#anyway i have a lot of thoughts about abortion and population control and birth control in the QZ so i could go all day

[justplainsalty]

How Soon is Now? 🌻

Me, wading through the angst muck like a pig in shit ☝️. I would not make this a song fic but it would be multichap and every chapter would have an epigraph with a section of lyrics.

[Insert footage of me deleting and rewriting this several times.] TIME FOR BULLET POINTS.

Tess falls pregnant in September.

Unfortunately, she does not realize this until early December. She had assumed she was pre-menopausal, and food has been scarce. She's happy to not have periods.

She and Joel have been busy, busy prepping for winter, doing as many runs as possible, stashing food away so they can survive until spring.

[More under the jump.]

She has an IUD. Had an IUD. It was due to expire anyway, but turns out it fell out sometime during her last two extremely hellish periods, when she'd been stuck shivering and groaning over the toilet for hours. (Thank god those only happen a few times a year.) She figures it all out when her breasts are tender and she can't feel the strings anymore.

Unfortunately part II, FEDRA requires pregnancies be registered, and bans abortions for people who fall pregnant from August through November. They have to keep up enough population to feed their supply chain, and the summer months are when resources are most plentiful for supporting births and families newborns.

Tess will have an abortion, one way or another. She refuses to be pregnant, refuses to go through that misery again, especially at her age, refuses to put their work on pause and leave Joel without a partner, refuses to risk death during the delivery process, refuses to bring a child into this fucking hellscape world.

She doesn't tell Joel any of this. She'll figure it out on her own, as soon as possible; he doesn't need the weight of this burden on his shoulders. And maybe, a part of her doesn't want to face what it would do their relationship. She doesn't know what the consequences will be, but she knows they'll show up if she doesn't act fast, and there will be a reckoning.

She starts taking more risks during their runs, and during their daily life -- drinking more, going out without Joel more, taking the more physically demanding route around and outside the QZ, provoking the people in the slums known to be happy to swing a fist at anyone so she can put herself in that path. She won't go to one of the dirty back-alley butchers with unsterilized tools. She'll figure this out on her own. Hopefully sooner rather than later.

Joel calls her out on it one day, and it's the knock-down drag-out fight of a lifetime. He gets her backed into a figurative corner. And the truth comes out.

Joel turns white and storms out. Tess gives him a minute, and then snatches up a bottle of moonshine that was for trade and storms out in the opposite direction. She won't wait at home for him to slink back, shitfaced and having whatever reaction he's going to have. She's glad Tommy is gone, if he was still here, Joel would be tempted to tell his brother.

She stays out as late as possible, going nowhere in particular, just stalking their usual paths around the QZ, ducking the checkpoints. It's so much harder without Joel, she'd forgotten.

By the time she gets back, she's hammered. She lies down on the cold, refreshing, disgusting tile of their bathroom and hopes, just this once, not to wake up in the morning. Her arm and the tile beneath her are wet. She's not crying, is she?

Joel is back the next morning. They're both hungover, so prickly with each other. It's not forgiven, and it's not forgotten. Even if they somehow seem to be in consensus that this pregnancy is bad and should be terminated, Joel's reasons feel so much more personal. He never wanted to be a father again. He doesn't blame her for getting pregnant, but he blames her for not telling him until whatever date it is, late December or early January. She doesn't understand why it's the case, but somehow, for him, that's worse. And he blames her for the foolhardy way she's been acting. And probably, on some level, the anger is probably covering up for his fear, so it's particularly vicious. It's hard not to take it to heart. He's angry at her. She starts to withdraw, to lash out. To assume everything from him is said and done backhandedly.

They don't patch it up. It's approaching February. Tess is probably close to five months along. Her body is changing; it remembers her last pregnancy from a lifetime ago, when her son was born, and is trucking along fast enough that she's looking quite far into the pregnancy. She hates every single day. Time is running out for her, for them.

As with everything in their lives, the best luck and the worst luck seem to collide and happen at the same moment:

Someone she crossed has snitched. One of their regular FEDRA clients warns them that FEDRA is coming to pick her up, now, tonight, to put her in custody until she can be screened by an OB/GYN, and possibly to be kept in "protective custody" until her little parasite is born.

They're out at a drop. Someone has changed their mind, doesn't like the terms. Ammo has been scarce this far from FEDRA patrols, so no one has guns.

Someone comes barreling at Tess. Normally Joel would step in front. He meets her eyes, looking sick, and steps aside, faking a stumble.

He lets them hold him back, sagging in their grip. His eyes and face are dead. He has gone away somewhere else.

She wakes up in FEDRA custody. She hurts all over. That fucker was thorough.

There's a doctor, comes in with a clipboard and a falsely sympathetic expression. No heartbeat. Sick relief warring with strange and unwelcome shame. Not for what she'd done, but for the how. For the expression she'd seen on Joel's face. For the fact that she'd put too much stock in blissful ignorance and gotten pregnant in the first place.

The FEDRA fuck can't keep her mouth shut:

Her fetus, their child. It was a boy.

A son, an heir, of their nebulous and unstable empire, of things that could be snatched away at a moment's notice, of nothing in particular.

Send me a made-up fic title and i’ll tell you what i would write to go with it!

[preggomancer]

Mother is really cool!! Is there background as to why it was created?

oh you would not believe how much thought I put into this 

SHORT ANSWER: due to the whole post-apocalypse situation, there was a population crisis and Mother was built as an ethical solution. 

LONG ANSWER: The setting is sort of post-post-apocalypse, where society is getting its legs back under it. (is. That the saying. Anyway) Mother is from the dwindling remains of a civilization which was never huge to begin with, but now has only a few thousand people. At this point, birth control/abortion etc are universally accessible, and in a society where most traditional values were scrapped in favor of survival, not a ton of people want to get pregnant. Because it’s hard and unpleasant and also everyone’s kind of busy with the rebuilding society thing. This meant they were at risk of dying out in a few generations. Because this particular society is run partially by a bunch of AI who think very hard about ethics all the time, they weren’t about to force anyone to have kids against their will. So they all thought extremely hard about what to do, and figured out that the only ethical solution was to create a robot specifically for the purpose of procreation. 

