Abortion Doctor Charged with 8 Murders.

Alhazred wrote:

Quote :

We've been through this. No one here ever says that, and if that's the subtext you're getting out of it, than that's your problem. Not ours.

It's really pretty blatant, actually, but even if it were subtext, subtext is not the audience's problem. If you're trying to get a point across, it falls on you to make sure the proper idea is communicated.

Blatant? What, just because someone doesn't come out right away assuming the woman is just a lying, vicious little vixen that means that person is a man-hating misandrist?

Speaking for myself, I am doing my best to make sure I communicate my ideas clearly. If you twist them into a man-hating statement because you're uncomfortable and would rather shoot the messenger than focus on the problem, that's your malfunction.

I think you're just mad that I'm interrogating the text from the wrong perspective.

Alhazred wrote:

I think you're just mad that I'm interrogating the text from the wrong perspective.

Mad? Disagreeing = mad?

Also: Elaborate.

Maximilia wrote:

Yeah. I don't want to read any articles on this asshole. But I am wondering how much he was charging?

This is from the grand jury report:

Quote :

Lynda Williams provided the FBI with a handwritten chart listing what Gosnell
charged for abortions at various gestational ages:
6 weeks - 12 weeks $330
13 weeks - 14 weeks $440
15 weeks - 16 weeks $540
17 weeks - 18 weeks $750
19 weeks - 20 weeks $950
21 weeks - 22 weeks $1,180
23 weeks - 24 weeks $1,625
But other employees said that what he charged was often more. They said he charged as
much as $3,000 for a single late-term abortion. The great aunt of another patient testified
that she paid $2,500.

Jesus wept.

God damn. I keep trying to be analytical in response to this story, and it's really not working. Although the price for the first one of the list is pretty comparable to having the procedure done legally, I can only imagine there was a lot of scared teens... *rubs face* Jesus Christ. I can only imagine there were a lot of scared teens in that office of horrors.

Gosnell and his staff kept the girls and women pretty zonked out of it. I read the grand jury report and it is horrifying. The patients were "offered" anesthesia. They were told to choose which one they wanted.

Quote :

You can pick which anesthesia you want to receive,
whether you want to be up, half asleep, if you want to be
knocked out, and it’s additional to your procedure, but local
anesthesia is included in the smaller cases and custom
anesthesia, which is the highest, to be put to sleep in the
bigger cases. [snip] It will probably be best to pay the extra money and be more
comfortable if some of the following conditions are true for
you.
1. The decision to have the procedure is a difficult
decision.
2. Medication is usually necessary for your
menstrual cramps.
3. Your decision has been forced by your parents
or partner.
4. Your family members or friends “don’t like
pain.”

The choices were:

Quote :

(1) Local (10 mg. of nalbuphine and 12.5 mg. of promethazine);
(2) Heavy (50 mg. Demerol, 12.5 mg. promethazine, and 5mg. diazepam);
(3) Twilight (75 mg. Demerol, 12.5 mg. promethazine, and 7.5 mg. diazepam); and
(4) Custom (75 mg. Demerol, 12.5 mg. promethazine, and 10 mg. diazepam).

The staff didn't always follow this chart. Sometimes they made up their own mixes. These meds were given repeatedly (without documentation) over several hours until the procedures Gosnell used were carried out. Some of these women were sitting around in filthy conditions on blood stained chairs for up to 8 hours.

I don't have words for the things I read in that report.

Not really surprised at the report - if you're going to break the "big" laws (murder, illegal abortions, etc.), you won't blink at breaking the small ones (like only having trained personnel administering anesthetics).

I wish there were a silver bullet, one-size-fits-all solution. We've tried making it more difficult for people to picket clinics or harass patients entering them (struck down as violating the First Amendment), but as long as legitimate, compassionate doctors are afraid of becoming targets there is going to be room for men like Gosnell to fill the space.

Mr. Doobie did a fantastic job of responding to this post, but I'd really just like to respond to this point in particular.

[quote="Alhazred"]

Anathema wrote:

Quote :

Because all unwanted pregnancies are the result of consensual, non coerced sex.

All all heterosexual men rapists? Because if not, there is such a thing as a woman who can choose not to have sex by saying "no."

This attitude is disgusting fuck you fuck you fuck you fuck you

If you've ever been in the position of being coerced into sex, you would understand how grey an area this really is. It's not as though saying "no" will deter everyone. There are guys who see 'no' as a challenge, who won't stop pushing for it until it changes to a "yes" or at least a lack of response. There are men who think they're entitled to sex, and will guilt or threaten or any other number of things until they get it.

And if the girl actually does say no, no matter what he does? She'll be told she was overreacting, she's a bitch or a frigid or prude. There are way too many women in my life who have been shamed by their circle of friends because she refused to do something she was uncomfortable doing.

You claim people on this site think that women aren't responsible for anything, but you seemed to want to put all of the blame on women. Protip: Acting like women can't be coerced into sex, and if they don't say no they're just whores who wanted it, makes you look like a terrible, terrible human being

inb4 "I never said that lolololol". Guess I'm just reading your subtext wrong. Perhaps you should make your point more clearly next time, eh?

