Welcome to Gaia! ::

I care because the affect me, and because it doesn't just happen with "idiots." It happens with people who are seemingly sensible on many other issues. It happens with every day people who I know. If I'm going to refuse to correct the mistakes that seem stupid, then how are they ever going to get corrected?


And I say I'm fighting the stigma, not feeding it. If a Pro-Lifer comes up to you and says, "The only people who have abortions are teenage sluts who slept with the entire football team without using protection and then wanted to get an abortion to avoid getting stretch marks," I would want to correct them. I would want to say, "No, there are people who fit none of those criterion who have abortions." Am I wrong for not just rolling my eyes and ignoring them? I don't think so.

I think you and I are talking about different stigmas. I'm trying to fight against the stigma that people are pro-choice just because they want to run around having sex without having to give birth. I believe you are talking about the stigma that abortion is bad. However, I don't think that it is necessary that a choice can be wrong for me and not be bad. I could never, ever, ever be a doctor. When talking about people becoming doctors, I may bring this up. This doesn't mean I think becoming a doctor is bad.

But honestly I don't like the belief that somehow those people who would choose not to have an abortion shouldn't talk about what they would choose. I don't like it there are people who are perfectly okay with someone saying, "I'm Pro-Choice, and if I became pregnant right now, I would have an abortion," but the object to a person saying, "I'm Pro-Choice, and if I became pregnant right now, I would not have an abortion." I really think it encourages the belief that if you wouldn't choose an abortion, you are in fact Pro-Life. I see this occasionally in the abortion thread. We get a young woman who comes in and say, "I'm Pro-Life because I wouldn't have an abortion." However, when questioned further, it becomes apparent that she is okay with other people choosing to have an abortion. It's that whole, "And what if your mother had been Pro-Choice!" mentality. If no one says anything, how is this girl to realize that not all people who would choose to give birth are Pro-Life.

And, sadly, more than once I've met women who actually feel that the Pro-Choice segment of society is hostile towards the fact that they would choose not to have an abortion. These women feel that in the eyes of some Pro-Choicers, they are somehow "betraying the cause" by not wanting to have an abortion. I am profoundly uncomfortable with this. No one should feel that they aren't Pro-Choice "enough" for making the choice that is right for them. I want to tell these women to know that they are not alone within the community.

So? People assume I am straight every single day. But if I were to correct them, I'd be told I'm "flaunting" my sexual orientation. This is what queers have been protesting for the past several decades, and we've been dealing with it. Why can't straight people do the same?



And I see it as distancing yourself from the affected group because you don't want to be seen as a part of them. Subconscious or not, that's certainly what it looks like, no matter how many times you explain that you're just "fighting the stigma". Intentions don't mean squat if it comes out the wrong way. A pro-lifer's intention is to stop abortion--that doesn't mean that's what will actually happen, or that's how it'll be interpreted, when zie tries to illegalize abortion and advocates a law that would end up making women second-class citizens. In the same vein, lots of people may intend to fight the stereotype that all people who support gay marriage are gay, but they end up coming off as homophobic when they make sure the whole world knows that they're not gay.



And I'm sick and tired of seeing heterosexuals complain about people assuming they are gay, and pro-choicers complaining about how people think we're all going to get abortions. I know most people don't intend it to sound like that, but that's what it reads as. At the end of the day, is it REALLY a big deal if some random person thinks you're gay or would get an abortion because of your opinions?



I think we are talking about different stigmas. :/

Because: How the hell can you fight the stigma of being gay/getting an abortion by having to explicitly halt the conversation just so people know that you're not gay/would not get an abortion? That's not "fighting the stigma", that's continuing it. I know that's certainly not your intention, but every single time some straight/personally pro-life person has to tack on the disclaimer that they're not gay/wouldn't get an abortion, it only serves to perpetuate the idea that you don't want people to think you're gay/would get an abortion because then they would judge you, think lowly of you or you would simply be embarrassed for them to know.



Yeah, that's a totally different situation. Besides, there are other ways to convince pro-lifers that not all pro-choicers get abortions besides proclaiming your personal choice whenever you possibly can. If someone says, "Those pro-aborts just can't get enough abortions," you don't have to say, "Well, I'm pro-choice but *I* wouldn't get an abortion!" You can say, "That's not true; there are plenty of pro-choicers who won't get an abortion," without sounding like you're placing yourself on a pedestal.

But as a quick FYI:



There is no social stigma attached to being a doctor. People will not attack you, send you death threats, tease you, exclude you, call you a slut or murderer or hurl epithets at you, or send you to the brink of suicide for being a doctor. There's no reason for anyone to be offended if you said you yourself would never be a doctor, because it's a perfectly reasonable disclaimer. The comparison doesn't work.

I don't have a problem with you correcting the assumption that you are straight. Seriously. I say go for it. I wouldn't say you were flaunting your sexuality, I would say you are being open and honest. Having people assume you are someone other than who you are is not something that I think should be simply accepted.


Well, I don't want to be seen as a part of a group that I'm not a part of. For example, I don't wear crosses because I'm not a Christian and I don't want to be taken as such. Is this because Christians are somehow viewed as inferior beings by the general society whereas atheists are incredibly privileged? Of course not. Same thing for correct people on the internet when they believe I am a man. Am I privileging myself by not allowing people to mistakenly assume I am a man? I don't think so. And I don't like the idea of correcting people when the mistake they are making socially privileges me but not when it doesn't. I want to correct people when they are wrong about me, period.

