[R] Baiting in the abortion thread.

[Attempted Socialism]

At this point I think it's quite clear that Saiwania is baiting. Constantly calling women "spinsters", declaring that a woman isn't a (proper) mother because she only had one child (And this, too, could be true for posters on the forum), dragging a general discussion of The Handmaid's Tale into the thread (Rather than the exact representation of abortion, which might be on topic).
This goes beyond having a disagreeable opinion, and crosses into the territory of baiting.

(All bold is mine)

I've looked into Margaret Atwood and she is almost a spinster. During her lifespan, she's only had the one child so... how can we trust her on issues of motherhood when she discusses it or writes about it? I can't consider her as a proper mother if she didn't accomplish replacement rate fertility. My own mother raised far more than she did if I'm included.

I got a very simplified and cliff notes version of Handmaid's Tale outlining the entire work and just as I thought- it is filled with more nonsense than anything profound or insightful. Also, the author I wouldn't consider as qualified to be an expert on issues of motherhood. Like I said, she can almost be considered a spinster if she just barely made it to having one child during her lifespan.

(...)
But overall, the highest and most greatest aspiration for a woman is for her to become a mother in my view. I want as many women as possible to become pregnant at least once if not twice in their life. There are of course, going to be at least some spinsters or barren women, but the women who're able to procreate should overnumber such women by a large margin.

[Attempted Socialism]

It continues:

I'm most impressed by the commander in Handmaid's Tale. He sees women not as whole people but as their function in relation to him. To maximize efficiency, multiple women are used to get what he needs from the female gender.

Yes! This is exactly the outlook I want to adopt. It makes far more sense from my perspective, to focus on the utility someone else has to you than to care about every aspect of somebody else. I don't see it as a bad thing at all.

Why not separate women into different categories and reduce them to their functions? I'm sure women do the exact same thing with regards to men, they arguably should if they don't already. If that happens behind the scenes, I don't think I mind it at all.

Of course people will put other people in their life into different categories and treat them accordingly.

[Attempted Socialism]

More baiting and threadjacking:

Saiwania the Slaver... it has a certain ring to it.

The dystopia that story presents, is mostly a bunch of ultra Feminist nonsense. But the relationship dynamics between characters, that is more realistic and potentially interesting. Its true that people do like to put other people into different "boxes" and etc. depending on their utility. Few people you meet, are really going to give a damn about all of your hopes and dreams and etc. What matters is how useful you are to certain people, and if you'll keep being of value in different ways.

Chattel slavery in the Atlantic world was bad and you should feel bad for entertaining the idea of bringing it back for the lolz. Also this is a huge fucking threadjack so you should feel bad for that too.

Does the novel I reference and am analyzing, not complain about some "big bad, evil conservative regime" that bans abortion? It'd be more simplistic to conclude that the entire work can be condensed into "abortion good, anti-choice bad." But a lot of people would perhaps reach that conclusion after reading even some of it.

Like I said, the chattel slavery it posits is made up BS. It might be allegory instead.

Besides, society has never been completely free in that it isn't true that people can always do what they want in every stage of their life. To a large extent, you're limited by how much your income is, how much wealth you've accrued, or what your skills are. You're not allowed to just try out or switch to any career you want to for example- there will of course be obstacles in the way, you're only allowed to move to similar jobs as what your resume or education qualifies you for.

Even being able to do something, doesn't do you any good if people who're above you in rank or influence- don't believe in your potential or skills.

[Farnhamia]

I loomed ominously. We'll see how that goes.

[Attempted Socialism]

Not sure it stuck:

And yet so is the US, which increasingly goes against that. Similar deal in most of Western Europe, which is really the best-off part of the world.

No, the US and Europe are in terminal decline, so is Japan and most of the White developed world which is increasingly becoming non-White. China is rising to most of the entire rest of the world's expense. China should've been stopped while there was still a chance for that. But China becoming a super power is near inevitable now.
(...)

It seems like an exaggeration because it is. There's no "destroying." It has jack-fuck-all to do with "liberal politics." It's literally a matter of white people are still hoarding resources and wealth, to the point that we are experiencing the first generation with a decline in birth rate because life for whites is so good that they don't need to have children. And white people aren't screaming about racial purity as much or disowning their daughters for dating black men. I mean, there still are some, and they wont shut the fuck up, but there are fewer of them.

It is no exaggeration and it is at minimum, diluting the White skin color and European genotypes, what do people not understand about that? I'd most definitely disown a daughter who race mixed but wouldn't get an abortion in that situation.

[Lamoni]

Addressed.

[Attempted Socialism]

Appreciated!