Abortion

173 posts / 0 new
Last post
thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Jun 30 2007 01:44

j.rogue
Offline
Joined: 8-04-07
Jun 30 2007 13:45
hardtokill wrote:
Here is a question: my girlfriend's friend is on her third abortion and she is 20. While I am probably taking the moral high ground a bit here, I am of the opinion that ok that is enough - eventually you have to start telling them to wear a condom or start taking a pill. What are people's thoughts on this? This is of course assuming in a post-capitalist society that women are still going to be wanting serial abortions. Endless abortions or abortion cap? Yes I am being serious.

I have been staying away from this one because frankly, I don't take internet arguements too terribly seriously, but what the hell, I'll bite.
There are a few things wrong with the notion that women are soley responisible when it comes to abortion. Telling them to take a pill is questionable so long as they are as medically sketchy as they are now. And there are a myriad of problems that surround the notion that women should be the one to push for the condom. A lot of women, particularly ones in abusive situatons, would become more unsafe if they asked to use a condom. Plus, we are all not exactly socialized in this vibrant sex-positive culture that encourages to have open, healthy communication about getting it on. And condoms break. And I am of course leaving rape, incest, and all that other shit out of the picture.
Now, all that aside, I think the underlying problem is judging how others have sex. I think that if people want to have unprotected sex, that is their right. It is up to each individual, so if you have a problem with abortion, don't have on, or use birth control. Period. After that, step off because other people's sex lives and what they decide to do with their bodies have nothing to do with you. The idea that "Oh, sure, women are allowed to have an abortion or two, but we (men?) need to cap it after a while," smacks of paternalism at best, and authoritarianism at worse. Post-capitalist society better have abortion on demand and without apology, or else we have a problem.

pgh2a
Offline
Joined: 9-12-06
Jun 30 2007 14:40
Quote:
hardtokill wrote:
Here is a question: my girlfriend's friend is on her third abortion and she is 20. While I am probably taking the moral high ground a bit here, I am of the opinion that ok that is enough - eventually you have to start telling them to wear a condom or start taking a pill. What are people's thoughts on this? This is of course assuming in a post-capitalist society that women are still going to be wanting serial abortions. Endless abortions or abortion cap? Yes I am being serious.

I can't really think of anyone who would want to have endless abortions. From what I understand, it is not a pleasant experience, nor is it a particularly healthy procedure for the woman. Therefore, if I had a close friend who was actually using abortion as their form of birth control (generally an unusual situation), I might say something to them based upon the health aspects -- for them.

Devrim's picture
Devrim
Offline
Joined: 15-07-06
Jun 30 2007 16:03

Am I the only person here who thinks that Flint, and Rise are shockingly stupid, and naive to be posting their pictures up on a libertarian communist board on the internet?
Devrim

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Jun 30 2007 16:08
Devrim wrote:
Am I the only person here who thinks that Flint, and Rise are shockingly stupid, and naive to be posting their pictures up on a libertarian communist board on the internet?
Devrim

At a certain point in the US you're already burned and everything you do is above ground.

hardtokill
Offline
Joined: 31-05-07
Jun 30 2007 17:15

Yeah but endless abortions? That is the question. Is society going to provide abortion without questions? I haven't made up my mind on it yet, but it does cost money and time and resources. Actually I probably am going with the endless abortions over the coathanger option. Nah, okay I definitely am. If she needs the abortion then it is not my place to say you can't have it.

But on a side note, come on, a woman telling a man to wear a condom is not too patriarchial or oppresive to the woman in my opinion. Put a rubber on or you're not putting it in me. How fucking hard is that? Rape excluded, she has total control of her body and should exercise that control.

rise's picture
rise
Offline
Joined: 11-01-07
Jun 30 2007 18:19

Devrim,

I'm already a very "public" figure. Im on the executive of a union local with 5000 members, and I've spoken and numerous events and demonstrations with thousands of people in attendance. I did a small speaking tour of the east coast of the US and canada for NEFAC last year. My name and image are publicly available on my union's website.

If anyone was inclined to get "information" on me, the cat is already out of the bag. Besides that, I have nothing to hide - I support my politics because they are revolutionary and credible -- I'm not embarassed by them. I also recognize that if any intelligence agency or law enforcement organization or red squad wants my photo or personal information, they alreayd have it, for sure.

rise's picture
rise
Offline
Joined: 11-01-07
Jun 30 2007 18:21

acutally im only embarassed by people who claim to share my politics, or claim to be anarchists, like some of the people who post on here, and the people who run the local food not bombs.