Alhazred wrote:

I think you're just mad that I'm interrogating the text from the wrong perspective.

How do you interrogate text? Do you, perhaps, mean interpret?

Lady Anne wrote:

Alhazred wrote:

I think you're just mad that I'm interrogating the text from the wrong perspective.

How do you interrogate text? Do you, perhaps, mean interpret?

Alhazred is using an old favorite Fandom Wank meme... badly. Here's the scoop on "interrogating the text."

[quote="Anathema"]Mr. Doobie did a fantastic job of responding to this post, but I'd really just like to respond to this point in particular.

Alhazred wrote:

Anathema wrote:

Quote :

Because all unwanted pregnancies are the result of consensual, non coerced sex.

All all heterosexual men rapists? Because if not, there is such a thing as a woman who can choose not to have sex by saying "no."

inb4 "I never said that lolololol". Guess I'm just reading your subtext wrong. Perhaps you should make your point more clearly next time, eh?

What subtext, exactly? I said if there is such a thing as a man who is not a rapist, there is such a thing as a woman who can choose not to have sex by saying "no." There's really nothing subtext about that.

You can babble about coercion all you want, but unless the man is willing to result to physical force, the woman can still say no. And if he is, well, then, he's a rapist. Not much debate on that.

But wait. Here's the real question:

What does that have to do with anything in this article?

InkWeaver wrote:

But wait. Here's the real question:

What does that have to do with anything in this article?

Stop bringing your sense in here!

[quote="Alhazred"]

Anathema wrote:

Mr. Doobie did a fantastic job of responding to this post, but I'd really just like to respond to this point in particular.

Alhazred wrote:

Anathema wrote:

Quote :

Because all unwanted pregnancies are the result of consensual, non coerced sex.

All all heterosexual men rapists? Because if not, there is such a thing as a woman who can choose not to have sex by saying "no."

inb4 "I never said that lolololol". Guess I'm just reading your subtext wrong. Perhaps you should make your point more clearly next time, eh?

What subtext, exactly? I said if there is such a thing as a man who is not a rapist, there is such a thing as a woman who can choose not to have sex by saying "no." There's really nothing subtext about that.

You can babble about coercion all you want, but unless the man is willing to result to physical force, the woman can still say no. And if he is, well, then, he's a rapist. Not much debate on that.

You see, everyone, this is why it's all the fault of the woman. And if you say otherwise, than why do you hate men you bastard?

Anathema wrote:

Mr. Doobie did a fantastic job of responding to this post, but I'd really just like to respond to this point in particular.

Alhazred wrote:

Anathema wrote:

Quote :

Because all unwanted pregnancies are the result of consensual, non coerced sex.

All all heterosexual men rapists? Because if not, there is such a thing as a woman who can choose not to have sex by saying "no."

inb4 "I never said that lolololol". Guess I'm just reading your subtext wrong. Perhaps you should make your point more clearly next time, eh?

What subtext, exactly? I said if there is such a thing as a man who is not a rapist, there is such a thing as a woman who can choose not to have sex by saying "no." There's really nothing subtext about that.

You can babble about coercion all you want, but unless the man is willing to result to physical force, the woman can still say no. And if he is, well, then, he's a rapist. Not much debate on that.

And you can whinge about how "she can just say no" and act as though no consequences will follow when the reality is, in some cases, she can't just say no. I understand exactly where you're coming from, and it's a slimy, disgustingly misogynistic place.

I'm sorry, guys, I didn't mean to let the thread get derailed. I realize doing this is like banging my head against a wall.

Anathema wrote:

Anathema wrote:

Mr. Doobie did a fantastic job of responding to this post, but I'd really just like to respond to this point in particular.

Alhazred wrote:

Anathema wrote:

Quote :

Because all unwanted pregnancies are the result of consensual, non coerced sex.

All all heterosexual men rapists? Because if not, there is such a thing as a woman who can choose not to have sex by saying "no."

inb4 "I never said that lolololol". Guess I'm just reading your subtext wrong. Perhaps you should make your point more clearly next time, eh?

What subtext, exactly? I said if there is such a thing as a man who is not a rapist, there is such a thing as a woman who can choose not to have sex by saying "no." There's really nothing subtext about that.

You can babble about coercion all you want, but unless the man is willing to result to physical force, the woman can still say no. And if he is, well, then, he's a rapist. Not much debate on that.

And you can whinge about how "she can just say no" and act as though no consequences will follow when the reality is, in some cases, she can't just say no. I understand exactly where you're coming from, and it's a slimy, disgustingly misogynistic place.

I'm sorry, guys, I didn't mean to let the thread get derailed. I realize doing this is like banging my head against a wall.

I hope you're not looking for Misguided Act of Righteous Zeal points.

Anathema wrote:

And you can whinge about how "she can just say no" and act as though no consequences will follow when the reality is, in some cases, she can't just say no. I understand exactly where you're coming from, and it's a slimy, disgustingly misogynistic place.

