Roe vs. Wade overturned

[Scepticalscribe]

Another unintended consequence of this decision, men trapped by psychotic women who feel the way to keep them in a long term relationship is to have their kid.

Men trapped by "psychotic" women by "having their kid"?

Come on.

Women can be trapped by pregnancy, - and all too often are - but men do have options in such situations but rarely choose to exercise them, because, as a rule, they don't have to, can't be forced to, and generally prefer not to - in the context of this discussion, the use of, and wearing of, condoms comes to mind.

 

[SuperMatt]

Men trapped by "psychotic" women by "having their kid"?

Come on.

Women can be trapped by pregnancy, - and all too often are - but men do have options in such situations but rarely choose to exercise them, because, as a rule, they don't have to, can't be forced to, and generally prefer not to - in the context of this discussion, the use of, and wearing of, condoms come to mind.

In addition to the cringeworthiness of the statement, it is nonsensical because there was no law requiring women to get abortions if the father wanted them to, so Dobbs changes nothing in such situations.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

Men trapped by "psychotic" women by "having their kid"?

Come on.

Women can be trapped by pregnancy, - and all too often are - but men do have options in such situations but rarely choose to exercise them, because, as a rule, they don't have to, can't be forced to, and generally prefer not to - in the context of this discussion, the use of, and wearing of, condoms come to mind.

I understand that view and agree, but you know what I mean. Plus I wager a good amount of men celebrating this decision don’t like condoms. (Another unintended side effect, they might have to start liking them) These aren’t the most evolved deep thinkers in the pool and are somehow always the victim.

Having said that, the pregnancy trap is a thing. Now add "I’d get an abortion but I can’t. Sorry, not sorry."

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

In addition to the cringeworthiness of the statement, it is nonsensical because there was no law requiring women to get abortions if the father wanted them to, so Dobbs changes nothing in such situations.

So you believe a woman has never gotten pregnant to keep a man around and all people act responsibly in the height of passion. Fascinating.

 

[SuperMatt]

So you believe a woman has never gotten pregnant to keep a man around and all people act responsibly in the height of passion. Fascinating.

Another unintended consequence of the decision: misogynists with poor reading comprehension are coming out of the woodwork.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

I understand that view and agree, but you know what I mean. Plus I wager a good amount of men celebrating this decision don’t like condoms. (Another unintended side effect, they might have to start liking them) These aren’t the most evolved deep thinkers in the pool and are somehow always the victim.

Having said that, the pregnancy trap is a thing. Now add "I’d get an abortion but I can’t. Sorry, not sorry."

So you believe a woman has never gotten pregnant to keep a man around and all people act responsibly in the height of passion. Fascinating.

The "pregnancy trap" is a thing, agreed, but is one that is invariably over-stated by men, who do have options (including walking away) and tends, unfortunately, to be disproportionately experienced by women, for whom pregnancy - especially an unwanted pregnancy - very often is, indeed, a trap, physically, economically, and psychologically.

Moreover, I find that men toss around adjectives such as "psychotic", or "crazy" far too casually. All too often, a man labels a woman "psychotic" or "crazy" if she calls him out, or, if she doesn't do what he wants her to do, or would like her to do.

And, as for "height of passion" argument: Precisely because the cost of the possible consequences of the "height of passion" is so disproportionate - (for women, there is the threat of unwanted pregnancy, the threat of possible violence, the social stuff, such as "slut-shaming", the sheer tedium of enduring underwhelming sex - a surprising number of men think that they are terrific lovers, just as they think they are "naturally good" at driving a car, when they are nothing of the sort), women will think about birth control because they have to, - or, rather, usually, or, very often, birth control will be to the fore of a woman's mind - whereas men have the luxury of not having to worry about any of this.

Seriously, if men do not wish a partner to become pregnant, they can do something about it; generally, they choose not to, because they do not have to bear - quite literally - the consequences, and because it is much more enjoyable for them not to do so.

