It's Official! Women are Just Incubators and Future Incubators!

Considering women to be potentially able to get impregnated is not destroying their character, but it is just stating a mere fact. I can right now call you a pregnant woman, but i am not destroying your character (hopefully) by saying that , because i am simply stating that you are pregnant and know nothing else. Similarly, men are able to be fathers, and women are able to be mothers, its a fact , its different machinery. There is nothing wrong in accepting that a woman can be a potential mother because having the ability to be impregnated is an inherent quality of womanhood, why think that it is destroying her character? I just don't understand this.

 

no, its not "character". Its INDIVDUALITY. Its our basic need to feel different, unique, multi-faceted. I am pregnant right now, but that isn't all that I am... I am still ME too. And thats what the issue is, at least with me.

By labeling all women as "pre pregnant" they are taking away some of our freedoms. The freedom to drink, the freedom to smoke... even if we don't actively do these things, the option to do so is nice. "Pre pregnant" or "pregnant"... women are more than just labels.

 

I know! Let's all be forced to under strict medical physicals every month just to ensure the health and well being of any potential future humans! Anyone in violation of the guidelines should be automatically executed!

 

You see, a doctor does not need to know information that is not needed for the care of his patient. For him/her, you are just a patient and he does not need any information unless such information is required to treat you. This is true almost everywhere and almost every service that we get today. So, no one really cares for individuality in this scenario. "Prepregnancy" is just a label that tells the doctor that he needs to be careful in treating a female patient and that he needs to give recommendations that will help her have a healthy baby in the future. Thats about it!
All they are talking about is recommending healthy things, they are not passing out laws that will prohibit women from smoking or drinking. Ofcourse, according to the patient Bill of Rights, you are eligible to say "NO" to the treatment and do as you please. I don't think there is a destruction of individuality.

 

nah, I got a better idea, lets pass a law that forces all the women to wear cameras on their heads then we can monitor what they are doing all the time and better ensure our species survival

 

Don't do drugs...mmmkay. Drugs are bad.....mmmkay.

 

When I was 2, I had cancer along my spinal cord. They treated me with radiation and chemotherpy. The doctors weren't concerned about my ovaries, they were concerned with saving my life. They could have very easily hit my ovaries with radiation rendering me infertile....

with this new label, would the doctor's still do the same? Or would they need to weigh their options?

You don't understand what the issue is because you aren't a woman. Because you aren't a woman you can't see it the way we do. This isn't me "bashing" you for being a man... its just the way it is.

 

haha well with this type of argument I don't think i have anythiing more to say, but come back when you get rid of your sexism and similar delusions then maybe you can construct a plausible argument on your behalf

 

I didn't mean it as a sexist arguement. I meant it as a mind set arguement. I have one mind set, because I am a female and this directly effects me. You have a different mind set because you are male and this doesn't directly effect you.

It would be a sexist comment if this subject had nothing to do with gender and sex... but guess what? Reproduction happens to have a lot to do with both gender and sex! If we were talking about driving skills and I made a "but you are a male" comment then it would be sexist... but don't think it is in this case.

 

I wonder if this means women shouldn't ride rollercoasters too, since you're not supposed to ride them when pregnant...

All this is just so acinine. It is a cheap band-aid stuck on an infant mortality problem. Rather than addressing the issue they just want women to pretend they're pregnant. Instead, why don't they make sure all women have healthcare? Why don't they actually do something productive and beneficial?

 

HA!
you call a proposal for a more holistic care for patients by doctors (doctors :Including me in the future) sexist because you don't want to think about your habits that might be affecting for good or worse another person's LIFE!, you call that "destroying one's individuality" and when asked why? you go around and say something as preposterous as "You are a man, you won't understand" , yea thanks lady, Ive seen enough here. If you want a definition of sexism I will give it to you , its simple really , "Discrimination based on gender", why don't you just admit that you can't come up with a reasonable explanation for why the health care system should not think twice before making drugs or prescribing drugs that might affect a woman's chances of a successful pregnancy in the future ( because they understand that a woman might change her mind about pregnancy even if she does not want to think about it at that time), other than that I think we are done with this here and if you are going to write more about why what you said is not sexist, don't bother because it will just be a waste of time.

 

because that will not be easy. On the other hand, being more mindful of pregnancy problems does not cost much money .

