My Great- Grandfather
My great- grandfather Francisco Carrillo circa 1907. He was a pianist, composer and music teacher.
Medical instruments in vaginas
Over in the Great Debate, I see you're talking about whether "vagina" is a proper word for formal discourse, i.e., the Wisconsin legislature. As a medical term, I agree with the consensus there that it is a proper term. It could even be a required term for certain kinds of legislation. Penal codes, for example, often define rape as any penetration of the vagina without consent. This is to change the law from older definitions, when there had to be "forcible" or "violent" penetration, or possibly even ejaculation. Some states also want to make it clear that it's rape even when the penetration is not with a penis, but with a finger or even a pencil, for example. But for penetration with a pencil to make sense as rape, obviously it has to be penetration of the vagina, not, say, the shoulder. Stabbing someone in the shoulder is battery or assault, not rape.
But you're also discussing whether abortion is rape, and the legislator (legislatrix?) kind of made an allusion to abortion restrictions being rape. Let me explain.
The legislator's remarks first. I haven't read the legislation, but a lot of states, notably Virginia, are requiring ultrasounds before abortions. Some have said this requirement, if not necessary for the abortion, is rape. I don't agree with them, but let me explain their thinking: Most fathers have probably attended an obstetric ultrasound at 16 weeks gestation. At 16 weeks, the woman is showing, and the doctor or tech uses extra-sticky hair gel on her abdomen and a rather flat ultrasound wand, kind of a square hockey puck. But early in a pregnancy, when most abortions take place, the ultrasound has be to internal. The wand goes in the vagina and is the shape of a curling iron, except domed at the end, so like a very large eraser-end of a pencil (can't remember the length, but between 1" and 2" in diameter). As these ultrasounds are not always medically necessary for the abortion, and involve vaginal penetration, some people analogize them to rape.
A kind of historical pro-life argument next: Historically, abortion has been an assault. "Safe" abortion is relatively new. I can't keep the statistics in my head, but certainly certain kinds of abortion are still less safe than carrying a pregnancy to term. There is also a line of thinking that because abortion is per se evil, no woman can really consent to it. Add to these understandings the fact that abortion necessarily deals with women's sexuality, and usually deals with their vaginas, and you come to the thinking that abortion is a form of sexual assault or rape. Not the "traditional" rape, but in a metaphysical or moral sense.
[no time to proofread]
Comment
-
Comment by Rebekah on June 18, 2012 at 4:49pm -
No offense taken, Paul. I've been doing this all my life, and the stuff here is a whole lot tamer than what my college friends spit at me when I try to explain the law or medicine. My whole life? Yes, my mother had to sacrifice professionally/financially for her pro-life principles beginning before I was born and continuing to now, and I have volunteered for crisis pregnancy centers and pro-life non-profit law firms. Those who know me well should not have cause to question my pro-life bona fides.I, personally, don't have a problem with words meaning 1 thing in 1 context and another in another. My job wouldn't exist if this weren't common in human society. I do understand the "corruption of language" arguments, or I recognize their legitimacy. I haven't really studied them. I think some pro-choicers are being disingenuous when they talk about a woman "not even pregnant yet" taking RU-486 or emergency contraception (before the NYT piece). Not too many citizens read the fine print of ACOG fact sheets. But I also understand what ACOG's trying to accomplish. Unfortunately, I don't have time to explain the pop psychology involved or the medicine.
-
Comment by Paul_of_TX on June 18, 2012 at 11:39am -
Rebekah. I hope you didn't take that as an attack on you; I actually have no idea where you stand on the abortion issue. I know you were just offering up your knowledge that others may not know. This blog post of yours was a side note to the vagina comment talked about in TGD so I will not take it further off topic than I already have.
-
Comment by Rebekah on June 18, 2012 at 11:27am
-
And, legally, slaves were property. I think ACOG's definition causes all sorts of problems, but I can see how ACOG's stance is a fair one for practitioners. There's no difference in treatment for a woman trying to conceive and a woman who has conceived but no one's certain of it yet.