 

[SuperMatt]

Moving back to serious issues stemming from this court’s attempt to return us to the dark ages:

Indiana doctor says she has been harassed for giving an abortion to a 10-year-old

The harassment began soon after her young patient became flashpoint in the national debate over abortion, Dr. Caitlin Bernard told NPR. "It's honestly been very hard for me, for my family," she said.

www.npr.org

An Indiana doctor says she has faced harassment after the story of one of her patients — a 10-year-old Ohio girl who became pregnant as a result of rape — captured the nation's attention as a flashpoint in the debate over abortion rights.

In the weeks since Roe v. Wade was overturned, Dr. Caitlin Bernard has become a household name, with her face shown on right-wing television and her work criticized by public officials, including Indiana's attorney general, Todd Rokita.

She has worried about her own safety and the safety of her family, Bernard said Tuesday in an interview with NPR's Sarah McCammon.

One might think the fanatics who screamed and harassed women going to abortion clinics in the past would find a new hobby now that they “won” their fight. Nope. They just find new targets for their harassment.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

Moreover, I find that men toss around adjectives such as "psychotic", or "crazy" far too casually. All too often, a man labels a woman "psychotic" or "crazy" if she calls him out, or, if she doesn't do what he wants her to do, or would like her to do.

I think that’s the main issue being attacked here, the way I worded it. I’m not going to walk it back because that’s how some people feel about that scenario. Whether you think that’s how I really feel about it I don’t really care, and I’m not saying that righteously. I get labeled and pigeonholed on here constantly for sharing a viewpoint. There’s some real purity of thought police here.

This isn’t entirely a one-sided scenario all the time. Maybe the woman lied about being on the pill. Maybe she was and stopped. Maybe there was a history of trust that deteriorated. Maybe it’s a last-ditch ill-conceived plan to save the relationship. The men’s options to leave is kind of a moot point. A child was born.

Clearly a woman who has that mentality probably wouldn’t get an abortion anyway, but my main point to the post is that option has been taken off the table for the men who really didn’t quite think about all the implications of the court decision and are big fans of controlling women’s autonomy. They’re probably all hopped up on seeing it as a punishment for women having sex with men who aren’t them and don’t look much past that to where it also means it could also lead to them being a father they don’t want to be with a woman they don’t want to be with. And while they could walk away, I’d like to think the legal system has advanced past the point of when they could just disappear and not be bothered for the rest of their lives.

 

[Alli]

Having said that, the pregnancy trap is a thing. Now add "I’d get an abortion but I can’t. Sorry, not sorry."

Thirty some years ago my brother had a girlfriend. He was never serious about her, and corrected her often when she told her mother that they were engaged. She told him she was on the pill. But guess what…. And she never suggested an abortion cause she’s Catholic. Yea, it’s definitely a thing.

 

[JayMysteri0]

Drunk on their success, some are showing their asses

Indiana AG’s Probe of Doctor Who Gave 10-Year-Old Abortion ‘Riddled With Inaccuracies’

“We urge Mr. Rokita to stop wasting taxpayer money and our time on his nonsensical campaign against Dr. Bernard."

jezebel.com

Since Rokita made this declaration on Fox News, all but inciting anti-abortion extremists to (once again) stalk and attack Bernard, the Indianapolis Star confirmed Bernard had in fact reported the child’s abortion within two days—within the three-day time frame that Indiana law requires for the abortions of patients under 16-years-old to be reported. “None of the complaints came from a ‘consumer’ who purchased any goods or services from Dr. Bernard or even from a person who has had direct communication with Dr. Bernard,” Bernard’s lawyer, Kathleen DeLaney, said in a statement shared with HuffPost. Further, the complaints against the doctor “rely on [individuals with] no first-hand knowledge.”

In Rokita’s suit against Bernard, DeLaney says the attorney general cites a complaint that lists the doctor’s phone number as “555-555-5555”—sounds trustworthy to me! The ostensibly tough-on-crime AG, so tough-on-crime he’ll bully and harass a doctor, also cites complaints against Bernard from someone who has a “significant criminal history,” DeLaney noted.

“Unfortunately, Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita continues to use his office to try and intimidate Dr. Caitlin Bernard,” Bernard’s lawyer said. “We urge Mr. Rokita to stop wasting taxpayer money and our time on his nonsensical campaign against Dr. Bernard for doing her job as a physician properly and in accordance with the law.”

