How threatened by women’s rights do you have to be to use “your body, my choice” as a slogan?

[MzAsh]

Is it just a weak attempt to get a rise out of those who know better?

[MisterWack]

Definitely feeling threatened about your clutch onto power over the “inferior gender”.

Women are powerful, dignified, and incredible people because they are human. Human beings are supposed to look after one another, uplift one another, open doors and not tear others down….

These people need to understand when you are raped, sexually abused, impregnated by incest, suffer a loss through miscarriage, at high risk pregnancy…. You are what the majority deem to be a victim. A victim dealing with key issues that need key solutions via women’s reproductive healthcare. Now you are given two options, you can support and uplift the victims of such atrocities, heartbreaks, and life threatening conditions or you can demonize them as ‘sinners’…. Sadly people take the demonizing route instead of having an ounce of compassion.

These men (sometimes women) who use this kind of “Pro Life” language, it is not Pro Life in its simplest form, it is truly Anti Woman. Anti Woman because when you say “stay down! submit! we control you!”, that is very Anti Choice.

[MisterWack]

And to those who didn’t get the message: Pro Choice is the Choice to handle it, the way you see fit as a woman victim. You can talk to a priest, you can talk to a rabbi, you can also choose to talk to your doctor and get what’s necessary done too. When you say “State’s Right to control” & “Pro Life” & “Your body, my choice”…. You are definitely Anti Choice.

[Shiprex]

I don't like the phrasing one bit as it sounds aggressive and creepy. In some ways you could say men have experienced this throughout history of being forced to go to war for nation states. However, I don't especially find that a particularly happy pill to swallow either.

My thoughts would be that since this is aimed at promoting abortion restrictions then the idea that a law should be brought out that every conception should come with a responsibility on the state to support that growing citizen through state funds. The woman should be funded from conception through to birth by the tax payers since THEY are forcing her to carry the child. Employers perhaps should continue to pay full salaries and allow parental leave to ensue when it's necessary as well as until the child is 18 years old after being brought up by the employed (paid as a parent) by the employer to raise a child. THAT way the conservatives can have their cake and eat it. The parent who remains home should not receive increments in the salary they earn while at home but should at least match inflation rate rises to bring up the taxpayer funded children.

THIS IS NOT an infringement on anyones rights only passing on the responsibility to employers and taxpayers for the choices of their lawmakers.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

I saw some guy send a message ending with that phrase to a girl on twitter, threatening rape and violence with a whole tongue-in-cheek vibe. She sent the screenshot to his school, directly emailed his teachers, and posted everything on twitter. Immediately, he comes back apologizing, begging to take it back because he was “being edgy” and “it was all I could think of for a joke” but she didn’t seem to respond beyond a “you made your bed now lie in it” attitude.

[CupcakeTheDestroyer]

In essence, if you give them consequences for their actions, they’re suddenly no longer misogynists and are model citizens

[MemeSupreme]

well do they mean that LITERALLY or is it something else... like it's divisive but attention getting so im curious what it actually is

i hope it's not some chronically online dork shit lol

[OlderAndWiser]

Your question assumes that such statements are motivated by men feeling threatened. You have no idea how such men actually think, particularly since they think so differently from you. It is simply your dishonest attempt to control the story being told.

Why don't you ASK people if they have made that statement and, if so, what motivates them to do that?

[beefcakebradybatson]

"Your body, my choice" is a r*pe incitement!!!

[OlderAndWiser]

@beefcakebradybatson That is one potential meaning, but that is irrelevant to my response.

[OlderAndWiser]

It is permissible to use the word "rape" on this site.

[crmoore]

It does sound like inflammatory rhetoric, but what does the movement behind the slogan actually consist or? I mean BLM sounded like a good cause but it consisted of a lot of violence and greedy financial behavior (throwing house parties and purchasing mansions, to name a few examples).

For example, if their opinion is that at some point the fetus is not her body, it's the baby's body and her body is just connected to it, and considering that the fetus was produced by her eggs and his sperm, the baby is both of their's, not just hers, and thus, she doesn't have the right to terminate it against the wishes of him. That's not an unreasonable statement.

That being said, I do think they could choose a better slogan. But if we're being fair, women saying "my body my choice" is a very clear misrepresentation of what "her body" is (or is not).

And considering people will assume otherwise, to clarify, I'm not saying the baby is a baby at the point of conception, it's just an egg and a sperm cell and soon after it's just a clump of cells, not a human or a baby.

