Doctor Treating Pregnant Women With Experimental Drug To Prevent Lesbianism

TheHedonist wrote:

While the things this 'treatment' is supposed to 'fix' may be unfeminine behavior (and that is vile), it's not only female fetuses this would happen to because it's administered before the sex is decided (or can be known). So, yes, while most of the effects are targeted at women, the side-effects (brain damage, etc.) will still effect many men if it becomes common practice. He's not saying 'GUYS IT'S SO MUCH MORE HORRIBLE IF IT HAPPENS TO MEN, LET'S FOCUS ON THE MEN MEN MEN MEN', he's saying 'Hey guys it's pretty fucked up that they're doing this to fetuses at all, don't you think? Because it effects fetuses of both genders.' Like you once told me, Cy, the patriarchy doesn't just harm women.

It is a result of the patriarchy. Which is why we were bloody talking about it.

As for educating people about gender issues, I definitely understand Cyberwulf's frustration. After all, there were plenty of perfectly measured posts beforehand, and Somath still didn't get it. I guess the question is: does he get it now. Somath? Somath?

TheHedonist wrote:

'Hey guys it's pretty fucked up that they're doing this to fetuses at all, don't you think? Because it effects fetuses of both genders.'

That. That right there. Thank you so very much. Any further questions? Or am I still to be raged at because I think that at times certain things take precedence over Feminism?

One thing I wonder about is just who decides what is "unfeminine". Doesn't that vary from culture to culture? For example, one culture might say, "Women doctors? How disgusting! Women shouldn't be doctors!", while another might say, "Women doctors? Of course women should be doctors! Everyone knows that!"

Somath Cegem wrote:

TheHedonist wrote:

'Hey guys it's pretty fucked up that they're doing this to fetuses at all, don't you think? Because it effects fetuses of both genders.'

That. That right there. Thank you so very much. Any further questions? Or am I still to be raged at because I think that at times certain things take precedence over Feminism?

You just don't get it, do you?

This is being done to foetuses of all genders because of that thing feminists are pissed off about: the patriarchal model of how women should be. This sort of thing wouldn't be happening if we didn't live in a culture that values and devalues certain roles and characteristics. Shit like this will continue to happen for as long as this system exists.

And that is why this is relevant. Please tell me you get it now. Please.

ZoZo wrote:

And that is why this is relevant. Please tell me you get it now. Please.

Never said it wasn't relevant, I just stated my belief that the anti-gay sentiment of these experiments was much stronger than that of of the Anti-Feminist sentiment.
That and even if this wasn't the case it's not just anti-women not fitting into little boxes it's anti ANYBODY not fitting into little boxes and as such is not purely a feminist issue but an EVERY BUGGER ON THE PLANET issue.
Have I made myself clear or I do I need to all caps it before it sinks in.
Yes this might be a slight against what you fight for, but it spits in the eye of so many other bloody things I cannot even believe that the supposedly clever and empathetic person you can be over looked then in favour of just hammering the feminist angle home.

All I did was ask why nobody was mentioning the anti-gay rights angle which seemed to me to be the stronger issue, I didn't say that you shouldn't be talking about how it was anti-feminist, just there was other things wrong with this picture that people seemed to be ignoring and for that I'm sorry because apparently that upset you, though I cannot for the life of me figure out why.

ZoZo wrote:

Somath Cegem wrote:

TheHedonist wrote:

'Hey guys it's pretty fucked up that they're doing this to fetuses at all, don't you think? Because it effects fetuses of both genders.'

That. That right there. Thank you so very much. Any further questions? Or am I still to be raged at because I think that at times certain things take precedence over Feminism?

You just don't get it, do you?

This is being done to foetuses of all genders because of that thing feminists are pissed off about: the patriarchal model of how women should be. This sort of thing wouldn't be happening if we didn't live in a culture that values and devalues certain roles and characteristics. Shit like this will continue to happen for as long as this system exists.

Agreed.

Another reason, or culprit, for this sort of thing is the idea that children have no rights and are essentially the chattel of their parents. Think about it -- in Western society, particularly America, we allow things to be done to our non-consenting babies and young children to "beautify" or "normalize" them that would be considered criminal assault if those same operations were performed on non-consenting adults. Any form of childhood genital alteration for cosmetic purposes falls into the category of being form over function, aesthetics over utility, with a vengeance, and it's being done to a category of people where it is assumed that it will make their lives better so that they will be more "normal" (or more "beautiful" or "sexy", normal being considered both of these) -- e.i., fit into their gender roles as adults. Like the doctor who was blank-faced after being asked what his girl patients would want as adults, or how their clitorises would function as adults, and responded only that he was operating on children, we don't think of these children as one day growing up and wanting something different for themselves and their bodies. It's assumed that they will always want what their parents' generation did for them.

