Reproductive Justice: Part 1

Reproductive justice is a BLACK issue. In fact, the term and framework was created by Black women to ensure that we maintain the autonomy to make decisions for our own bodies and families.
Learn more and join the fight for Liberated Bodies at coc.is/LB.

[@jackitrelawny3464]

Thank you so dearly for putting this comprehensive story-telling together! Using it for our youth program!

[@tainaadam3504]

Loved this video!!

[@bobroberts2581]

Equity says everyone gets the same outcome right? According to to the court case “San Luis Obispo v Nathanial J” - “Victims have rights, here the victim clearly has a responsibility to the child.” Nathanial J was 14. The woman suing for child support was 30+. Nathanial J didn’t have the adoption as a survivor of statuary sexual assault had no reproductive rights. Nick Olivas was 20 when told he owed 6 year back child support to a 30 year old. So: do you want more women going to to soon, losing custody, being chemically castrated, and being forced to work to pay their victim child support when the victim wants to keep the child? Or do you support no one have the option of abortion, adoption, or abandonment? Because male victims can’t be freed financially, does your stance on equity say that women that made the elective choice to raise the child should also have no escape clause?

[@jeronimocastro3282]

A bit unsure on why was I made to watch this for law school… I will share a couple of notes on the many fallacies shown in this video, anyway, arranged chronologically: - Is there discrimination in sex education? - Where are planned parenthood locations mostly found? “White neighborhoods”? - Why marginalize and stereotype women of the women’s rights movements? Is there data to support these claims? - Couldn’t the women’s rights movements represent the needs of women of color? Why exactly? - Attacks the binary division of the issue at hand, yet offers no relevant nor viable solution for change. - Systems of oppression regarding what?! Very ambiguous, poorly supported by evidence. - What exactly do the vast generalizations of the actions against women of color 200 years ago have to do with reproductive justice? - Several pictures that would seemingly support the narrative picture the work team of gynecologist and researcher Dr J. Marion Sims, yet there is no historic hard evidence that the subjects of this practice or experimentation had any relationship to a persons race. - Quite the contrary, Dr Sims is considered to have saved hundreds of thousands of lives thanks to his surgical breakthrough practices. - Eugenics is not at all a pseudo science. It has multiple field evidence for selective effectiveness. Another different deal is the ethical considerations this may be applicable to, but to attack effectiveness only proves ignorance. - Eugenics did not mainly target race. Instead, it tackled other syndromes and conditions such as cystic fibrosis, believed in consensus to be a strong disadvantage in the life of a patient who suffers from it. - In the case of Minnie Lee, and Alice Relf, the fact that the suit was won by the families of the two girls is dismissed so as to make this case appear like the rule, and not like the exception it was, and continue with an inaccurate narrative. - It is a huge fallacy to present the few and very debatable “facts”, poorly supported by any evidence, and then proceed to claim that “as you can see, black women’s reproduction has been historically viewed as negative”. - Although a black woman in the US are 2.6 times as likely to die in pregnancy as a white woman, there is yet to be a valid study that presents evidence linking these two conditions. Correlation≠causation. - It is absurd to support that the Hyde amendment exclusively targets black women, as it bars federal funds to be allocated towards abortion in any case, not discriminatory by race. Emergency cases apply for all races and have no distinction between them. - The US family cap has got nothing to do with reproductive rights, and only calls women for responsibility. It is in congressional consensus that the US taxpayer should not pay for the lack of responsibility or the attempt to take advantage of the welfare programs by any woman (not just black). -What do transgender and non binary people have to do with all this? Unexplainable

[@yumyumjellyfish]

Hi! I think this video was meant to be an overview of reproductive justice, which has a rich history that integrates many stories. There is only so much that a 3 minute video can provide, and while it is both succinct and rooted very much in fact, I highly recommend you continue to ask those questions and start to do some digging on your own. There are a multitude of sources out there. A great place to start is the link provided under the video. Oftentimes it's worth knowing more about the primary source itself. Scene on Radio, a podcast produced by the Kenan Institute of Ethics at Duke University (a very reputable source) would be worth a listen for you too! Season 2 and 3 have your name on it. The Mismeasure of Man by Stephen Jay Gould (a well respected evolutionary biologist) is a wonderful read that will give you a bit more understanding of the eugenics movement. Lastly, consider Kimberlé Williams Crenshaw (a law professor at both Columbia and UCLA) and her concept of intersectionality. That may give you more context regarding why it's so critical that you understand this and why your law professor may have assigned this. Hope this helps!

[@natertown]

You cannot change the past!! Move on.

[@spatehicks4724]

booga booga go back