But I digress. Do you know what the point of the movement is, behind the inflammatory slogan?

[goaded]

Wait, so you're suggesting some people took advantage of a good slogan to do questionable things, but the people behind this disgusting slogan might be "good"?

Force a woman to act as an incubator for months on end because you spent a night together? Disgusting.

[crmoore]

@goaded Well I'm not sure what you mean by "questionable things" unless you just mean something along the lines of your incubator comment. But yes, there can be good people behind a "disgusting slogan".

Firstly, 'disgusting' is objective. I'm sure people on the right would argue "my body my choice" is a disgusting slogan because from their perspective they're killing a baby. To them, that's disgusting. Would you say "there are good people behind the 'my body my choice' slogan"? I assume you'd say yes, and if so, then there you have it. There are "good people behind a disgusting slogan."

I'd also point out that a bad slogan can have good people behind it who were manipulated into doing so. Not to mention good people can be mean at times. Additionally, good people can be bad at verbalization. (Though to be clear I'm not suggesting that's what is happening here. I'm answering whether "people behind this disgusting slogan might be 'good,'" emphasis on might)

And I could turn your "force" remark around and accuse you of being the disgusting one. "Force a man's baby to die leaving him to grieve for the rest of his life just because you spent a night together? Disgusting." So now that you and I have both been accused of being disgusting, which one of us is? Is it one or the other? Both? None?

I know it's normal to say "despite the entity in question being the sum of both his and her biological matter, a woman should have the sole right to cease the life of that living matter," but it was also normal to say that "black people are slaves," or that "gay people are demons." So considering that what is "normal" isn't necessarily morally sound, I ask you to toss out your preconceived notions and verbally rationalize why a woman should be able to terminate something that is only partially hers.

[goaded]

"So now that you and I have both been accused of being disgusting, which one of us is?"
It's obviously you.

Would you be fine with a law that forced fathers to take and literally carry their newborn child for six months? Not put them down for a second in all that time?

"Your body, my choice" says clearly the woman has no choice over her body, but men do. That's disgusting.

The belief that a fertilised egg is a person is a completely religious one, and a modern one at that; nobody knew about mammalian ova until 200 years ago. You want the government to impose a religious belief on people who don't share it. That's unconstitutional. And disgusting.

"Force a man's baby to die leaving him to grieve for the rest of his life just because you spent a night together? Disgusting." A disgusting lie. For that to be true, the baby would have to have been born. Abortions are pre-birth, usually more than six months before the due date. Later ones are an end of life decision by the undeniable next of kin.

[RainbowMarinade]

@crmoore
LoL @ “only partially hers.” 😂🤣
You neglect to consider her contribution to the growth and birth verse that of the man.
Fair to say her part in this is significantly more involved.
Why is this NEVER part of the conversation? What she must endure for something that is only “partially hers.”
I guess when you minimize what she must experience, it’s easier to claim the situation is 50/50. 🙄

[crmoore]

@goaded "It's obviously you." Oh, okay. Well you said it so it must be true. I guess that's the end of it considering you didn't verbalize your rationale.

If what your question boils down to is "if men could get pregnant would you be of the same opinion"? Then yes, I would. Considering that the fertilized egg is not just his then if he wanted to abort it and she didn't then I would say he should not be able to abort it since it's not solely his.

But if you genuinely want to know about "holding a newborn child for six months," I'm not sure I have an answer right now, I'd have to think about it, but the first thought that pops up in my head is "not putting them down for a second in all that time" isn't an accurate comparison to women's pregnancy because the baby is not in their hands for six months, so it's not that they're "unable to put them down at any point throughout their pregnancy", like their hands are free. So asking a man to carry a newborn for six months and not putting them down is not equivalent. Though I do obviously acknowledge the burden of being pregnant, but I'm also of the opinion that they willingly entered that agreement knowing that pregnancy could be a result and I do think that in the circumstance that one of the two individuals wants to keep it, it should be kept.

"'Your body, my choice' says clearly the woman has no choice over her body, but men do. That's disgusting."
Yeah, I agree, as I've already stated I think the phrase is incredibly off-putting and inappropriate.