This was itself a whole problem. They have the tech to grow babies whole cloth, but it’s far too difficult and resource-intensive to do on a large scale. They originally considered implanting an AI in a donor corpse, but aside from the challenge of having to find a donor with the right body parts and age who just happened to die in a way that sticking a robo brain in there would fix, that raises a whole slew of ethical problems with autonomy. Does the new host have a right to pilot around this body, where is the line between body and person, etc etc. 

So the solution they set on was to grow one body which would never have a human mind. Which just came down to developing a fetus with almost no brain—just enough for basic physical functions. The body was then run by a dummy program for about a decade, which had no intelligence, but just kept it alive and healthy until it had enough fine motor skills to not be super annoying to live in. They then replaced the dummy program with Mother. 

To the robots, this was a perfect ethical solution which totally negated any concerns about autonomy. Mother's not human, and never was! It has total autonomy, so they can be sure it's acting of its own free will, and it's just programmed so that it'll (most likely) choose to perform its role as surrogate. Of course, a lot of humans still feel weird about it, because we have all these built-in ideas about the human soul and whatnot. I imagine that its a lot like some humans are having this ongoing existential philosophical crisis about the whole thing and the robots just can't comprehend what the issue is.

[rgr-pop]

@madmoths some thoughts, I deal with this kind of a lot (a friend of mine who I cherish is a scholar of eugenics history who works with one of the biggest figures and programs in sterilization compensation). I always think it’s interesting how hung up people are on finding and naming “eugenicist” historical figures, individuals, when eugenics was (is) state policy. all american historical actors of the first half of the twentieth century were operating within eugenics, relating variously. with sanger in particular you get “but she was a eugenicist!” (both as conservative rallying as well as kind of vapid liberal signalling) met often with “well everyone was a eugenicist at the time, it was the norm.” the latter is not false but it is missing the point, to me, because eugenics was not primarily a cultural atmosphere or a set of attitudes or beliefs but those things applied to policy and operating through various medical mechanisms. I don’t mean to be like “but material!” about this, I just think the distinction matters. it becomes easy to say, “margaret sanger was a eugenicist, but it was because of her time” and then it becomes less easy to say “she operated in a framework of eugenicist politics that looked like this at this time; those politics look different now,” which then makes it possible to say the ahistorical thing, “since margaret sanger fought comstock laws I guess therefore abortion is eugenics.” unclear if that makes sense, I think half of what I am saying is that we need to locate how eugenics was operating in context, but another half might be that I am saying that we need to locate it outside of people and inside of institutions. which is kinda edgelord of me but... I am right.

so “margaret sanger was a eugenicist and therefore abortion is eugenics because [unclear] planned parenthood *checks notes* does abortion *sweating*” is silly on its face but is particularly historically nonsensical, as many historians are pointing out today, in large part because abortion did not factor very heavily into the work of many high profile eugenicist reformers at that time, including sanger herself, who, iirc, opposed abortion for most of her career. birth control movements--and, certainly although I do not know this for sure, sterilization movements--in many instances were movements to prevent abortion from happening. so it fascinates me that we may hear: “it is true that abortion is eugenicist” (ahistorical) “yes but also isn’t birth control eugenicist?“ (less ahistorical) “yes but if we use birth control to prevent abortion, maybe that is less eugenicist” (actually as eugenicist!)

as many people have pointed out in response to thomas, the idea of the eugenicist abortion has mostly always been made-up--weird that we have like a whole ass pro-choice movement just accepting to discuss in good faith shit that an organized pro-life movement made up pretty much from thin air in like idk 1980, even though many among us have library cards. it makes sense that this is a myth if you know anything about anything. why on earth would states promote abortion as eugenic control when it was so efficient to sterilize people against their will? how would it really really really make sense that the most restrictive and deadly period for abortion access in the united states was also the period when eugenics was law and many states were very successfully implementing forced sterilization campaigns? (north carolina’s eugenics board was performing these sterilizations until after roe.) considering these things together--that abortion prevention was a targeted goal of mainstream eugenicists in all kinds of fields, at the same time that eugenics was practiced through mass sterilization and other means by the state--makes it seem really clear to me that the restriction of abortion has always, in america, to some extent, been about that very population control, “eugenics.” which it is! the fascinating and extremely true galaxy brain conclusion here is that if we believe in reproductive justice as specifically a movement against eugenicist politics, then the right to get pregnant and terminate a pregnancy is central. a eugenicist policy is any policy that aims to “prevent” a reproductive outcome.

the issue of disability is a whole other thing, I’m sure you can guess that my take on this is that it’s a bullshit fucking commodified fake red herring lie, which it is. but it’s strange to me that we are comparing a eugenicist politics that restricts disabled people’s right to get pregnant and reproduce (largely although not exclusively through sterilization, often practiced via institutionalization of various forms) to this other, newer thing, that is uniquely about abortion (selection “against” potentially disabled children, enabled by abortion). the latter is a whole imaginary that is necessarily new (via the technology of the unborn, although technologies of genetics are a whole thing there). I could definitely say many things about this (the specter of the unborn!) but it feels to me like the unborn emerges in our society as a technology (lennart nilssen shut off those lights) along with a set of explicit concerns about the preservation of the race (this is the argument of this book, building on this book) (we get to see inside the womb, and have a full scientific and medicalized accounting of pregnancy, at this moment when people are terrified for good reasons about the future of humanity and their immediate selves but also still operating in a eugenicist state, with regular eugenicist fears about white racial power.) the invention of these tools to determine (and think about) the “health” and “fitness” of the unborn is also the invention of the tools with which to imagine the unborn as something political. to me, “the unborn” is necessarily the terrain of the white supremacist, the eugenicist, and the pro-life movement. they want us (disabled people, everyone) to fight on that field, to talk about potential fitness, to play a game. they want us not to not abort a disabled child--and if we are disabled, recall, maybe we are sterilized anyway, right--but specifically to cede the less-humanness of the disabled. participating in the “well what if your baby is disabled huh?” thought exercise is not enlarging the space where we have rights, it is shrinking them. the conversation parses out hypothetical exceptions to rights we should have, and theoretically do have, legally, right now anyway. just as importantly, the shifting boundaries of “life” that the pro-choice movement is forcing us to litigate--and many of us choose to participate in this! even when we do not have to! as if there is something meaningful and given about it!--force us to concede that there are boundaries around what kind of disabled life is personhood. As far as I’m concerned, this is a secondary goal of the pro-life movement, to narrow what counts as a life, or a citizen, by forcing us to generalize and define a more narrow conception of the unborn. And this is why I reject both the sport of arguing with eugenicist red herrings, and the terrain of the “unborn” entirely. :)

