a lot of ground. a lot.

and the rare crap is not helpful.

great op. thanks and k&r

and nothing could be farther from the truth.

You "can't" obstruct access to abortion under the Constitution, except that it's being obstructed and attacked everywhere, with sniggers and grins for trap laws and waiting periods and "mandatory counseling." The law is the law except when people decide they can get away with subverting it.

it's godawful laziness on our part to allow political discourse to be circumscribed by telephone polls.

i take that as an indication of how much we're failing in the larger project.

See if we'd just educate women about where babies come from, there would be no abortion and all the unicorns would return.

Jesus FUCK, it's maddening. And these are people allegedly "on our side".

Sorry for venting here but I didn't want to kick that other thread again.

venting totally warranted. we're at a tipping point and it's time to push back.

The ignorance among progressives is astounding.
You want someone better than Hillary to be taken seriously- prove you give a shit about the lack of liberty women are experiencing now.

there was a rollout of new messaging that included the stat "1 in 3 women have an abortion." that makes it seem like abortion is incredibly common and it masks what women actually have to go thru to access the procedure...as well as masking how many women were unable to access the procedure (and what the consequences of that were).

Just like Ledbetter (or that equal pay law passed in the sixties!!) = equal pay. We have so far to go.

But subverting the law to find new ways to attack people they "disapprove of" has become a Republican national sport

to the idea that abortion is something the public at large has some right to object to and obstruct. No medical care a woman or anyone else needs should be "rare."

You can't appease people who think they should have a say in what others do with their bodies, or what options women have, and there's no point in even nodding vaguely in their direction.

exactly.

we have to move beyond poll testing every word we use. some words simply send the wrong message no matter how appealing they are to a "broad swath" of "swing voters."

and BTW -- the idea of "swing voters" is another concept that should be left in the 90s. swing voters don't win elections. they just lead to shitty policy.

Nothing real or meaningful comes from it.

"Rare" means people with power and privilege still have options. It's just everybody else who is fucked.

Women on Medicaid have been endangered by Hyde for decades. Rural women are deprived of choices by telemedicine bans, waiting periods and clinic closures. Feticide prosecutions and sex selective abortion bans are racist and classist.

DUers are, on average, white, prosperous, and too fucking old to get pregnant anyhow. Which is why the hand waving pablum of "safe, legal and rare" works for so many here. In the real world what's becoming rare is access to safe and legal abortion.

everything you said...especially, "In the real world what's becoming rare is access to safe and legal abortion."

there's a lot of truth to the fact that older folks excuse themselves from this issue b/c it no longer affects them. "oh, it's up to the younger folks now," they think.

also, the paternalism encoded in the "rare" language is sickening. it's no one's business how frequent or how rare a medical procedure is for any particular person.

likewise, it's delusional to think that advancing better birth control and sex-ed is going to make abortion rare, when we ACTUALLY live in a world where birth control is more difficult to access and sex-ed is increasingly a corporate-Christian abstinence-only purity sermon.

people need to pull their heads out of the sand and realize what's really going on in the real world.

The most privileged always have options and always will. They will always have privacy and a network of financial support.

In the meantime, women in the U.S. get paid less to begin with, have no maternity leave, and now -- no guaranteed access to reproductive care through insurance if their employer has a "religious objection."

There seems to be a genuine fear that somehow women won't be sufficiently disadvantaged due their reproductive systems.

- They shouldn't be working, because they might get pregnant. Pay them less.

- If they do work, they shouldn't be able to control whether they become pregnant. Withhold birth control.

- If they do become pregnant, they should have no choice in how to handle that pregnancy. Shut down the clinics in a thousand disingenuous ways.

Too many have been far too complacent on this subject, for far too long.

if we're relegating women to poverty for having children, we're doing it wrong.

Why we have permitted contempt for women and women's bodies and women's privacy and women's health to grow and grow is beyond me.

