Birth Rape

I recently learned a new term.  Apparently, it’s been tossed around for several years now, but it’s starting to gain more momentum.  Birth Rape.  What is “birth rape” you may ask?  Probably not what you are expecting it to be…

‘Birth rape happens when any medical doctor, nurse or other personnel insert anything into or cut into any part of women in labor, delivering a baby, or after birth against her wishes. Even administering an enema to a laboring mother against her will can be birth rape. Birth rape happens when mothers are laboring and weak and either not able to say “NO,” or sometimes even when she says “Don’t!”

Ignoring the mother’s resistance to or rejection of a method of penetration: injection, enema, forceps, incision, suction, etc. is a crime against a woman’s civil rights of peace, equality and privacy inside the body. Even the medical extraction of placenta after birth is often unnecessary because the nutrient-rich placenta is naturally and spontaneously expelled after the birth, and no hurry is necessary in a normal delivery.

Of course, the well trained medic has “their good reason,” citing the “need” of the patient, all the while causing pain, shock and suffering with their attacks into the body. Medical birth rape is rationalized as “for her own good” and these body invasions can cause painful trauma and long lasting harm to both mother and child.’

source – http://www.naturalnews.com/037357_birth_rape_childbirth_assault.html

Tell me I am misreading this.  Tell me this is not a real thing.  Tell me this is just satire.  Tell me no one actually believes this NONSENSE!  Sadly, it is all too real…

I’m at a loss on this one.  Starting an open discourse on this subject is an utterly daunting task.  I normally like to try to keep my words a bit less mocking and a bit more impartial than I am now; focusing instead on facts and logic to help my readers form their own opinions.  But under the circumstances I just plain don’t know how.  I think this is the best I can muster…

Really?  REALLY???  Is this what we’ve come to now?  Is this really the next wave of politically correct misandry that has been wrapped up with a bow in a neat little package labeled “feminism”?  Forget about true abominations against women (such as young girls being maimed and dying from being forced to undergo “female circumcision” – http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/).  Why campaign and fight against such horrors when it’s clearly far more important to focus on making it harder for OB-GYNs (doctors who YOU went to for help) to do their job and safely deliver your baby(ies).  (Note the extreme sarcasm.)

Can we just completely forget about the modifier “birth” for a moment and concentrate on the word “rape”?

Merriam-Webster defines rape as: unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against the will usually of a female or with a person who is beneath a certain age or incapable of valid consent because of mental illness, mental deficiency, intoxication, unconciousness, or deception.”

That sounds pretty cut and dry to me.  That’s certainly how I have always defined rape.  A doctor or medical professional (one that you sought out for treatment and care, no less) performing a standard medical procedure surely does not fit those parameters.  How could it possibly be considered rape unless the doctor touched you in a sexual way that has no medical purpose?

Doesn’t the overt act of going to the hospital to give birth grant your doctors permission to treat you as they deem necessary?  Isn’t that the ENTIRE reason you went to them (as opposed to giving birth at home)!?  Shouldn’t only unnecessary procedures (such as an epidural) supersede the doctor’s judgement?  Are these REALLY questions that need asked?

Even Natural News says:

The best way to avoid birth rape, medical birthing procedures and unnecessary C-sections, is to avoid hospitals for the event of childbirth. Seek out a reputable natural birthing center and experienced midwife. Better yet, have that childbirth at home and invite your midwife to attend.” 

Those words suggest to me that they expect all hospitals to perform standard medical procedures.  They seem to be implying that these procedures not only aren’t medically necessary, but are even harmful to you in some way.  They are basically telling you to trust their medical opinion over the opinion of board certified doctors.

Either that or they are “victim shaming”.  (Isn’t that the popular “feminist” outcry. That it’s “victim shaming” to teach girls how to avoid dangerous situations that increase their odds of getting raped.  That instead we should be teaching boys not to rape.  – Personally, I think we should be teaching BOTH of those things, but what do I know.)

Don’t get me wrong, there are sets of circumstances where a doctor ignoring your wishes are not lawful.  Such as if you DECLINE to be treated by the doctor/hospital (typically a situation caused by someone else bringing you to the hospital when you did not want to go).  Such as forcibly giving you medication that you have indicated you do not want to take.  Such as ignoring a DNR.

Such acts on the doctor’s part could range anywhere from malpractice to assault.  But RAPE!?

It’s ludicrous!  Outrageous!  HARMFUL!!

It demeans and minimizes the trauma and suffering of every woman who has ever legitimately been raped or sexually assaulted.  It desensitizes the word.  Waters it down.  The broader the meaning attached to it, the less seriously people will view it.  Women will become ashamed to open up about their assaults for fear of being judged by these unrealistic standards.

And what a horrible thing to wrongly accuse someone!  It ruins lives.  A person can never fully bounce back from a rape allegation.  Regardless of their conviction status, if follows them for the rest of their life.  And a doctor convicted of this “birth rape” would not only carry the stigma and face jail time… they would NEVER be able to practice medicine again.  One less doctor in the world.

Not to mention, why would ANYONE even want to become a doctor if they are afraid to treat their patients?!  And what would you do without them?  Do you really want to live in a world without doctors?