[crmoore]

@goaded And it seems like you're attributing other people's words to me. At no point have I asserted that "a fertilized egg is a person". I am of the opinion that throughout pregnancy a human being does gradually come into existence, but I don't think there is a human or consciousness or anything in dire need of being protected for a period of time after conception (as it is merely a clump many cells). I do not believe that a human pops into existence the moment an egg is fertilized. My argument thus far has been about who should have authority over that fertilized egg, not whether it is suddenly a human.

I'll also point out that based on your "a fertilized egg is a person" remark that you've attributed to me, it seems as though you think I'd oppose abortion once an egg is fertilized, and I am not of that opinion. I support early term abortion (though I do detest it being used as a contraceptive, it should be the last resort, not the first option).

I'd also point out that a notion's religious origination is not relevant to its validity. Infidelity, for example, is supposed to be a sin or something. Yet I'd say it's incredibly likely that despite apparently not being religious yourself, you'd consider cheating (distinct from polyamory) to be wrong. I'd also point out that despite its alleged religious origination, that doesn't make it still religious. I, for one, am practically atheist (technically agnostic), and I support at the very least a late-term abortion ban (with exceptions), and my perspective isn't remotely religious. So no, I don't "want the government to impose a religious belief on people who don't share it."

[crmoore]

@goaded While I don't mean to be rude, I get really tired of these assertions you make that quite literally oppose the very fabric of my political perspective. It's like insisting my favorite color is green just because someone who shares a perspective with me said their favorite color is green. I am libertarian, not conservative. I explicitly and passionately support the separation of religion and the state (government). I'm certain I have years of evidence of that posted on this sight alone. And I know you and I have had a number of conversation just like this where you make some assumption about my politics and then you eat your words (pardon the derisiveness). It wasn't that long ago that you were surprised that I defended and advocated for gay rights. I don't know why you don't learn from this. I err on the side of freedom, not err on the side of conservatism.

"A disgusting lie. For that to be true, the baby would have to have been born." That's not true. A baby is not a baby once it has been born. For a very simple but obvious example, a baby is still a baby 1 minute before birth. Whether it was birthed does not determine whether it is a baby.

[crmoore]

@RainbowMarinade Actually, no, I don't neglect to consider that. Just because I didn't mention it here doesn't mean I haven't considered it. Did I mention what I did today at work? No? Well then are you of the opinion that I neglected my duties?

But if you're still of that opinion, feel free to verbalize exactly what I've neglected in considering. And I don't know what you mean about it "never" being a part of the conversation, I've seen this exact point brought up time and time again.

Can you quote me claiming the situation is 50/50? I've already had this conversation several times on this sight. I've made the analogy that if two people get together to make a company, them each co-owning the company, even if one of the co-owners does more work than the other, that doesn't give them the right to terminate the company. Both co-owners of the company would need to agree to make that decision.

[goaded]

"I guess that's the end of it considering you didn't verbalize your rationale."
Only if you ignore the rest of the discussion.

Maybe you should explain your "political perspective" clearly and early instead of waiting until after you've been called out for defending the people using the phrase "your body my choice"? I can think of no decent people using that phrase; even most people whose religious beliefs they want to impose on others by law wouldn't. It's almost as if you regularly troll like this.

"I do think that in the circumstance that one of the two individuals wants to keep it, it should be kept.". OK, that's your opinion, do you think it should be enforced by law? I don't.

What restrictions should that hypothetical law impose on the father? None at all? Can they say "I want her to keep the baby", then walk away?

You compare this matter to cheating in a relationship; that may be immoral, it should never be illegal.

Everything you say seems to be ignoring the fact that the people cheering this attitude want the government to essentially impose a sentence of months, if not years, life or even death on a woman based on the whims of a man who has zero restrictions put on them. Just because contraception didn't work.

It's her body, it should be her choice.

[crmoore]

@goaded

I went back and reread "the rest of the discussion" that you allege details my disgustingness.

You said I was "obviously" disgusting.

Then you asked me if I'd be fine with a law that forced fathers to carry newborns.

Then you quoted the "your body, my choice" (not my words) and stated it was disgusting.

Then you mention "my belief" (not my belief) about "a fertilized egg being a human"

And then lastly you asserted that an aborted baby is not a baby because abortions are pre-birth.

That is all 5 paragraphs of your response, so you did not substantiate why I'm disgusting at any point throughout that response. So it doesn't appear as though "only if you ignore the rest of the discussion" is a valid response.

