Canada: The uteruses of poor women are our business

[sabotabby]

First, CIDA's funding priorities get changed to focus on women and children. (Never mind that CIDA's funding priorities have always been global hegemony.)

Then, Harper's increasingly batshit government was going to cut funding for contraception in its foreign aid.

[Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon] told a House of Commons committee that the government's initiative to bolster maternal health in developing countries would not include funding for contraception, because “the purpose of this is to be able to save lives.”

(Not the lives of women and girls, of course. Women are meatbags in which precious fetuses may be temporarily stored.)

Now they're saying that contraception is in, but abortion is out. Maybe. And if you say otherwise, you're anti-American.

Every year, unsafe abortion kills at least 700,000 women. Maternal death is a global crisis. And yet these sanctimonious sons-of-bitches at Parliament Hill who can't even be arsed to run their own country think that they should get to decide whether women in other countries get to control their own bodies?

Fuck them all. I'm provisionally impressed that the Liberals have decided to take a stand on this, but I'm betting they'll cave in the end.

Comments

[sabotabby]

Oh, definitely.

When I was reading about this/writing the post, one thing that struck me is how powerful assholes have gone from supporting eugenics and denying poor women (particularly women of colour) the right to have families to denying them the right to control the size of those families or the right to choose not to have children at all. Never is the will of the woman herself, as a human being, taken into account. Not in policy, not in language.

[lienne.livejournal.com]

And if you say otherwise, you're anti-American.

o.ô

[sabotabby]

Yep, they went there.

[lienne.livejournal.com]

Good old Prime Minister Palpatine.

[sabotabby]

He is opposed to eating kittens. Until they are born, and then they're fair game.

[pofflewomp.livejournal.com]

I'm just anti-American.
Christ, that it could even bother people whether they are called anti-American or nay. It wouldn't bother me to be called anti-British. Anti-English would be a bit sad-making maybe for a second or so, and anti-Welsh would be very sad, but pretty trivial and silly. They need some good old British post-colonial self-deprecation and guilt thrust down their throats.
still, isn't it an extraordinary breakthrough for them to have allowed people to have contraception at least? Grrr.

[sabotabby]

A few people have been silly enough in the past to attempt to insult me or sway my political positions by calling me anti-Canadian. It worked about as well as you might think.

[ginny-t.livejournal.com]

What the f--- does it matter whether I'm anti- or pro-American? I'm Canadian in case you forgot, you f---ing sweater-vest subverter.

*ahem* Sorry 'bout that.

[sabotabby]

DON'T YOU KNOW AMURRRCAH IS OUR BEST ALLY? AND WE ARE LIKE AMURRRCAH'S HAT?

[ginny-t.livejournal.com]

Oops. Back to re-education for me. *eyeroll*

[frandroid.livejournal.com]

Are you kidding? The Liberals are DYING for the Conservatives to re-ignite the abortion debate. I think the Libs could build a majority on that. Harper knows it's a non-starter, but apparently Lawrence Cannon hasn't got the message. They know they need to make noises about it for their base, but they're not going to take a clear stand on this, sadly.

[sabotabby]

I'm not sure the Libs could build a majority on that. One trend I've noticed lately is Canadians' willingness to throw other people's rights under a bus. Granted, abortion is something that potentially affects half the population, but no one ever thinks about it that way unless it's happening to them.

[frandroid.livejournal.com]

Well, at the very least, the Conservatives can't build a majority on it, otherwise you can be sure they would have legislated the hell out of it. So we start from there...

[zingerella.livejournal.com]

That's not what I got from the article sabs linked. Mind you, you may well have sources beyond that. But if the libs won't even use the word abortion, and won't reframe the debate focus on the rights of women, poor or rich, here or away, to make their own healthcare decisions, then I can't see how they'll stand up for women's rights if the social conservatives do succeed in re-opening the debate.

[audrawilliams.livejournal.com]

The Liberals are fucking up everything. They didn't consult with groups before taking this on, it's just a political football to them. Groups were operating under a sort of don't-ask/don't-tell dynamic re: this stuff. Which is shitty for sure, but really important work was being done. Then the Grits shone a big flashlight on the issue and everyone started asking questions and coalitions are falling apart and people are going to lose funding and it's the WORST.

[frandroid.livejournal.com]

And the Liberals weren't even able to shame the Conservatives in the process...

[sqrt-joy.livejournal.com]

The language used in family planning debates always frightens me. For instance:

"Having one baby after another without sufficient intervals weakens the children and endangers the life of the mother."

What are we, cattle? I mean, I think I agree with the meaning of this sentence, but such language is almost dehumanizing.