|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2007 9:25 am
Talon, I agree with a lot of the concepts in the "beauty myth". But No matter what academia says, keeping and maintaining good looks practically helps one's life in many ways. I'm a plain girl, and I can believe "the beauty myth" all I want, but today I still have to deal with my plainness, and tomorrow I have to work on ways of dealing with it again. It seems like women themselves (the viewed) are more progressive when it comes to knowing the truth behind beauty ideals than men (the viewers). It now becomes apparent, at least, that I have personal issues over my looks.
Seems like Broorel was fascinated with my post. So here goes.
Yes, you can say I was indirectly attacking "biblical womanhood", because I was moreso focusing on dissing the bible and its conservative interpretations. The way I see it, pro-life doesn't have a sound, logical system to explain to non-religious people why abortion should be banned. you might have one or two pro-lifers who have an eclectic background, like your gay/lesbian person, your wicca practitioner, your atheist, a few females, but the majority of pro-lifers are religious, conservative MALES. It's usually the same godamned religion too- a fundamentalist or catholic interpretation of Christianity.
...Like MEN have any concept of what a pregnancy, especially unplanned, really feels like.
Pro-life is a great organization for those who like to use their religion to bully and harass those they don't agree with.
So as long as the other side feels content using their religion as a tool to bully and harass, then I'll have no qualms trashing the s**t out of it. Call it fighting a wrong with another wrong, but it sure as hell makes me feel great.
I don't really understand why the other eclectic individuals LIKE to hang out with other pro-lifers (unless they also dislike women so much) because these same dominant group of men are also intolerant of OTHER different groups- minorities, non-Christians, gays/lesbians, and, dare say, they also hate women but rather than expressing the obvious, they cloak it with patriarchal ideas like "biblical womanhood", the "nature" of women, etc. Why the hell would anyone want to hang out with a group of people that are hostile towards their own individuality?
If I told anyone here that the "nature" of black people is to run really fast and jump really high, and that the "nature" of french people was to surrender at the drop of a dime and dine on cheese_whine , that would send obvious signals to everyone who reads this topic on how flawed, deplorable, and cheap those "arguments" are.
But the "nature" of women, the "destiny" of woman is to pop out babies... apparently some people have a hard time getting how that sounds very similar to the racist argument aforementioned.
Are you telling me that I was raised for the first 20 years of my life so that my ultimate destiny was to be a walking uterus that vomited crotchlings, while my brother gets to have a more uniquely tailored destiny? Somebody might as well rip my uterus out, place it in a machine and pump out kids. what use will we have for a brain and a heart when there's a functioning uterus?
Come on.. ANYONE can pop out babies.
But how many of you can say that you planned to have that child in your life, not just pop it out without any regard to the child or your future because you got accidentally knocked up?
How many of you can say that you've accomplished other things, like made your own individuality before having a child, or inventing cool s**t for the world to use, or contribute in some other way that benefits the world in a meaningful way (having kids doesn't actually benefit the world much, the last I checked the Earth has a serious overpopulation and other ecological problems).
