I could’ve had an abortion over 14 years ago, but didn’t. My then ex-partner at first pressured me into getting one (we were dirt poor), until I complained to his grandmother and church, and boy did he change his tune in a heartbeat.
This is why I advocate for access to abortion, that governments don’t have the right to interfere with our healthcare, regardless of the issue. This includes abortion, access to SRS, even if we want hysterectomies and vasectomies at the age 18 because we know at that age we don’t want kids.
However, one major issue I have is when radical leftists say that “men should not be deciding women’s health”. Not only does it reek of the misandry, but it ostracizes transsexual men like me, especially those of us who are victims of corrective rape. I am equally a man as any other—if these radicals carve out an exclusion for trans men to be able to voice our opinion because we have or had vaginas, then that means they don’t see us as real men; they dismiss our transitions and our experiences as men, and still see us as “women”—and what if a trans man, regardless if he had children or not, is pro-life? Is he still allowed to say something at the table?
Using religious arguments to deny access to abortion infringes on separation of church and state, while also prioritizing the views of one religion (or faction of a religion) over those of others. Some religions state personhood only starts at the first breath or quickening (when a woman first feels the fetus in utero), so abortion isn’t murder. Not to mention, some religions do dictate reproductive rights, like the Satanic Temple, Reform Judaism, and many heathen/pagan/folk religions. Doctors, nurses, pharmacists, and other medical specialists have no right to enforce their religion upon those they treat; if their religion makes them that selective, they should give up their medical license and preach from pulpits instead!
Insurances should allow the option for young people to get vasectomies, hysterectomies, and tubal ligations at the age of 18, instead of somewhere in the mid-30s for someone with no children, as forms of birth control. Some people adamantly know they don’t want children, because they know it’s just too damn expensive anymore; just like with many other standards of care, of course it would require several visits with a specialist just to be sure.
(Biological, non-trans) men should also have the option to walk away from an unplanned pregnancy, too, in the spirit of “gender equality”. If an unplanned pregnancy happens and a woman wants to keep the child but the father has made clear his intentions he never wanted to have children, he should not be financially responsible. If she can have sex and not have to live with consequences thanks to abortion, he should be allowed the same option. It’s hypocritical and archaic, otherwise, to give women the privilege to abort or even give up children under safe-haven laws, but expect the man she bred with to still have to foot the bill.
If insurances are covering birth control for women, they should also be covering those same condoms, spermicide, and other options for men. If women can have get theirs for free, why can’t men?
I am also calling out all the “pro-lifers” here who aren’t pushing for higher taxes and a budget to cover the costs of these unplanned pregnancies. For the states trying to make abortion illegal, they damn well better be making available the financial resources to provide for the these kids, especially as they will be coming from impoverished families. So that these kids have housing. That they have clothing. That they have access to food, schooling, medical services, daycare so their parent(s) can work. That they have access to scholarships if they come from poor and disadvantaged families. That they increase funds for adoption and foster agencies if for the people who gave birth but don’t want to raise the kids. That if the children were born with such severe medical issues that a parent may have otherwise aborted because of the financial and daily burdens, that they can get the medical, social, educational care they need to thrive.
Many of us who are pros choice don’t want us our taxes to go up because of unwanted or unplanned children.
If you are that much in the ”pro-life” camp, put your money where your mouth is, and make sure your government representatives raise taxes and have the funds available to accommodate all these kids, if your local or state government restricts access to abortion.
If the Supreme Court rules to deny guaranteed access to abortion, women will have to take unnecessary measures to make sure they don’t get pregnant. At least there’s pills now they can access; the days of back-alley abortions are over with. There’s women networking to help those in states who ban it, to access it in states that still allow it. (Not fond of my taxpayer money covering abortions for women from out of state, but better than paying many more times that to cover the costs of living for unplanned children.) Until we can get the Supreme Court to undo this ridiculous ruling, we have to do with the current reality—and tell bigots to stop shoving their views down others’ throats.
Update 11/26/2022: Fuck trying to take on a “libertarian”/Republican take on life. People have the right to bodily autonomy; the government has no right to ban access to abortion, or to interfere in the conversation between patients and doctors. Of course, this still means I’m against “health mandates” like requiring us to wear masks, to keep consistent with my belief in bodily autonomy.
You must log in to post a comment.