Le féminisme

[Adrian]

il y a 2 minutes, Rincevent a dit :

Tout cela me semble relever du bon sens, quelle est la source ?

 

The Oxford Handbook of Human Mating

 

Evidemment je n'oserais pas enfreindre la loi en te l'envoyant sur le discord.

[Rincevent]

il y a 15 minutes, Adrian a dit :

The Oxford Handbook of Human Mating

 

Evidemment je n'oserais pas enfreindre la loi en te l'envoyant sur le discord.

Aucun besoin d'enfreindre la loi, je l'ai déjà.

[Rincevent]

Et en le reprenant, je suppose que tu cites le chapitre 26, "Sexual Harrassment", par Kingsley R. Browne (pp 606-628 pour les petits curieux).

[Mégille]

Il y a 8 heures, Adrian a dit :

 

 

 

Littéralement ce meme.

 

 

 

Littéralement peut-être, mais pas intégralement. L'extrait évoque un deuxième facteur de la perception du harcèlement, qui est la relation de pouvoir. Dû à une plus grande tendance des hommes à "mésinterpréter comme du flirt" les interactions avec leurs collègues lorsque celles ci sont leurs subordonnées ?

[Rincevent]

Il y a 1 heure, Mégille a dit :

Littéralement peut-être, mais pas intégralement. L'extrait évoque un deuxième facteur de la perception du harcèlement, qui est la relation de pouvoir. Dû à une plus grande tendance des hommes à "mésinterpréter comme du flirt" les interactions avec leurs collègues lorsque celles ci sont leurs subordonnées ?

Ou à une plus grande tendance des femmes à minauder afin de négocier face à un homme en situation de pouvoir (ce "ou" n'étant pas du tout exclusif). Qui n'a jamais vu une femme tenter d'amadouer un policier, par exemple ?

 

Ce genre de situations merdiques se crée généralement à deux. Pas forcément à parts égales, mais à deux.

[Adrian]

Abortion Bans Have Delayed Emergency Medical Care. In Georgia, Experts Say This Mother’s Death Was Preventable.

 

Citation

She’d taken abortion pills and encountered a rare complication; she had not expelled all of the fetal tissue from her body. She showed up at Piedmont Henry Hospital in need of a routine procedure to clear it from her uterus, called a dilation and curettage, or D&C.

 

But just that summer, her state had made performing the procedure a felony, with few exceptions. Any doctor who violated the new Georgia law could be prosecuted and face up to a decade in prison.

 

Thurman waited in pain in a hospital bed, worried about what would happen to her 6-year-old son, as doctors monitored her infection spreading, her blood pressure sinking and her organs beginning to fail.

 

It took 20 hours for doctors to finally operate. By then, it was too late.

The otherwise healthy 28-year-old medical assistant, who had her sights set on nursing school, should not have died, an official state committee recently concluded.

[...]

In interviews with more than three dozen OB-GYNs in states that outlawed abortion, ProPublica learned how difficult it is to interpret the vague and conflicting language in bans’ medical exceptions — especially, the doctors said, when their judgment could be called into question under the threat of prison time.

 

Take the language in Georgia’s supposed lifesaving exceptions.

 

It prohibits doctors from using any instrument “with the purpose of terminating a pregnancy.” While removing fetal tissue is not terminating a pregnancy, medically speaking, the law only specifies it’s not considered an abortion to remove “a dead unborn child” that resulted from a “spontaneous abortion” defined as “naturally occurring” from a miscarriage or a stillbirth.

 

Thurman had told doctors her miscarriage was not spontaneous — it was the result of taking pills to terminate her pregnancy.

 

There is also an exception, included in most bans, to allow abortions “necessary in order to prevent the death of the pregnant woman or the substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function.” There is no standard protocol for how providers should interpret such language, doctors said. How can they be sure a jury with no medical experience would agree that intervening was “necessary”?

[...]

The state’s main anti-abortion lobbyist, Will Brewer, vigorously opposed the change. Some pregnancy complications “work themselves out,” he told a panel of lawmakers. Doctors should be required to “pause and wait this out and see how it goes.”

 

At some hospitals, doctors are doing just that. Doctors told ProPublica they have seen colleagues disregard the standard of care when their patients are at risk of infection and wait to see if a miscarriage completes naturally before offering a D&C.

 

Although no doctor has been prosecuted for violating abortion bans, the possibility looms over every case, they said, particularly outside of well-funded academic institutions that have lawyers promising criminal defense.

 

Doctors in public hospitals and those outside of major metro areas told ProPublica that they are often left scrambling to figure out on a case-by-case basis when they are allowed to provide D&Cs and other abortion procedures. Many fear they are taking on all of the risk alone and would not be backed up by their hospitals if a prosecutor charged them with a crime. At Catholic hospitals, they typically have to transfer patients elsewhere for care.

 

When they do try to provide care, it can be a challenge to find other medical staff to participate. A D&C requires an anesthesiologist, nurses, attending physicians and others. Doctors said peers have refused to participate because of their personal views or their fear of being exposed to criminal charges. Georgia law allows medical staff to refuse to participate in abortions.

 

[Jean_Karim]

Il y a 7 heures, Adrian a dit :

Abortion Bans Have Delayed Emergency Medical Care. In Georgia, Experts Say This Mother’s Death Was Preventable.

 

 

Est-ce que ce serait volontaire d'avoir la loi si mal écrite, afin de décourager l'utilisation des pilules non illégales ?

[Tramp]

il y a 24 minutes, Jean_Karim a dit :

Est-ce que ce serait volontaire d'avoir la loi si mal écrite, afin de décourager l'utilisation des pilules non illégales ?

Qu’est-ce qui est mal écrit ?