Teenager wearing a dress harassed by inbred Tennessee hillbilly

[Jim]

The very idea that somehow a rapist or pedophile would be able to convince a 12-year-old girl to consent to an abortion to cover up what was had been done to her and that the clinic would then collude in this scenario is so ludicrous that it comments on itself.

If the rapist was her father there is a fair chance that he would get away with it, especially if the clinic was operating illegally.

I haven't looked deeply into this to be able to verify it is true, but here's what is being said about coerced abortions. https://www.liveaction.org/news/coerced ... re-common/

Coerced abortion: It’s far more common than you think
Without fail, abortion activists present abortion as a choice. The abortion industry repeatedly claims that mothers do not regret their abortions and that abortion is empowering. However, looking at the stories of women who have had an abortion shows just how often abortion is not a choice freely made.

Studies show that 64% of post-abortive women felt pressured to abort. At the same time, 67% received no counseling before undergoing the abortion and 79% received no information about available alternatives. Often, mothers face pressure from parents, boyfriends, employers, and friends to undergo an abortion.

Even if a mother wants to choose life for her child, she may choose abortion because of the pressure put on her by those around her. The abortion industry, which has a profit motive, cannot be relied upon to assist women who are being coerced. We have documented evidence that the abortion industry ignores abuse and aids coverups for criminals. We also cannot rely on the abortion industry to acknowledge just how common coercion is.

In stories of coerced abortion, some themes emerge:
Intimidation from employers
...
Threats of homelessness and violence
...
Environment of abuse
...

[Pdxfashionpioneer]

All you have to do is read the choice of words in the first paragraph to tell its slanted; “Abortion activists,” “abortion industry” really? As far as I know, no one is out on picket lines advocating for abortions; they’re there advocating for a woman’s right to choose and to obtain those services without harassment.

How were these studies conducted? How was pressured defined? How pressured is pressured? How was that question asked? Was there at least a 5-point scale or was it a “Yes or No” question? Who all was questioned? If it was a yes/no question asked solely of teenagers, I’m surprised the percentage isn’t closer to 90%. Simply because young people at that age are pressured about nearly every major decision, in both directions. As far as that goes, my younger brother pressured me on the process I followed when I bought my Miata. Nonetheless, I made my own informed decision. But “pressured” is a far cry from coerced or even bullied. We all get pressured about all kinds of major decisions; that doesn’t mean we don’t make the final decision freely.

To me, the telling “finding” is the percentage who didn’t receive counseling on the alternatives. A common feature of bills pushed by anti-abortion activists is mandatory counseling. Why? We don’t require that of any other medical procedure, except gender affirming surgery. People opposed to free choice clamor for these provisions so they get a captive audience for their propaganda and scare tactics.

Whether or not getting objective, professional counseling before such a fraught, consequential decision is a good idea, even that choice should be at the discretion of the pregnant woman. It’s her body and her pregnancy. If, in the legal sense, she’s competent and of legal age, getting an abortion should be her decision and her choice without any interference by the government or anyone else. Afterall, what decision could be more personal?

[Uncle Al]

MOD HAT = ON

I've copied this message and now pasting it here

OK people - - cool down There are SEVERAL people, in this thread,
who are starting to create a verbal FLAME WAR and this must STOP

IF this diatribe drivel keeps being spouted here, this thread might get locked
WARNINGS WILL BE ISSUED (I don't like doing that )

We can all agree that compromise is acceptable. So, let's agree to disagree on these
topics and move on. Can we get this "train" back on the original track

MOD HAT = OFF

Uncle Al

[Dust]

Considering the offensive TITLE, as I said before, I'm surprised this thread wasn't locked a while ago. I'll try to be good, and steer this in a less incendiary direction...

I had a lot written up in response to other posts, and already removed a bit from my draft response before I saw Al's mod post. But I'm not going to post most of even what was left. Below is one clarification that I think I owe you all, because at least one person got confused. I'll only quote myself on this one:

As to raising the child of this sort of situation, I'm aware of cases where the child of a teen pregnancy (for any reason) was raised by the teen mother's parents, and treated as their biological mother's younger sibling until the truth of the situation could be properly explained to them.

