Adonis Diaries

Posts Tagged ‘abortion

Gloria Steinem’s novel recommendation for how to fix American gun laws goes viral

BY WITW STAFF ON OCTOBER 4, 2017

After a horrific massacre at a country music festival in Las Vegas this week, some women are suggesting that legislators begin passing stricter gun regulations.

For instance, by making gun laws as restrictive as the laws governing abortion.

An unattributed quote outlining such a legislative change was first shared by famed feminist Gloria Steinem in 2015, but in recent days the quote has gone viral once more after being shared and re-shared by women across the country.

“I want any young men who buy a gun to be treated like young women who seek an abortion,” the quote reads. “Think about it: a mandatory 48-hours waiting period, written permission from a parent or a judge, a note from a doctor proving that he understands what he is about to do, time spent watching a video on individual and mass murders, traveling hundreds of miles at his own expense to the nearest gun shop, and walking through protesters holding photos of loved ones killed by guns, protester who call him a murderer.”

“After all, it makes more sense to do this for young men seeking guns than for young women seeking an abortion. No young woman needing reproductive freedom has ever murdered a roomful of strangers.”

The quote, whose author is unknown, was shared in a post on Facebook by Gloria Steinem in 2015 as part of a list detailing her ideal Christmas wishes.

Note: Thus, if the gun purchaser has to go through the trauma of a woman wanting abortion, he might cool off his anger or direct his frustration to non-strangers.

 

Gloria Steinem’s novel recommendation for how to fix American gun laws goes viral

Do stories of personal experience help drive change

Great social movements often have one thing in common: they are created by people with the courage to talk openly about their lives and experiences.

Women have sparked movements to end street harassment, generating new public dialogue about safety and respect. Autistic people have formed communities to embrace their identity and push for better understanding of neurodiversity.

Formerly incarcerated men talk about their past crimes with the hope of shifting systems away from punishment and towards rehabilitation.

Patsy Z shared this link TED, September 24, 2015
Aspen Baker explains why the key to dealing with sensitive issues is to allow those with direct experience to feel heard.
t.ted.com

This isn’t what happened with abortion.

The movement to liberalize abortion laws in the United States was led by people who cared about helping women get safe abortions, but those who had actually had abortions were rarely at the forefront. In the meantime, polarizing political debates, violence, social stigma and the desire for privacy have pushed women who have abortions even further to the margins.

It’s time to change course and insist that all sides do more listening to the women who have had abortions — and their loved ones. Their experiences must take center stage in these public conversations — and that’s going to require us all to learn how to listen without judgment.

When I started talking about my abortion 15 years ago, I was told that my voice didn’t matter.

One major barrier to listening to someone telling a stigmatized story, like abortion, is that often the person with a real, first-hand personal experience is seen as someone who needs to be fixed or saved — even by their own advocates.

As for being smart, capable, wise or a leader to be followed? Forget about it. “She’s had an abortion so she must need my protection,” the thinking goes. “She’s so oppressed, she doesn’t need the burden of leading, too.”

When I started talking about my abortion 15 years ago, I was told that my voice didn’t matter. I was a 24-year old bartender from Southern California who grew up pro-life, and I had a lot of mixed emotions about my situation.

Politically, abortion was portrayed as a simple black and white issue, where women could feel either relief or regret, a dialogue characterized by an “are you with us or against us?” battlefield stance. My story didn’t fit neatly into one side or the other, so people tried to ignore it and ignore me.

We need to see the people who have lived through a particular experience as the expert on their issue.

I’m not alone, and abortion isn’t the only issue where this type of sidelining happens. A friend of mine, Susan, runs a program that supports battered women and their families. Yet when she revealed to her colleagues that she was in an abusive relationship, she was advised that she should leave the field. According to them, her own experience with domestic violence prevented her from helping others.

