Sorry, Matt Walsh From The Blaze, I'm Not Offended by Caitlyn Jenner

I recently read a piece on The Blaze by Matt Walsh which made me feel the need to put my thoughts to keyboard.  This lovely piece explained why feminists, and more importantly women, should be offended by Caitlyn Jenner.  It is always so marvelous to have a conservative leaning male tell women when they should feel something.  I have no issues with Caitlyn Jenner.  I don’t know her.  I’ve never been interested in sports.  So, beyond hoping she finds happiness in her transition, I really have very little thoughts regarding her.  (Both before and after the announcement of being transgender.)

There is no reason for feminists to be offended by Caitlyn Jenner.  Feminism, actual feminism and not the stereotype of “man haters”, is about equality.  This equality extends to people not being pressured to conform to gender expectations.  This means not just women, but men also.  If a man wishes to wear a dress or if he cries at a sad movie, these normally feminine things do not make him less.  Jenner’s statements about feeling like a woman or thinking like a woman aren’t offensive.  We have a society in which there are decidedly masculine and feminine ways of thinking and actions.  Jenner relates to the feminine.  If we lived in a society where there were not the perceived masculine and feminine spheres of thought, behavior, and appropriateness then would Jenner’s transition even be an issue? So, no, I don’t see a reason for feminists to be offended because generally feminism disagrees with the concept of what is properly masculine or feminine, which without these concepts Jenner could have been true to herself much sooner.  

Walsh also argues that feminism states that since men do not have a uterus or vagina they are not allowed to discuss women’s issues.  I think he’s misunderstood what has been meant.  There is room for all in discussion, but demanding what others can or can’t do with their vagina or uterus isn’t acceptable.  And really, this isn’t excluding men but more of a statement of “everyone makes their own choices for their own vagina and uterus.”  It isn’t just saying men shouldn’t dictate what happens but saying a person decides what happens with their own body.  Men have authority over their own bodies; there is no public discussion over what should be required from their body parts.  Women have long had their bodies be the subject of public discussion with men having the means to make the policies that effects women's vaginas and uteri.

The fact that Jenner calls this his authentic self is belittled.  This is blatantly twisted to serve the purpose of claiming Jenner is undermining the attempt for “natural beauty” to be accepted.  First of all, authentic means “real or genuine; true and accurate”, so if Jenner has lived for decades hiding his inner self behind the appearance of a masculine athlete, admits he was living in a way that didn’t reflect the inner him, then Jenner is now being authentic if this reflects the true her.  Secondly, there is a demand for accepting natural beauty in entertainment, but that doesn’t mean that it is wrong for a woman to have cosmetic procedures.  The movement is for accepting women of all shapes, sizes, and builds.  There is a fight to recognize that to be beautiful a woman doesn’t have to have a certain set of measurements, wear a certain size, or look a certain way.  There is a fight to stop the cookie cutter standards.  There is a difference though in cosmetic measures to fit society’s standard of beauty and cosmetic measures to feel more comfortable with yourself.  For some people surgery (be it to enhance their breasts or change their nose) makes them feel more comfortable, for someone else surgery to remove a birthmark might make them more comfortable in their own skin.  No one bats an eye over the amount of contact lenses, particularly tinted, that are sold in the country.  Most people, not just women, feel a little better about themselves when they do something they feel improves their appearance, be that new clothes, new hairstyle, teeth whiting, or any other number of things people do.  We can’t confuse things done for them with the fight against only one standard of beauty. 

Now, for the reason that women should be offended.  Women are beautiful and special, and are so because they hold the organs that can carry a pregnancy.  The enlightening piece explains that women should be very offended Jenner is lacking the anatomy needed to carry a pregnancy yet claiming to be a woman, and this makes a mockery of the essential beauty of women.  Really, this just boils down to women are important because they can have children.  A woman becomes a woman when she gives birth.  By this standard there are plenty of us that don’t qualify as women.  I know women that can’t have children; it is just not in their ability to give birth to a child because of medical problems.  I know women that could have a child but don’t want to have one.  I have children, but due to a hysterectomy cannot have any more.  I would guess that means I had my beauty surgically removed.  Personally, I think there should be plenty of women that have been through menopause, had a hysterectomy, that endure infertility, or just don’t wish to have children that should be more offended by this notion of what makes women beautiful than Caitlyn Jenner identifying as a woman.