 

Hmm I wonder if you would write "We don't understand this because we are women," in the "Why are self confident women written off as bitches" thread

 

Oh, by all means, if it is CHEAPER to just not allow womyn access to health care, and to treat them all as Potential Vessels, than WHY try to actually HELP womyn. I see exactly what this is, it has NOTHING to do with womyn's health, just an other move to try to control lives. HELL, it will save money to not treat womyn for cancer, as it may injure their fertiluty and it's cheaper to just let them die. And the ones who don't die can then just be eternal uteri for hire, and they can worry about the fetuses, of course, UNTIL they are born, then the hell with them. Heaven knows, actually making sure there is HEALTH CARE for people is just too damn expensive. (As long as it isn't YOUR life being watched like a hawk, in case you get someone pregnant, hmmmmm?) (Jedi, can't you SEE what is behind this? The RIGHT and their "Fetal Rights" which of course, don't extend to BABIES once they are born. The ONLY reason to be concerned with "Fetal Rights" and then not give a shit about the babies afterward is when one is ONLY concerned with control of Womyn's Bodies, in all ways. THAT is what the Right wants.)

MEN are also "prefathers" I see you didn't address this. THIS would be cheaper. Any man who drinks, smokes, uses drugs, needs cancer treatment, and is still able to make sperm should be in the same boat. Why not?

BTW, men are usually able to produce sperm from early adolesence until their deaths........longer than womyn are fertile. So, no drugs, alcohol, cancer treatment, ect EVER for men. Does that sound like a good idea? Or just STUPID?

 

Maggie,



what cancer treatment? what are you talking about? a person with cancer obviously needs chemotherapy and will be given that treatment to save his/her life unless he/she doesn't want to go through with it.


Second, what "No drugs?" do you mean illegal drugs? then no, one should not take illegal drugs and if this is one more reason why some one should not take marijuana etc , then so be it!, yes they cause alot of problems stay away from them.

Third, Yes, it is a good idea to recommend no alcohol both to men and women, maybe you are used to drinking alcohol maggie, maybe it is just the way many in America grow up/and then live out their lives, but as some one who has no experience whatso ever drnking it , and looking at all the problems it causes in people, I think it should be legally banned.



Fourth, all this put aside, the article is not talking about any extremes here, all it is saying is doctors need to make women aware of the health risks that these things cause so that if you are going to be pregnant in the future or plan to be pregnant in the future, then they try to recommend not having alcohol etc. etc. Also, they want to extend this to include all women if possible. In this country to radically change health care, its going to require alot of money, but to make some conscious effort for the betterment of community and to increase knowledge among women about the health risks that they might be exposed to is hardly "controlling their lives" and also ofcourse the doctor does not need extra money to tell you not to smoke.

 

This sounds a lot like how many abortion arguments go: "[insert healthy or unhealthy practice here] works for ME, so I don't see why EVERYONE shouldn't do it." I agree that PEOPLE (not just women, but men too!) need to be better educated about possible effects of ANYTHING on their reproductive systems. But when it somes down to it, a real healthcare system would do loads more for women, men, and their children!

And Maggie, you have a VERY good point about this being a "fetal rights" issue. We're talking about changing womens' lives for the sake of children who are not only not born, but not even CONCEIVED yet. It seems to me like it's a sneaky way of raising the rights of the unborn above those of the women who bear them - and in a way that most people wouldn't even question. Almost similar to the legislation that charges people with murder for harming/killing a pregnant woman. From the one side - who would argue that that's not a totally f-ed up thing to do? But from the other side, "they" are just building up a case for eventually illegalizing abortion.

Maybe some would think I'm jumping to make connections where there are none - but that's what this seems like to me.

 

hmm actually to come to think of it, rights of the unborn sounds pretty good to me.

 

But should their rights (and even the rights of the "pre-conceived") come before those of living, grown, concious, sentient women?

 

Nah, I don't think so.

 

It will only be a matter of time when we are put back into the kitchens, without shoes on, pregnant and five kids underfoot. That will be the norm again.

I suppose they are going to ban women from drinking alcohol now, as I am in a constant state of "pre-conception", I shouldn't DARE think about having alcohol.

You know. A sign of the level of civilization has always been this:
1) The treatment of women
2) The education of women
3) The birthrates

All of these coincide with one another. You put one out of balance, you put the other three out of balance and therefore civilization is now out of wack. I don't know if this made any sense because I can't see straight with how angry I am about this. I understand, guidelines. BUT, it's the reasoning and the intentions behind them that erk me. Men are intimidated by the fact that they are ultimately obsolete.

Ha! Take that peni!