(It's not at all funny but) Perhaps it's like the old (unfairly stereotypical) saying about the Irish -- that god invented whiskey to keep them from ruling the world.

Maybe some invent contempt for women's health to keep THEM from ruling the world.

To be clear - not by the "DUers on average" that you refer to. I mean the dishonesty of the self-righteous a*holes that want to police the bodies and moral choices of the powerless, when they know full well that anyone with money and power operates outside their rules anyway - including themselves, if their own little innocent Mary should happen to find herself in need of those choices.

On the other hand, the desire for abortion to be "rare" in my observation, really stems from the desire for the availability of contraceptive options to be ubiquitous rather than as constrained as it used to be. If a) people have easy access to contraception; b) the education to use it, and c) are not coerced into sex; then the need for abortion SHOULD be "rare". Unless someone is an ultra-conservative freak, what could possibly be wrong with that approach?

The problem is that there is more than one way for abortion to become "rare" and the self-righteous a*holes I mentioned above are not looking for the same kind of "rare" as the pro-choice folks who use that term. I think pro-choicers unwisely ignored the negative framing that the construct "safe, legal, and rare" implied, but I don't think for one second any of the pro-choice movement wanted it to become "rare" by being unavailable. What is the point of "safe and legal" then? Actually "safe" doesn't even coexist with "unavailable as a regulated medical practice". So you can fault them for making a mistake and being naive, but not for intention.

as soon as "rare" is part of the message, it activates the value-judgement neural pathways associated with "loose women."

It is extremely important that people actually get this.

referenced in my post, that i realized how the tide has turned on this language. i've assumed this is more of the same paternalistic bullshit we have to put up with as we fight our fight.

NOT ANY MORE. we've had it.

I've been having this conversation on DU for years. It's frustrating.

KILLING US SOFTLY On abortion we’re one compromise away from third world status
The Florida Squeeze
by nashville_brook

http://thefloridasqueeze.com/2015/04/19/killing-us-softly-on-abortion-were-one-compromise-away-from-third-world-status/

This week I traveled to Tallahassee to “tell my abortion story” to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Along with two other women, we went to make women’s voices heard as the fate of the Mandatory Wait Bill (SB 724) was “considered.” 

I put “considered” in scare quotes because we all know that there’s no “consideration” in these matters. And, the fact that I was the only one of the three of us who was able to tell my story proves they never intended to deliberate. They hid behind a procedural rule to cut off testimony, because what could women possibly add to a debate that’s already been decided? The suppressed testimony of the two other women can be found below. They had a lot to add, as you’ll learn when you watch these videos, and it’s outrageous that they weren’t permitted to be heard. 

Diane's unheard story:


Barbara's unheard story:



My own testimony focused on the fact that while our stories are different, we share the opinion that we don’t need Tallahassee politicians inserting themselves into our lives to remind us of the seriousness of our decisions. Everyone knows that mandatory wait laws are impediments made in bad faith by snickering opponents of reproductive rights. 

It’s clear to me that the only way to fight back is to step out of the shadows, so let the headlines read “Local Woman Has Abortion 25 Years ago: Still Doesn’t Regret It.”

In the 40-plus years since Roe v. Wade, we’ve lost so much ground that reproductive freedom barely exists anymore, and this threatens our basic human rights as women. I believe that if we don’t put a human face on it we’re ceding another victory to our opposition.

It was a mistake we made in the 90s. We thought that finally having a Democratic president after 12 years of Reagan/Bush meant we could rest easy on this issue of women’s rights. The rising tide would float all boats. We were wrong. 

This is precisely when things went haywire. Political thinkers and Democrats in Congress began asking, “Where can women compromise?” And the answer was ‘late term abortion,’ which is a procedure that’s used only under the most extreme circumstances when the life of mother or child is at stake. People needing this procedure aren’t seeking birth control. They’re fighting for their lives. And yet this seemed a “reasonable” place to cede ground — and it was the camel’s nose under the tent.

