Is a woman in a video posted in /r/PublicFreakout the poster child of modern feminism or just SRS? (np.reddit.com)
SubredditDrama
22 ups - 0 downs = 22 votes
188 comments submitted at 18:00:24 on Jul 10, 2014 by guest4000
Is a woman in a video posted in /r/PublicFreakout the poster child of modern feminism or just SRS? (np.reddit.com)
SubredditDrama
22 ups - 0 downs = 22 votes
188 comments submitted at 18:00:24 on Jul 10, 2014 by guest4000
Why were gay men protesting abortion?
sometimes^my^^keyboard^^^types^^^^shit^^i^know^it^shouldn't
EDIT: Holy shit, I was being facetious and it spawned relatively civil discussion regarding an idea I was using as an EZ punchline. AND at the time of this edit, I'm not even in the negative for karma, even though I said gay and abortion in the same sentence! Good on you, SRD.
I'm pro-choice, but why shouldn't a gay man protest against abortion?
Cause it takes the removal to basically another level. Men protesting abortion are trying to weigh in on something that doesn't affect them directly. Gay men protesting abortion are trying to weigh in on something that doesn't even affect them indirectly - they're presumably never even going to knock up a woman who may want to abort the fetus.
I suppose yes it's not direct, but I think most people object to abortion because they believe (incorrectly in my view) that it is murder.
If you genuinely believe that then you are going to protest whether or not it directly effects you because you believe children are being murdered.
Edit: Actually, thinking about this I think it would be worse if a gay person who was pro-life didn't protest. If he was like, 'I think abortion is murder but fuck it what do I care, I'm never having kids. I'll leave everyone to it and let people murder them all seeing as it won't ever effect me directly.'
Yeah, that's the disconnect. They think it's child murder and other folks are like "Fuck you it's not now step the hell off from something that has nothing to do with you".
Right, but I was asking why it's worse for a gay man to protest than for anyone else. I think if you genuinely believe kids are being killed, then it's noble to protest against it, especially if you aren't affected directly.
And I just explained why people who don't believe abortion is child-murder would think that.
I know, but it doesn't really answer my question. Why does not being directly affected by it mean you shouldn't protest? I mean I am someone who doesn't believe abortion is child-murder and I dont think that.
Because most people don't look at it from the other side. They look at it from their side, which is that a gay man would have absolutely nothing to do with any woman's pregnancy and so shouldn't concern himself with it.
Fair enough, that's quite a narrow minded way of looking at things though.
More Comments - Click Here
Wouldn't being "detached" make the individual's opinion more objective?
Let's ask psychologists about quantum physics and physicists about bipolarism. They're so far removed, so they're more objective.
For fucking real, dude?
"Removed" in this context means "does not personally experience and is not at risk of experiencing X" - not "lacks expertise on the subject."
I literally think that a dude that spends his time busting a nut in and on other dudes and can never get pregnant or ever get anyone pregnant lacks a fuckton of expertise on the subject of pregnancy.
A few questions:
(1) Why do you need "expertise" on pregnancy to have an opinion about abortion? I would think that a knowledge of the basics is all that is required.
(2) What is preventing a gay guy from obtaining actual expertise on pregnancy? Do you believe that gay men are incapable of becoming Ob/Gyns? Do you believe gay men are incapable of learning basic biology?
(3) Is a woman an "expert" on pregnancy just because she has the ability to get pregnant? Christ - I drive my car every day - that does not make me an expert mechanic.
Because the idea of having a kid growing inside you is a little more personal and relevant when you have the equipment to get pregnant, or have sex in a way that could get someone pregnant.
Notice that I don't say gay guys with obvious medical expertise. Just rando gay dudes.
No, but that probably makes her judgment on pregnancy and abortion, even if I don't agree with it, a little more relevant than someone who can't get pregnant and will never get someone pregnant.
The issue with respect to abortion is bodily autonomy vs. the sanctity of human life. Those are the two interests. The ability to get pregnant does not give women any additional insight or knowledge on those two topics. Arguments should be judged on their merits - not based on the identity of the person making them.
I also find that sentiment highly ironic coming from you - as you tend to weigh in on lots of men's rights issues....
No.
So, you believe that having a personal interest in the outcome makes someone more objective?
Really?
You do know that judges recuse themselves from cases where they have a personal interest, right?
You realize that the ability to easily dismiss negative outcomes for people involved doesn't make one "objective", right? It makes you ignorant and biased.
> You realize that the ability to easily dismiss negative outcomes for people involved doesn't make one "objective", right?
If someone can easily "dismiss negative outcomes for people involved" - then they are making decisions based wholly on what they THINK instead of what they FEEL - which is basically the definition of objective.
Your argument is that you need a personal stake in a subject in order to have an opinion on it - which is a completely absurd position.
> It makes you ignorant and biased.
Their opinion may be ignorant (depending on how much they've researched the issue) but biased? How? Biased in whose favor? Biased against what/who?
Is every straight person ignorant and biased regarding gay marriage?
The next time I argue about "legal paternal surrender" (male financial abortion) - can I count that you will stay out of the discussion due to your bias and ignorance?
>Is every straight person ignorant and biased regarding gay marriage?
They may be. And even if they aren't, straight people have no business telling gay people what to do with their lives. Same with men and abortion, since cis men are never going to be pregnant, so they honestly shouldn't go around telling cis women what they should & shouldn't do with their bodies.
> Same with men and abortion, since cis men are never going to be pregnant, so they honestly shouldn't go around telling cis women what they should & shouldn't do with their bodies.
Ok. But if that's the case, then cis women should not go around telling men what to do with their wallets. So, men should have the right to legal paternal surrender (financial abortion).
However, the issue is not what "women can do with their bodies" - the issue is what rights, if any and when, a fetus has. People who oppose abortion do not oppose it because they think women should not be able to do what they want - they just think that the fetus' right to life trumps the woman's rights on that issue.
More Comments - Click Here
Your screen name mocks victims of reproductive coercion, which is a form of sexual assault. I'd say that's easily dismissing negative outcomes, ignorant, biased, and offensive.
Ah yes, the epidemic that is women stealing used condoms out of the trash.
I honestly don't think this one knows what they think. I tried talking to them earlier and didn't get much sense.