Think about it: if we had a culture where altering a child's body -- not to save their life, but to make their genitals "normal" or "pretty" or "masculine" or "feminine" -- was considered barbaric and criminal, things like this wouldn't happen, or when they did they would be met with such a firestorm that it would immediately stop. If we had a culture where children were seen as having a right to genital and gender integrity, if it was seen as fundamentally unethical for a parent or a doctor to push cosmetic genital alteration, whether through surgery or drugs, on a child, the Dix Poppases of the world wouldn't have jobs. It's like Verandering said in the FGM thread -- this issue affects all of us.

I honestly don't know if what I'm describing above is part of the patriarchy -- others know more about this than I. I suspect it is but would be interested to know.

e: Somath, I will say that while I can see what you're saying -- and I agree that if some parents had a way to make their male children "not gay", or they thought they had a way, they would definitely do it, that hypothetical case would be anti-male and anti-gay, as well as being anti-human choice in general. This is anti-woman, anti-gay, and anti-intersex, since CAH is an intersex condition. There's a lot of prejudices interwoven here. You are right in that the anti-gay thing has not really been touched on in this thread like perhaps it should, though I also see ZoZo's points as well.

Somath Cegem wrote:

ZoZo wrote:

And that is why this is relevant. Please tell me you get it now. Please.

Never said it wasn't relevant, I just stated my belief that the anti-gay sentiment of these experiments was much stronger than that of of the Anti-Feminist sentiment.
That and even if this wasn't the case it's not just anti-women not fitting into little boxes it's anti ANYBODY not fitting into little boxes and as such is not purely a feminist issue but an EVERY BUGGER ON THE PLANET issue.
Have I made myself clear or I do I need to all caps it before it sinks in.
Yes this might be a slight against what you fight for, but it spits in the eye of so many other bloody things I cannot even believe that the supposedly clever and empathetic person you can be over looked then in favour of just hammering the feminist angle home.

All I did was ask why nobody was mentioning the anti-gay rights angle which seemed to me to be the stronger issue, I didn't say that you shouldn't be talking about how it was anti-feminist, just there was other things wrong with this picture that people seemed to be ignoring and for that I'm sorry because apparently that upset you, though I cannot for the life of me figure out why.

You are still missing this point:
It's a gay issue. It's a feminist issue. They are entangled. You cannot separate these issues.

Gender and sexual identity are intertwined. An affront to one is very frequently an affront to another. This is because of the patriarchy--now, this word is often associated with feminists, but women are not the only ones who get the raw end of the deal. It's a system which values white, able-bodied, heterosexual cisgendered men above all others. There are prescribed roles. Women, for example, must be subservient and willing to please men and then carry their babies. This means, of course, that heterosexuality is how women are supposed to be. Sexual identity is an integral part of the patriarchy. Being gay is wrong. Being heterosexual is right.

That foetuses are being subjected to dubious, possibly harmful treatments due to these entrenched notions about how people should behave, I think you'll find it's a feminist issue.

Do you get it now?

ZoZo wrote:

That foetuses are being subjected to dubious, possibly harmful treatments due to these entrenched notions about how people should behave, I think you'll find it's a feminist issue.

Do you get it now?

I'm going to say this one last time.

IT'S!

NOT!

JUST!

A FEMINIST!

ISSUE!

It's a simple point, one I made quite innocently, wondering why nobody was talking about anything other than why this was bad from a feminist view point.

It's Bad Science, It's Bad Parenting, It's Anti-Gay, The poor kids are prolly gonna be screwed up emotionally physically and chemically, It's bad government for letting this shit happen and it's a massive comment on American Society that stuff liek this even got this far.
And yet, all I saw was people are talking about, is how this is bad because it's forcing girls to act a certain way.
And so I asked, was why.

Somath Cegem wrote:

ZoZo wrote:

That foetuses are being subjected to dubious, possibly harmful treatments due to these entrenched notions about how people should behave, I think you'll find it's a feminist issue.

Do you get it now?

I'm going to say this one last time.

IT'S!

NOT!

JUST!

A FEMINIST!

ISSUE!

It's a simple point, one I made quite innocently, wondering why nobody was talking about anything other than why this was bad from a feminist view point.

It's Bad Science, It's Bad Parenting, It's Anti-Gay, The poor kids are prolly gonna be screwed up emotionally physically and chemically, It's bad government for letting this shit happen and it's a massive comment on American Society that stuff liek this even got this far.
And yet, all I saw was people are talking about, is how this is bad because it's forcing girls to act a certain way.
And so I asked, was why.

You miss my fucking point yet again. It is not just a feminist issue. It is a feminist issue, which is why we are discussing the implications from this perspective.

