• TurtleJoe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    ·
    11 months ago

    Texas: if your abortion is medically necessary, you and your doctor must go to court and prove it.

    Kate Cox: goes to court and proves it.

    Texas Supreme Court: If your abortion was truly medically necessary, you wouldn’t need to go to court to prove it.

    • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      11 months ago

      There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one’s own safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn’t, but if he was sane, he had to fly them. If he flew them, he was crazy and didn’t have to; but if he didn’t want to, he was sane and had to.

    • Pipoca@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 months ago

      Not quite. To quote from the opinion:

      Though the statute affords physicians discretion, it requires more than a doctor’s mere subjective belief. By requiring the doctor to exercise “reasonable medical judgment,” the Legislature determined that the medical judgment involved must meet an objective standard. Dr. Karsan asserted that she has a “good faith belief” that Ms. Cox meets the exception’s requirements. Certainly, a doctor cannot exercise “reasonable medical judgment” if she does not hold her judgment in good faith. But the statute requires that judgment be a “reasonable medical” judgment, and Dr. Karsan has not asserted that her “good faith belief” about Ms. Cox’s condition meets that standard. …

      Nothing in this opinion prevents a physician from acting if, in that physician’s reasonable medical judgment, she determines that Ms. Cox has a “life-threatening physical condition” that places her “at risk of death” or “poses a serious risk of substantial impairment of a major bodily function unless the abortion is performed or induced.”

      Basically, the opinion is a fairly legalistic argument that the physician didn’t use the right magic words, but that the ruling doesn’t matter because there’s no de jure requirement for court preapproval. It completely misses the point of why doctors are unwilling to perform abortions without that approval.

  • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    76
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Also, the witch hunts started around the same time peasant women started recognizing their intersectional class struggle. So women rebelling against the status quo were declared witches.

      • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        The Mallus Maleficarum is the most cited text when discussing witch hunts in a feminist light. It was written by a priest in the 13th century and includes a section on identifying witches based on inherent traits of women. Among those traits are “loose tongues”.

        Edit: as for a book that discusses this topic in feminist theory, there’s the Caliban and the Witch: Women, the Body and Primitive Accumulation

          • Apathy Tree@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Thank you for this. I don’t really have the energy for more books.

            My backlog is enormous already, so I listen to them in my car… cliff notes is helpful, lol, but a long road trip is a great way to learn some shit!

            As a side note, the drunken botanist is an amazing book but not for audiobook because it has drink recipes. You miss half the book ignoring the recipes while driving, and I hear they make great drinks. But napoleans buttons was so good, about the impact of specific materials on the world and how those interplay with the environment around them (napoleon’s buttons’ title is reference to a potentially apocryphal accounting that the cold, something they hadn’t planned one being as bad as it was, froze and failed the leaded buttons on their uniforms, causing them to freeze to death)

    • EatYouWell@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Nah, it was just a land grab. Claiming witches was just a good excuse to take their land.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        It was also a way to take valuable non-reproductive/sexual labor from women. The wise women whose medicine works (for a given value of works, but much better than humoral medicine) were doing valuable labor that men wanted. Like I’m glad medicine eventually became scientifically based, but it would’ve done that even if it was seen as women’s work.

  • BustinJiber@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    11 months ago

    Are we taking about the same people who say all life matters then in the next sentence start listing all the lives that don’t matter?

        • AbsoluteChicagoDog@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          I mean, at least under Capitalism we can move around where we wish since workers need to be mobile to go wherever they generate the most profit. Communism you go where you’re told, Feudalism stay where you’re born.

          There are some differences. Capitalism is still technically the best of those three. But Socialism is the real gold standard.

    • Patches@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      This is an hour long video you’re asking everyone to watch that says the exact same thing but in thousands of words.

      Cruelty is the point. Yeah we get it.

  • GoroAkechi@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    It’s simple intent. The goal is to weaken women because they follow an ideology that views them as lesser and unable to make decisions.

  • ColorcodedResistor@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    New Rule. You got shit ass laws you want to oppress on a gender or race?

    you have to face an Avatar of their choosing to fight you 1v1 in a UFC championship Match. All Proceeds go to whoever wins. If your ideology is perfect, it should be able to withstand the base form of authority, from which all authority is derived from, yes?

    i say this as i have a preference to watch female athletes compete. they fight like their lives depend on it, and it shows in the octagon.