Once you abandon the foundational premise that we’re equal members of society with full agency over our healthcare decisions, the forces that desire to “keep us in our place” are empowered on all levels. Forget equal pay, or the right to seek healthcare without discrimination. We’re all “daddy’s little girls” now.

more at link --> http://thefloridasqueeze.com/2015/04/19/killing-us-softly-on-abortion-were-one-compromise-away-from-third-world-status/

Here are a couple pieces from my journal about destigmatizing abortion and the case for repealing ALL abortion laws:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025684730


http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022133613

I look forward to reading the whole piece you posted.

for women.

We make incremental strides, here and there, and they appear to want to take it all back out of women's rights.

And we have so far failed to stop them.

Way past time to set that straight.

Lack of Democratic voters during elections is how these right winger conservatives get into office. The right wing anti-abortion and anti everything are driven to support their causes and turn out to vote in heavy numbers. I used to work for the Army and there was an old saying, "He talks a good war". Well, that is what has happened to liberals treatment of elections in America. They love to talk about the subject and people running for office, but are too busy to vote.

To gain back control of the legislatures and congress requires a huge push to get out the Vote on the Democratic side. Every election is important and you need to vote in them all, not just the Presidential.

do you realize how condescending and paternalistic that sounds?

I don't know why anyone would presume to lecture someone posting passionately on a pro-Democratic, politically based message board, about a core progressive issue, that they "need to vote." Or would assume people here only vote in Presidential elections.


WTF ????????

Nobody thinks that.

Beyond that, it's the importance of issues like this and intelligent, passionate Dems like the OP that drive turnout.

This OP, the thought behind it, and the people discussing it, will do a million times more to drive Dems to the polls than this weirdly presumptuous and utterly feckless attempt to scold people.

Way to miss the point.

Not reason. Not "compromise." Complete control over people's lives and bodies.

Every inch we have given (or that has been given for us) has been a disaster for millions.

Plus a healthy dose of fear of retribution.

It's like when I see some RW Gun Nut with a suburban bunker. The obvious question is, "What are they afraid of?"

Then it dawned on me that these types usually DO have some people out there in the world who they've pissed off. Some actually KNOW that they are assholes who deserve a punch in the face and all the window bars and such is to prevent what's comin' to em.

relate this to different states changing the laws which prohibit abortions, you have lost your way on this comparison.

Hillary's point was to promote family planning, birth control, less rapes, less incest and for the occasions where unwanted pregnancy occurred was to have a safe, clean professional abortion.

care to address those?

First the prevention through birth control methods. You are trying to address the pregnancy after conception, it needs to be addressed first.

Laws which prohibit or remove the availability of abortions. She is addressing the prevention of unwanted or unplanned pregnancies. If there isn't a pregnancy then there will not be a need for an abortion. Make birth control available first.

trying to make it into a "hillary-yes" or "hillary-no" thing is just silly.

http://thefloridasqueeze.com/2015/04/19/killing-us-softly-on-abortion-were-one-compromise-away-from-third-world-status/

(snip)

It’s a feature, not a bug, when no facilities exist to access the procedure.

It’s a feature, not a bug, when a woman is priced out of the ability to access the procedure.

It’s a feature, not a bug, when a woman is time-limited out of the ability access the procedure.

It’s a feature, not a bug, when a woman is shamed out of the ability to access the procedure.

And what’s the effect of all this? Here’s Sen. Hillary Clinton in 2009 clearly articulating how chipping away at reproductive rights sends women into a “cycle of poverty and abuse.” When asked if the administration had any plans to further restrict abortions in the developing world she responded:



It’s easy to articulate when we’re talking about other countries but we too often refuse to look into the mirror ourselves. It’s obvious that restrictions on access to women’s healthcare is creating a United States that accepts third world status for women. Tell me again where it is that we jail women for suspicious miscarriages. Saudi Arabia? Sierra Leone? Oh right … Indiana.