Supposedly women pay for their title because “she suffers with that title and gives life with that title”, once again placing a woman’s value in what happens with one part of our body.  This ignores both the varied experience of women and their other values to society.  We are just uteri, and our worth is judged by that organ.  For someone so worried about if transgender can or cannot coexist with feminism (which based on feminism being the desire for equality there isn’t a reason for it not to), the reasoning why women should be so deeply offended by Caitlyn Jenner really clashes with feminism.

Walsh accuses Jenner of appropriating womanhood.  There is no clear cut way to be a woman.  Some women can do flawless cat’s eye eyeliner with little effort; while others are baffled by eye shadow.  A woman can dress in frilly dresses, yoga pants, jeans; what is right for her to wear is based on her tastes.  A woman can enjoy planting flower beds, playing on a soccer league, sewing quilts, rebuilding a Mustang, baking cookies, hunting deer, being pampered at a spa, or tailgating before the game of their favorite sports team. There is such a vast variety of ways to be a woman.  I couldn’t possibly write a single thing that a woman absolutely should do to be a woman because regardless of what it is there’s bound to be some women that don’t do that. 

 

There are some experiences that we do consider strongly female.  One of those is loud judgements based on our appearance.  Welcome to that club, Caitlyn.  Once people discussed your winning the gold medal in the decathlon, referred to you as the “World’s Greatest Athlete”, but now how you look is more important.

No More

I have said for a long time that I have feminist leanings.  This isn’t exactly true.  I’m a feminist, but how could I not be?  Especially after having a daughter.  While I grew up with the status quo, it doesn’t mean that she has to accept that this is just how things are and will be.

One of the issues that ignite my anger the most is rape.  How can the idea of rape not make people furious?  It shouldn’t be possible to accept that someone can be forced to have their body violated.  It is so completely unacceptable.  This is something that there shouldn’t be excuses for; something that should enrage anyone.  The incredibly crazy part is it doesn’t.  Excuses are made, the victims are blamed.  Even though the term date rape is part of our awareness, it’s still just ignored.  On fictional cop shows the rapist goes to prison, reality is a report probably won’t be taken seriously.

I have, unfortunately, had several friends that have been raped.  This is just the friends that have admitted that it has happened; who knows how many people I know that won’t admit it because of fear of being judged.  Consider that the U.S. Department of Justice states that in America a woman is raped every 2 minutes, the estimates of 37%, possibly as low as 26%, of rapes are even reported, and 92% of rapes the victim knows the attacker.  Yet we have politicians that classify between rape and “real rape”.  They aren’t the only ones, that’s the really sad part!

As I’ve said, I’ve had several friends that have experienced this problem.  None of them would qualify as “real rape”.  I had a friend go on a date, and while she was willing to kiss him she didn’t agree to sex, but he decided that she was going to anyway.  I have another friend that made the poor choice of drinking underage while on Spring Break; a guy drugged her drink.  She had some fuzzy memories, but knew something happened by her lack of clothing.  She didn’t feel comfortable reporting that she had been raped by two guys she didn’t know while she’d been drinking underage.  Really, they would have put zero effort into finding the guys but she would have been charged for underage drinking.  A friend that had an ex decide that even though she was saying no she really meant yes.  These are typical situations.  Honestly, I have a few women that I’ve known that were raped (they said no, they absolutely did not wish to have sex, but out of fear of being injured didn’t fight, but instead just “laid there and took it”), but they would insist that they weren’t really raped because they accepted the sex that was forced onto them.  THIS is also rape!  If you say no, you don’t want it, but are afraid of how severely he will hurt you if you don’t just lay there, possibly cry silently during it, then that is rape.  Yet all of these things are not what some lawmakers, prosecutors, and even police officers would call “real rape”.  For “real rape” you can’t know the man that attacks you (which statistically she’s more likely to know him) and you must fight using every ounce of strength that you have (because if he has not properly beaten you into submission you must have wanted it, but don’t let him beat you into unconsciousness because then it can be questioned if you consented by not continuing to fight.)  This is still the reality of what women face after being violated. 

We live in a society that cares more about analyzing how much the victim might have wanted it than protecting us.  What the woman was wearing still matters.  If she had ever had sex with him in the past still matters.  If she let him in her car or home (or has done so in the past) still matters.  Realistically, if I were to answer my door in the summer in short shorts and my ex was standing at the door asking to use the phone because his car broke down outside and he decided to rape me, odds are if I reported it there would be little done about it.  The culture of “what did the victim do?” still wins.  It shouldn’t matter if she was wearing a sundress that shows (gasp) her legs and shoulders, if she’s had sex before (and hence, would be willing to do it again), or is a virgin (and hence, just wants to claim it was rape so people won’t think badly of her), or any of the other excuses that are used.  I’d like to believe that in 2014 these things wouldn’t matter, but they do.

