said in the first place.
*Claps Loudly*
THANK YOU!
Post a Comment