The Oklahoma Legislature are a Bunch of Sadistic Perverts

In general, I’m a live and let live kind of gal when it comes to funky things that turn people on.  If you want to only have sex with one man, ever, in your whole life and you want that sex to take place within the confines of marriage, full speed ahead and good luck to you.  You sit alone at your computer furiously masturbating to stories about bad, slutty girls who want abortions and are punished by kindly abortion doctors who are being forced by someone powerful (with whom you identify) to insert things into the bad girl’s vagina just for your satisfaction, which is not sexual, oh, no no no, just don’t tell me about it, is all I ask.

But there is a line for me and that’s when folks cross over from pretend and inflict their will on people who are helpless to resist them.

Like, say, for instance, the Oklahoma Legislature, which now requires doctors who are performing abortions to stick what is basically a dildo into women’s vaginas, not for any medical purpose, but just because Oklahoma wants women to be clear that we might think we can say what goes into our vaginas, but we are wrong.

This is vile.  It’s so vile it’s almost hard to get your head around, but let me spell it out for you again.  If you want an abortion in Oklahoma before 12 weeks, which is when most abortions take place, along with all the medical stuff that you have to go through, you have to have something shoved in your vagina for no other reason than that the state demands it.  No exceptions, no mercy, even, for women who are the victims of rape or incest, who probably don’t need one more thing shoved inside them without their concent.

This, my friends, is why I cannot see how to compromise with the anti-abortion crowd.  For every one person who believes that abortion is wrong, but is moved to mercy and understanding for what brings a woman to that decision, and who is working to ease the pressures and burdens that make aborting a pregnancy look like a woman’s best option, there are whole legislatures full of sadists like this who feel so righteous in their cause that they’re willing to do this to women in order to try to convince women not to have abortions.

If a woman’s boyfriend or husband said “If you want an abortion, you have to let me put my dick or my finger or this dildo inside you first, until I’m satisfied you understand what you’re doing,” we would have no problem–I don’t believe there’s a person reading this who can’t understand how wrong that would be–no problem at all calling that the evil it is, regardless of what you believe about abortion.

And yet, when a state does it, folks applaud it.  Let me be frank.  If you think that forcing things into a woman’s vagina is okay in the service of the greater good (in this case “the babies”), you have lost your way morally.

Really, you have.

And it may be time for you to take a step back and ask yourself just where the hell you got off track.  I mean, seriously, that the National Right to Life people can put out a press release with this in it–

Today, the Oklahoma House of Representatives and Senate overrode Governor Brad Henry’s veto of SB 1878. Among other things, the bill requires that at least one hour prior to an abortion, an abortionist perform an ultrasound and display the image of the unborn child so that the mother can view it if she chooses.

–when they know what that entails…

What do you even say in response to that?

Yes, they want everyone to think they’re just talking about the doctor slathering a woman’s stomach and rubbing on it a little, but they know, they know that, in order to get an image of a fetus under twelve weeks, you almost always have to go into the vagina to get it.

But they gloss that right over, don’t they?  Sure, they’re all about “making sure women know the truth about abortion” but they sure are happy enough to let folks just assume we’re talking about the kind of ultrasound we all imagine when someone says “ultrasound.”

Because they have to know that there are a lot of women out there who might consider themselves anti-abortion who would still be outraged to learn that a woman has to endure a state-mandated violation before she can get one.

34 thoughts on “The Oklahoma Legislature are a Bunch of Sadistic Perverts

  1. Do you mind explaining this or telling us where we can find information on this legislation? What are they sticking into women? I’ve read this twice and I’m confused. If I’m understanding this correctly, it’s wrong on so many levels, it should be national/international news.

  2. Aunt B., we have similar legislation sitting (last I checked) in House and Senate subcommittees: HB2999.

    Do you even need three guesses on who sponsored the bill?

  3. Good lord, just when you think it’s safe to take your eyes off Campfield, he’s up to that crap. Why do I even bother to be surprised?

    hmks, you should start with Rachel’s post (hers is the first link). I’m not sure who else has been writing about this. I may have seen it over at Shakesville, but I don’t find the post now.