(snip)

It was a wrong-headed attempt to compromise with people who were implying that abortion is a moral hazard of some kind. Some Dems may have hoped that sex education and better access to birth control could appease the people who thought abortion should be "rare."

But they were wrong. Better sex ed and birth control are not at all on the agenda of those who think abortion should be "rare."

And abortion isn't "rare." Doesn't need to be "rare." Cannot be "rare." It's a medical procedure that women need and it's not up to triangulating Dems or anyone else to decide that making it "rare" is a goal any of us need to pursue.

that's the difference.

Abortion. In fact it would only be women having abortions, men and women have backs.

Need an abortion. Do you accept one not being pregnant doesn't need an abortion?

It is not the normal and abortion is the WOMAN'S CHOICE. Now how many abortions have been performed on a woman who isn't pregnant?

Are they not deserving of safe, legal, accessible, affordable medical abortions?

B/ c if Jesus wanted you old guys to have plenty of boners you wouldn't need pills to make your boners happen.

Let's put a 24hour waiting period an anal probe and a sanctimonious pre-pill speech requirement on every boner pill.

Control and sex education. Again let me state if there I not a pregnancy then there is not a need for an abortion, making abortion RARE.

the "moral hazard" subtext of the "the rare abortion" had a LOT to do with this. see, they just can't support something that might make abortion easier to access...b/c you know...it SHOULD be rare. even when you have a DEMOCRATIC SUPERMAJORITY.

this is why this language is so toxic.



http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2015/04/15/oregon-democrats-kill-reproductive-health-bill-included-abortion-provision/

An Oregon bill that would have codified the right to affordable, full-spectrum reproductive health care was killed by the state’s Democratic leadership last week because of a provision that would have increased access to abortion.

(snip)

The proposal would have required all health insurance plans to cover a wide range of reproductive health services, including contraception, abortion, prenatal care, childbirth, and postpartum care, at low costs. It would also have allowed pharmacies to dispense a 12-month supply of birth control at one time, and reduced cost sharing and deductibles for abortion care.

But the language on abortion proved a sticking point even for the Oregon legislature, which has a Democratic super-majority and a track record of supporting abortions rights. Senators in the health committee failed to even give the bill a hearing date, killing it by default.

Health committee chair Sen. Laurie Monnes Anderson (D-Gresham), who was also a sponsor of the bill, “did not schedule it because she didn’t think she could get the votes from her caucus, and it was absolutely because of the inclusion of abortion in the bill,” Aimee Santos-Lyons, director of programs for Western States Center, told RH Reality Check. The Western States Center backed the bill. “Senators didn’t want to be asked to vote on abortion and have that on their record. They find it a difficult issue to go public on.”

Gahhh. It's only difficult to the extent people won't stand up and be counted.

Not good enough, Oregon Dems. You're better than that, or you ought to be.

We all HAVE to be.

Beautiful! Sing it sister, I'll stand shoulder to shoulder with you!!!

Kicked and recommend!!

....who has to drive hundreds of miles to the "nearest" clinic. Ask a woman who has to travel, then stay in a hotel to wait out the waiting period before she can obtain an abortion. Ask any woman who CANT AFFORD an abortion. Ask any woman who has to run the gauntlet of invasive, state-sanctioned rape (trans-vaginal ultrasounds), waiting periods, lectures full of lies about breast cancer or "reversible" abortions, and the harassment of anti-choice zealots screaming at them in an ever-shrinking buffer zone (oh, but it's "counseling," don't you know). Ask the woman who has been jailed for miscarrying/terminating her pregnancy. Or the woman who was jailed because she tried to commit suicide while pregnant.

Abortion is already rare. It is safe and legal, but it is already rare. And it's killing and punishing women.

are even willing to go on record showing their supporting and expressing concern about how restrictive legislation has become with regards to reproductive rights. This lack of support is exactly why and how this shit has become so easily pushed through. Time for a lot of people to wake up and smell the coffee!

K&R.