[eldritchsurveys]

151.

What would you do, if you encountered a Dalek? >> I have no idea. I haven’t watched nearly enough Doctor Who to know the proper thing to do in case of Dalek.

Do you enjoy good food or do you prefer to constantly watch what you eat? >> I definitely choose my food based on taste and enjoyment as well as nutritional value; it’s basically a good thing that I gravitate towards more nutritionally robust food naturally, because otherwise I’d probably be in the same boat as a lot of people (letting nutrition fall by the wayside in pursuit of That Good-Food Feel). It’s an understandable boat to be in and I don’t begrudge people their junkfood/fast-food habits at all.

Is there any snow where you live? And where do you live, exactly? >> Not right now, thank god.

Are you excited that spring is on its way? >> It isn’t.

Is there a website you frequent the most? >> I guess this one.

What would you most likely do, if your computer suddenly froze? >> If it BSODs, then I just let it do its thing (it restarts itself in that case). If it just freezes in place, then I wait a minute and if nothing happens (and I can’t get a response from Ctrl-Alt-Del or anything else), force a restart with the power button.

Which OS (operating system) are you using? >> Windows 10.

Have you ever seen the inside of a computer? If yes, can you name any of the components? >> Yeah, because I open it up to clean the fan out every so often. I can point out a few of the components, but not all of them.

What is your favourite gaming console/system? >> I prefer PC gaming.

If you only had one week to live, what would you do? >> I don’t know. I can’t imagine that situation.

Do you know what IRC is? >> Vaguely.

If you were stranded on an island, what one object would you want with you? >> I mean... I’m just gonna say a ship. I know that also comes with complications (no crew, etc), but I’m not really in the mood to be serious about it.

How often do you listen to music? >> Pretty often.

If you could get a new phone right now, would you/which kind? >> I’d really rather not.

Have you ever cut your own hair? >> I cut my own hair regularly.

Could you live without a TV? >> Sure.

Back to the very first question, do you even know what a Dalek is? >> More or less.

Is there someone special in your life? >> There are several.

Do you want to get married one day? >> It’s in the plan, either way.

Is anyone close to you pregnant right now? >> No.

Do you want children? If yes, how many and why? If not, why not? >> One would be fine, I suppose.

If you could spend the rest of your life with someone, who would it be? >> Sparrow.

What is the most important thing in your life? >> I don’t know, I haven’t really thought about it like that.

What would be your dream job? >> None.

When you were a child, what did you want to be when you grow up? Do you still want to be that? >> I had some vague ideas, but nothing serious.

What is your biggest dream? >> I don’t have one.

What are some of the things on your Bucket List? >> I don’t keep a bucket list.

Do you have any pets? If yes, what? If not, why not? >> No. Sparrow has a cat and that’s quite enough, tbh.

If you could go anywhere in the whole world, where would you like to go? >> Anywhere, I suppose. I’m not picky.

What has been the worst thing that's happened to you? >> I don’t know.

If you had the chance, would you start your life entirely over? >> No. That concept gives me the hives.

What is your view on abortion? >> I support legalised abortion.

What about birth control? >> I support free/affordable birth control.

Over-population? >> I am not knowledgeable enough about ecology and biodiversity and related disciplines to know exactly how dire human overpopulation is.

Racism? >> I think it’s absurd and I am quite tired of dealing with it.

Homophobia? >> Ditto.

Bullying? Have you ever been bullied yourself or have you bullied someone? >> I was bullied as a child. I think it will continue to be a problem until adults start taking it seriously (and focus more on teaching compassion and consequences for anti-social behaviour rather than teaching bullied children that “bullying just happens and you should just ignore it”).

What do you think of people, who choose NOT to have children? >> I think that’s great, and they should have their choice respected.

Do you think euthanasia (assisted suicide) is acceptable? If not, why not? >> I do think it’s acceptable.

What about suicide? If not, why not? >> I think that’s ultimately acceptable too, as a fact of existence -- obviously that’s a loaded answer, and I’m not at all suggesting people just kill themselves, but I don’t think it helps anyone (including suicidal people) to stigmatise it. If someone’s pain is so great that they can’t imagine living with it, then that’s something that deserves attention -- if their pain is unable to be mitigated, then what do you suggest they do, keep living with it for the sake of other people? It’s just... such a complicated issue.

Do you know anyone with a severe mental illness? >> Yes.

What is your view on teenage pregnancy? >> I don’t have an opinion. It happens, and the teens in question should be supported in their time of need instead of kicked out of their homes and burdened with guilt and shame.

What about sex before marriage? >> Fine with me.

In your opinion, what is the ideal age to start having sex? >> I don’t have an opinion on this.

What about the ideal age to start drinking? >> Or this.

What do you think of smoking? >> I don’t really think about it. It’s just another thing we humans do.

What about people, who listen to their mp3-players in public? >> Most people use headphones, so it’s fine.