You also missed all of the points you raised discussed earlier in the thread. Do please try to read the whole thread before moaning about those dreadful feminists.

ETA: I have always wanted you to understand these issues, but you just seem to get pissy and defensive whenever I mention issues pertaining to feminism or queer politics. I really do want you to understand it. You're a nice bloke, but you see the world through this privileged lens.

Don't try to question it Somath, just let it go.

ZoZo wrote:

It is not just a feminist issue. It is a feminist issue

Yes, but it is not only a feminist issue, which, if you've actually read my posts instead of looking at the words and deciding what they mean, is what I was trying to say, and I will say it again.
Why, save for the odd ignored by all others post, is the feminist angle the only one being discussed when there are other things wrong with this scenario?
So far I have yet to have been given an answer, just been told why this is a feminist issue (which I never doubted) and that I'm wrong for saying what I have (which I'm not).

Oh and I know about other points being posted about, I made the point about it being bad science myself, on page 1, was completely ignored.

Somath Cegem wrote:

Why, save for the odd ignored by all others post, is the feminist angle the only one being discussed when there are other things wrong with this scenario?

'Cause hobbyhorsing is fun!

Nihilist wrote:

The reason I posted this is because of how it was like eugenics. It seems the medical community is taking a stance against people who are different because they don't fit the mold of a heterosexual human being. It's highly likely that the doctor's prejudice reflects society's overall ignorance and fear of people who are different from them. And who knows, maybe the doctor will refuse to care for someone, say a man that needs a pap smear or a woman that needs a prostate exam. And perhaps their negligence will result in a patient dying.

Oh, it's happened... this documentary called "Southern Comfort" is about a transman, Robert Eads, who was denied medical care for his ovarian cancer, which killed him.

Somath Cegem wrote:

TheHedonist wrote:

'Hey guys it's pretty fucked up that they're doing this to fetuses at all, don't you think? Because it effects fetuses of both genders.'

That. That right there. Thank you so very much. Any further questions? Or am I still to be raged at because I think that at times certain things take precedence over Feminism?

Hahahaha.

I love that you think
1) it's a case of hierarchy and that we have to prioritise homophobia over misogyny
2) that equality for women is something that can be pushed to the bottom of the list WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT FEMALE FOETUSES BEING EXPERIMENTED ON TO MAKE THEM MORE FEMININE.

Somath Cegem wrote:

ZoZo wrote:

And that is why this is relevant. Please tell me you get it now. Please.

Never said it wasn't relevant, I just stated my belief that the anti-gay sentiment of these experiments was much stronger than that of of the Anti-Feminist sentiment.

They're ANTI-WOMAN sentiments.

Quote :

Yes this might be a slight against what you fight for,

A slight? A fucking SLIGHT? Someone wants to genetically engineer dutiful little housewives, eradicating "masculine" notions like "not having babies" and "getting a job" and you have the fucking nerve to call it a SLIGHT?

Quote :

All I did was ask why nobody was mentioning the anti-gay rights angle which seemed to me to be the stronger issue,

No you didn't. You came in here and scolded us for talking about feminism and femininity as if they were off-topic. If you wanted to talk about the implications for homosexuality, you could've done so without whining at us to shut our traps about feminism. But you didn't. Now reap the whirlwind.

Quote :

I didn't say that you shouldn't be talking about how it was anti-feminist,

You asked us to "reign it in".

Quote :

just there was other things wrong with this picture that people seemed to be ignoring and for that I'm sorry because apparently that upset you, though I cannot for the life of me figure out why.

Because whenever we do talk about feminism, or gender issues, you roll your eyes and tune out.

Somath Cegem wrote:

IT'S!

NOT!

JUST!

A FEMINIST!

ISSUE!

You don't think it's a feminist issue at all, McGee! If you did you wouldn't have scolded us for taking over the place with talk of feminism. You wouldn't have suggested we "reign it in" because it was off-topic.

Quote :

And yet, all I saw was people are talking about, is how this is bad because it's forcing girls to act a certain way.

Because that's a trivial issue compared to everything else, right?

I have a feeling you'd have ZERO problem with us discussing stereotypical masculinity if male foetuses were being injected with bull testosterone to make sure they grow up beefy studs who don't talk about their feeling and like to cook outdoors.

Penguin wrote:

'Cause hobbyhorsing is fun!

Wanting to be treated like a human being instead of a sex object/domestic servant/baby-machine = a "hobbyhorse".

Cyberwulf wrote:

Because whenever we do talk about feminism, or gender issues, you roll your eyes and tune out.

I wonder why.

Penguin wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

Because whenever we do talk about feminism, or gender issues, you roll your eyes and tune out.