Also, I appreciate it when men fight for women's rights and Christians fight for atheist's rights. For me, it is a positive that people who aren't just like me, people who may even benefit from me being oppressed, decide that it is important to fight for my rights not because they will benefit from it, but because it is the right thing to do. In essence, I am acting as I like people to act towards me.

Furthermore, although you may see it as separating oneself from the inferiors, not all people feel this way. After I first had this discussion, I asked my mother (a woman who would have had an abortion if she had gotten pregnant when she didn't want to be, a woman who would want both my sister and myself to have abortions if we got pregnant right now) if she felt such statements were offensive. She said no, that she felt it was important for people to be able to put differences of opinion on the table. I've also talked to other Pro-Choicers who would have abortions who feel that it is a good thing for people to say when they wouldn't have abortions because it allows the pro-choice position to be inclusive. I've spoken to a lot of homosexuals who feel similarly. It is not that I'm simply a privileged person who is deciding this in a vacuum. I both possess minority status in some categories and have talked to minorities about how they feel about what I'm doing. Some feel like you do. Some feel otherwise.

And the funny thing? If I got pregnant tomorrow, I almost certainly would have an abortion. Yet I am saying that I think it is good for a person to say if they wouldn't.

Honestly, when people get upset when someone says, "and I wouldn't have an abortion" but not when someone says, "and I would have an abortion," I think it conveys the message that somehow choosing to not have an abortion is the inferior choice in the minds of some pro-choicers. That is not I personally want to convey.


I'm sorry, but I really do think that making decisions based on incorrect assumptions is a big deal. Assuming Pro-Lifers really do believe what they say when they say women only are Pro-Choice because they want to be able to have sex without having a baby, they are using at least one false assumption to justify their argument.


I'm sorry, but it is really, really important to me that I be honest and forthright about who I am. I'm sorry if it seems as if my attempts to be such are derogatory towards you. All I can do is tell you that it has nothing to do with that. You see, I spent years of my life simply not correcting mistaken assumptions about me. Years. I didn't tell people who I was because I was afraid of how people would react. Do you know where it got me? Into a place of social isolation and extreme unhappiness. No one could be my friend because they didn't know who I was. I'm not doing it again. Not ever. Years ago I made a vow to never let anyone assume something incorrect about me, especially regarding important issues. This is a personal issue. I find that if I start making excuses about, "Well, it is okay for me to let the person believe something false about me in THIS instance," I find myself using this justification more and more.


How is it a different situation? I don't understand why I can tell someone, "I'm Pro-Choice and I haven't slept with the entire football team," but I can't say, "I'm Pro-Choice and I wouldn't have an abortion."


If I say, "There are lots of pro-choicers who aren't that way!" the pro-lifer could simply respond, "No there aren't." If I bring up other people, I find that Pro-Lifers are more likely to say, "Well, they lied to you," than they are to call me a lier if I speak for myself. In essense, trial and error has taught me that using myself as an example whenever possible is both easier and more effective.

But are you saying it would be ok to say, "Person X is pro-choice but wouldn't have an abortion," but it's wrong for Person X to to be me? I just feel uncomfortable speaking for other people on this issue. It is easier to speak for myself whenever possible.


So, if someone makes an assumption about me without a social stigma (say, a doctor) I should correct them. But if they make an assumption about me with a social stigma (say, being gay) I shouldn't correct them?

Well, I don't make "disclaimers" before someone makes the assumption (or at least I don't think I do) so I can't speak for why people do it. That being said, it may seem to you that people are trying to separate from the affected group, but that's not how it seems to me.

But just to be clear, I don't find this thread to be a preemptive disclaimer.


I think it's fairly safe to say that you are in fact more cynical than I am. My naivety is intense. You don't have to do a lot to be more cynical than I am. lol


And for me, part of doing something about their privilege includes not acting as if they aren't privileged. Although I must admit that the assertion that women who would choose not to have an abortion are privileged feels odd.


I'm not saying that one person can speak for all people or that just because you are gay you are an expert on gay issues. Same thing for Pro-Choice issues. I'm saying that although it may be clear to you that statements like , "I'm Pro-Choice and I would never have an abortion," or "I'm for atheists' rights and I'm a Christian," or "I'm a feminist and I'm a man," are meant to separate the speaker from the disenfranchised group, it is not something I find to be universally clear. In that particular part of my post, I'm not talking about whether or not it is actually bad, I'm talking about how people actually take the these assertions. After all, if we are talking about how people perceive this statement, then how people perceive the statement is relevant. For example, earlier in your post you said that such statements "come across" a certain way. But to me and other people I've talked to, that's not how they come across. I'm not sure how I'm supposed to judge an action based on how it comes across if that action comes across differently to different people.


I'm not saying that being a doctor has the same kind of stigma being gay does. I'm saying that it doesn't make much sense to me that I can correct a mistaken assumption about me only as long as the mistaken assumption is neutral or positive in regards to social stigma. However, if (as you say in this post) the problem only when the statement is made before the mistaken assumption happens, then this part of my post probably doesn't really relate.

And the original intention of bringing up the doctor example was to point out that just because you correct someone who believes something false about you doesn't mean you think something is wrong with the group in question. I am perfectly capable of saying, "No, I'm not a doctor and there is no incentive that anyone could give me to make me want to be one," without thinking doctors are evil. I could even preemptively add this fact every time someone talked about people becoming doctors without thinking doctors are bad. That doctors are not stigmatized is in fact the point. I picked doctors as an example because they are not viewed poorly by general society. I appologize if that was unclear.