Virginia is for Misogynists

By Michael Collins 2/22/12

The Virginia legislature is about to enact a law that requires a transvaginal ultrasound procedure for all women who have abortions (except in the case of a medical emergency). Apparently, the legislators are unaware that the law violates existing sexual assault code or that Virginians oppose the law by a wide margin.

Here's the procedure.

"You will lie down on a table with your knees bent and feet in holders called stirrups. The health care provider will place a probe, called a transducer, into the vagina. The probe is covered with a condom and a gel. … The health care provider will move the probe within the area to see the pelvic organs." Medline Plus

This isn't an option. It's a requirement for an abortion in the Commonwealth of Virginia. The law is clear:

Update Feb 28: Virginia Senate Passes Controversial Ultrasound Bill

"a qualified medical professional ... shall perform fetal ultrasound imaging and auscultation of fetal heart tone services on the patient undergoing the abortion for the purpose of determining gestational age." House Bill No. 462, Virginia Assembly (Also here)

The medical professional is then required to "offer the woman an opportunity to view and receive a printed copy of the ultrasound image and hear auscultation of fetal heart tone."

Women will not only suffer the invasive procedure, they will be asked to experience a vicarious reenactment.

When used for medical purposes, this procedure can determine the risks of miscarriage, infections, and isolate the cause of any vaginal bleeding. The procedure is used detect cancers, birth defects, and infections that impact fetal health. It is an accepted treatment in voluntary reproductive medicine.

The mandated transvaginal ultrasound procedure is not intended for any medical purpose. It is the consequence for seeking an abortion in the state that is credited as the source of the Bill of Rights in the United States Constitution.

Women who choose abortion will have to endure vaginal invasion, seek abortion in another state, or complete the pregnancy.

Procedure Violates Virginia Law Against "inanimate or animate object sexual penetration"

The Virginia Code states that penetration of the labia majora … [for] other than a bona fide medical purpose" is an act of "object sexual penetration." There is no routine medical purpose for a transvaginal ultrasound procedure prior to abortions. As described in the proposed law, the procedure "penetrates the labia majora … of a complaining witness." Since we can assume the complaints would be nearly universal, the new law violates existing law.

§ 18.2-67.2. Object sexual penetration; penalty.

A. An accused shall be guilty of inanimate or animate object sexual penetration if he or she penetrates the labia majora or anus of a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, other than for a bona fide medical purpose, or causes such complaining witness to so penetrate his or her own body with an object or causes a complaining witness, whether or not his or her spouse, to engage in such acts with any other person or to penetrate, or to be penetrated by, an animal,,,: Virginia Code

Legislators in Violation of Virginia Law Against "attempted object sexual penetration"

By the very act of proposing a law that "penetrates the labia majora" the state legislators proposing the bill are, by current law, guilty of "Attempted … object sexual penetration." This is a Class 4 felony punishable by 5 to 20 years in prison and a $100,000 fine.

§ 18.2-67.5. Attempted rape, forcible sodomy, object sexual penetration, aggravated sexual battery, and sexual battery.
A. An attempt to commit rape, forcible sodomy, or inanimate or animate object sexual penetration shall be punishable as a Class 4 felony. Virginia Code

"Sanctioned Cruelty"

"History is replete with reigns of terror during which powerful institutions sanctioned atrocious behaviors. Consider the rape and plunder of defeated populations during the Crusades of the Middle Ages, or the execution of women during the Salem witch hunts in colonial America." FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, Feb 1992

The state sanctioned cruelty has already begun. Women who choose to have an abortion, for whatever reason, must now deal with the emotional turmoil of anticipating an object placed in their vagina for no purpose other than to satisfy the vulgar inclinations of the legislators who passed this bill. Women seeking to end a pregnancy arising out of trauma, e.g., rape, will be re-traumatized by the invasive procedure mandated by this bill,

The invasive procedure proposed by this bill, a clear violation of existing law, is intended to (a) discourage abortion and (b) punish and humiliate those who choose to have the procedure.