Illegal Immigrants v. Undocumented Immigrants

Ever curious as I am behind the motives of PC terminology, I have been google searching the reasons why “illegal immigrants should now be called undocumented immigrants”. The basic premise of every article I have read is the same: because a person can’t be illegal – only an act can be illegal (well no shit, I never thought that was in question).

One prominent article specifically said the following:

“Illegal” is uselessly vague. (“You’re under arrest.” “What’s the charge?” “You did something illegal.”) [FULL ARTICLE]

And that made me stop dead in my tracks. The charge, sir, is ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION. That would be why I used the word “immigrant” immediately following the word “illegal” when I used the phrase “illegal immigrant”. That term isn’t calling the PERSON illegal, it is calling their IMMIGRATION STATUS illegal. How base does an individual need to be not grasp the difference? I understood the concept when I was a child, I wouldn’t expect it to trip up the average adult. (BTW – according to the website: immigration.laws.com “illegal immigration” is the official term for the crime, therefore calling a perpetrator of that crime an “illegal immigrant” is not only logical, it is technically correct.)

This same article then went on to state the following as another reason:

“Illegal immigrant” is dehumanizing. Murderers, rapists, and child molesters are all legal persons who have committed illegal acts; but an otherwise law-abiding resident who doesn’t have immigration paperwork is defined as an illegal person. This disparity should offend everyone on its own merits, but there’s also a legal, constitutional problem with defining someone as an illegal person.

Am I on Candid Camera? Murder, rape, and child molestation are ALL illegal ALL OF THE TIME. Therefore, it would be redundant, offensive, and inappropriately silly to call them an illegal murderer, an illegal rapist, or an illegal child molester. But you still just referred to them as a murderer, a rapist, and a child molester, didn’t you? Because by committing the act, they are that thing. (Just as an illegal immigrant is just that, an immigrant who did so illegally.) And once you’ve been stigmatized as a criminal, ANY kind of criminal, your title follows you.

Immigration, however, is NOT illegal. Most of the time it’s a GOOD thing that opens a country up to diversity and understanding of other cultures. The United States was FOUNDED on immigration and the VAST majority of people here either immigrated or are a descendant of someone who did. And that’s pretty inspiring! Something to reflect upon and be proud of as a country.

But immigrating without following the legal protocols and being granted the necessary paperwork to enter and/or stay in the country IS illegal – calling them “undocumented” makes it sound as though it was some kind of an oversight and not a deliberate criminal act. If your issue is that you don’t feel their crime SHOULD be illegal, then focus your energies on CHANGING the immigration laws, not excusing the law-breakers with word-play.

Just because the individual in question is “an otherwise law-abiding resident” does not make their illegal act any less illegal – implying otherwise “should offend everyone”. It’s very important to designate the difference, because not only is it illegal, it’s NOT FAIR to all of the people who did it the LEGAL way who don’t deserve to be lumped into the same category as CRIMINALS. (Did you forget about the legal immigrants? If you’re so concerned with hurting everyone’s feelings, don’t their feelings deserve your concern? Isn’t it a travesty that in this day and age it even be necessary to add the word “legal” in front of the word “immigrant”? Why aren’t you on your soapbox about that?!)

Is illegally immigrating even close to the same level of crime as murder, rape, or child molestation? FUCK NO! But who ever said it was? Why would you try to compare a violent crime to a regulatory infraction?! Not only does one NOT negate the other, it’s completely ludicrous!

Example: “Hey man, It’s offensive to call that guy a jaywalker! He illegally crossed the street; he didn’t beat a guy to death with a pipe! Calling someone a jaywalker is racist because it is generally perceived as an urban traffic safety problem.”

Is jaywalking on the same level as murder, rape, or child molestation? NO! It’s generally considered one of the least significant crimes a person can commit. BUT IT’S STILL ILLEGAL, AND SOMEONE WHO BREAKS THAT LAW IS STILL A JAYWALKER!! Is there no common sense left in the world?!

This article then wrapped up its list of reasons with the following:

It’s contrary to the Fourteenth Amendment, which affirms that neither the federal government nor state governments may “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” An undocumented immigrant has violated immigration requirements, but is still a legal person under the law, as is anyone under the jurisdiction of the law. The equal protection clause was written to prevent state governments from defining any human being as anything less than a legal person.

….. WHAT?!

How does referring to a person as a perpetrator of a crime take away their equal protection under the law?! How does referring to a person as ANYTHING take away their equal protection under the law?! WORDS ARE NOT ILLEGAL! Equal protection of the laws means that you have a right to emergency medical care, that you have a right to enter and utilize public establishments if you follow all rules of use, and that if another person causes you harm by breaking a law, that the police investigate the crime and that if sufficient evidence of that crime is found – the person who broke the law is prosecuted for it. None of these things are stripped from a human being by referring to them as a phrase. I can call them “inhuman goat-raping piles of crap who don’t deserve the right to breathe” and tell them “I hope you get AIDS and die a miserable painful death” and I haven’t taken away their equal protection of the law… but somehow you think I have by calling them an “illegal immigrant”? Really??

In short, if I didn’t think this particular PC term was pointless and intelligence lowering before doing my research… I sure do now.