_____’s rights on the chopping block
The Guardian attempts to report on a massive attack on women’s rights without ever mentioning women. Look, look, women treated as not deserving of rights over their own bodies, except we take it back about the “women” part, we don’t know what that word means, we never heard of any people called that, we don’t know whose rights these are that we’re writing this piece about.
These fucking idiots.
How can you report on a massive war on women’s autonomy while adamantly refusing to mention women?
You can’t. You fucking can’t. By erasing women from this news article you join Team Delete Women’s Rights.
The Guardian, or reporter Carter Sherman, or both, literally don’t use the word once. It appears once, but that’s in the name of a clinic the story cites. They don’t voluntarily use it to specify the people whose rights are being destroyed one single time.
Euphemisms for “women” bolded:
A six-week abortion ban went into effect on Wednesday in Florida, cutting off access to the procedure before many people know they are pregnant and leveling the south-eastern United States’ last stronghold for abortion rights.
The ban went into force weeks after Florida’s state supreme court issued a decision clearing the way for it to take effect. Strict bans now blanket all of the American deep south, increasing the strain on the country’s remaining clinics. The closest clinic for most Floridians past six weeks of pregnancy is now several states away in North Carolina, which outlaws abortion after 12 weeks of pregnancy.
Last year, Florida abortion providers performed more than 84,000 abortions, state data found – including more than 9,000 for out-of-state patients…
On Tuesday, the last day before the ban took effect, an abortion clinic in Gainesville, Florida, was trying to squeeze in as many patients as possible. The clinic had added hours throughout April, but the rush was compounded by the fact that, in addition to the impending ban, Florida requires people to have an in-person consultation at an abortion clinic at least 24 hours before they get the procedure or take abortion pills. A patient could have arrived on Tuesday exactly six weeks into her pregnancy, but have been too late to get an abortion given that the ban came into effect on Wednesday.
Oops how did that “her” get in there? You wanna watch that, boys.
On Tuesday, the female team of staffers at the clinic, Bread and Roses Women’s Health Center, had to explain these complex regulations to bewildered callers and patients over and over again, as the phones rang off the hook for hours.
I wonder why the team of staffers at the clinic is female. I wonder if they all avoid the word “women” as carefully as the Guardian does.
Before the six-week ban, Kristin, director of Bread and Roses, said that the clinic rarely saw people before they hit six weeks of pregnancy.
“Most people don’t know they’re pregnant until at least six weeks,” Kristin said in an interview the week before the ban took effect.
I wonder if she really did say “Most people.”
“We try to get people in as quickly as possible, but sometimes we’re one or three weeks booked out, so it’s rare that someone is in before they’re six weeks.”
Mustn’t say “before she’s six weeks.” That would be injurious to the men who want to shove women aside.
Compared with 2020, there were nearly 9,000 more abortions in Florida in 2023. Out-of-state abortion patients accounted for almost 60% of that increase, according to the Guttmacher Institute.
Bread and Roses used to see 20 to 30 patients daily, but in April, the clinic started to see closer to 40 patients a day, Kristin said. The clinic tends to see somewhere between three to 10 out-of-state patients every day, she said.
…
“This is going to be awful, and it’s going to impact the whole south-east,” said Dr K, a family medicine doctor who performs abortions at Bread and Roses. “I just have no idea what these patients are going to do and where they’re gonna go.”
Well at least they’ll have the comfort of knowing that the Guardian refuses to call them women.
They really don’t go far enough. Why does this apply to humans only, and not mammals in general? Or vertebrates? Or really any kind of entity? Can a chair get an abortion under the new law?
And what about those who identify as prepositions? Why does the article exclude them?
“Patients” and “callers” aren’t on their own offensive; it’s the pairing with the utterly deplorable “people” that makes the agenda clear, here.
We really have to protect people’s rights and not allow people to enter people’s restrooms. Same with sports — we need to make certain people’s sports is for people only and not people. In shelters for people who have been assaulted and/or raped, let’s allow only people to serve the people who have been harmed to protect people’s privacy and safety. People should be able to choose people as their doctors and caregivers. People should respect people’s spaces. Sometimes people feel safer around other people rather than people.
Mike B: “We really have to protect people’s rights and not allow people to enter people’s restrooms. Same with sports — we need to make certain people’s sports is for people only and not people.”
Isn’t it interesting how the ignorance of how biology works is so clearly reflected in the ignorance of how language works?