-
Comment by Paul_of_TX on June 18, 2012 at 10:37am
-
Very nice. It is good to have a "definition" for pregnancy. It makes it very easy to have your way and feel like you are on the side of good once you (not you personally Rebekah) get to create the definitions. By defining things around us in our past we defined black people as property not people and made it acceptable to enslave them. We defined Jews, Gypsies and Poles as untermenschen or "inferior people" which then made it acceptable to kill them. Now we are defining the unborn so that it is acceptable to kill them.
-
Comment by Liam S. on June 16, 2012 at 1:43am -
Thank you for the correction regarding the difference between pharmaceutical abortion and emergency contraceptive.
-
Comment by Rebekah on June 15, 2012 at 3:03pm
-
This is more important than my original post.
This appears in TGD: "Pharmaceutical abortions (emergency contraceptives)." This equation is very wrong. Pharamaceutical or medical abortions are done with RU-486 and similar medications available only with a prescription. They are effective well into the first trimester. They are known to terminate an existing pregnancy. "Pregnancy" as defined by the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, which is an IMPLANTED fetus (implanted in the uterus, but occasionally in the fallopian tubes).
Emergency contraceptives are different doses of regular birth control pills. They are only effective 5 days after intercourse. They are not known to terminate an existing pregnancy. Indeed, they are known not to. Their labels state they work by preventing ovulation (so conception cannot occur; there is no egg available to combine with sperm) or by changing the lining of the uterus so the fertilized egg/embryo/baby cannot implant. Just last week, the NYT ran a front-page article that emergency contraceptives, like all hormonal birth control, likely work only by preventing ovulation. The preventing implantation theory is old science.
Yes, the medical definition of pregnancy is an implanted embryo; medically, pregnancy does not begin at conception.
-
Comment by Rick Shelton on June 15, 2012 at 2:38pm -
"PS"... I will admit that my information regarding that is anecdotal.
-
Comment by Rick Shelton on June 15, 2012 at 2:34pm
-
You may be right, I can think of several situations where consent can be given but whether it is "competent" or not could be called into question. Opens a whole 'nother can of worms.
-
Comment by Rebekah on June 15, 2012 at 2:33pm
-
PS
Most states require parental consent, or at least notification, before a minor obtains an abortion.
-
Comment by Rebekah on June 15, 2012 at 2:15pm
-
Shelton, some states may define it that way. If you have a way you think it "should" be defined, write your elected representatives. My understanding is that the statutory rape laws basically say, "Below this age, a person is incapable of giving consent." My use of "rape" above was meant to cover that situation. It's the same as when a woman is passed out, whether from alcohol (the usual situation) or say, anesthetic for surgery. She cannot give consent. So, even if the penetration is not "forcible" and certainly not "violent" (which historically has required there be some kind of injury, like bruising or cutting), it is still "without consent."
Latest Activity
Nathan DeParis replied to Nathan DeParis's discussion Women: The Infallible Baromoter"I don't think it is saying that males manners are irrelevant, but just that if manners or morals swung in one direction for the worse then there would be balance or an origin.
That's why I think the word barometer is pretty…"
Davis commented on Carl Monster's blog post Ferdinand"Dear El Toro,
Your blog brought back a memory from my high school years. Incidentally, I graduated 50 years ago this week. I went to a high school which was a boys college prep high school with all the trappings of a classical education. It…"
Carl Monster commented on Carl Monster's blog post Ferdinand"Thanks, and sounds good. Will bring it up at the next meeting."
Jax replied to Uncle Sam's discussion 20 years old and enlisting tomorrow. Tips and thoughts?"I don't know if the Marines are this way, but before I processed into basic training in the Army, they sent a list of things to bring. Bring everything thing on the list. Exactly as they state it. Mine said running shoes, preferably Nike…"
""If you're gonna go airborne, wear a parachute" Words to live by--especially off base.
Good luck and thanks for serving. "
© 2013 Created by Brett McKay.
Powered by
You need to be a member of Art of Manliness to add comments!
Join Art of Manliness