Then there’s my friend Sabrina, an award-winning leader in technology and media. When she accepted a top position at an organization to help recruit more people of color, she did so because as a black woman she knows the kind of barriers that often keep people like her out of influential positions. Except, once she started dismantling those barriers, the white men who had put them in place there told her she was doing it the wrong way and publicly derided her efforts.

These responses are upside down and back-to-front. We need to see the people who have lived through a particular experience as the expert on their issue. No one is smarter about domestic violence than someone who’s experienced it, just as no one is smarter about inclusiveness than a black woman who’s worked her way to the top. No one is smarter about the experience of abortion than someone who has actually had one.

We need to think about how to give power to those who have faced stigma to take leadership on those same issues; to think about how to help them help others in situations that have affected them so significantly. Otherwise, the people who talk the most and make the decisions will too often be people without first-hand experience of the topic.

Like Bill Clinton (who changed his stance on abortion once he entered the White House), Mitt Romney (who changed his mind — the other way — when he ran for President) or even Donald Trump, who has also flipped from being pro-choice to pro-life.

In private, women say more — a lot more — about their abortions than they do in public.

Maybe this is just wishful thinking, but I can’t help but imagine how different the abortion conversation would be if the women who had had abortions were leading the charge for change. Would groups of women talking about what they went through really draw a battle line between those who felt relief and those who felt regret?

Would they avoid talking about the fetus and what happens to it after an abortion? Of course not. In private, women say more — a lot more — about their abortions than they do in public. Without the unique wisdom and insight of people who really know what it’s like, everyone suffers from a lack of understanding and awareness.

Other women who may have their own abortions one day, friends and family are left not knowing what to say or how best to provide support to a loved one having an abortion. And without women’s voices and leadership, politicians are left with no alternative but to operate in a vacuum without the knowledge that comes from real life experiences.

This gap, the gap between what gets said in private and what gets debated in politics, provides a unique opportunity for deep, transformational change. It’s also a problem that we can help to solve.

Instead of speaking on behalf of a woman hidden by stigma or conflict, take a stand by bearing witness; by creating the space where she can finally be heard.

Aspen Baker

Featured illustration by Hannah K. Lee/TED.

Telling personal experiences: Best way for abortion laws to make headways

When I started talking about my abortion 15 years ago, I was told that my voice didn’t matter.

We need to see the people who have lived through a particular experience as the expert on their issue.

Aspen Baker explains why the key to dealing with sensitive issues like abortion is to allow those with direct experience to feel heard.

Great social movements often have one thing in common: they are created by people with the courage to talk openly about their lives and experiences.

Women have sparked movements to end street harassment, generating new public dialogue about safety and respect.

Autistic people have formed communities to embrace their identity and push for better understanding of neuro-diversity.

Formerly incarcerated men talk about their past crimes with the hope of shifting systems away from punishment and towards rehabilitation.

This isn’t what happened with abortion.

The movement to liberalize abortion laws in the United States was led by people who cared about helping women get safe abortions, but those who had actually had abortions were rarely at the forefront.

In the meantime, polarizing political debates, violence, social stigma and the desire for privacy have pushed women who have abortions even further to the margins.

It’s time to change course and insist that all sides do more listening to the women who have had abortions — and their loved ones.

Their experiences must take center stage in these public conversations — and that’s going to require us all to learn how to listen without judgment.

When I started talking about my abortion 15 years ago, I was told that my voice didn’t matter.

One major barrier to listening to someone telling a stigmatized story, like abortion, is that often the person with a real, first-hand personal experience is seen as someone who needs to be fixed or saved — even by their own advocates.

As for being smart, capable, wise or a leader to be followed? Forget about it. “She’s had an abortion so she must need my protection,” the thinking goes. “She’s so oppressed, she doesn’t need the burden of leading, too.”

When I started talking about my abortion 15 years ago, I was told that my voice didn’t matter. I was a 24-year old bartender from Southern California who grew up pro-life, and I had a lot of mixed emotions about my situation.