    But here’s the skinny. The legislation requires that a woman undergoes an ultrasound for the express purpose of showing her the best possible view of the fetus. Now, ultrasounds are routinely performed during abortions, but usually they are performed for the health of the mother. And, usually, a woman can just have what we think of as an ultrasound, where the doctor rolls the transducer across the woman’s belly and a little image shows up on a screen. This may be the kind of ultrasound that best serves the physician’s purposes when doing the abortion.

    However, the law is clear that the physician must do an ultrasound that gives the clearest view of the fetus. In the early stages of a pregnancy (which is when most abortions take place), the clearest view is gotten by taking an ultrasound sensor that is on a rod and putting it in a woman’s vagina and wiggling it around.

    I have had both and I can say that, though I didn’t find the vaginal one any more traumatizing than anything else that evil gynecologist put me through, it is pretty much the definition of invasive. They stick a wand up you and wiggle it around in order to get a look at your uterus and what might be inside it.

    If you had to choose which kind to have, just in general, I can’t imagine choosing that one.

    So, yes, they’re mandating a medically unnecessary intrusion into your vagina. And it seems Campfield would like to see something similar here.

    I tell you, I have half a mind to invite him along to my next gynecological appointment, just so he can see first-hand what he’s legislating about.

  4. “But there is a line for me and that’s when folks cross over from pretend and inflict their will on people who are helpless to resist them.”

    This is how I feel about the baby. Who is helpless, and having someone else’s will inflicted on them. What’s worse? A little camera? Or a painful, grisly death?

  5. Three observations, beyond the obvious wrongness of being vaginally probed to exercise your right to what is now an entirely legal procedure.

    1) The reasoning on this seems to be if we just make it really expensive (and make sure that those who will perform these have to get expensive machines that go ping), maybe we will put it out of the cost range of poor women;

    2) Since when do legislatures have the right to practice medicine and direct a mandatory unnecessary procedure? Bet you this one is not going to pass constitutional muster;

    3) Wonder how much race is the hidden issue here? Indian women’s reproductive life (and who controls it) is a pretty huge topic there. Indian women who get their health care through the Indian Health Service are disparately affected by the Hyde Amendment because only a third of them comply with their own mandatory policies of alerting women in crisis situations (rape, incest, endangered life) that they can terminate their pregnancy. Only 5% of the IHS clinics nationwide offer abortion services. None of them stock any “morning after” or “early term” pills. In other states with large Indian populations (North Dakota, South Dakota), Indian women are disproportionately represented as abortion recipients. I’m guessing that’s so in Oklahoma too.

  6. Pingback: Forced Ultrasounds for Abortion in Oklahoma - Because Your Government Can Demand That An Object Be Inserted Into Your Vagina « Women’s Health News

  7. bridgett, i think it’s much simpler than that. i think the reasoning goes, “let’s show her its little puppy dog eyes and how cuuute it is, she’ll change her mind about aborting it then! because women are all emotional and stuff!”.

    or if even that doesn’t convince her, then she’s some sort of frigid harridan and can be shamed for that.

    cubegirl, we’re talking first trimester here. nobody who’s thinking rationally calls that kind of fetus a “baby” yet; the only reason to do that is to commit an appeal to emotion, as an implied tear-jerker over some hypothetical child that does not, in actual fact, yet exist by then.

  8. Nomen, yeah probably. Considering when most abortions are performed, it might just make her hungry for sushi. But if it also puts it beyond the price range of uninsured young women or drives up the costs for the provider to the point where he or she no longer can provide the service in this rural state and a woman has to drive another four hundred miles and take off a couple of days of work to have a medical procedure that should take less than an hour, it’s all good. Make it as difficult, time-consuming, invasive, embarassing, and expensive as possible to obtain these legal medical procedures — you know, because we love teh babeez (just not the half that grow up to be women).

    Knowing how these things work, it also gives an additional paper trail to subpoena (you know, just a routine check of who uses what to clear up “over-prescription of unnecessary services”).

  9. Knowing how these things work, it also gives an additional paper trail to subpoena (you know, just a routine check of who uses what to clear up “over-prescription of unnecessary services”).

    Bridgett, you’re starting to sound like an anti-registration gun nut.

