General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhere did the idea of "unlikely pregnancy in a rape" come from?
I never heard of it and it seems, suddenly, that it is being repeated.
I hope that it is an old piece of BS.
I suspect that it is a recent invention that has taken hold in the minds of fuckwits in order to make negligible the idea that the raped and pregnant need to have options regarding their rapist's baby.
I need to hold back the feelings of unreality at having to even say(type) those words.
niyad
(113,052 posts)Akin rape theory rooted in Nazi death camp experiments
The theory behind Rep. Todd Akins (R-MO) assertion earlier this week that women who are victims of legitimate rape would not get pregnant appears to be based on 1972 research that cites experiments done in Nazi concentration camps, a Missouri newspaper reported on Monday.
. . . .
In the article titled The Indications for Induced Abortion: A Physicians Perspective, Dr. Fred Mecklenburg concluded that it is extremely rare for a rape to result in pregnancy.
. . . .
But it was Mecklenburgs presumption that a traumatized rape victim will not ovulate even if she is scheduled to that appeared to be the basis of Akins recent remarks.
. . . .
Nazis reportedly tested the theory by selecting women who were about to ovulate and sending them to the gas chambers, only to bring them back after their realistic mock-killing, to see what the effect this had on their ovulatory patterns. An extremely high percentage of these women did not ovulate, the article said.
. . . .
digonswine
(1,485 posts)It seems new. Not that it would matter.
Even if true-why would it have any bearing on who could get an abortion?
It just seems to be an easy way of dismissing certain realities.
This is why I am against the death penalty.
So what if ONE gets fucked over, as long as the public is served?
One is too many.
obamanut2012
(26,046 posts)digonswine
(1,485 posts)How have I never heard of this and others take as truth? What a bunch of ignorant fucks.
Heather MC
(8,084 posts)in their youth, but never impregnated them.
Nine
(1,741 posts)NashvilleLefty
(811 posts)The earliest known mention was in 13th Century English lawbooks. It was believed that a woman couldn't conceive unless she orgasmed. Therefore, if a rape victim became pregnant, her rape allegations were thrown out and she was punished, instead.
Of course, the belief certainly predates that, but that was the oldest written mention of it that I could find.
niyad
(113,052 posts)digonswine
(1,485 posts)But--is this crap widely believed? How can I have not heard?
The more I learn about my species, . . . .
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)One of the many, many facts we like to ignore is that the people in control of our nation at this time were sympathetic to and supported the Nazis in the 20's - today. Almost all of our political discourse and strategy comes directly from Nazi discoveries. We sheltered and protected war criminals than, just as we do now.
Another inconvenient fact we choose to ignore.
obamanut2012
(26,046 posts)For real.
So, the GOP's stance on this is, literally, positively medieval.
digonswine
(1,485 posts)each time I open my eyes, I discover a new level of horror.
Every time I think I know how low we can sink, I learn of a deeper and more terrible reality.
Cerridwen
(13,252 posts)"If, however, the woman should have conceived at the time alleged in the appeal, it abates, for without a woman's consent she could not conceive."
This was a long-lived legal argument. Samuel Farr's Elements of Medical Jurisprudence contained the same idea as late as 1814:
"For without an excitation of lust, or the enjoyment of pleasure in the venereal act, no conception can probably take place. So that if an absolute rape were to be perpetrated, it is not likely she would become pregnant."
There's more about how women's reproductive organs are just an extension of the man's.
obamanut2012
(26,046 posts)Will you post this in the Feminist Group?
Cerridwen
(13,252 posts)Freddie
(9,256 posts)Told of something similar a number of times and no one seems to have noticed. Probably because everything Ricky says is so ridiculous and/or offensive it was just another sentence.
(a treasure from FB I saved--photo of Rick w/caption "Every time Rick Santorum opens his mouth I have to check to make sure it's not really The Onion"
Anyway, I think the "pregnancy from rape is almost impossible" idea is an effort to simply dismiss the idea. "it hardly ever happens so we don't have to think about it"--they can cast abortion solely in terms of "baby killing" with no consideration of the woman involved if she's not seen as a person deserving sympathy.
digonswine
(1,485 posts)I do not get why we should automatically dismiss it. It makes no sense.
I would guess that murder by katana is uncommon as well-no need to worry our precious heads.
Freddie
(9,256 posts)It's 100% zygote, 0% woman. Her needs simply are no concern as compared to the Holy Fetus. She is simply an incubator, that's all.