Devrim's picture
Devrim
Offline
Joined: 15-07-06
Jun 30 2007 19:18
rise wrote:
Devrim,

I'm already a very "public" figure. Im on the executive of a union local with 5000 members, and I've spoken and numerous events and demonstrations with thousands of people in attendance. I did a small speaking tour of the east coast of the US and canada for NEFAC last year. My name and image are publicly available on my union's website.

If anyone was inclined to get "information" on me, the cat is already out of the bag. Besides that, I have nothing to hide - I support my politics because they are revolutionary and credible -- I'm not embarassed by them. I also recognize that if any intelligence agency or law enforcement organization or red squad wants my photo or personal information, they alreayd have it, for sure.

Whatever, it is bad security practice.

Security concerns are important. This doesn't mean that we should have an excess of paranoia. There are times when it is obviously necessary to be in situations where your security will be compromised, posting a picture of yourself, and you girlfriend on the internet isn't one of them.

Even if people have your photo, and personal information there is no need to give them another connection for nothing.

Also, even if you have a relatively high profile, it doesn't mean that everyone else does, and that some people are not stupid enough to copy you. It develops a bad general culture of security.

We will probably have another coup late this year, or early next year. After the coup before last over 600,000 people were arrested. It gives you perspective.

Devrim

welshboy's picture
welshboy
Offline
Joined: 11-05-06
Jun 30 2007 21:19
Quote:
Rape excluded, she has total control of her body and should exercise that control.

That's not taking into account some of the really fucked up power relations that occur in modern society. Physical rape is not the only circumstance where a woman can lose control over her own body. All sorts of psychological factors can come into play. Whilst coercing someone into not using protection is not rape it is taking away a womans choice.
Probably could have said that better.

Nate's picture
Nate
Offline
Joined: 16-12-05
Jun 30 2007 22:06

Yes. Endless abortions, in terms of institutional arrangements. Let's say some woman became an abortion hobbyist, because she liked to hurt the men she got pregnant with. That would be morally problematic, put mildly. It'd also be very rare and unlikely. Any institutional measures which would serve to prevent that would ultimately end up doing more harm than good. That is, the possibility of endless abortions is better than any institutional limits that would prevent this. Beyond that, why not talk to your friend instead of talking about her on the internet?

j.rogue
Offline
Joined: 8-04-07
Jul 1 2007 04:39

Revol, if you are all worried that women are going to have abortions or that they have HIV then DON'T FUCK THEM WITHOUT CONDOMS. See? There ya go. Take some responsibility for your behavior rather than moralize about hypothetical people whose lives you feel the need to pass judgement on. Especially since you have no concept of their experiences.
Also, that calling women who have had multiple abortions irresponsible assholes thing? You do realize who you sound like, right?
Ugh, whatever.

Flint
Offline
Joined: 17-12-05
Jul 1 2007 05:40
Devrim wrote:
Whatever, it is bad security practice.

Security concerns are important. This doesn't mean that we should have an excess of paranoia. There are times when it is obviously necessary to be in situations where your security will be compromised, posting a picture of yourself, and you girlfriend on the internet isn't one of them.

Even if people have your photo, and personal information there is no need to give them another connection for nothing.

Also, even if you have a relatively high profile, it doesn't mean that everyone else does, and that some people are not stupid enough to copy you. It develops a bad general culture of security.

We will probably have another coup late this year, or early next year. After the coup before last over 600,000 people were arrested. It gives you perspective.

Devrim

I think I'm already burnt (damn! did they take down my picture?). My partner and I have been together for over a decade, share a bank account, car, have leases together, are benefactors on life insurance and what not. I think the state might have enough to figure out the connection. (She also got an illustration credit in my last article). Last two articles I published under my legal name.

A lot of folks in NEFAC have already been arrested because of their political activity; though none have ever been disappeared or done serious time. We had a pretty high profile case with some arrests due to anti-fascist activity a while ago, and the details of the folks involved got shared with neo-nazis and the internet at large. That's just how it is.

NEFAC is not an underground organization, and most of us have stopped pretending that it is. Most of the aliases are dropping away to. If someone wants to be doing underground activity or keep their identity masked from the state (or even an employer) they might want to stay as far away from NEFAC as possible.

If you're worried about repression, by all means post under an alias and don't let anything personal out; and keep your personal life as separate from your political life.