I wonder why.

Another one who rolls his eyes and tunes out. Women who want to be treated the same as men are just "hobbyhorsing", after all.

I've been following this thread closely, and haven't really been tempted to stick my oar in until now [God knows what happened the last time I joined in one of these little debates [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] ], but god forbid the posts in a thread discussing feminism-related news be focused on, y'know, feminism.

Here's an idea: until these posts start spilling into threads where other things are the focus of discussion, I think people should stop trying to restrict the likes of Cyberwulf and Co. [the deadly patriarchy combat squad!] on how they should post.

Penguin wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

Because whenever we do talk about feminism, or gender issues, you roll
your eyes and tune out.

I wonder why.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Somath Cegem wrote:

It's a simple point, one I made quite innocently, wondering why nobody was talking about anything other than why this was bad from a feminist view point.

We've mentioned the gay viewpoint, the trans viewpoint, the intersexed viewpoint, and the viewpoint of reasonable people who are against dosing fetuses with steroids. We went on a little tangent about the patriarchy because Psy-4 started arguing about it.

Also, I'd say in this particular case the harm done to women, intersexed, gay, and trans people all comes from the same set of repressive binary gender norms. So gender theory (which generally gets conflated with feminist theory) is really the key concept here.

Somath Cegem wrote:

ZoZo wrote:

It is not just a feminist issue. It is a feminist issue

Yes, but it is not only a feminist issue

You do... you do realize you quoted her and repeated exactly what she just said, right? That this argument is weird and circular?

It's like... you're arguing, but you just said the exact same thing ZoZo did. She goes on to acknowledge that you have a point, and then you blow that off.

wtf's goin on here

InkWeaver wrote:

Somath Cegem wrote:

ZoZo wrote:

It is not just a feminist issue. It is a feminist issue

Yes, but it is not only a feminist issue

You do... you do realize you quoted her and repeated exactly what she just said, right? That this argument is weird and circular?

It's like... you're arguing, but you just said the exact same thing ZoZo did. She goes on to acknowledge that you have a point, and then you blow that off.

wtf's goin on here

It's like that story about the four blind men who come across an elephant. One grabs the ear and says that elephants are like leaves, another grabs the leg and says, no, elephants are like treetrunks, another grabs the tail and says, you're both wrong, elephants are OBVIOUSLY like paintbrushes and I forget what the last blind man grabbed, except they continued bickering about it, none of them willing to relent, each one convinced that he is ABSOLUTELY RIGHT AND YOU GUYS ARE SO TOTALLY WRONG.

Jay/Cris wrote:

Sutremaine wrote:

If he's not familiar with the concept of gender after all the time he's spent here, it's his own damn fault.

Yes. Cheesing off the guys who are willing to learn seems like the way to about things, don't it?

He's either not willing to learn, or his observational skills are so poor that his intentions are irrelevant. The post that started this latest part of the thread was about how we sit down and be quiet, eh, and he's spent the rest of the topic stating his views over and over again (in caps, even) in the hope that, I dunno, we'll suddenly see sense and stop talking about why the creation of straight women is considered an acceptable goal.

Certainly it's going to affect the foetuses in this study that turn out to be male, but if these people weren't trying to control female behaviour even before said females are even born then the problem wouldn't exist at all.

InkWeaver wrote:

Somath Cegem wrote:

ZoZo wrote:

It is not just a feminist issue. It is a feminist issue

Yes, but it is not only a feminist issue

You do... you do realize you quoted her and repeated exactly what she just said, right? That this argument is weird and circular?

It's like... you're arguing, but you just said the exact same thing ZoZo did. She goes on to acknowledge that you have a point, and then you blow that off.

wtf's goin on here

Thanks, Inky.

Also, Somath, you are still missing the pissing point. This issue is due to the patriarchy. While this is a term typically used by feminists, it also applies to gay people, trans people, etc. Just because we are using a word mostly used by feminists doesn't mean we're ignoring anyone else. Jesus fucking Christ.

Saeku, eloquently put point regarding feminist theory and gender theory. To an outsider, those are particularly indistinguishable.

Does this make ANY sense to you, Somath? In a thread like that, you can't tell us to rein in the big long feminist words and thoughts. Because it's intimately connected.

Yeah, the guys aren't the only ones "tuning the argument out" this time. What I'm getting from this thread and the HUGE BLOCKS OF TEXT as well as the QUOTE PYRAMIDS OF DOOM! (well, ok, they're not really huge quote pyramids, and certainly not of doom) is this: "News article is horrible blah blah blah feminism blah blah blah you're wrong blah blah blah no I'm not blah blah blah anti-gay-woman-feminist something blah blah blah patriarchy blah blah blah".