Politically, abortion was portrayed as a simple black and white issue, where women could feel either relief or regret, a dialogue characterized by an “are you with us or against us?” battlefield stance. My story didn’t fit neatly into one side or the other, so people tried to ignore it and ignore me.

We need to see the people who have lived through a particular experience as the expert on their issue.

I’m not alone, and abortion isn’t the only issue where this type of sidelining happens.

A friend of mine, Susan, runs a program that supports battered women and their families. Yet when she revealed to her colleagues that she was in an abusive relationship, she was advised that she should leave the field. According to them, her own experience with domestic violence prevented her from helping others.

Then there’s my friend Sabrina, an award-winning leader in technology and media.

When she accepted a top position at an organization to help recruit more people of color, she did so because as a black woman she knows the kind of barriers that often keep people like her out of influential positions. Except, once she started dismantling those barriers, the white men who had put them in place there told her she was doing it the wrong way and publicly derided her efforts.

These responses are upside down and back-to-front.

We need to see the people who have lived through a particular experience as the expert on their issue. No one is smarter about domestic violence than someone who’s experienced it, just as no one is smarter about inclusiveness than a black woman who’s worked her way to the top. No one is smarter about the experience of abortion than someone who has actually had one.

We need to think about how to give power to those who have faced stigma to take leadership on those same issues; to think about how to help them help others in situations that have affected them so significantly.

Otherwise, the people who talk the most and make the decisions will too often be people Without first-hand experience of the topic. Like Bill Clinton (who changed his stance on abortion once he entered the White House), Mitt Romney (who changed his mind — the other way — when he ran for President) or even Donald Trump, who has also flipped from being pro-choice to pro-life.

In private, women say more — a lot more — about their abortions than they do in public.

Maybe this is just wishful thinking, but I can’t help but imagine how different the abortion conversation would be if the women who had had abortions were leading the charge for change. Would groups of women talking about what they went through really draw a battle line between those who felt relief and those who felt regret?

Would they avoid talking about the fetus and what happens to it after an abortion? Of course not.

In private, women say more — a lot more — about their abortions than they do in public. Without the unique wisdom and insight of people who really know what it’s like, everyone suffers from a lack of understanding and awareness.

Other women who may have their own abortions one day, friends and family are left not knowing what to say or how best to provide support to a loved one having an abortion. And without women’s voices and leadership, politicians are left with no alternative but to operate in a vacuum without the knowledge that comes from real life experiences.

This gap, the gap between what gets said in private and what gets debated in politics, provides a unique opportunity for deep, transformational change.

It’s also a problem that we can help to solve. Instead of speaking on behalf of a woman hidden by stigma or conflict, take a stand by bearing witness; by creating the space where she can finally be heard.

Aspen Baker

Featured illustration by Hannah K. Lee/TED.

A few examples of how the Lebanese institutions react to nasty events

The physician syndicate president, freshly elected, refused to revoke the practice licence of a physician who aborted more than 200 Syrian sex slaves. The minister of health had to step in and close the physician clinic after he testified of his crimes.

Minister Abou Fa3our is one of the younger and active ministers who are competing for the heart and mind of the people, along with Education minister Abu Sa3b and minister of foreign affairs Basil.

Many internal force officers patronized the sex slave business for over 3 years and received in kind kickbacks.

Apparently, with the diminishing arrivals of tourists, this business could no longer afford the heavy kickbacks and was pray for quick action.

More than one million, out of 4 million Lebanese live under $9 a day. And the government don’t give a damn

And we have over 2 million refugees who get monthly stipends of around $250 and other facilities, like free education and allowances for rent… funded by international institutions.

These institutions promised a lot of funds to Lebanon in many conferences and we received nothing.

Actually, Ban Key Moon wanted to lend us money to take care of the refugees.