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2007 12:19 pm
Quote: Broorel Grip, would you mind posting your response to me on my site? It would be much easier to facilitate discussion directly, rather than you posting here and me posting there. Hi Broorel, Thanks for showing interest in thoughts about your public journal and viewpoints. Unfortunately, I am primarily interested in discussion amongst my peers at the pro choice guild. My main reasons for membership in the pro-choice guild is to collaborate with peers who share the same basic view on woman's rights but also become enriched by the diversity and the intellectual stimulation they offer. I am not interested in discussing, or debating with pro-lifers or outsiders for the following reasons: - I am not interested in getting converted to Christianity. - I do not find pro-life arguments much intellectually stimulating. - I do not personally find pro-bible arguments intellectually or morally stimulating. - I am not interested in debates with the general public, I find that lots of people have no basic understanding of the rules in the correct ways of debating, which would lead to a frustrating experience in which wastes time and nobody learns anything. Even I would have to brush up on Logic in order to seriously consider debating. I'm interested in acting ranty and infantile with a heck of a lot of common sense at pro-choice guild, not pretending to consider bible apologetics "arguments" in the name of political correctness. I've been through that "bible" route... ungh, never again! As it stands, you've already posted some of my earlier thoughts on your blog without my permission. It's not that I *wouldn't* give you permission for posting my earlier thoughts, but that I wasn't even given a choice on whether to allow you to post my earlier thoughts or not! rofl So really, to ask me to post my opinions willingly after the fact sounds like a silly question, eh? xp Thanks for asking, and have a great day. Cheers, ~Grippy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2007 2:26 pm
Quote: But the "nature" of women, the "destiny" of woman is to pop out babies... apparently some people have a hard time getting how that sounds very similar to the racist argument aforementioned. Are you telling me that I was raised for the first 20 years of my life so that my ultimate destiny was to be a walking uterus that vomited crotchlings, while my brother gets to have a more uniquely tailored destiny? Somebody might as well rip my uterus out, place it in a machine and pump out kids. what use will we have for a brain and a heart when there's a functioning uterus? Quoted because I feel these two paragraphs are the most poignant... The second the most damning for any sense of biblical-womanhood. If God intended for women to be no more than loving mothers and servants to their husbands, what need is there for a brain and a heart that seeks so much more? Why am I so readily able to learn, and proficient in math and engineering? Why do I have a passion and aptitude for philosophy, literature and music? If it is my nature to be a mother, a wife, a servant, and to not even attempt engineering why do I abhor the idea of pregnancy and become truly and deeply passionate and fascinated with math, music, and philosophy? Either God screwed up big time when making women (which can't be true if God is perfect), or the Biblical ideal of womanhood is wrong - being nothing more than a written verification of the sexist paradigm of the times... or, we'll take the stupid way out when things don't make sense, " we can't understand the will of God."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2007 6:37 pm
CAPTAIN Plixy[Stix] Can you even be a pro-life and a feminist at the same time? No. But there is a group called "Feminists For Life" if you want to laugh your a** off/weep at the hypocrisy of it all. I don't even want to look for a link. Here's what I TRIED to post: Quote: "If you know that sex causes pregnancy, even if you take every step to not get pregnant, you are still consenting to pregnancy because it is the cost of the gamble." That's like saying that if you get into a car, you are automatically consenting to getting into an accident and providing medical care to alleviate any injuries from the accident should be illegal. Besides which: If she's consenting to pregnancy when consenting to sex, why the birth control? And you do understand that consent for sex can legally withdrawn at any time, right? I still don't understand how you people can say that motherhood should be compulsory for all sexually active women and call yourselves "feminists." Last I checked, it was about respecting women and trusting them to be in charge of their lives. It's about not telling women they can only live a certain way. "When you think about it, these women beleive that we have to have surgery (abortion) to be equal to men." So now you're going to deny that women can get stuck being pregnant from sex and men can't? That's just plain ridiculous. The fact is that not being able to choose when you become pregnant is a biological handicap. "It reminds me of two t-shirts my college roommate and I intend to make. One is "Pro-life women are prettier than pro-choice women."" How very mature of you. This blog suggests insecurity in your own femininity. If you're so secure with it, why do you have to obsess over having a pretty, pink background and a baby and a husband looking over your shoulder? Looks like you're the one with gender insecurities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2007 9:35 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 11:59 am
CAPTAIN Plixy[Stix] Can you even be a pro-life and a feminist at the same time? i believe the term "pro-life feminist" is an oxymoron. as has been said before, how can you claim to support equal rights for women and at the same time deny them right to their own bodies?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Mar 28, 2007 5:39 pm
It's kinda like being pro-life and pro-war/military, or pro-life and anti-environment, or pro-life and pro-death penalty, or pro-life and against birth control and emergency contraception.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