  10. I’m not sure what good they think it will do. At that point there isn’t much to see. My wife had that type of ultrasound done early on and all we saw was this one big dark spot. The fact that we saw ONE dark spot was pretty significant because the doctor didn’t even have enough detail to notice that there were actually two embryos.

    I like that they specified a waiting period of at least an hour. That was a nice touch.

    If it succeeds in detering any abortions it’s going to be because of the monetary reasons Bridgett mentioned, not because someone decides it’s a cute embryo.

  11. Well, now that you mention it, Ex, I confess that I had a flash of “you know, I could get behind that whole “gubbermint out of my gotdamm bidness” thing that the gun folks go on about…wonder if the NRA will oppose this legislation on principle…”

    And then I about died of laughing. But, you know, it did cross my mind that there’s more common ground than we tend to think.

  12. W., I honestly don’t think it’s about doing good. I think it’s about punishing women (see cubegirl’s comment, for instance): if the women of Oklahoma want an abortion, they have to submit to this unnecessary procedure and then think about it for an hour (and, of course, pay for it).

    They have, in fact, succeeded in making abortion like a crime, but circumventing the justice system. You do something, the government punishes you for it, without due process. Look at even cubegirl’s language. This is about inflicting punishment on women who have abortions, even though abortions are legal and, therefore, fall outside of the justice system.

    It’s really ingenious. Evil, but ingenious.

  13. yeah bridgett, it’s pretty entertaining, listening to Rush Limbaugh expound on how he is all about smaller government, except when it comes to things like abortion.

  14. Rush Limbaugh is the only reason that I miss using “retard” as a noun. But hey, “fuckwit” works just as well and has a jazzy British feel to it.

  15. I truly am amazed that Planned Parenthood isn’t filing some kind of lawsuit…or the ACLU…or even the AMA. How can a legislature get by with deeming a procedure as medical necessity when they do not have medical licenses? How does that fly?

  16. Take abortion out of the equation. Shoving a foreign object into a non-consenting woman’s vagina is RAPE. Period. How could that possibly be unclear to anybody?

    Let’s take even that out of the equation and you’re still left with performing a medical procedure without the consent of the patient. That’s a major violation of medical ethics. Doctors should be all but rioting in the streets. It’s this close to a violation of the hippocratic oath (technically the oath allows exceptions if keeping the oath would violate the law, but still this clearly violates the spirit of it).

  17. dolphin, the law is worded so that the act of seeking an abortion in the state implies consent. The expanded “consultation” is part of “informing” the patient, as is the waiting period (where, you know, women gets to freeze her jahoobies off in a paper gown and watch The View for an hour…the more I think about it, the more I am tending towards thinking the effects could be both cruel and unusual.)

  18. Taking all of the emotion out of the matter, I still believe that there must be some kind of violation wherein non-licensed persons are practicing medicine by stating this procedure is required.

    If this is okay, then I am going to diagnose myself as it being medically necessary that I have liposuction on my ass.

    Just sayin…

  19. Exador, Georgia law is different in important ways. It specifies that women be told of places they can get an ultrasound. If an ultrasound is performed because prior to an abortion, the woman is to be asked if she wants to view it. It does not specify that an ultrasound is mandatory regardless of clinical judgment or patient consent, nor does it specify the type of ultrasound based on the best view of the embryo/fetus.

  20. Nomen — you’re right. It’s reasonable and logical to think that before 14 weeks, all a human consists of is about 3 cells. Them MAGICALLY at 14 weeks and one day, a head and arms and legs and heart, liver, pancreas, etc.. pop out of NOWHERE. We could all learn something from your critical thinking skills. Good show.

    Aunt B — just because abortion is legal.. doesn’t make it ok. Just like I’m sure you wouldn’t immediately hop to my side of the fence if it wasn’t.

    Dolphin — “Shoving a foreign object into a non-consenting woman’s vagina is RAPE. Period. How could that possibly be unclear to anybody?”..

    I believe stopping a beating heart is MURDER. How could that possibly be unclear to anyone?