Are you afraid of global warming? If yes, why? If not, why not? >> I’m not afraid of climate change, because it’s difficult for me to conceptualise in the long-term. But I understand the anxiety.

Do you believe the world will end in 2012? Why/why not? >> Hah!

Aren't surveys, that ask favourites, this'n'that etc. questions, annoying? >> No.

Aren't you just as tired as me writing all your basic info in surveys? >> No.

What's the most important factor for you when choosing a survey to take? >> Whether I’ve taken it in recent memory.

Have you ever made a fool of yourself in front of someone you like? If yes, what did you do? >> I mean, maybe at some point, but I sure don’t remember it now. As it goes.

Don't you think that sunglasses they sell today look ridiculous? >> No.

What is something that annoys you very, very much? >> The super-bass some people have in their vehicles. I can feel it in my bones and that’s an experience I’d rather choose to have (like at a concert), not have forced upon me.

Do you like long car rides? If yes, what makes them fun? If not, why not? >> I used to like them a lot more, but now I get really antsy and stifled-feeling after a while (especially if the windows are closed). I’m just not as used to the long car ride experience anymore.

Have you ever been on a plane? If yes, where did you go? If not, why not? >> Yes, quite a few times.

Have you ever been on a cruise ship? If yes, how many times? If not, why haven't you? >> No. Because it’s not affordable and I don’t regard it as a priority anyway.

Do you know any of your neighbours? >> No.

Do you ever shop online? If yes, which stores? >> Sure, Etsy and Amazon and the like. Sometimes other places.

Are there any animals or insects that absolutely scare you? >> Probably, but I can’t think of any right now.

If you could have absolutely anything right now, what would you want? >> I’m fine.

What is the most stupid thing you have ever heard anybody say? >> I don’t know.

Are you allergic to anything? >> Nope.

Have you ever done anything that would be considered illegal? >> Yep.

Did you ever go to kindergarten? >> I did, for half a year. (I started out in pre-K at the typical age, and then halfway through the year they were like “this kid is too advanced for pre-K so we’ll just bump them up to the kindergarten class now” and that’s how I ended up being consistently younger than my peers for the rest of my school career.)

Did you/do you like school? When did you/will you graduate? >> I did not enjoy school. I graduated in 2004.

How do you handle a situation you desperately want to get out of? >> It really depends on the situation. For most of them I just find my way out (I’ve definitely straight-up walked out of places before, in the middle of things, because I couldn’t deal with it.)

Who is the weirdest person you have ever met? >> I don’t know.

Would you say your family is ordinary or somehow crazy? >> I don’t know how ordinary they are. I will say, if they’re ordinary, then that’s pretty depressing.

If a stranger asked for money, would you give them any? >> Sometimes I do, sometimes I don’t. 

What do you think of 90s girl- and boybands? >> I like some of them.

What about today's pop music? >> I like some of it.

Do you enjoy any form of art? >> Of course.

What would be absolutely the worst job ever? >> I don’t know.

Do you need a daily caffeine fix? >> No.

Are you a Pepsi or a Coca-Cola person? >> Neither.

Are you a cake or a bisquit (cookie) person? >> Neither.

Do you see the positive or the negative side of things mostly? >> I’m more inclined to optimism than pessimism, unless I’m depressed.

Do you ever boycott anything popular? >> No.

Do you still live with your parents or have you flown out of the nest? If you've flown out of the nest, when did you move out from home? >> I left home the first time at 17, and officially left at 18.

Do you live on your own or with someone else/do you share a room? >> I live with Sparrow.

How old is the eldest member of your family? >> I don’t know, probably in their mid-eighties or early nineties.

Who in your entire family do you get along with the best? >> ---

Do you enjoy reading books? >> Yes.

Or do you prefer magazines? >> I also like those, I just read them much less frequently.

What do you think is the biggest waste of time? >> I don’t know, I don’t really think of things like that.

What is the most disgusting thing you've eaten? >> I’m not sure. Hospital food? Ha. (The two hospitals I stayed in in North Carolina had pretty good food for being hospitals, though, I must say.)

Do you still have any of the stuffed animals you had as a child? >> Nope. I can’t even imagine what it’s like to still have stuff from childhood.

[antiracistkaren]

Post Hysterectomy Thoughts

CW/TW: Mentions of eating disorder, surgery, suicide, sexual assault/rape of trans people

I am at home with my family--meaning, I can hear every cry my girls make, every short answer from Jon, and every minute that goes by that I'm not studying. I feel it all.

I was at Dylan's this weekend for the first couple of days. I just went into a room and really didn't come out except to use the bathroom and have small talk when I was too restless to stay upstairs. I ate Oreos whenever I wanted and eggs scrambled up by Dylan in the mornings. I had one cup of coffee while I was there.

I watched all of The Crown, and have that fullness of feeling caught up on something. I finished Becoming right before my surgery, which has also extinguished my desire to read in general. It was my "easy" read, while The People's History of the United States is dense and must be read slowly. It's hard to speed read through history. It takes time to digest. And then there's This Little Light of Mine about Fannie Lou Hammer. Another dense biography with close writing and thick pages. I know the outcome of this one is not nearly as bright as Mrs. Obama's, so I am loathe to really get into it. However, I know that once I get going, I am able to polish off books rather quickly. It just takes me time to reach the halfway point--which is usually where I start to get invested in the rest of the book. I always have to fight to get to that "halfway" mark, where I bend the book and it no longer wants to snap shut on my hands, but falls beautifully open, having been appropriately used and doted on enough to break the spine.

So I just let my eyes enjoy some historical fiction. The quiet dialogue of The Crown would help me drift off the sleep when I became tired from my medication, and would be there when I woke with gentle British accents and sweet "arguments" occurring on screen.

It's hard watching Diana's eating disorder. It is not something that I personally struggle with--bulimia, but I do strictly control what I eat and when. You can always tell when I am super stressed out because I simply stop eating because I am too nervous or overwhelmed. The times when I have dropped weight suddenly are times in my life when I was at my worst, emotionally and relationally.