Within days of Roe v. Wade being overturned last month, the child rape victim from Ohio had to travel across state lines for care after Ohio’s six-week abortion ban went into effect. The child was reportedly six weeks and three days pregnant. Right-wing politicians and media wasted no time pretending the harrowing story was fake news, beginning with Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine (R) pretending stating he simply had no knowledge of the case and couldn’t comment and escalating to Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost telling Fox, “Every day that goes by, the more likely that this is a fabrication.”

The Wall Street Journal, not to be outdone, ran a story under the truly ghoulish headline—again, about a 10-year-old rape victim—“An Abortion Story Too Good to Confirm,” and suggested the child’s trauma was a “fanciful” figure of left-wing imagination. Eventually, on July 13, the victim’s alleged rapist was arrested, but the damage inflicted by these attacks on Bernard and a literal child had already been done.

“I feel anguished, desperate and angry,” Bernard wrote in a Washington Post op ed last week. “I don’t want to be the one who loses a patient because her pregnancy killed her before I could save her. I don’t want to live in a place where my government tells me that child sex abuse victims must become mothers. I don’t want to have to accept that a particular religious ideology eclipses my duty as a physician.”

Bernard, who’s currently preparing to sue Rokita for defamation, is unfortunately well acquainted with the consequences of viral right-wing conspiracy theories and anti-abortion extremism. In 2020, the FBI informed her of a threat from anti-abortion activists to kidnap her young daughter. We already know the violence of which anti-abortion activists are more than capable. And Rokita knew what he was doing when he said on Fox, “This is a child, and there’s a strong public interest in understanding if someone under the age of 16 or under the age of 18 or really any woman is having abortion in our state.”

The lies lodged against Bernard and, by extension, her 10-year-old patient enduring unthinkable trauma, are a transparent attempt to downplay and erase the horrific, everyday consequences of overturning Roe. Much like increased maternal deaths, increased domestic violence against pregnant people, denial of life-saving medications, and more women and pregnant people jailed, child rape victims are denied care all too often in countries that ban abortion. Days prior to Roe being overturned, an 11-year-old rape victim in Brazil was denied an abortion.

That anti-abortion activists’ response in the face of all this harm is to smear and lie, rather than self-reflect on the gender-based violence innate to their bans, presents an important lesson: There’s no experience that will ever be sympathetic enough to a movement that simply does not care about the suffering it’s causing.

 

[JayMysteri0]

This shit is going to get scarier & scarier... by design.

These Companies Know You're Pregnant—And They're Not Keeping It Secret

Gizmodo identified 32 brokers selling data on 2.9 billion profiles of U.S. residents pegged as "actively pregnant" or "shopping for maternity products."

gizmodo.com

In early 2012, the New York Times Magazine put out a cover story about Andrew Pole, a statistician working for Target who was tasked with inventing a way to identify potentially pregnant shoppers, even if those shoppers didn’t want the company to know. The rationale, Pole said, was that moms-to-be are a multi-million dollar market, and Target wanted a way to pepper these moneymakers with promos and coupons before its competitors did the same.

Pole obliged. After crawling through the freight of sale data from statewide shoppers on Target’s public baby registry, he came up with a “pregnancy prediction” score that the company would internally assign to each of its regular customers. If you believe the rumors (not everyone does!), Target’s algos were so accurate that the company sent coupons for cribs to a teenage girl before her own father knew she was due.

A decade later, the story reads less like a quirk of capitalism and more like an ominous sign. Now it’s not just Target, every company is hounding you for data. And thanks to the Supreme Court’s decision to overthrow Roe v. Wade, a good chunk of the nation’s police and private citizens can go after people seeking abortions and the doctors that would serve them if there’s enough evidence.

In total, Gizmodo identified 32 different brokers across the U.S. selling access to the unique mobile IDs from some 2.9 billion profiles of people pegged as “actively pregnant” or “shopping for maternity products.” Also on the market: data on 478 million customer profiles labeled “interested in pregnancy” or “intending to become pregnant.” You can see the full list of companies for yourself here.