Introducing the rape issue forces people to consider the woman's point of view in the equation. Can't allow that.
Once had a FB "friend" ask "why is it so important to you libs that women be allowed to kill babies?" I never did reply to that one, with some people what's the point.
nickolas007
(5 posts)i think its comes from nazi
Downwinder
(12,869 posts)Be they Nazi, Republican, or other.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)They want to ban abortion even in cases of rape, which obviously is an unpopular position. So they invent "science" saying women can't get pregnant when raped. Therefore, if they get pregnant it wasn't really rape.
digonswine
(1,485 posts)I am just surprised that I have heard this shit from not a few repugs lately, having not heard it before ever.
Also-what you said-IF it was rape, the kid would be chucked out-if not-NOT a legit rape. Like a witch test.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)If she drowns, shes not a witch.
GreenPartyVoter
(72,377 posts)Hamlette
(15,408 posts)Lucy Goosey
(2,940 posts)Pro lifers are anti-abortion, but by and large they are not sociopaths, so they can acknowledge, however subconsciously, that rape is bad, and that maybe having to bear a rapist's baby would be pretty horrible. But they can't get past 'abortion is bad', because most of them are black-and-white thinkers, so their brains have to find a work-around, and the 'no pregnancy from legit rape' thing covers their bases fairly well, with a bonus: a dose of good old fashioned slut-shaming misogyny. If she got pregnant, she secretly wanted to be raped, so having the baby is appropriate punishment.
See, it all ties up neatly, with no nuanced thinking required!
digonswine
(1,485 posts)it's like a "get out jail" card for those who think the raped are not exceptions.
I mean, FORCING a young woman to carry a rapist's child is beyond the pale---but rationalizing that the female is complicit in conception-perfect.
It is a mental dodge. No need to rationalize one's beliefs! Whoo-a bullet avoided!
PDJane
(10,103 posts)Last edited Sat Sep 1, 2012, 12:08 AM - Edit history (1)
The fact that it gets recycled in 2012 is just amazing to me. Science has come a long, long way since then, as has medicine. However, the fact that this comes back as 'fact' just leaves me astounded ....and more than a bit afraid.
It's surreal, and I just don't understand how this kind of myth has taken such a hold on a certain kind of mind. It goes along with the extremely religiosity and the Christian nation thing and the absolute dependence on lies and illusion to build their world view.
If I had one book that I would recommend to everyone who wants to see or understand what is happening at the moment, it would be Empire of Illusion: the end of literacy and the triumph of spectacle by Chris Hedges.
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)result of "research" on prisoners in death camps.
So that ought to tell you all you need to know. Other than the fact that it is physiological nonsense.
JI7
(89,239 posts)this is nothing new. they are just being more open with their bigotry of women and others.
it's the same as blaming a rape victim because of what she was wearing. she must have wanted it because of the way she was dressed.
this is why these men feel they have a right to legislate the bodies of women while crying about wanting less government .
Major Nikon
(36,818 posts)... back in the 70's. Ever since he's been quite the rock star of the fringe nut forced birther crowd.
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) The discredited notion that a woman's body can resist conception in a sexual assault has persisted in anti-abortion circles for decades, largely because of the efforts of a Cincinnati obstetrician who is considered a godfather of the movement.
Dr. John C. "Jack" Willke founded the National Right to Life Committee and wrote the influential 1971 "Handbook on Abortion," which has shaped the thinking of generations of anti-abortion activists.
http://news.yahoo.com/ohio-doctor-helps-perpetuate-rape-pregnancy-ideas-204010659.html
Nine
(1,741 posts)Major Nikon
(36,818 posts)Nine
(1,741 posts)and I see the CBS version cuts off too soon unless I'm not seeing the "next page" button.
This part blows my mind
The book became an instant touchstone for the anti-abortion movement, selling 1.5 million copies at the height of the sexual revolution. The authors asserted that a douche, vaginal scraping and medications administered quickly after a rape "invariably" prevents pregnancy. "If the rape victim would report her assault properly, there would be, for all practical purposes, no pregnancies from rape," the couple wrote.
Medications? Are they advocating a morning-after pill? More importantly, even if these techniques worked, do they not realize that many rape victims do not report promptly or sometimes at all because of the psychological trauma? This is all very different from Akin's (and others') claims that the body itself "shuts down" the pregnancy.