So I understand the Bulimia, the desire to have control at least, over what goes in and out your body. Especially when you have no control over how your mind feels, how your emotions are responded to, and even your every day movements are stilled and controlled. Post-surgery is a box, but it is one I do not mind inhabiting at the moment, because I know that once I emerge from this particular box, I will be free of cyclical pain and will be free to live as a man does: without concern or thought to when my period is coming and when I will be in pain.

Although it may sound small to most people... or to men especially, it is hard to describe the depth of thought and concern one's period brings. You hear about it a lot as a kid growing toward puberty, and then comparing severity among your peers becomes normal. Women talk about their periods to each other all the time: ways to avoid it, to skip it, to make it lighter, shorter, less painful. We use all of the strategies and tricks to attempt to act "normally" like a man does while we are mercilessly bleeding from a major organ.

It's really strange: how we treat women and their periods. Something that afflicts over half of the population on a roughly a monthly basis, and we're not even allowed to discuss it.

I want to talk about something that happened the day before my surgery, which still has me stewing and fuming a bit, and that was a Pregnancy Test.

I have not been sexually active with Jon in a way that would produce a baby since June. June, y'all. I know my life and I know my marriage, and we are hanging on by a thread, but I know this fact: I am not pregnant. I have gotten my period, often and heavily.

However, thanks to Texas state law, prior to my hysterectomy I had to prove that I'm not pregnant.

Basically, the law prevented me from "lying." And I can't help but think about... well, "what if?"

What if, after having three children and taking every single precaution I could, I was pregnant? It means I would either have to cross state lines to get an abortion and then have a hysterectomy, or carry that unwanted baby to term, furthering the pain and trauma on my body.

My body has been through enough at this point, y'all. That's what I was in the office to get this organ removed. Pregnancy is literally toxic to my body. Getting rid of my uterus was the last recourse I had, since birth control makes me suicidal and absolutely bonkers prior to my period. I'm not talking about PMS, I'm talking heavy mood swings that put me into suicidally sad places. I'm talking fits of rage that felt like explosions from my body. In short, birth control really aggravates by ability to manage my emotions at all levels. Which means, as an autistic woman that struggles to manage emotions anyway, I was absolutely psychopathic. I would come out from the fog and look backwards and see how irrational I was, how irritated I was. I found myself apologizing every few weeks for having huge breakdowns emotionally, physically around ovulation and then again around my period.

So I am telling the nurse that there is no way that I can be pregnant, and I'm mostly shrugging this off, but it really bothers me when I get to the paperwork: I must either consent to have this test, or risk not having the surgery if I won't take it. Classic catch-22: submit in order to get the thing I need to have a better quality of life, or stand up for my rights as a woman and risk being denied this surgery.

So I submitted, with great resentment. I stood up after my blood draws and asked if I needed to pee on a stick, and that I could leave a sample. The nurse informed me that no, they would run a blood test.

A blood test. Something far more accurate, detailed, and expensive. I am lucky enough to have hit my deductible, and so I will not personally pay for this bloodwork and this pregnancy test, but if I didn't have health insurance, I would have been required to do something because of my gender, and then been required to pay for it myself.

That's fucked up, y'all. Never mind that I was taking birth control. Never mind that my husband and I are basically abstinent right now. Never mind that I have three children already and if I don't want to have another one, that should be my RIGHT as a human being, I was required to take a test AND pay for it at the same time.

Smacked by two laws: one in which I do not have the right to free healthcare and pregnancy tests, and one in which I do not have the right to evacuate a toxic organ if it happens to house a mass of cells (because I just had my period, there's literally... no way that it could have been more than a mass of cells that that point), because my husband happened to catch an egg right before my procedure?

I was heartsick thinking about it. The amount of women who may try their best to get away from an endless cycle of pain or pregnancy being turned away because they caught an egg this month. Pregnancy is like being in prison for some of us. It is toxic to my body: I would get gestational diabetes without fail. That's my body telling me something: This isn't healthy for you. And yet I did it three times.

And I don't get to say when it's over without taking a test? Without proving to the medical community, to law-makers, that I am not pregnant?

What is the reasoning here? Do we somehow believe that women will, knowingly pregnant, go in for a hysterectomy? Really?

It's three days later, I still cannot get over it. I also think about Trans people, who want to have their uterus removed and are denied if they are under 30. That leaves Trans people open for getting pregnant via rape: trans people are far more likely to be sexually assaulted and raped (Source). If we refuse to allow trans people to remove their own uteruses when they deem fit, we are damning them to having to take hormones to suppress ovulation, or other chemicals that will fundamentally alter their mental state for the worse.

This isn't about oh poor suburban me--I am LUCKY I can do this. Luckily, I'm not pregnant. Luckily, we have paid out of pocket all damn year and got this surgery for free. It makes me angry that I have to feel like this is a damn gift that I got--this major abdominal surgery is a privilege that many do not have, simply because they are not a white, suburban mother whose husband has decent (not great!) healthcare through his employer.

I'm thinking about all of the women under 30 with endometriosis, cysts on their ovaries, and other conditions that make having this monthly cycle a NIGHTMARE. I'm thinking about trans people who want desperately to evacuate an organ that does not feel like part of their bodies. I'm thinking about homeless women who want to be rid of their pain on a monthly basis, who are just trying to survive and who have to make money just to be a part of society, to have money to buy sanitary supplies.

We are treating people with uteruses in this country as criminals if they want to alter their bodies. We have brought a Christian, white supremacist, doctrine into the patient/doctor relationship, and it is humiliating to women, especially those AFAB, and those women of color who cannot get access to this surgery at all.