There have been improvements, don’t get me wrong.  Date rape is now part of our vocabulary, even if it is highly unlikely for it to actually be taken seriously legally.  Back in high school (many moons ago) I had a teacher (ironically, I believe, for sociology) and we had an interesting class discussion about his belief that girls shouldn’t have premarital sex, his belief that if you did it was a sign that you’d have sex with anyone, and how there were certain signs (like how you dress or if you smoke) that you were “easy”.  Mind you, I went to high school in the 1990’s, not the 1950’s.  For him, this wasn’t just his belief, but this was reality.  Unless you completely behaved a certain way it was a neon sign of being ready and willing.  His attitude isn’t completely aligning with mainstream thought at this point, but we are still too close to his views.

We like to think that we are more evolved.  I have seen articles about women, primarily in the Middle East, that are killed for being victims.  We think we are beyond punishing the victim.  We ARE NOT.  If a woman has the courage to go to the police she will face some very difficult moments.  There will be the hospital rape kit, which is humiliating in itself even though it is necessary to collect the evidence needed.  The having to repeat over and over what happened to you.  The woman has will be asked questions about her life, such as how many sexual partners she’s had and her sexual habits.  If, by chance, the police take it seriously and the prosecutor is willing to pursue the charges, any possible aspect of her life will be brought up as defense.  She once had a one night stand with a guy?  Well, then why should anyone believe that the man that raped her had to?  Rape allegations are the case where the victim has to try to prove that they’re not lying about the crime. 

This is part of why I am a feminist.  My daughter should not grow up thinking that by wearing something that a man finds intriguing (which literally could be anything), walking anywhere alone, being alone with someone that she thinks she can trust, or just not fighting as hard as she could have because of fear makes being violated alright.  It’s never alright, ever.  Right now though, she lives in a world where that’s how it works, but it shouldn’t have to stay that way.

But How Are the Chlorine Levels?

I have been a bit preachy. I would apologize but then again his is my area and I can do what I want. I kind of look at this way:

I am not a strong swimmer. I manage and am fairly sure I won't drown. Mind you, only in the last year would you actually see me in the deep end of a real pool, but I realized I'm actually able to keep from drowning. Of course I'm still not ready to jump in a lake. Because of this I spend time in the deep end and in the shallow end. I take some time to push myself in the deep, but I also go over to the shallow to relax and enjoy. Life needs to be the same way. Sometimes you need to venture into the deep, test yourself and push your comfort limits. You also need some time to relax your muscles and recoup for another journey into the deep. 

I have been paddling in the mentally semi-deep here. My kids get the shallow end, at least when I'm not nagging them to clean up their mess. I will express more shallow, just for fun... eventually. I think mostly I express more of a mid-pool, 4' range here, but the last few might have been more 5-6'. Sometimes though we just need to work through our deeper stuff. 

Start a Fight: The New Self Defense

This George Zimmerman case is bothering me.  From the beginning I have been disgusted by the death of Trayvon Martin.  Now following the verdict I continue to be disgusted.

Don’t get me wrong, I can see the reason for the verdict.  Florida has the most lenient self defense laws around and based on the evidence and the charges pursued it really wasn’t a surprise.  I am liberal enough that I do feel that unless all reasonable doubt has been removed the right choice is not guilty.  I am also rational enough to know that sometimes your gut tells you when something is wrong, even if based on our court system the person facing charges must be let go.  It can be flawed, but it is a decent system designed to (hopefully) prevent the innocent from being wrongly convicted.  Sometimes the innocent are found guilty, sometimes the guilty go free, but as a perfect system is not possible I am not disgusted by the system we have.  Sometimes our laws do interfere with the right judgment being made.

I haven’t followed the case extensively; I just don’t have the time for that kind of thing.  I acknowledge that Trayvon wasn’t an angel.  I’ve read he had a few run ins with the authorities in the past, but then again from what I’ve read the same could be said for George.  It is clear that Trayvon wasn’t up to anything, he was just walking; George didn’t know this, but then again I feel that it shows a certain level of bias that his assumption was the kid was up to no good.  He called 911, which I think is a realistic thing to do if you have concerns.  I once called the police because I saw someone messing with a manhole in the street in front of our house in the middle of the night.  The police checked and found that city workers had been called in for an emergency situation.  I did what I think most normal people would do, contact authorities instead of directly approaching a person.  George decided, despite the recommendation from the operator not to, to follow and approach Trayvon.  This seems to be the big disagreement point, what followed after George notified 911.  I have seen, in my opinion, far too many people that feel George was in the right in following and approaching Trayvon, that Trayvon’s reaction (which isn’t clear) and the altercation that happened justified George in shooting Trayvon.

Let me tell you a little story.  Back when I was pregnant with my oldest child I had a prenatal appointment.  The only parking was in a poorly lit parking deck attached to the office.  The parking deck is incredibly poorly lit; during the day it is dark enough in the parking deck that you actually have to turn on your headlights (which on more than one occasion resulted in me forgetting to turn them off and running out my battery.)  At night the lights come on inside, but during the day they’re not on and the natural light is just horrible.  I had asked my husband to join me, but he had to work, didn’t think he’d be able to leave early, so he said he wouldn’t be able to make it.  I take a long lunch from work, drive to the parking deck, and can only find a parking space deep in the deck because of all the other offices in the building.  I gathered up my things (the purse and such), huffed and puffed my way out of my car (which word of warning, if you find out you’re pregnant and have a car that sits really low, just sell it or eventually you’ll be considering a winch to get you out.)  As I walked towards the offices I hear footsteps behind me.  I glanced and saw what seemed to be a male walking behind me.  It was dark enough that only the general shape of the person could be made out.  That wasn’t that uncommon, like I said there are quite a few doctors’ offices there.  Then I heard the steps quicken.  If you are female, you know the last thing you want to hear when in a dark area and no one else is around are footsteps following you quickly.  I tried to pick up my pace, as best as I could as I waddled along.  The footsteps behind me picked up their pace.  This is what you might call an “oh crap” moment.  I’m not much of a runner, and most women will tell you that running while pregnant is pretty difficult (except for those rare women that continue to run a mile until the day they go into labor.)  I still had a way to go, so running wasn’t a great option.  I do, habitually, carry a rather large purse and have for a rather long time.  I’m one of those people that carry everything but the kitchen sink in my purse.  My purses are big and hefty enough that at times it makes my shoulder and back hurt.  I shifted my keys so one was poking out of my fist.  I grabbed my purse strap as if I was adjusting it as I heard the steps right behind me.  I suddenly spun around and swung my purse right at the person behind me.  I am kind of proud, my aim was dead on.  I managed to give my husband a really good whack with the purse.  

I didn’t know it, but my husband did manage to get out of work early.  He was sweet and decided to surprise me.  He did a marvelous job of it!  He saw me park, and parked a few spaces away.  I was so occupied trying to get out I didn’t pay attention to that.  There was no threat at all.  He didn’t say anything because he saw me glance at him and thought I was able to tell it was him.  He was just trying to catch up to me.  He was sweet, and I yelled at him to never do that to me again.  Why?  And also, why in the world would this man later buy me pepper spray??

Back to the first “why?”  I think it is our natural response to feel threatened if someone is following us in the dark.  This is a reaction that is ingrained into us.  It goes back to our incredibly distant ancestors.  In the days of hunters and gatherers becoming alarmed by possible threats in the dark helped keep them alive.  This turned into the instinct that we have today.  When we feel threatened it brings about our fight or flight response.  It is only rational to believe that as Trayvon realized some strange man was following him that he would begin to feel the rush of adrenaline and the beginnings of the urge to flee or fight.  He could have run.  Really though, if he ran people would have used that as proof that he was up to no good, and considering George’s already gung-ho actions it is possible he would have shot a running Trayvon under the belief that he was trying to stop someone guilty of a crime.  Because why would an innocent man run?  Unless he’s scared of a stranger coming towards him in the dark.  Apparently Trayvon went with fight.  There is nothing that shows exactly who threw the first punch, the exact sequence of events.  Maybe Trayvon did turn around, on the offense, and become hostile towards George.  This isn’t exactly a surprising reaction though, if he did it.  I can’t say that I would be shocked if this was his reaction though.  My own harmless incident, I didn’t politely turn around and ask the person behind me who he was and if his intention was to rob me, rape me, abduct me, or maybe some combination.  In hindsight, instead of whapping my innocent husband with a heavy purse I could have whapped an innocent stranger with my purse.  Our instincts don’t tell us that when we encounter a perceived threat to stop and talk about the situation; we are not wired that way.

While the racial overtones of the case are alarming, I am most disgusted by the most basic facts of the case.  A male spots another male that he thinks could be a potential threat to someone (not himself or any specific person, just a potential threat to anyone in the general population.)  After alerting the authorities, who encourage him not to do so, he decides to follow and approach that potentially threatening male.  An altercation ensues, in which the male decides to shoot the potentially threatening male.  Realistically, stripped down it could almost sound like self defense, except for the fact that the male (George) pursued the altercation with someone that wasn’t doing anything more suspicious then being somewhere that the male (George) felt the potentially threatening male didn’t belong.  I prefer a more traditional view of self defense.  I see self defense as a threat comes to you and you then use necessary means to stop this threat.  I even go so far as necessary means if another person’s life is in danger.  I kind of have the old view of “don’t start nuthin’, won’t be nuthin’.”  If you don’t go and seek out the altercation, then it won’t start and you won’t have to feel like you are in danger.  George Zimmerman felt threatened when he got out of his car with a gun, then followed a stranger, and an altercation with that stranger ensued.  He felt threatened.  I wonder how Trayvon felt when he was followed in the night by a stranger.

Hold Up a Tampax and Let Out a War Cry

It is almost hard to believe, but there is a war on women.  Realistically, it shouldn’t seem possible.  I mean, we’ve had the right to vote for nearly one hundred years.  For nearly the same amount of time a woman’s US citizenship has not relied on that of her father or husband.  We have slowly been recognized as actual people.  Hooray for us!  I truly believe that if some have their way there will be a complete about face.

I admit, I’m a bit of a feminist.  I feel that women should be able to make their own choices.  There is nothing wrong with a woman deciding that she wants to remain single and focus on going as far as she possibly can in her chosen career, or staying home to be a wife and mother, or even a combination of the two.  To my mindset, being recognized as an equal to men means that we are not required to follow a certain path but instead follow what we feel our purpose in life should be, or just doing what we have to do.  (And yes, I am also completely behind men choosing to be the ones to be the stay at home spouse and parent.  Some men are wonderful at it.)

Then today I read about something that I thought had to be a hoax.  Then I saw more about it, and more.  I am still hoping, in a completely delusional kind of way, that it was actually just a joke that somehow began to be reported and shared on Facebook.  The resources make it unlikely, but I seriously hope that Texas did not confiscate feminine hygiene products and allow people carrying guns into the Texas Senate.  Keep in mind, I’m not totally anti-gun.  I don’t really like guns, but in fairness I haven’t used them much because we were raised not to touch them.  (Oh, they were there, and loaded, but Heaven help our butts if we went near them.)  My spouse has a concealed carry license; we have several guns and a crossbow in the house.  If I was totally anti-gun do you think they’d be in the house?  No!  While my husband enjoys shooting and likes guns, he likes marital relations better.  So it isn’t a matter of me being anti-gun or anything like that.  If the law allows them to carry concealed weapons into the Senate then fine, that’s their law.  (Sounds dumb as heck to me, but it’s their state and you probably picked up on the fact that I don’t live there, well if you read some of my other stuff.)  My issue is the confiscating feminine hygiene products for the safety of the Senators.

If you are a guy, let me give you a little DL on menstruation.  First of all, it is a bodily function that we have no control over (with the exception of some forms of birth control that can produce hormones that will prevent menstruation, but even then it isn’t a sure thing.)  Despite what tampon and feminine pad commercials will tell you, we don’t like our periods.  Oh sure, occasionally we have those “oh thank God, my period has started!” moments, but it isn’t because we like it but because we like what it means.  Totally different things.  There is not a single feminine hygiene product out there that will inspire us to spin in circles on a beach or a field of wild flowers; that is just advertising.  It is unpleasant for us.  We feel crampy and bleed like a stuck pig.  For some of us, a slasher flick has less blood.  And we have no control over this.  It isn’t like needing to pee; you can’t just “hold it.”  Your body decides it wants to shed its uterine lining and it happens.  I think the best thing I can realistically compare it to that a guy would understand is it is like a bad runny nose.  Imagine a really bad runny nose, and cold medicine does not exist.  Instead you just have to wipe that nose or let it run down your face.  You can’t control it, you’d rather not have it happening, but it is so you have to deal with it.  That’s the intro to what is like to be menstruating.  (See, doesn’t sound like fun does it?)  So yes, we do need those products.  And yes, many women carry one with them even when they don’t need them because we have all had those “surprise, the period is going to start early!” moments, plus as a courtesy we will offer them to our fellow females in need.  (Seriously, all my kids, the whole pregnancy, I had some in purse just in case someone needed one.)  To me, confiscating feminine products equals a statement of “your scary uteruses that we do not understand are not welcome here!”

Now, I know they were taken for fear that they would be thrown.  Do you know how much a tampon or a pad hurts???  I do.  Not at all.  See, my boys have thought that tampons were missiles.  So they have been thrown, as missiles would be thrown (you know, the plastic ones that come with toys), and I can say with certainty that they don’t hurt.  Doesn’t even leave a bruise.  (And I bruise worse than a peach.  I have gotten a bruise from my kids just thinking about jumping on me.)  My daughter enjoys dumping my purse, and when caught she has thrown a pad at me as distraction.  It also does not hurt.  I understand that for a very delicate male ego having feminine hygiene products at him could be harmful.  To this I say, “Man up!!!”  Being near a feminine hygiene product won’t make people think you are a female (as if there is anything wrong with that gender) or make you suddenly grow a vagina.  Seriously, if being near a feminine hygiene product caused a man to grow a vagina I am willing to bet that transgender men wishing to become female would opt for the fine they’d get for ripping open a few packages of pads and tampons in the store and rolling around in them instead of paying for the very expensive procedure.  (I’m kidding, they’d buy them.)  Maybe, and I know this is a farfetched maybe, but perhaps if you are so worried about women throwing feminine hygiene products at you because they are enraged, then maybe instead of taking these products away you should consider treating women as equals that are actually capable of making their own choices.

Anti-life

Some people might find it surprising that a mother of four would be pro-choice.  There would be some people in the world that would be baffled how I could look at my children and still support the ability of women to have abortions.  I look at it that I can’t make life choices for others (I mean, other than my husband and kids.)  If I could, I would have Bill Gates or Oprah kindly give me a few million dollars.  (Hey, I’m human!)

I think one of the big misconceptions, at least from a pro-life stance, is that if you’re pro-choice you are pro-abortions.  Not even close.  I’d much rather it was something that didn’t exist at all, but it does and has for centuries.  The best cure for any problem is prevention.  Banning abortion is not a reasonable way to prevent abortion, if that were the case there wouldn’t have been any abortions prior to Roe v. Wade (which why even have it go to the Supreme Court if it didn’t exist and some women felt they needed the option without the fear of dying), but preventing the need for them will decrease the number.  I favor easy access to birth control, incredibly easy access, and excellent sex education.  Knowledge can help reduce accidental pregnancies.  If this wasn’t true then there wouldn’t be a correlation between the increases in abstinence only sex education and increases in teen pregnancies.  (Truth, there’s plenty of info out there on this connection.)

As I said before, I can’t make life choices for other people.  I don’t know their situations, and how can I say what is best for them?  Sure, I can give recommendations when asked, or sometimes even if I’m not asked, but I can’t make their choices for them.  I do know that I really dislike the idea that a woman’s purpose in life is to be a living incubator and that’s really her only true value. 

Additionally, attempting to prevent abortion by making unavailable introduces a slippery slope.  (This is a real slippery slope, unlike the cries that same sex marriage creates the slippery slope to bestiality.)  A common reason from the pro-life movement to object to abortion is because “life begins at conception”.  Now, the slippery slope is that quite a few methods of birth control not only prevent a sperm from fertilizing an egg but can also prevent a fertilized egg from implanting.  No implantation, no pregnancy.  If by chance ovulation still occurs and sperm manages to make it to the egg, the changes to the uterus make it more difficult for the egg to implant.  Realistically, in forms of birth control that use hormones, it is possible that a fertilized egg (that is “a baby”) can be prevented from implanting, which then it would “die”.  If abortion should be stopped because life begins at conception then it is not a leap to see that next some of the most common, and reliable, forms of contraception will be the next foe.

The disagreement over abortion really is a disagreement over women’s rights.  Are women people equal in value to men?  Blocking abortion, and possibly eventually certain contraception, reintroduces an era of women being regulated to home and family.  I am, primarily, a stay at home mother.  It is my choice, but I don’t limit my value to only being a wife and mother.  I am the mother of a little girl.  Right now my daughter is a toddler, but she will grow up.  As she grows up I want her options to be wide open.  Right now she loves to care for her doll babies and stuffed animals (when she’s not trying to hit her brothers with them), and I wouldn’t be surprised if she ends up wanting to be a mother when she’s an adult.  I don’t want her to be limited to just being a mother.  Her options should be just as open as her brothers.  I want her to feel that she can decide her purpose in life and not have people she’s never met decide her purpose is to play incubator to babies.