[crmoore]

@goaded

And it certainly would help if I explain my political perspective clearly, wouldn't it? But if I don't, does that give you the right to fill in the blanks yourself? Obviously not. You're jumping to conclusions. And I do admit, I've been there. I think it's a common mistake in our contemporary, politically charged, highly tribalized society. So I get it, no ill will. But regardless, it's something we should try to avoid.

I'll also note that I have not "defended the people using that phrase," I have questioned their intentions. Once those intentions are revealed I will decide whether I feel they or some of them are worth defending. And I've made no indication of trolling, I think it's silly for you to suggest such. And while I don't like to take it to this extent, but I especially fill this way considering to what degree I have to correct you not only on what my perspectives are but merely on what has or hasn't been said in this conversation. I don't think you're trolling, but if anyone is between you and I, it's certainly not me. Again, I apologize for the derisive rhetoric, but I feel as though it needed to be said.

I'm not quick to state definitively "my opinion should be enforced by law", I'd much prefer many, many open discussions be had over it before it is implemented. But I do err on the side of it being enforced by law, yes. And to be clear, this is an exception to my typical political beliefs. I'm no anarchist but I heavily err on the side of freedom. But obviously, for example, I don't want people to be free to murder or steal property. And in this instance, the property in question is biological matter comprised of both of their living cells (their property). Though, to be clear, I prioritize a country or state's self-sovereignty. If a state or country's citizens say "we want to outlaw it despite freedom" or "we want no laws despite the risks", I support their right to do so. I don't think 'my opinion must be implemented everywhere.'

[crmoore]

@goaded

And similar to what I said above, I'm not stating anything definitive here, the law would obviously need to be discussed and go through iterations, but I don't think it's fair for a man to say "keep it" and walk away. I think it's reasonable that he would need to aid her in her pregnancy. I'd also note that in most cases this is natural, people will get pregnant, love each other, and as a result they support each other. But in cases where they are not are not naturally compelled to do so, I do believe the man should support her throughout the pregnancy. Precisely what that may entail, I'm not sure. But a first-thought might be to financially support her pregnancy. Maybe that includes food, doctor's visits, I'm not sure. Obviously, ideally, the man would support her in any reasonable way she would need, I'm not saying "the man should do the bear minimum", I'm just trying to rationalize what could be legally enforceable and finances seems like an obvious answer. Maybe there's more, I'm not sure.

And to be clear, I did not compare this ordeal to cheating. I used cheating as an example of something being of religious origination and still being a value you hold yourself, despite being devoid of religion. And despite you feeling that way, you do not "want the government to impose a religious belief on people who don't share it." And I do agree that it should not be illegal by default (there may be an argument to be made about contractual repercussions).

[crmoore]

@goaded

I'd point out that not having mentioned details is not ignoring details, if you had mentioned them and then I didn't acknowledge them, that would be ignoring them. But if you feel as though there are critical details I haven't outwardly expressed, feel free to mention them and I would be happy to discuss them with you.

"It's her body, it should be her choice." As already stated, I question that. But repeating myself won't really result in anything. So we'll move on to the following point/question: At what point is it no longer solely her body? At what point is it the baby's body? Would you say on average at 8 and a half months that the baby has a body? Does it share a body? Are they two distinct bodies merely connected?

Respectfully, please answer each of these questions individually (with the last two being an exception, they're kind of the same question)

[goaded]

Nearly a thousand words, ending with a demand I answer your questions, and yet I don't see any answers to my questions. I might get around to answering, but it looks a lot like you delight in avoiding anything that might commit you to any position at all.

Did I miss an answer in there?

[Zack-Bann]

No one is really “threatened” they just know how to fuel the flames
Keep the debate going and keep the masses divided by ensuring neither side ever comes to a common ground solution


Everyone pushing for either one or the other extreme is a perfect way to keep the people docile and controllable

[NYCQuestions1976]

It was clearly a troll job. I support "your body, your choice, your wallet", and urge others to do the same. Individuals should be able to make whatever medical decisions they choose, as long as they don't try to use my money in the form of my tax dollars. I don't ask/require other individuals to pay for my medical decisions, and the same should be true for everyone else. Your medical decisions aren't my business, and my money isn't your property. Problem solved.

[John_Cobretti]

It's just dealing gaslighting with gaslighting.

It's like Trump's victory "Took away your rights"? Ok , we'll just play along

[loveslongnails]

The saddest part about it all, Mz. Ash, is that some women will probably line up to date those dudes. To me, that's the equivalent of saying " Shut the fuck up, open your legs, get back in the kitchen, and make sure my dinner isn't late". Also on a sad note, some guys will say "so what's wrong with that?" I hope these people find one another and can't have kids.

