Question about "We resist efforts to limit women's reproductive autonomy"

submitted by NDG from (self.GenderCritical)

Quote is from the sidebar.

Is this an essential qualification for being able to post here? And what exactly does it mean?

Let's say someone thinks abortion should be banned after twenty weeks, except for health reasons. Or that clinics with multiple serious health code violations should be shut down, even if they're the only clinic in a state that does abortions. Or that eighteen-year-olds shouldn't be able to have their tubes tied, because that's too young to make such a permanent decision.

I'm going to be totally candid - I'm probably "not supposed to be here," because while I agree with most of the sidebar, I'm pro-life. I lurked on the old GC subreddit, and my plan for this sub was to just post archived version of the Peak Trans threads and then disappear. I don't have any desire to debate abortion with anyone, or even to discuss abortion on this sub. But I have very few people in my life I can talk to about gender-critical topics, and this is one of the only places online I can do that.

18% of Americans think women should be able to have abortions at any point during pregnancy. The rest want at least some restrictions. FWIW, I think that if this sub requires posters to resist all "efforts to limit women's reproductive autonomy," it's going to cut out a lot of women who are able and willing to fight against trans ideology.

all 14 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]fuckingsealions 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

We stand up for the rights of women to control our own bodies as individuals

I don't know what to tell you. If not having an abortion is your idea of control, I don't care what you do with your time. If you're lobbying, volunteering, or otherwise acting to make it difficult or impossible for other women to do so, then that's between you and your skydaddy.

[–]DifferentAirGC 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

pro-life

Do you care about the babies after they are born? Do you help the family if they are too poor to provide for the kid?

[–][deleted] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"I don't have any desire to debate abortion with anyone, or even to discuss abortion on this sub. But I have very few people in my life I can talk to about gender-critical topics, and this is one of the only places online I can do that."

Please remember to be respectful.

[–]NDG[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I said I don’t want to discuss or debate abortion here. I spend 40+ hours a month volunteering for an organization (without any position on abortion) that helps underprivileged newborns, and that’s my final comment on the issue.

[–]marmalade 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

So if you see the pain and suffering caused every day, why would you want to limit access to contreceptives? Why must your religious beliefs affect my life and the lives of others? If you want us to say "right on, sister! Overturn Roe!", I'm afraid the majority of us do not agree.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Nothing there says that her feelings on being pro-life are religion-related. Nothing there says that she doesn't want women to have access to contraceptive measures.

[–]NDG[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It’s kind of like someone saying, “I’m a vegan animal rights activist” and other people retorting, “Stop forcing your Dharmic religion on us!”

I think I thank my husband at least once a week for getting a vasectomy. 🙂

[–]peregrine_throw 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You can be pro-life under pro-choice. Pro-choice doesn't necessarily mean pro-abortion and gives women autonomy over their own bodies according to their own beliefs.

If by pro-life you mean anti-choice, then best you don't participate in those relevant topics out of respect for the sub which is radfem first and foremost.

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Is this an essential qualification for being able to post here? And what exactly does it mean?

On /r/GC iirc the rule was simple and clear: content arguing against the right to abortion in any way would be removed.

I think you can probably still post and participate just fine, just don't post that specific disallowed content here. Or at least that was the rule. The rules may be different in the new forum. And of course they're different in other radfem spaces.

it's going to cut out a lot of women who are able and willing to fight against trans ideology.

The requirement to be a "radical feminist" arguably removed most women already, anyway. Most women are not radical feminists! on /r/GC it seemed like it was ok for women who were not radical feminists to post relevant stuff as long as they remained respectful that it was a radical feminist space. Like women posting asking for help with bad experiences they were having with men in their lives.

I've also seen posts elsewhere by conservative women who say they like to read GC but don't post because they know they're not radical feminists and that's fine, but they still appreciate the information.

I think it would be neat to just have a women's place where we could all talk to each other, differences and all.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

"Let's say someone thinks abortion should be banned after twenty weeks, except for health reasons. Or that clinics with multiple serious health code violations should be shut down, even if they're the only clinic in a state that does abortions. Or that eighteen-year-olds shouldn't be able to have their tubes tied, because that's too young to make such a permanent decision."

-- that doesn't sound like a pro-life stance??? Pretty standard pro-choice view.

As for "being allowed to post here", why not? Presumably that rule means you oughtn't try to argue anti-choice here, but that doesn't impact on any other type of gc engagement.

[–]NDG[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I would think that’s a pretty standard pro-choice stance, but the quote from the sidebar sounds pretty absolute.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

No one here, I should imagine, is advicating for under-the-table abortions, willy-nilly cutting out nearly-cooked babies out of mothers, or giving kids access to drastic and permanent body modification (the latter, incidentally, rather a hot button for peak-trans). I think the sidebar quote is fine. How would you phrase it?

[–]NDG[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I have no idea how I'd phrase it. I'm just trying to figure out if it's okay if I post on this sub, or if it's supposed to be only for people who can agree with everything in the sidebar.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't think you need to agree with everything to be somewhere. Pro-life is your opinion, which should be respected as long as you do not seek to legally limit other women's choices. You don't have to debate it here, since it is assumed by default.