I wasn't very clear in the above with my use of pronouns.
I used "them" to refer to the baby, as they could be a boy or a girl. I was referring to the young mother's child not knowing initially, not the young mother herself. Much the same way some adoptive parents sometimes wait to tell them they are adopted until they are a little older. Of course the mother knows she gave birth and how it all happened. I should have worded that better.


I hope this puts a wet blanket on at least one thing I said that heated things up. Some other stuff got lost in the shuffle, and might become another thread, sans abortion debates. And I might try to post another couple points I had, if this doesn't get locked. I'll read anything I do post a few more times to pull anything heated that I can out of it first.

[Pdxfashionpioneer]

Greetings,

In the interests of bringing down the temperature here in the Cafe, I went back through my recent posts and in as many of them as are still open for editing, went through them and scrubbed them of as much intemperate or inflammatory language as I could find. I also made other edits to simplify or clarify my language. If any of you see something I missed, please send me a PM about it. If you're inclined to do so, please keep in mind that insisting on facts and creating controversy is perfectly okay within SkirtCade; personal attacks, baiting the other correspondent is not.

Dust said,

I'd hate to think you are on the side of rapists and pedophiles.

As I see it, the only purpose of such a scurrilous, unfounded implication is to be provocative and inflammatory. I am asking the moderators to call Dust out on that.

[Fred in Skirts]

First of all given the title of this thread I think it should have been locked a long time ago. And as abortion does not figure in skirt wearing it does not belong in an open forum here. If you want to talk about or argue the merits of such do so in PMs or E-Mail or in forums that are there for that reason.
Things like this bring discord to the peaceful settings of the Cafe.

[Pdxfashionpioneer]

Fred, as you well know, we often have topic creep, but I have to agree this digression is worthy of the Guinness Book!

Unless someone has further thoughts about the couple in the Volunteer State, I’d call this a wrap as well.

Going forward, I feel those of us who are politically-minded should pay more attention to the the title of the thread and the subforum that it is in. That is certainly my intention.

A serious question to the moderators: When a thread, by whatever inexplicable process, drifts from the original topic to something that belongs in another subject group, is there any way that you can snip the thread at the point of departure and put it into that portion of the Cafe so that readers who don’t care for the new direction are spared from it?

If it would take a lot of work, please just say so, and leave it to the debaters to self-manage the issue. Of course, with the encouragement of the mods to take the dust up elsewhere when appropriate

[moonshadow]

I lose no sleep over internet arguments. Say whatever you want... when I lose interest in a thread, I know how to close out my browser and find something else to do.

[Pdxfashionpioneer]

As do we all, however, my concern is that a person may be interested in what more someone had to say about the concerns of the prom couple, in this example, and no interest whatsoever in a debate on abortion. If whoever took it in that direction had moved the abortion debate to Off Topic, no one would have been inadvertently dragged into it.

Looking at it that way, self-policing is definitely the better solution. If reading about that fellow in Tennessee got me thinking about the legality and morality of abortion, I should have opened a whole new thread under Off Topic with a title clearly showing it was about abortion.

I know we’ve talked about topic drift in the past and made light of it, but we do no one any favors when a thread gets hijacked the way this one was. I apologize to our group for my contributions to this process over the years and promise to start practicing what I just preached.

If in the future when I do so if my new topic doesn’t interest you or worse yet offends you, please don’t read it. If you feel it has no place whatsoever in the SkirtCafe, please complain to one of the mods in a PM and let them adjudicate. That’s part of their role.

Shalom.

[crfriend]

A serious question to the moderators: When a thread, by whatever inexplicable process, drifts from the original topic to something that belongs in another subject group, is there any way that you can snip the thread at the point of departure and put it into that portion of the Cafe so that readers who don’t care for the new direction are spared from it?

This has been mooted in the past, and has come in for some serious consideration. Each time the consensus decision was that (a) it'd be a whole lot of extra work and (b) that it'd break the normal functional model of conversation-drift as it happens in the real world. Thus, each time, it has been put down as being impractical and confusing.