It IS a gift, but I wish it weren't. I wish that women could take comfort in knowing that when they feel "done" with having children, they can choose to be done. Whenever they want. Empower women to take control over their own bodies and reproductive lives. You don't need to imprison us to make children--many of us want to, and will suffer in order to have children. But it shouldn't be forced on anyone simply because they have a uterus.

[julystorms]

Hello! How do you think the Survey Corps handle unplanned pregnancies within their ranks? Especially, let’s say, if they are people with positions— like squad leaders. I really wanna know your thoughts on this :D

Sorry, I promise I wasn’t ignoring your first ask! I just wantedto find the time to respond properly. For the longest time I had a drafted metapost about this topic (“Pregnancy & Disability in the Survey Corps”) that Ioccasionally added to when I had a thought. I think I deleted it when I purgedmy drafts, though. Oops!

I definitely have a lot of thoughts on the topic. This is a really long post; there are a lot of things to consider with a question like this!

Let me start by saying this: I feel that strong worldbuilding isprimarily a result of consistency. I know SnK’s worldbuilding is, overall,rather weak, but there’s no reason we as creators can’t force consistency intoour own narrative explorations of that world! A consistent set of rules for thecharacters to operate under make for a better experience overall, not just inthe canon, but also for readers/viewers of fanworks. You can always switch thingsup for fun, but I personally like to have one particular set of rules that I useby default. It makes it easier for me as a writer to sink down into the storyand portray it without having to think too hard about every little detail as Igo.

One of the most interestingthings about SnK is that it portrays a sexist world but still allows women intothe ranks of its military branches—all three of them. However, we generallydon’t see women in positions of power: there are no female government members,no powerful merchants, no notable members of the aristocracy, and no confirmedtop female officers*.

*Rico is the closest we get,but she doesn’t seem any higher-ranked than Ian or Mitabi were, and is clearly outrankedby Kitz, so she doesn’t count. Hange is the only POSSIBLE high-ranked femaleofficer in the entire series, but “possible” =/= “actual” so again, no-go.

Boris accuses Hitch of(essentially) using her femininity in an underhanded way to get into the MP; asI’ve said before, we don’t know if he’s right or if he’s just trying to be anasshole because he doesn’t like Hitch, but I think it’s fair to say that thiskind of misogyny is something that women in SnK’s military face on the regular,especially if they perform on par with male classmates. Hell, this is somethingwomen who work in male dominated fields face daily in our world. It doesn’t surprise me. Isayama’s not portraying autopia with this series, after all. But it’s clear he didn’t put a lot ofthought into the little things: like sexism/misogyny in the military and how itwould clearly impact the lives of the girls and young women who enlist.

I don’t think it makessense to say: SnK’s world is 100% reliable and the narration we receive is 100%credible. We don’t see what happens to our female characters behind-the-scenes.We don’t see if they’re treated differently by their instructors, teachers,trainers—in front of peers or alone. We don’t see if any of them werepropositioned for sex or other favors. We don’t know that team leaders in theSurvey Corps, Military Police, and Garrison don’t abuse their positions of relativepower over new recruits. We have to assume that in an imperfect and clearly sexistworld, these kinds of things do happen, and some people aren’t left with a lotof choice as to how to deal with it. What would Hitch be able to do if hercommanding officer (Eibringer IIRC) propositioned her or touched her or [insertother possibilities here]? Who is she going to tell? Will they believe her? Andwhat are the chances that saying something would tank her career in the MP? Shedid all that work to get into the MP; would she risk doing something now that might get it taken away again? Yeah, saying nothing means putting up with abuse, but if she doesn’t disturb thewater, so to speak, she’ll have a long career that pays well ahead of her—somethingmost people on Paradis don’t get to have. These are the little details thatweren’t considered but do mean agreat deal when you’re writing about the daily ins and outs of the world thesecharacters live in.

Which brings me topregnancy, sex, and all related topics. I’ve seen writers use various kinds oftea as “birth control.” I’ve seen authors use oral sex or the pull-out methodto try and avoid the possibility of pregnancy. Some characters track theircycle (assuming for them it’s reliable enough to be tracked) as a form of birthcontrol. And look, all of these are perfectly valid and all are very likelyused in the world of SnK. Not all of them work. There may not be many herbalremedies that are effective; there may not be many that are readily or cheaplyavailable. These are the things to think about. Just because someone claims itworks doesn’t mean it does. The characters have to contend with that!

And because no methodexcept abstinence is 100% effective, some characters are going to get pregnant—andnot just in the Survey Corps.

This world is sexist. Youhave to consider whether or not the Garrison or MP would allow for pregnantsoldiers to stay enlisted and you have to think about what would happen after ababy was born. Think carefully. Yes, it seems feasible to work and raise achild, especially on the Military Police’s paygrade. But would it be allowed? Again, we don’t see hardly any femalecharacters in a position of power, and the ones we do see aren’t shown to bemarried or have children.

Think, too, about thepopulation, and about the world’s belief that humanity is going extinct insidethe walls. All of these things affect the mindset of the general population:how they feel about women, what they feel a woman’s job/place in the world is,and so on. Notice that in background shots, you see women carrying babies,groceries, with their children, and always wearing skirts. Chances are, womenare wives, daughters, housekeepers, and babymakers first and foremost, andworking women (women who don’t have a choice and/or are yet unmarried) do “lowerwork” and probably not for much money (laundry for better-off folks, shellingnuts, simple factory tasks, sewing/darning, waitressing, prostitution).

All right, so…with these considerationsin mind, let’s talk about pregnancy.

There’s a lot to thinkabout when it comes to someone in the military of SnK’s world getting pregnant.Is it considered shameful to get pregnant out of wedlock? Seems kind of thatway, re: Historia’s awful mother and cheating father. Nobody blinks an eye atmen having affairs but women are another story. What are their optionsregarding birth? Are midwives easy to find? Doctors who can make a differentsure seem rare (re: Grisha showing up and magically being able to help people;Ragako Village letting some quack come in and inject them all without oncequestioning it)! Midwives who are trained and experienced? Expensive andprobably not easy to come by. You’re probably going to be stuck with anotherwoman who has given birth before helping you out, and if something out of the ordinaryhappens, you or your baby could die. Because of this, abortion may be anoption, but what kinds of choices do these people have? The old coat-hangerroutine (that can easily end with death when the bleeding doesn’t stop and isextremely painful)? Herbal remedies that might have side-effects that you can��thide/that may spell the end for your career?