I wonder though... is it the completely marginal position of libertarian communism as a political current in most places that encourages libertarian communists to think that some weak security measure will protect them. On one hand it seems like hubris to think that their politics or activity is so potent that the state is going to spend time smashing you down; and the other it seems like an acknowledgement of the marginality or impracticality of their politics at the current moment that they don't feel that they actually have to be public with their politics. Obviously, states sweeping up 600,000 people who have anything to do with "communists" are dealing with a very different situation from where large scale repression hasn't happened in many decades.

---

Going to delete my myspace profile now!

Devrim's picture
Devrim
Offline
Joined: 15-07-06
Jul 1 2007 06:25

I made a split for the photo discusion as it is very off topic:
http://libcom.org/forums/organise/photos-security
Devrim

bastarx
Offline
Joined: 9-03-06
Jul 1 2007 09:59
revol68 wrote:
yep it's not something i'd imagine as common and in the few cases it does happen the women in question is likely to have alot more wider problems.

I read years ago that in the USSR it wasn't uncommon for women to have had 20 or more abortions as there was essentially no contraception available.

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Jul 1 2007 14:58
Quote:
Firstly, what people do with their bodies does have something to do with all of us, someone with HIV or other sexually transmitted diseases and engages in unprotected sex is an anti social cunt, secondly in the case of an abortion, the women doesn't carry it out herself and so she automatically brings others into it.
Now I believe in a womens right to choose from a pragmatic viewpoint , afterall what are we going to do, lock them up, leave them to take coat hangers to themselves, force them through a pregnancy. But such a political position in no ways stops me from thinking a women on her seventh abortion (and i know of one) is a utter irresponsible arsehole. Likewise someone who repeatedly cheats on all their partners is not above judgement, they might well be beyond a political/societal intervention but judgement they aren't. Afterall don't we do this in everyday life, warning our friends what certain people are like?

As for men telling women what to do with their bodies, this is utter shite, don't you think many women would have something to say about abortion being used as a defacto contraceptive, I mean haven't you noticed that pro life organisations have an awful lot of women involved.

Agree totally with this standpoint.

I guess what Revol is saying about "excessive" multiple abortions is that social pressure/sanction, gossip and the like will try to enforce some limit of abortions in a communist society. Hopefully sex-ed and the taboo on speaking frankly and openly about sex, contraception, abortions and the health implications of various sexual practices has changed a lot come communism. I would assume that endless multiple abortions would be very low, and to be honest I do not think this is such a huge problem now (or even would be if abortion was completely a-ok now). It just sounds like a pro-life straw man argument constructed as bait that liberal pro-choicers swallow hook and line.

Nate's picture
Nate
Offline
Joined: 16-12-05
Jul 2 2007 01:16
Khawaga wrote:
try to enforce some limit of abortions in a communist society

I don't like the point when it's phrased this way. I'm against any limits at all on abortions. That said, if multiple abortions in some case were the sign of a problem, then that problem should be addressed, but I think that this is highly unlikely to actually happen. And I don't see why it should be posed as "limiting abortion."

Khawaga's picture
Khawaga
Offline
Joined: 7-08-06
Jul 2 2007 16:29

Point taken Nate, the phrasing is a bit poor. Of course no one should be forced into having abortions or from having abortions, women (and men!) must have complete autonomy over their bodies. So no one should be denied abortions if they so want to. In any case I do think it will be, such a big problem. The number of women that have abortions right, left and center is surely very insignificant.

redtwister
Offline
Joined: 21-03-05
Jul 5 2007 03:02
thugarchist wrote:
Flint wrote:
This the most recent picture of me.

(She always looks better than me!)

((Will this get me on redwatch?))

I've never understood why everyone wears suits and nice dresses to NEFAC conferences.

Looks like Rainforest Cafe in Towson...

Chris

Flint
Offline
Joined: 17-12-05
Jul 5 2007 16:17
redtwister wrote:
Looks like Rainforest Cafe in Towson...

Chris

Good guess, but you are totally wrong.

Nulono
Offline
Joined: 29-04-09
May 1 2009 20:15
MJ wrote:
Lucas, would you be more willing to work with left wing people if we accepted your opposition to abortion?

I would be able to settle for not being labeled a reactionary, or a chauvinist, or anti-choice, or assumed to be religious, or any of the other litmus-test-ical [pun not intended] stereotyping and name-calling.