Discussion and debate on controversial ideas are a core part of what it means to be a free society. Thus, we really cannot stifle those and, given how pervasive they are in the Brave New Order, it's more important than ever. There's a reason why we try to use a "light touch" -- and also why I try to spread the consensus of the moderation staff as far and as wide on the globe as I can.

If we are personally affronted, we have the absolute right to defend ourselves in the public light where the offence occurred. Personal affronts on-line are frowned upon as largely unnecessary at best, and cowardly at worst. Do not commit them if you expect to remain respected. Ideas, theorems, and hypotheses however, are fair game as are policies. Yes, this opens the door to political discussion, but given how things have gotten in the past 40 years, we cannot exactly detach political policies and dogma from our own personal lives because of the intrusion of said policies and dogmas into our personal lives.

The above having been said, it's important that we retain respect for each other, and for the views we may hold -- at least publically. That's the primary ask here.

[Uncle Al]

I've searched and found nothing 'new' about the boy in a prom dress.
The latest I've found is from May 3, 2021.
Teen Boy Who Wore a Gown to Prom Has an Important Message for the Haters

I wish him the best and hope he has a wonderful life, free to be his self in everyday life.

(The CEO was fired from his position.)

Now, can we let this thread die out

Uncle Al

[Sinned]

I actually have an example in my family tree of a child brought up by apparent parents that was actually the child of their daughter. The evidence is there in the civil records. So it does happen.

[Uncle Al]

Considering the offensive TITLE, as I said before, I'm surprised this thread wasn't locked a while ago.

Do these words really offend you

Considering WHEN this thread started on 21 April 2021, at that time, the TITLE was not
considered "offensive". Seems like you are applying 'standards' of 2022 onto things
written in 2021 or earlier. You're judging 'The Book by it's cover' not knowing what
the content really is. Same applies to people. Just because someone is "dressed to the 9's "
doesn't mean they are wealthy and intelligent. Same for someone dressed in jeans and T-Shirt,
as being a poor, unintelligent person.

During an interview on The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson(circa 1972-79), Bill Cosby was
discussing how people perceive other people. He was planting some flowers (dressed in jeans,
T-Shirt and sun hat) in HIS FRONT FLOWERBED. Someone pulled up, rolled down their window and
started asking questions of "The Gardener".

He was asked if he knows the home owners. Bill's response was priceless.
He said "yes, I know the owners quite well. I even get to sleep with the owners wife."

This brought waves of laughter from the audience.

Now - taken out of context, some people could/would be "offended" by these comments.
Placed in their original context - the words make sense and convey a complete meaning
or idea of what happened.

The title of this thread, if I remember correctly, was a quote from the news reporter.

( - I was given these "Words of Wisdom" many years ago:
To be informed, remain silent and listen.
To show the world how ignorant you are, speak. - )

Uncle Al

[Sinned]

Well said, UA.

[Dust]

Considering the offensive TITLE, as I said before, I'm surprised this thread wasn't locked a while ago.

Do these words really offend you

I'm not from Tennessee, but I've been there. Much of it is very nice. Some great people. Beautiful part of the country. I doubt anyone there is any more inbred than the various royal families of Europe.

The quoted statement was about that very fact, that the things being said that got us in trouble weren't any worse than how it started. If we are going to shut down threads to protect people from harsh words, the title should have done it. If the title didn't, let the whole thing play out, unless perhaps it goes full flame war. I was pointing out hypocrisy.


I also don't believe in going back and editing the record. There there things said that got to me (the worst was still up despite edits, last I checked) that I'm not asking to be removed. I'm not editing my posts, either. It got heated for sure, but without the full context, including the heated exchanges, no reader coming back through this thread will be able to understand this discussion.

I'll probably start a new thread on the topic that got lost in the shuffle (also a tangent), soon. If the mods would rather attempt to extract it out of this thread, feel free, but I doubt it's worth your time, and something might come with it to poison the new thread from the start.