Joelle Boutros posted

‫#‏بمحصلة_هالنهار‬؛
– ابو فاعور تحرك في ظل مماطلة نقابة الاطباء بأخذ اجراءات بحق الطبيب رياض العلم. فقرر يسحب اجازة مزاولة المهنة منه ومن الممرضة المساعدة جيزيل اراكيلو وطبيب البنج واقفال العيادة بالشمع الاحمر. وزير الصحة عم بينافس وزير التربية على لقب “حبيب الشعب”. ونقابة الاطباء ب “لا لا لاند”، مستمرة بتجاهل المشاكل والفساد يلي عم يواجه الجسم الطبي.
– في مقابلة مع “للنشر” مبارح، كشفت فتاة كانت هربت من “شي موريس” انو كتير من رجال الامن كانوا زبائن دايمين بالاوتيل.
– غرد جنبلاط عن الموضوع ع تويتر. تحرك المشنوق وطلب التحقيق في اتهامات جنبلاط لمسؤولين في مكتب حماية الآداب بالتواطؤ مع شبكة الاتجار. وردّ المشنوق بعنف ومعو قوى الامن على الاتهامات. جنبلاط بيغرد والكل بيتخبط ببعضه.
– نايل سات رح توّقف بث عبر محطة جورة البلوط في لبنان. وبالتالي من بكرا بيبطل فينا نحضر عدة محطات لبنانية. السبب: الشركة صرلها ٧ اشهر باعتة طلب تجديد للعقد. وزارة الاتصالات اهملت الملف ومجلس الوزراء كوما كالعادة. هالحكومة هيي افضل شي حصل للبلد.
– مليون مواطن لبناني بيعيشوا بأقل من ٨،٧% دولار في اليوم في لبنان. بناء عليه، اطلق الحريري مشروع “ازالة الفقر والعوز المدقع في لبنان”. اولا، المدقع؟ سيريسلي. ثانيا، ازالة الفقر؟ ثالثا، من بيت الوسط؟ اعزائي، انتو افضل من انتج وصدّر الفقر واكتر من استغله.
– الشركة المتعهدة تركيب الكاميرات لبلدية بيروت اسمها guardia. هيي ذاتها مستلمة اعادة تأهيل سجن روميه (لول). وهيي الشركة الوحيدة المختصة يلي قدمت على مناقصة تركيب الكاميرات (كمان لول). بيملكها شخص مقرب من الحريري وجهاد العرب، حسب تقرير بنشرة ال.بي.سي. لول، لول، لول.
– وزير المالية: “سنرفع الغطاء عن كل الفاسدين”. هوي شو نوع الغطاء يلي عم تحاولوا ترفعوه ومش عم تزبط معكم من ٢٥ سنة؟
– رئيس وزراء ايسلاندا استقال على خلفية فضيحة “اوراق بنما”. عيب عليه! بدل ما يكون ع مستوى اللحظة! نحنا عم نطلق مشاريع “لإزالة الفقر” ومنعتمد سياسة النأي بالنفس ومنأكد على اهمية الصبر عند كل فضيحة. ونحنا منعمل ١٠ فضايح بالتنكة. عن جد عيب!
– الجامعة اللبنانية منحت شهادات التخرج لطلاب كلية الاعلام بعد طول انتظار. قام طلعوا كلن غلط. يعني المعلومات الواردة بالشهادة لا تمت للطالب بصلة. فخر الصناعة الوطنية.
– لمحة عن اسئلة ريما كركي مبارح لفتاة ضحية شبكة الاتجار: “بدي اسألك سؤال موجع كتير؛ بتفيقي الصبح وبتنامي اي ساعة؟لو بدي ضايقك شوي بالسؤال، كيف بيكون شكلو النهار؟ بتفيقي اي ساعة، اديه عدد الاشخاص، شو يلي بتشوفي بيإذيكي شخصيا؟ انت شو ذنبك لتستحقري نفسك؟كيف بتوصفي حالك هلأ؟” ريما هيي “ملكة الاحساس” بالاذن من اليسا.
– “١: ع فكرة، عمر بلش شغل معي اليوم بالشركة.
٢: والله. وكيف شفتو؟
١: بعد ما شفت منو شي. بس حبيت فيه شغلة. عينو شبعانة وخجول كتير”.
– “الساعات الطويلة يلي بقعدها لحالي بتاخدني لكتير ابعد من هيك. مش مهم شو بتحس، اطلع ع ارض الواقع وحكوم بنفسك”.
– “ليه سجلتلي الشقة بإسمي؟ ما انا وانت واحد”.
ما فينا الا ما نذكر اقوال من مسلسلات لبنانية رصينة.