If we assume that pregnancyand childbirth are a free pass out of the military, it will be abused. Therehave to be measures in place that would make a person want to avoid pregnancy.Is it a dishonorable discharge? Do you have to pay a fee? Do you have to givethe baby up for adoption? These sorts of things would discourage a lot ofpeople who might otherwise benefit from having a baby. The Survey Corps alsohas a built-in discouragement: your lover dying and leaving you alone with ababy to raise. But then, what’s to stop them from crippling themselves to getout? It wouldn’t be that hard to drive a sword through your own foot and makeit look like an accident. (No doubt doing this on purpose is treasonous andpunishable by death, just like running away/disobeying orders if doing soyields bad results.) The only way to keep that in check is to assume that itwould be hard for them to find work if they were too disabled. Maybe for somepeople it would be worth it, but others…not so much.

Being realistic, losingyour post in the Military Police would be discouragement enough; characterslike Hitch who are young and wanted very much to get in and stay in are likelyto avoid pregnancy like hell; any man who got her pregnant could deny it andwhat recourse would she have if he refused to acknowledge her and help her? Theydon’t have paternal testing in this world. And she’s not a high-rankedrespected member of the military: she’d be out of a job with two mouths to feedand no experience in anything but military training! That’s terrifying. In manyways, that serves as its own form of birth control. (But we can’t pretend thatmen don’t abuse their positions of power in the military and push themselves onwomen anyway. We can’t pretend that characters like Hitch can always say no and have that norespected. She’s going to be thought of as disposable to many people.)

The Garrison is a littlebit more interesting. They’re not hurting for soldiers, so if a few women hereand there decide to get pregnant and leave the military, there will be plentyof replacements to take their places. It’s possible that the Garrison forcesyou to quit but it’s not looked on so poorly. It’s also possible that if you’rerespected or liked enough, or you know the right people, you might be allowedto keep working doing administrative work. Hey, being a paper-pusher might notpay as well as scouting on top of the walls or cleaning artillery, but at leastit’s work if you need it. And if you’re single: you will. Plus, since yourstation is permanent, you could have your parents move in with you to help withthe kid and maintain a full-time job without too many issues. Hell, because it’snot so terrible a crime, or even a crime at all, you can probably speedily getmarried and avoid too much gossip. (That’s not to say that people aren’t kickedright out of the Garrison for getting pregnant, but there’s probably more roomfor the well-liked and hard-working individuals to stay on after giving birth.The MP are elites and may view pregnancy out of wedlock (possibly also workingwives) as imperfect and therefore not okay. Garrison soldiers are not elitesand don’t have those kinds of delusions or grand appearances to keep up.

That brings me to theSurvey Corps. How many people join only to regret it a few months later? A babyseems a small price to pay compared to being eaten by a titan, trampled, orworse, mangled so badly you’re permanently disabled & discharged from themilitary—left with no way to care for yourself (except to maybe rely onrelatives if you have any to take care of you). Like I said earlier, if havinga baby was a free ticket out of the Survey Corps, people would be trying for iton purpose. There must be rules in place: dishonorable discharge,fraternization rules with stiff penalties, a steep fee you have to pay toleave, you’re forced to stay in the military and give up the baby for adoption.One or several of these would work well.

That said, giving up a babyfor adoption seems fine, but this is a world where the population is both “toosmall” and “way too big” (ugh…). It makes sense in its own way, but there areprobably tons of homeless children out there like Eren, Mikasa, and Armin, who didn’t join the military. There areprobably lots of young women in poverty with babies they can’t take care of,dropping them off at churches and on the porches of slightly better off people—maybeeven at military HQ buildings. That makes that option feel…a lot less likelyIMO.

I want to look at anexample. Let’s say Nanaba and Mike are in a relationship and she finds out thatshe’s pregnant. Now, Mike’s a decent person, right? He won’t deny his role inNanaba’s pregnancy. In that way, she’s luckier than some women would be, butshe still has to tell him, still has to deal with his reaction. It’s her bodybut her options kind of all suck, so it might be nice for her to discuss itwith him and get his opinion, too. How far along does she think she is, howsafe are abortion methods, would she be comfortable aborting, what are theside-effects of trying something like that—arethe risks worth it? If they are, she has to try one of them, and theoutcome could be: hey, she can return to work in a few days (everyone probablyknows why she wasn’t around, tbh). It could also just as easily be: she triesto return to work and can’t due to side-effects of an herbal remedy or becauseher body is too weak, or she hemorrhages and dies within 24 hours, or she doesreturn to work but the side-effects linger and cause her death on an expedition—orworse, they cause someone else’s death.

So maybe she decides tokeep the baby. Mike cares about her, he won’t abandon her to raise a baby alonewith no help, but where is she going to live? With her parent(s)? His? Alone?What if neither of them have living parents? Or, as portrayed in the anime,what if her parent(s) are abusive? Is she going to take her baby back to aplace like that? Does she have much of a choice?

Maybe she does. Maybe Mike’sparents will be happy to have her live with them. Mike can send them money. Heonly gets furlough at most 4x a year so they get to see each other a few timesa year for a few days/a week. This could depend on how far away they live, somaybe Mike uses some savings to move them closer so that visiting can happen onweekends or afternoons off. Cool. Great.

If Mike is 40, his parentsare likely to be 60+ years old and maybe not in the greatest health. This worlddoesn’t exactly allow for easy aging, you know. Are they working? Is Mikepaying all the bills himself? Well, what’ll happen when Mike eventually dies oris hurt so badly he can’t fight anymore and is sent home to die or lay arounduselessly?