I'm sorry, guys, I didn't mean to let the thread get derailed. I realize doing this is like banging my head against a wall.

What "consequences," exactly, are there when a woman says no to a man who isn't a rapist? That he and his friends will call her an ice queen? Oh no, peer pressure!

Alhazred wrote:

Anathema wrote:

And you can whinge about how "she can just say no" and act as though no consequences will follow when the reality is, in some cases, she can't just say no. I understand exactly where you're coming from, and it's a slimy, disgustingly misogynistic place.

I'm sorry, guys, I didn't mean to let the thread get derailed. I realize doing this is like banging my head against a wall.

What "consequences," exactly, are there when a woman says no to a man who isn't a rapist? That he and his friends will call her an ice queen? Oh no, peer pressure!

You've never been an uncertain teenager who just wants to find a place to feel where they belong and have friends, have you?

Yes, I have, along with almost everyone in modern civilization. Shockingly, I came out of it without a persecution complex or the belief that "I just want to be liked!" would place the fault for my actions on the people responsible for the peer pressure.

Who gives a shit if these women consented to sex or not?! Jesus Christ, people, stop playing into this misogynistic fuckface's hands. They wanted an abortion, were prevented from obtaining one legally, and felt as if they had no choice but to go to a back-alley butcher.

Let me say that again. THEY WERE PREVENTED FROM OBTAINING ONE LEGALLY - either through lack of money, or cultural reasons, or fear, or because the closest abortion clinic is two counties over, or because a mandatory waiting period means more time off work they can't afford, whatever.

This is the world that abortion clinic protesters want to build. This is the one that KelinciHutan and "her cause" wish to bring about. This state of affairs exists because Liberal Dudes insist that ladies shut up about their "special interests" in the name of "the big picture", and anyway here's the protocol that women who want an abortion should follow and men have a right to know about it and blah blah blah. It exists because old celibate men who live in Rome and turn a blind eye to the widespread rape of children think they can dictate to women what to do with their bodies.

Stop debating whether or not these women were raped with this disgusting, woman-hating piece of shit. Every time you do, you're implying that certain women deserve the luxury of an abortion, and other women should suck it up and pay the price for their whoring.

And if you can't stop, put the long streak of Alsation diarrhea on Ignore. It makes the forum a lot more bearable, believe me.

Alhazred wrote:

What "consequences," exactly, are there when a woman says no to a man who isn't a rapist?

How does she know if he's a rapist or not without saying no?

What does that have to do with anything?

Cyberwulf wrote:

Who gives a shit if these women consented to sex or not?! Jesus Christ, people, stop playing into this misogynistic fuckface's hands. They wanted an abortion, were prevented from obtaining one legally, and felt as if they had no choice but to go to a back-alley butcher.

Let me say that again. THEY WERE PREVENTED FROM OBTAINING ONE LEGALLY - either through lack of money, or cultural reasons, or fear, or because the closest abortion clinic is two counties over, or because a mandatory waiting period means more time off work they can't afford, whatever.

This is the world that abortion clinic protesters want to build. This is the one that KelinciHutan and "her cause" wish to bring about. This state of affairs exists because Liberal Dudes insist that ladies shut up about their "special interests" in the name of "the big picture", and anyway here's the protocol that women who want an abortion should follow and men have a right to know about it and blah blah blah. It exists because old celibate men who live in Rome and turn a blind eye to the widespread rape of children think they can dictate to women what to do with their bodies.

Stop debating whether or not these women were raped with this disgusting, woman-hating piece of shit. Every time you do, you're implying that certain women deserve the luxury of an abortion, and other women should suck it up and pay the price for their whoring.

And if you can't stop, put the long streak of Alsation diarrhea on Ignore. It makes the forum a lot more bearable, believe me.

Cyberwulf wrote:

Who gives a shit if these women consented to sex or not?! Jesus Christ, people, stop playing into this misogynistic fuckface's hands. They wanted an abortion, were prevented from obtaining one legally, and felt as if they had no choice but to go to a back-alley butcher.

Let me say that again. THEY WERE PREVENTED FROM OBTAINING ONE LEGALLY - either through lack of money, or cultural reasons, or fear, or because the closest abortion clinic is two counties over, or because a mandatory waiting period means more time off work they can't afford, whatever.

This is the world that abortion clinic protesters want to build. This is the one that KelinciHutan and "her cause" wish to bring about. This state of affairs exists because Liberal Dudes insist that ladies shut up about their "special interests" in the name of "the big picture", and anyway here's the protocol that women who want an abortion should follow and men have a right to know about it and blah blah blah. It exists because old celibate men who live in Rome and turn a blind eye to the widespread rape of children think they can dictate to women what to do with their bodies.

Stop debating whether or not these women were raped with this disgusting, woman-hating piece of shit. Every time you do, you're implying that certain women deserve the luxury of an abortion, and other women should suck it up and pay the price for their whoring.

And if you can't stop, put the long streak of Alsation diarrhea on Ignore. It makes the forum a lot more bearable, believe me.

Oh, Cyberwulf, I love you so much sometimes.