Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

On Being Pro Choice and Male

I'm a white male, with Welsh, Greek and German roots, blue eyes, you name it... my God, I couldn't be whiter if Casper was ejaculating all over my supple rear. Forget the music I listen to, or the things that I do; really, when it comes to just being viewed as a number, I don't get any more stereotypically WHITE.

I'm not alone; we're the majority in this country, after all. And the last time I checked, thanks to some wonderful (heh) foresight by our forefathers, we've made just about all of the rules, including the ones that only we could vote, and that we could own other human beings as property.

Naturally, we've had a "do-over" on some of those, especially that whole slavery bit... that was a hoot, eh? The blacks got their equal rights, women were able to fight for equal rights and equal pay (in most places, though nowadays, I'm not seeing old fashioned feminism anymore; it's either "RAWR MAN KILLER" or "As long as I get to watch CSI, I don't care what happens", and nothing in between), and the playing field, more or less, is more even than it's ever been.

So excuse me if I don't understand why the fuck we still think we can decide what a woman can and can't do with her body.

My mother miscarried twice before having me. After me, she - being about as fertile as a fucking dandelion - had four more that she had to abort. The first one was choice; she didn't have the money for another kid. But the last three were health reasons; she flat-out would have died had she had those children, and by then, she WAS ready for another child. So to anyone that wants to abolish Roe vs. Wade and make it totally illegal, or put Draconian rules and standards on it that would make it virtually impossible for someone that DID need an abortion to be able to get one before the end of the second trimester, really, I have no respect for you, because if you people would have had your way, my mother would be dead, and as I never met my father until I was 10 years old, I'd be an orphan.

COULD my mother have aborted me? Of course. Would I be sad about it? No; I'd be non-existent. I wouldn't know a thing. There seems to be an image of a foetus screaming in pain, and taking memories to the grave that I don't understand, and it seems like little more than pandering.

And why is this? Why is it that you want to tell a woman what she can and can't have in her body? There's two reasons: the debate of when life "begins", and the big one of all, religion, or more specifically, AMERICA'S religion; as a country, we're just as radical and fundamental as we deride Islam for being, we just don't blow up AS many doctors, or buildings; in short, God's lost a bit off his fastball over the years. The first point has been debated ad nauseum over the years by people more qualified than me to make that determination, so I don't really think I need to go there. But the second point is asinine.

I am not Christian. You are? Fucking bravo. But I refuse to allow someone else's belief on how we should be affect how we act. Now, what I'm about to say is going to make people like Dale and Wilfor flinch, and to those people, I'm going to do something rare and apologize in advance, because they're good Christians, and it feels wrong to bunch them in with what I'm about to say, and Wilfor's had issues with my opinion on the Bible for some time. But the fact of the matter is that throughout history, religion has been used to control masses of people and get them to do the biding of another man for as long as it's been around. It's very easy for a man telling another man to do something to be usurped; he's just a man. But for a man to tell another man that there's a being up there that could give him happiness - or pain - forever, that's something that has just enough plausible doubt, depending on the education level of the person in question, for a person to go "maybe...", and possibly being taken in. After all, what man can possibly quantify, in his mind, forever? To me, forty-five minutes in line is practically an eternity, now multiply that times infinity + infinity + one? I could see our LONG ago ancestors being scared straight by this ideal, and let's just say they didn't have Wikipedia back then.

And as they grew up and had children of their own, these teachings manifested themselves in the children at a very impressionable age, and just like how it's convenient to put a child in front of the television just to shut him up, it became convenient to say to do just about anything because God said so. Do good in school, little Timmy, or God won't be happy, and he knows everything you do at every point in life! In a way, it hearkened back to the eras of the Greek gods, where children's questions would be answered by saying there was a God of whatever. Now, take the self-righteousness, add in the belief that it's OK to "convert" someone, and leaders willing to exploit the inevitable mob mentality (remember, the Crusades were a political war fought over religious auspices), and you have a large group of people that will do anything in the belief that their time on Earth is temporary, that the true heaven comes after one dies, and that it's noble to die for a cause and to be a martyr.

