Ocasio-Cortez: Disfiguring the Biological Identity of Womb-Fallopian Women
A Man Who Men-struates is a Medical Malpractice
If America were a truly civilized country, which in other words means if the Left and the Right were, having an abortion would have long time ago become a non-issue. It would have been made legal through the Left and the Right agreeing the specific cases, circumstances, conditions, and the number of times a woman could abort a child-in-the-making within the legal frame.
Such an agreement would have created in practice a situation in which having an abortion would have become legal while at the same time remaining illegal. That is, it would have been legal when legal rationality was met in each case, but illegal when not. It is alongside this line that the abortion problematic has been dealt with in most civilized societies in the West where abortion was always legal or became so, and where it never became such a seriously divisive an issue, as it has wherever civilization has yet to be fully achieved. That would have also facilitated a basic template for the whole nation, instead of each state independently deciding on party lines if, and when, having an abortion is legally possible. After all, the fetus that is deprived of the opportunity to grow into a child is a child deprived of the opportunity of growing into an American citizen, and so state-by-state piece-meal laws would have had to be regarded as unconstitutional. Any other way of going about this only has only guaranteed that abortion remains an issue to be mishandled over and over and again, whether from the Left or from the Right. By way of an example, that is what we are seeing happening in Texas.
What has taken place in Texas is that the logic of irrationality—-yes there is such a monster─ has prevailed. It is not, as Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez maliciously distorts, that a bunch of men has managed to impose their male worldview over and against women. After all, not all men are against abortion right and it was men (“the patriarchy”) who in the first place gave birth to the juridical rationality on which women could have and have claimed abortion as their right. And, given that in the US fathers have practically no rights, abortions can be as legally and financially unburdening to men as to women, but even more so to the former than to the latter. In Texas, however, a religious morality and an ideological worldview concerning what a Living Being is and when it starts to be that has been imposed over and against all men and women who subscribe to differing beliefs. And that is the main problem. For, from the perspective of the rationales of a modern, bourgeois state and the political organization of an advanced society, such move stands in contravention to the philosophical rationality embodied in liberal democratic principles. That should be fine in Iran or Saudi Arabia, but not in America.
But, if that is where are when we are in present-day Texas, feminism is to blame. Instead of demanding the right to have an abortion on the basis of the juridical rationality advanced by “the patriarchy,” and instead of educating men as to why making abortion legal could also be beneficial to fathers who, again, “the patriarchy” allowed no rights of their own, in demanding abortion right as a right in which only women have a say, feminists went against the one and the other. And they did so even though they know human pregnancy in civilized societies necessarily and of itself presupposes more than one agency, male and female. A pregnancy is as much a biological development as it is a social one, in the literal sense of both terms, and so smarty-pants slogans like “My body, My choice” are just ways of conveniently forgetting this.
Feminists also conveniently forgot that, more often than not, they had already had their saying before becoming pregnant whenever that happened as their implicit, even if unspoken choice. Feminists never had the time nor the mind to realize or admit that they were not just demanding the right to have an abortion but the right to abort a child, which might sound the same but is not. Feminist irrationality might be predicated or cushioned on a justified demand for freedom; but it is not less unreasonableness than that of conservative Texan politicians. In other words, had feminists been less hateful of men; had feminism been less an ideological structure for feminists to hide their hatred for men while dragging all other women with them, then it could have helped those other women in taking adequate advantage of the juridical rationality “the patriarchy” bequeathed to modern society. So, the day would hardly ever have arrived when a woman’s right to abort a child/pregnancy would have come this close to being wiped out in Texas.
But then, neither would have the day ever had come when someone like AOC would attempt to vag-explain “Biology 101” to most of Texas, while conveniently botching the attempt. She so is cock-sure in her loopy recalcitrancy. So, in AOC’s abortista vag-explanation, there are people that are not women but who also have menstruations, and presumably could also claim the right to having an abortion. Hence the bloody, politically correct expression “people who bleed” she coined, dismissive of womb-fallopian physiology. That should be offensive to women simply because it indirectly disfigures the female biological identity, while directly falsifying the physiology of everybody else that is not female.
That is, to conclude that men (“people”) also “bleed” from the medical fact that women who acquire some forms of cancer end up losing the physiological faculty to menstruate makes as much sense as to argue that “men cannot walk” merely because some men lose their legs to some forms of cancer, or to construction accidents. That is mendacious as much as fallatious. If a female gets her sexuality literally doctored and continues to menstruate after becoming “male” it does not mean at all that “men also get menstruation”; it simply means that her doctoring failed to “transition” her into a full-fledged man. Incidentally, that also suggests that she is a victim of medical malpractice and should be allowed to suit in a court of law.
And thus, menstruation in this case proves the contrary of what AOC thinks she’s saying.
On the other hand, “non-binary” sexuality, which Ocasio-Cortez also alludes to in her vag-explanation, is a political and not a biological category. Nature does not engender hyphenated sexualities. The hyphen is itself a cultural artifact, not a nature-generated object. And being so, it is the graphic marking of “non-binary” sexualities as cultural constructs. And this is further proved by the fact that the principle of natural human reproduction has alterative duality as its sine qua non. Or in common vernacular: it takes two to tango, though sometimes it can take more than that. Humans sexually gravitate to female, to males, or to both; but whatever the case, male-to-male or female-to-female, we are affected by the gravitational pull as female or as male, never as both at once, or undifferentiated between one or the other. The logical principle of non-contradiction does not allow it otherwise. For yes, because they constitute themselves as specifiable categories, sexualities also can and must be the subjects of logical analysis——-that is to say, they must be approached logically.
And that is what AOC’s smart mouth is far from doing. None of these sexual identities newly minted by political correctness and feminism can stand to logical reasoning; but they can be exploited for political advantages. That is what Ocasio-Cortez is up to; being a Bolshe-Feminist, she’s always up to that. But do not get me wrong; I understand why the politically correct bunch of liberals and progressives would be justified in rejecting logical rationality and logical reasoning when doing so is to their convenience. In the end, those are two hurtful creations of “the patriarchy.” And who needs that? Oh, don’t let me forget. Traditional Texas Conservatives are as capable of being irrationally unreasonable; but for different reasons that are equally stupid.