In all cases, these datasets were sold on what’s known as a “CPM” or “cost per mille” basis—which essentially means that whoever buys them only pays for the number of end-users that are reached with a given ad. Depending on who was offering up a dataset, the price per user ranged from 49 cents per user reached to a whopping $2.25.

The datasets offer information on some 3.4 billion people in total, though how many unique individuals those data cover is unclear, as the datasets obviously overlap. Multiple brokers are likely hawking the same information, as half the world does not live in the United States, and half the world is not pregnant. Their sources do differ, however. Some brokers were gleaning this information directly from pregnant people who had agreed to have their data shared through these channels when they signed up for coupon sites or downloaded a given app. In other cases, these companies were doing exactly what Target had done all those years before: instead of collecting data from end-users that were explicitly saying they’re pregnant, the brokers instead modeled a core base of potentially pregnant users with internal data analysis.

Gizmodo was able to find likely data sources for 19 of the data brokers by scouring announcements about past partnerships and integrations. For the remaining handful of these players, the mind-boggling complexity of the data-sharing ecosystem meant it was completely impossible to suss out where, exactly, they were deriving their data. Eerie.

In one case, for example, a company called AlikeAudience was selling access to an estimated 61 million iOS users who were at a “Pregnancy & Maternity Life Stage,” but the listing didn’t go into detail about the source of that data. It simply notes that “AlikeAudience collects data from various sources such as users’ mobile app downloads & usage, geolocations, public records such as POI and self-declared information.”

One possibility is that AlikeAudience leveraged its relationship with Mastercard to see who was buying items in the “Maternity Care” category. While the company’s listing didn’t go into specifics about what a “maternity care” product is in this particular listing, you can kind of fill in the blanks yourself: maternity clothes, prenatal vitamins, etc.

Another data broker called Quotient was more explicit, offering marketers access to the iOS and Android devices of 9.6 million “pregnancy test kit” and 960,000 “female contraceptive” buyers.

Quotient didn’t make it clear in either of those cases where it was getting that purchasing data from, but Gizmodo’s investigation revealed that the company also owns the popular couponing site, coupons.com. The site has offered coupons for products like Plan B in the past, though it does not currently. Gizmodo also found that Quotient had access to purchasing data from shoppers at Giant Eagle—a chain of small pharmacies across the Pennsylvania area—via a proprietary ad network the data broker operates.

AlikeAudience and Quotient have yet to respond to Gizmodo’s requests for comment.

It's crazy to think that many of the people all in on getting rid or Roe Vs Wade, are also some of the people most vocal about the threat of "Big Brother". Except it seems when "Big Brother" is aimed squarely at others.

 

[SuperMatt]

It's crazy to think that many of the people all in on getting rid or Roe Vs Wade, are also some of the people most vocal about the threat of "Big Brother". Except it seems when "Big Brother" is aimed squarely at others.

Justice Thomas was very clear in his concurring opinion on Dobbs. He doesn’t believe the constitution gives Americans a right to privacy. He is an “outlier” they say, but they also said Roe would never get overturned.

 

[mollyc]

This shit is going to get scarier & scarier... by design.











It's crazy to think that many of the people all in on getting rid or Roe Vs Wade, are also some of the people most vocal about the threat of "Big Brother". Except it seems when "Big Brother" is aimed squarely at others.

most targeted ads at me have figured out i am female, but i get an equal amount of ads thinking i am trying to get pregnant or entering menopause.

 

[JayMysteri0]

This is just going to get more & more stupid & cruel

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1553773183697829893/

West Virginia Republican wants to ban child support because he thinks it'll incentivize abortions

Chris Pritt owns his own law practice, Pritt Law, where he specializes in divorce, custody arguments and child support. But standing before the state legislature in West Virginia, he argued in favor of eliminating all child support for the parent who gets custody of a child. According to Pritt...

www.rawstory.com

Chris Pritt owns his own law practice, Pritt Law, where he specializes in divorce, custody arguments and child support. But standing before the state legislature in West Virginia, his argument was a linguistic pretzel to justify eliminating all child support for the parent who gets custody of a child.

