Vive La France!

OMG, guys.

I posted the article to provide a very simple counterpoint, to the very simple narrative that some were pushing on here, that only men who hate women want to restrict abortion. Here is the figure from that latest poll. It shows by a twenty point margin (again), that women are more in favour of making abortion more restrictive than men are.

1711358906380.png
 
noseall said:
Males: 26% in favour. Females: 43% in favour (of more restrictive abortion measures).

A bit of an ambiguous, misleading nonsense stat. 'More restrictive' could mean knocking one day off the gestation cut-off point, lol. Largely irrelevant when you consider at what (gestation) point 99% of abortions occur.

What is telling is that overall, 87% of people in the UK are in favour of abortion.
Click to expand...

The article wasn't arguing for more restrictive abortion. That was never the point of the article. It was purely comparing the attitudes of men and women to more restrictive abortion. I found it really interesting as I had never been aware of these figures.
 
JonathanM said:
OMG, guys.

I posted the article to provide a very simple counterpoint, to the very simple narrative that some were pushing on here, that only men who hate women want to restrict abortion. Here is the figure from that latest poll. It shows by a twenty point margin (again), that women are more in favour of making abortion more restrictive than men are.

View attachment 337883
Click to expand...
Does that poll include feminists campaigning to decriminalise abortion and advocating for pills-by-post?
 
JonathanM said:
I posted the article to provide a very simple counterpoint, to the very simple narrative that some were pushing on here, that only men who hate women want to restrict abortion. Here is the figure from that latest poll. It shows by a twenty point margin (again), that women are more in favour of making abortion more restrictive than men are.

View attachment 337883
Click to expand...
A largely irrelevant ambiguous nonsense stat.

It's still the women hating men that want to restrict or ban abortion altogether. Knocking a few days off an already very late gestation cut-off point seems noble - but is far from it. You obviously don't understand at what point most abortions occur.

The women hating men in the USA for example have virtually prevented women in their loony RWR states from getting an abortion. The women hating RWR fruit loops are even trying to get Mifepristone banned, so that they can have ultimate control over their 'birthing vessels'.
 
space junkie said:
To repeat my earlier question, why tinker with the edges of a policy that has the majority support of the nation?
Click to expand...

Firstly, it was just an interesting article. That is what newspapers are supposed to do.

It wasn't calling for any change.

But even if it was calling for some tinkering, what would have been wrong with that? Is the current system perfect? Could it be made slightly better?
 
Last edited:
JonathanM said:
But even if it was calling for some tinkering, what would have been wrong with that? Is the current system perfect? Could it be made slightly better?
Click to expand...
Not especially no.

It would be like celebrating or championing a factory owner, that promises all the workers in his employ, that once they reach their 133rd birthday, they get a million pounds bonus each.

Virtually all abortions (barring a small number) occur early on.
 
space junkie said:
Call it what you want. It doesn't alter the fact that a measure of abortion related deaths, in comparison to childbirth, is meaningless, for the reasons I've mentioned, and given in more detail in the article.
Click to expand...
Its not intended to prove anything but is useful statistically, for example an analysis of the availability and/or effectiveness of contraception.
 
noseall said:
Not especially no.

It would be like celebrating or championing a factory owner, that promises all the workers in his employ, that once they reach their 133rd birthday, they get a million pounds bonus each.

Virtually all abortions (barring a small number) occur early on.
Click to expand...

So what if during the first 14 weeks, we were like France, where you don't need two doctors opinion? And then from 14 to 24 weeks the system remains the same. Some people might think that was an improvement. What is so perfect about the current system that changes can't be discussed?
 
noseall said:
The women hating men in the USA for example have virtually prevented women in their loony RWR states from getting an abortion. The women hating RWR fruit loops are even trying to get Mifepristone banned, so that they can have ultimate control over their 'birthing vessels'.
Click to expand...

They will not succeed...

The stakes in the Supreme Court’s mifepristone case go way beyond abortion.@ VOX.com
 
fillyboy said:
Aren't 2 medical consultations mandatory in France?
Click to expand...
Possibly. Not sure.

Approval is quite specific in the UK and is peculiar or unique to abortion, i.e. two doctors MUST sign it off before it can proceed. Until then there is no approval.
 
fillyboy said:
Aren't 2 medical consultations mandatory in France?
Click to expand...

Yes, two consultations, at least a week apart. But purely to discuss the procedure. Not two doctors opinions about whether the criteria for abortion are met.
 
incorrect - the cooling off period was dropped in 2015

Edit: I stand corrected - the 2 consultations are required, not 1.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top