    Oh, and you continued: “Let’s take even that out of the equation and you’re still left with performing a medical procedure without the consent of the patient. That’s a major violation of medical ethics. Doctors should be all but rioting in the streets. It’s this close to a violation of the hippocratic oath (technically the oath allows exceptions if keeping the oath would violate the law, but still this clearly violates the spirit of it).”

    Is the baby not a patient here too? And not giving consent? They can’t seem to riot either… Just a thought.

  21. Is the baby not a patient here too?

    No, because it isn’t a baby, it’s a clump of cells. The baby is NOT a patient, the pregnant woman is.

    And not giving consent?
    It is incapable of giving consent. Because it has no cognitive functions. Or a brain. Or a brain stem.

    And just btw – children don’t have the ability to consent to medical procedures, even after they are actually children, and not potential children (i.e. after they are born), so again, nice appeal to emotion, but no sense behind it.

  22. cubegirl, beating the stuffing out of straw men is neither reasonable nor logical, nor does it display critical thinking skills.

    the same goes for all-capitalizing random words when making patently ridiculous statements. the beating of a heart is no longer the measure of medical life — much less then of legal personhood — and hasn’t been for quite some time, for excellent reasons. cardiac surgeons stop and restart hearts with some regularity nowadays, are they murderers for it?

  23. I’m assuming that cubegirl is a vegetarian, with all that concern about beating hearts.

  24. if she posts again, i’ll try to rein in my snark long enough to ask her how she thinks this Oklahoma law will actually help her cause, or how it will help anybody. should’ve had the presence of mind to do that sooner, in fact. the rest of us are speculating, but she’s the one who seems upset with our opposition to it, so she might actually know.

  25. I have had both and I can say that, though I didn’t find the vaginal one any more traumatizing than anything else that evil gynecologist put me through, it is pretty much the definition of invasive. They stick a wand up you and wiggle it around in order to get a look at your uterus and what might be inside it.

    I’ve had a vaginal ultrasound too, and I personally found it much more uncomfortable than any routine gynecological procedure. Not the most painful thing I’ve ever experienced – that would be having this blasted implant inserted – but definitely not something that I would undergo again without a good reason.

    I know it’s largely a matter of personal preference and the training/skill/compassion of the person performing the procedures, but it’s just so much more invasive than anything I’ve had done with a speculum or fingers. It’s a thing similar in size and shape to an immersion blender with a light on the end instead of a, well, blender. They don’t just stick it up there and let it do its thing… it gets slathered in lube/gel, covered in a condom, and then pushed up in you and moved around while you get pushed on, told to sit still, hold your breath, clench these muscles, no relax, do it again, stop wiggling, I know it hurts but it’s the only way we can get a clear picture, now stay there, no moving or we’ll have to do it again.

    I can’t imagine doing that while under emotional stress as well as physical.

  26. Me neither. And, yeah, what might not be too bad for some women might be terrible for others. We’re all slightly different down there and it’s not as if this is just some “no big deal, one more thing in the vagina” activity.

    Again, I’ll just reiterate that if a person cannot understand why doing this to a woman, even when you disagree with what she’s doing, is wrong and evil, you have lost your moral compass. Ahem, cubegirl.

  27. I have had to have three of those transvaginal ultrasounds done in my life (one of those times when I was 7 months pregnant, and Mag, you couldn’t have described it more accurately. While my experience each time was such that it did not hurt per se, it was extremely uncomfortable.

    When I had the procedure done when I was pregnant, it was because we suddenly couldn’t find Amanda’s heartbeat. I was emotionally distraught, and having even a gentle doctor performing the procedure did not keep me from feeling very helpless and vulnerable.

    To have that done when it is not medically necessary and when you are already under distress seems to me to be cruel.

    At some point, compassion for the woman going through the situation has to override one’s political agenda, if they have any kind of human decency…or as you said, B…moral compass.

  28. Pingback: Armchair Psychologist to the Conservatives « DeMarCaTionVille

  29. It’s simple they do the ultrasound to see how far along you are before they perform the procedure, they do have to know how far along you are hince and Ultrasound, when you go to a regualr doctor for a pregnancy most of the time they stick that inside of you, becasue you are to early to see it the other way. It’s very common for that to happen. Also you can say no, i am sure they work with you on this, they don’t force it in you with giving you no choice.

Comments are closed.