So where am I going with this inane rambling? This is the exact mentality that brings us most of our current debate on Roe vs. Wade, and a woman's right to her own body. In the eyes of most religions, a woman's job is to mind the house, bear children for her man, and serve her man. Nowhere in this is "individualistic thought" part of the equation, and the only thing I'm thankful for is that Christianity isn't as nuts about this sort of thing as Islam, or the Asian cultures. But there's still an underlying current of a woman being there to serve a man is still alive nowadays. It's alive in the vast majority of domestic abuse cases being man against woman, just as much as it's alive in the fact that a white politician feels it's OK to tell a woman how she can treat her body, and to cast doubt on the virility on those that disagree... all in the name of Jesus, of course. And apple pie, because somewhere along the line, Jesus cast his lot with the Republican party of America. If a woman wants to have an abortion, she's a whore, harlot, murderer, whatever coarse word you want to use. If a woman wants the CHOICE to have one, she's not Christian (itself a negative tone), or any of the above words. Too much of a demand to fall in line or be outcast for my liking, and it comes under the same underlying premise: God says it's OK for us to essentially own our women, for men are the breadwinners.

If I want to own a woman, I'll run down to VIP and get a blow-up doll, thank you. They even have little Hentai ones that aren't QUITE as creepy, but that's like saying Dahmer wasn't QUITE as creepy as Manson.

Aileen and I have been dating for almost two years now. She's still a virgin. Why is this? It's not because she's a cold fish, trust me on that. It's because we made a choice - how about that! - that pregnancy was not something we wanted to risk just yet; it was a major part of our ongoing decision. I don't "expect" her to "put out" or anything like that. We decided, even with abortions being legal in all three states of ours (New York, Connecticut and Massachusetts), that it wasn't worth the risk yet. If we are smart enough to make that choice... aren't we smart enough to decide what to do if something does go wrong? Or if her life's in jeopardy?

America is a "free" country, we're told oftentimes. Usually, we're told of our symbiotic freedom as we're being asked to sacrifice our real freedoms - protections against search and seizure, freedom of privacy, freedom of speech and choice, etc. - in the name of counter-terrorism; after all, we're so "free" we can't even defend ourselves, and have to have our government do it for us. If we're so "free", then we need to go all the way with that: we cannot take a woman's right to have an abortion away from her. She needs to have the choice to do what she pleases. THAT is true freedom. And we cannot allow some religious zealot to play to the evil in our hearts in the name of "greater good", because I know that as a collective, we're smarter than that.

I don't want anyone - man or woman - telling me what I can do to my testicles. It's not right for me or my kind to tell a woman what to do with her vagina, or her ovaries. Simple as that. And even beyond what's right and moral? The Supreme Court ruled on it already, and I'm not about to say that court in '73 was "worse" than the one we have now.

I support Blog for Choice Day, on the 35th anniversary of Roe vs. Wade


Jan. 26th, 2008 01:30 am (UTC)
That and I think he forgot that women know how to read and we're allowed to have opinions now. :
Jan. 26th, 2008 01:32 am (UTC)
Nah, I don't think he's that misogynistic; he's got a Catholic school background colliding with his own ideals. He's young, he'll get it eventually.
Jan. 26th, 2008 01:42 am (UTC)
I'm actually agnostic, but I don't think the church is completely off track here. This is going to come down to basically the same thing it always has - the definition of 'living thing'. Personally if it has DNA and the ability to grow - even if it requires a 'host' of sorts, it's alive. I'll argue that to a fault. Since I'm against killing that places me by default against MOST abortion, death sentences, wars, and all the like. But note the word "most". There's times where it's unavoidable, but if it's avoidable, I see it as unacceptable to do it.