Imad Bazzi posted

لمن يسأل كيف دامت شبكة الإتجار بالبشر 3 سنوات دون أن يكشف أمرها، عليكم بالحسبة التالية: ضمت الشبكة 75 سيدة على مدى 3 سنوات، وكان المشغل يقبض مبلغ 100 ألف ليرة من كل زبون، ويجبر الفتايات على معاشرة 10 الى 20 رجل يومياً. فلنحسب ان 50 منهن فقط اجبروا على العمل يومياً وان متوسط الزبائن 10 لكل فتاة.
50X10X70$: 35000$ يومياً
بمعدل مليون وخمسين ألف دولار شهرياً، اي أكثر من 12 مليون دولار سنوياً، فتات وكسور هذا المبلغ كافية لشراء كل الذمم من رأس الهرم الى الزبون الوضيع

Free-will Eugenic: Finally you have Choices (February 7, 2009)

 

            Eugenic is the elimination of undesired embryos, malformed babies, unwanted babies or undesired grown ups for one reason or another.

 

All that parents need to know on the condition of a fetus of six weeks is a drop of blood from the mother.  The mother blood carries cells transferred from the fetus and all the necessary information can be obtained from a single cell.  A wide array of diseases of physical and cognitive natures, whether curable or incurable, can be diagnosed at six weeks of the fetus. A sample of these diseases is: sterility, mongolism (Down syndrome), Elephantine, blindness, deafness, metabolic deficiencies, epilepsy, mental retardation, cancer (ovary, breast, colon, and prostate), neurological, Alzheimer, and anxiety to name a few. Consequently, the parents are strong with the following facts:

 

 First, would the baby be normal or not.

Second, if the baby is normal would he develop grave physical or mental illnesses in the short or long term?

Third, would the sane baby develop at his adulthood incurable illnesses such as cancer or Alzheimer?

 

Parents have now sound facts on the preconditions of the fetus and they can make bold choices for an abortion before the fetus is legally considered a human with all the legal and social complications.  One day, you might have to decide or be asked to contribute your opinion as a family member then answer the following questions by selecting a disease from the array that I have already mentioned:

 

If the fetus is surely to die immediately after birth then would you abort?

 

If the fetus would look physically sane but mentally retarded then would you keep him and shoulder the responsibility of caring for him throughout your life?

 

If the fetus would turn physically handicapped but mentally sane then what is your decision?

 

If the fetus would turn out sane physically and mentally for the first three years before a physical handicap develop then what is your decision?

 

If the fetus would turn sane physically and mentally for the first three years before a mental handicap develop then what is your decision?

 

If the fetus would turn sane physically and mentally for the first ten years before a mental or physical handicap develop then what is your decision?

 

If the fetus would turn sane physically and mentally for the first 20 years before a mental handicap develop then what is your decision?

 

If the fetus would turn sane physically and mentally for the first 40 years before a mental handicap develop then what is your decision?

 

You now have choices; failure to decide is a choice, a stupid one.

 

Note: If you give birth to an abnormal baby with full knowledge of the consequences then you still have to deal with the attitudes of the grown up baby when he is told the facts.  The adult might hate you forever or separate from the family or lead an introverted life or whatever.  The array of later psychological consequences is in the hundreds.


adonis49

adonis49

adonis49

November 2020
M T W T F S S
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
30  

Blog Stats

  • 1,429,207 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.adonisbouh@gmail.com

Join 777 other followers

%d bloggers like this: