I was 100% pro-choice but somehow this made me more pro-choice. Wtf...

It’s a gender election. It really is.

Men who haven’t figured out how to define themselves outside the sphere of a woman’s involvement, are trying to push back to a time where they no longer have to do just that. Like it’s an entitlement. Like we’re horses that should be properly stabled, by them.

Look at the toxic weirdness of the Trump ticket. It’s not necessarily Republican, but it is MAGA.

Enter Heritage foundation.

And yes. Abortion bans do mean rapists are making these decisions because Trump has empowered them to do so. That’s what the laws mean, though people aren’t stating it in this way often enough.

That it ended up being a career woman like Kamala on the other side of the ticket just emphasizes the MAGA drive to force masculinity into a very toxic place going forward.

As our Lord intended

That's really missing the point.

If a man rapes a woman and a child is born, the courts will give him shared custody. Choose to give the child up and the racist can block it and get full custody.

There is a depth there that has no legal equivalent where the victim is punished. Closest I can think of is if a burglar breaks in, you have to give them a room in your house for the rest of your life or you can just give them the whole house.

I don't think anyone is saying that only rape victims should be able to get an abortion.

At least, not that I've seen.

I'm sure someone with a fence wedged up their arse is going to say that or something similar...

To anyone considering it: prosecuting and proving that something is rape in order to allow the woman to abort a pregnancy will take so long that the pregnancy will be over by the time you get a final verdict.

Terminating a pregnancy is a personal choice and it should not be something that needs some kind of excuse to allow. It's a personal and medical procedure, by dragging it into the public, you're going to invite all kinds of HIPAA issues and you'll be unfairly exposing someone's medical situation to the public. To put it simply: you will make a very private medical decision, into a public record, for no good reason.

To anyone still reading, if you don't already, please support bodily autonomy, and women's rights. I'm a guy and I approve this message. (Anyone who disagrees, can go to hell).

There's also that wholesome bible story where Lot threw his daughters to a mob of rapists and was referred to as an "honorable man" for it.

The bible is full of misogyny, incest, rape, and quite frankly doesn't treat women as people. It's a shitty book with shitty ideas from the bronze age.

They do care about rape, but not quite the way you're thinking. Those rules you mentioned about having to marry the rapist? That's what they care about. Basically, young unmarried women are property of their fathers. When they marry, they become property of their husbands. If you rape an unmarried young woman, you're stealing her father's property, and the marriage pact sets it right.

So it's actually much more fucked up then not having any problem with rape at all.

i wish we didn't live in a world where that was necessary ://

Magic trick

Relevant part from Face Off

I just now realized that they had professional scumbag, Danny 'Rapist' Masterson play the rapey douchebag in the first scene, too. Sometimes life is stranger than fiction.

Sure but demoncrats are having post birth abortions and controlling hurricanes and rigging elections and causing my taco bell dinner to cost more! So what's the problem with stopping blue haired nymphos from killing babies?

-The average conservative voter

Turns out you can get away with a lot of blatantly evil things if you just convince your entire voter base that the only reliable news source is a Republican owned "entertainment" propaganda outlet

I have no doubt a new horrific policy happened recently since its seemingly constant with them, so I'd guess yes to both.

In the modern day or historically? And would the perpetrator in this case be a man or a woman?

Because I can point you to an interview from about a decade ago where a prominent researcher of sexual assault (as in she coined the term "date rape" and is the origin of the 1 in 4 number you see sometimes) reacts in utter disbelief to the idea that a woman could rape a man, and when given an example where the man is drugged into compliance declares that situation to not be rape but just "unwanted contact".

In the UK, a woman cannot commit rape by law unless she is trans (rape requires the perpetrator to penetrate the victim with the perpetrator's penis, cis women simply lack the equipment).

In the US the definitions aren't that bad, but they're close. The FBI redefined rape a few years back in a way that allowed for the possibility of a woman committing it, but is also phrased in a way that implies only the penetrating party can rape.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forced_fatherhood

Not necessarily. Some women are conditioned with some but not all of patriarchal views. My mom is very much supportive of women having their own independence, but she is still prude and blames raped women for what they wear or how they behaved.

Or, we could torture & execute rapists instead of shifting blame/responsibility.