According to Pritt, there are fathers who don't want to be involved in the lives of their children.

"If she carries through with the pregnancy, he's going to have, possibly, some sort of child support obligation," said Pritt. "And, so, what he wants to do is, he wants to — in a sense — encourage her to go and find a way for her to get an abortion. Because he knows that a certain individual — if he has any kind if familiarity with her, he knows that she might be of such a state of mind, she must be in such a vulnerable position that it's not worth everything that he's going to put me through to carry this pregnancy forward. It's going to be easier, it's going to be better, for me to just go and terminate this 'life.' So she goes over to Virginia or to some other state where she goes and gets the abortion. So, I think that's a really clear possibility if we enact the Second Amendment here, I don't want to be doing anything that is encouraging thugs to go and get an abortion."

It's unclear what he means by referencing the Second Amendment.

Parents fighting to not get child support for the child they're raising isn't something that happens. Single parents are generally cash strapped and any opportunity to ensure the other parent helps is important. Having financial support is typically more of an incentive to have a child, as the number one reason women give for getting an abortion is financial.

 

[SuperMatt]

This is just going to get more & more stupid & cruel

https://www.twitter.com/i/web/status/1553773183697829893/

And now we see what the danger and harm to women of statements like this can have:

Another unintended consequence of this decision, men trapped by psychotic women who feel the way to keep them in a long term relationship is to have their kid.

Because the GOP men in charge don’t give a crap about the kids or the women. They have the same thought about being “trapped” by a baby, and their solution is to force the birth anyway, but remove all responsibility from themselves to care for it.

 

[lizkat]

And now we see what the danger and harm to women of statements like this can have:



Because the GOP men in charge don’t give a crap about the kids or the women. They have the same thought about being “trapped” by a baby, and their solution is to force the birth anyway, but remove all responsibility from themselves to care for it.

Yeah... the phrase "went and got herself pregnant" is the fallback.

That concept lets red states cut taxes or reallocate federal block grants to other than adequate support for dependent women and children -- e.g., subsidized daycare so the woman can work.

They also signal that if a woman "can't afford to bring up a kid" then she should keep her legs crossed. Nothing in that picture about a man exercising similar discretion... because he's just doing what comes naturally?

What comes naturally to women is... well, who cares. What matters to the GOP is tax cuts and personal freedom. For men.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

And now we see what the danger and harm to women of statements like this can have:



Because the GOP men in charge don’t give a crap about the kids or the women. They have the same thought about being “trapped” by a baby, and their solution is to force the birth anyway, but remove all responsibility from themselves to care for it.

Well, at least they waited the customary Republican 5 seconds to reveal their bigger idealogy and so far they are hitting it out of the park with a vile response to a horrific scenario.

One would think a state that already struggles to take care of its existing population would be against adding even more people to the roster, but it appears that doing that is some kind of solution in their view with struggling state after struggling state trying to one-up each other with these "solutions".

 

[Alli]

most targeted ads at me have figured out i am female, but i get an equal amount of ads thinking i am trying to get pregnant or entering menopause.

And my lack of breasts confuses the hell out of the algorithm. LOL

 

[lizkat]

And my lack of breasts confuses the hell out of the algorithm. LOL

I usually click my way through a bunch of newspaper subscriptions so after years of that, the algorithms have deduced that I'm either a journo, a politician or at least over the age of 65. So the ads run to either invitations to subscribe to pricey journals or to try out this or that vitamin or exercise regime. But then every year comes summer, when often enough the newspaper fare I bother with is about baseball or book reviews. Suddenly the algos are confused anew.... eventually pitching me ads for custom t-shirts and beach reads.

 

[SuperMatt]

Is there a limit to the insanity of the “pro-life” laws in the wake of overturning Roe V Wade?

Pregnant? Georgia says that fetus counts as a dependent on your taxes

A person at least six weeks pregnant on or after July 20 through Dec. 31, 2022, can submit the fetus as a dependent on their state tax returns starting next year.

www.npr.org

Maybe not…