Nanaba has to sit at homeand think about that kind of stuff. What if Mike dies? She can’t help him, can’tbe there for him; she’s just at home waiting for the news. It’s possible he’lldie before their kid is very old and won’t remember him at all. How are thebills going to be paid? Are his parents capable of watching the kid if Nanabahas to try and go to work herself?

It’s scary no matter howyou slice it.

And that’s not includingthe potential dishonorable discharge, payment of a high fee for leaving, andpossibly even a paycut for the remaining spouse if they fess up to their rolein it (all of which make raising a baby even more difficult).

You would think thispotential future (or worse, depending on circumstance) would promote abstinence(or at least methods of sex that have no chance for pregnancy)—and it probablydoes…but not in everyone. A lot of people enjoy sex, and mistakes happen; somepeople may just get carried away but others may have too much to drink or lackthe foresight to consider what may happen to them if they do get pregnant.

The problem here is that it’swomen who primarily suffer the consequences of a pregnancy. It’s women who losetheir position in the military. It’s women who can be pushed around or abusedby male peers or superior officers and women who won’t be trusted or believedif they complain. And it sucks, but in the world we’re presented with in the canon…itfits. And it leaves us to wonder how many women this happens to. How many arepassed over for promotion because they’re women (and considered likely toleave/want to leave/or less-than their male counterparts)?

It really makes you think!

I know I didn’t give you adefinitive answer to your question, anon, but I hope that there was enoughspeculation here to help you come up with your own headcanons (while alsogiving you a good idea of what mine might be). ;)

The usual disclaimer: IMO, YMMV, et cetera and so on.

To add, I didn’t really talk a whole lot about pregnancies as a product of rape or of a loving relationship where the man denies his part in it, but a lot of the same things apply. 

Lastly, I don’t want readers to think that men can get away with anything in the SnK world; I don’t actually think that’s the case. But like in our own world, a patriarchal society makes it hard for women to feel safe speaking up, with the result being that very few women do. The problem with SnK is that there aren’t many ways to prove that what you’re saying is true; if you say you’re pregnant, you can’t prove who the father is unless by some miracle that baby comes out looking like them (and that would truly be a mixed blessing anyway). If you’re not a respected officer who will believe you? If you’re accusing a respected officer, or worse, accusing someone who is married with children already, do you think anybody will be on your side? I do think some men are caught in the act, or there is proof of some kind (love letters clearly written  by them); sometimes they’re even brought to court and prosecuted for crimes and fired or sent to jail or fined (and forced to pay some compensation to the mother-to-be in the case of a child). But how often do these things end in favor of the women involved? Probably not often. With rape it’s: “Boys will be boys.” “What were you wearing?” “Well you can’t blame him... you’re a healthy, attractive young woman.” How many women say something and are faced with these kinds of things? In court, even? Women still hear some of these things today. In a modern society. And with men who would choose to run from their responsibilities instead of facing them like an adult, the women involved still have to deal with the emotional betrayal and all of the other fallout. 

It’d be kind of silly to imagine that a fantasy world that clearly functions as a patriarchal society wouldn’t be almost exactly the same in this regard.

[mentalisttraceur]

I see what you're saying, and you're right that this is sometimes a factor. However, I think this way of looking at it will miss some of what goes on in the minds of at least some of the men who do this.

Because it doesn't have to be lesser to be not threatening, it just has to be different. And this specific difference is intimately tied to something our very biology is built to care about.

I think I have some relevant first-hand insight into the cognition involved, because I have personal experience with both

insecurities about relationship partners (or even just friends!) having stronger bonds with somebody else than with me, and

desiring relationships where I have multiple women and no other dicks or other particularly male body parts are involved.

And in my own internal experience these are just separate things. Like when I'm insecure about competing on human connection strength it is sometimes very different than feeling icky about other dicks being involved.

Which makes sense if you consider that our brains are optimized for a life without ubiquitous access to very reliable contraception and abortion, and other men having sex with women you were into meant significant odds of them getting pregnant with those men's children, carrying them to term, and then being very motivated to invest and sacrifice a lot to raise them.

That's time and resources that could be spent on your potential children that you just "lost". And the odds of that are higher if she's into him sufficiently more than into you, and he's demanding a one dick policy. So it makes sense that our brains would have predispositions towards cognition that would motivate behavior that would "win" in those conditions. And this cognition won't necessarily be rational and responsive to evidence like her being on birth control, because that cognition never had to be evidence-sensitive until we discovered ways to actually change that reality from an inevitability to an option. And since it didn't have to be logically connected to any evidence, it doesn't even have to be particularly connected to an understanding of sex or pregnancy or whatever. It could just be something like instinctive revulsion at the thought of a woman you like being with another man. And there could be multiple unrelated cognition flows that achieve approximately the same motivational result within the human population.

Anyway, the mental angle I use to not mind other dicks is mostly being confident that it will not lead to children, or that if it does then I will be entirely free to walk away from raising them (or from the relationship as a whole if pregnancy or child modifies it in a way that no longer works for me). The mental angle I use to not mind stronger or equally important other relationships is being confident in my own unique merits and desirability. But the latter mental angle does nothing to alleviate the former.

So for me at least, those are just two independent insecurities, and neither requires me to think that the connection two women might have as less valid or limited.

BUT it's definitely easy to get those wires crossed, and I think a lot of men do get them crossed. Especially because culture already conflates a lot of things with dick-having, and some of those things do in fact involve misogyny or devaluation of women's relationships with other women relative to their relationships with men.

Still, it's important to be able to see this other angle where it has nothing to do with that, and to consider it when idea-fitting why someone might want a one dick policy.

If I was to be one of those polyamorous or otherwise non-exclusive people who have a "one dick policy" for the relationship, I would at the very least have the decency to be self-aware and up front that it is coming from a place of insecurity and neediness.