[HighValue]

With all the harm and abuse women have done to men and children for generations, they should lose their rights to custody of children and lose their right to vote/make decisions.

[MzAsh]

Do you believe that historical abuses by some men should similarly disqualify all men from certain rights? Why or why not?

[Snakeyes7]

Nah high value, I don't think that's the answer. The answer is to stop our culture from being manipulated by the powers that want the sexes to hate each other.

Lead our court of public opinion to understand that women are just as susceptible to corruption as men are, and most if not all social issues facing men in the modern world will eventually fade.

[DryGermanGuy]

As Chris Riddell just put it:

[sawno]

I've never seen someone use that slogan, but its certainly been the attitude in corona season.

[Joshydavid25]

It's just a troll really.. Women's "rights" have already been handed back to the states, so really there's not much to talk about..

[Agape93]

They're not threatened, they simply don't care. They want to scare you. Make you fear being raped and controlled even more.

[NathanDavis]

these are not regular people... it's a mix of mentally unstable people + BS propaganda, both

[Unit1]

Sounds just as sensible as the man or bear fad. I don't want to think about either.

[PsychicBoobs]

They grew up on the internet and learned how to get hits. The audience is wider spread than a playground. If they believe in a god they have explaining to do.

[__Nikki__]

They're just angry little boys who are so lonely even negative attention makes them feel good.

[ChefPapiChulo]

That's not the worst you'll find on X, or the internet for that matter. Internet is full of the most disgusting people and they can be that without consequences.

[goaded]

"Your body, my choice" was being screamed by young boys in many schools yesterday. isn't that just disgusting? ↗

[ChefPapiChulo]

@goaded yeah, I've seen people say way worse things. That’s nothing new.

[goaded]

It is new. Same as "International Rape Day".

[Pohjolan]

Its trolling and for a lot of women it isn't their choice.

[Snakeyes7]

Aren’t the people who follow the guy who says that primarily preteens? What men are even saying any of this?

[RedInnocent69]

Right? Like, WTAF? Then bitch about their own freedumb. Talk about whiny snowflakes. As if any of them have ever even read the Constitution..

[noohair]

You should ask how tired men are of hearing we are bad just for being men.

[MzAsh]

Noted, but that’s a different topic

[ErzebethBathory]

That's the kind of trash who feel empowered when someone like Trump is elected.

[thenerdone]

If it was your body, you'd be the one dismembered.

[moneymagnet24]

I agree on bed during sex it's your body but my choice you should be sex slave...

[seeyounexttuesday]

It’s hilarious to watch lefties histrionics being called out.

[Sabretooth]

that punk kid is a window into MAGA'S soul. I hate that kid.

[purplepoppy]

The slogan sounds quite rapey to me.

[Slim57]

It's obvious it's just to get a rise, and it very obviously works

[ShadezMcgee]

Never once heard or seen that slogan.

[goaded]

Now you have. What is your opinion?

The admitted virgin white nationalist and Trump dinner companion Nick Fuentes posted this:

Your body, my choice. Forever.

— Nicholas J. Fuentes (@NickJFuentes) November 6, 2024
twitter.com/.../1854015641218355621

[ShadezMcgee]

@goaded hostile much?

Regardless, I would not call it a slogan because one man decided to out and day something like it. That is the individual speaking for himself. Not the collective whole.

That's my answer to you.

[goaded]

It it was just that it wouldn't be popular.

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/your-body-my-choice

[ShadezMcgee]

@goaded No shit it wouldn't be popular to anyone with morals and a shred of common sense.

We done here?

[NewWaves]

Who used that slogan?

[Dargil]

What about the unborn baby's body?

[Ladsin2]

It's a joke because women don't understand comedy.

[goaded]

I take it that's another "joke"?

[Ladsin2]

@goaded That women don't understand comedy? No, they just legitimately do not.

[beefcakebradybatson]

VERY because you're an INCEL !!!

[shortster]

Sounds like IRL trolling.

[goaded]

Maybe trolling should never have been normalised anywhere.

[shortster]

Well the only thing you can control is your self. So the best thing to do is set a good example and hope others will see it and follow.

[Gwendoline]

Not at all.

[Deserter2]

He even said it was a troll post

[goaded]

Who?

[Dinoparx]

What women's rights?