This Law is Not Unique

The mandatory invasion of a woman's body simply because she chooses to have an abortion is repellant and uncivilized. This law is not unique. Mark Adams pointed out that there are several processes sanctioned by the state for those in penal institutions. More than one million prison inmates have been raped, most anally, over the past twenty years. Juveniles have a high likelihood of raped within forty eight hours of placement in adult detention. Offensively invasive searches are routine. As Adams makes clear, the justice system is structured to allow all of this to go forward.

In the case of Virginia's law, there may be an opportunity to act. Existing law is clear. Actual and attempted "inanimate or animate object sexual penetration … [that] penetrates the labia majora" are crimes. The legislators either didn't know or didn't bother to reword the laws on "object sexual penetration." Their mere attempt to pass such a law is a crime. Any implementation of the law, starting with the first woman to seek an abortion, will compound the crime again and again.

It is difficult to fathom people who would even admit to fantasies similar to the events that this law creates. It is nearly impossible to imagine the type of people who would act in unison to make this the law -- one that will harass, humiliate, and traumatize women simply because they don't agree with those opposed to abortion.

END

This article may be reproduced with attribution of authorship and a link to this article.

The Money Party

Michael Collins February 28, 2012 - 5:45pm

Michael Collins's diary | printer friendly version |

( categories: Health Issues )

Thank gods I wasn't born a woman; what is it...

...about our species that so hates women?

Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them,and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows,or with both~FDouglas

Celsius 233 February 22, 2012 - 9:25am

Fundamentally, I think it's about child birth

What man can conceive of carrying and then giving birth to another human being. I think it's just too much and a lot of the anti-woman policies start right there.

This bill is undeniably a woman hating bill. Amazing.

The Money Party RSS

Michael Collins February 22, 2012 - 3:06pm

Amazing indeed; the Island of Dr. Moreau...

Celsius 233 February 22, 2012 - 8:12pm

The procedure itself "physically" is not painful-

- in comparison to the Pap smear and pelvic exam women go through routinely - stirrups and all - and much less so than what is required for an abortion

The point of the anti-abortion movement using this approach is the emotional chaos of the whole "image and fetal heart tone" drama

_{The origin of the universe has not as yet been shown to be a conspiracy theory}

nymole February 22, 2012 - 10:09am

Hmm; are you perchance, a woman?

Celsius 233 February 22, 2012 - 10:41am

Of course, or I wouldn't comment on this

except from experience. I'm certainly not in favor of the law, just want to make clear what I think is the most damaging part.

But now that I've told you, I'll have to kill you:-)

_{The origin of the universe has not as yet been shown to be a conspiracy theory}

nymole February 22, 2012 - 4:47pm

and also, who's going to be doing the "procedure"?

-who's going to be interpreting what is certainly not an image
that makes any sense without explanation

- where is the procedure going to take place?

It doesn't require a doctor, so the Hippocratic oath is not in play.

http://www.mmc.org/em_body.cfm?id=4723 is a medical site

Even if you can't view the video links, the explanations still give some idea of what the punishment will be like.

_{The origin of the universe has not as yet been shown to be a conspiracy theory}

nymole February 22, 2012 - 5:21pm

Good points all; all in all, I find it abhorrent.

Celsius 233 February 22, 2012 - 8:09pm

Who is going to be doing it?

a qualified medical professional trained in sonography and working under the direct supervision of a physician licensed in the Commonwealth (from the bill)

In other words, a technician under the supervision of a voyeur.

The Money Party RSS

Michael Collins February 23, 2012 - 1:20am

LOL, thanks...eom.

Celsius 233 February 22, 2012 - 8:08pm

AS you say, the point isn't the pain

It's the attempt to slut-shame the woman into avoiding the abortion by showing her the fetal heartbeat...

I think more play-time/emphasis needs to be put on the Santorum response to the mother of a physically disadvantaged child that she just as to 'suck it up'...

Fundies are all for preserving the embryo/fetus and shackling the woman for unapproved sexytime, but once the baby arrives---suxtobeyou...you're on your own, kid..

Sociopaths

"It's no longer IOKIYAR....It's OK If You're A Republican, but IOKBYAR--It's OK BECAUSE You're a Republican." -- Me

justadood February 22, 2012 - 12:16pm

Yes

And all this happens without making the slightest attempt to change boy's and men's behavior.

There was a very interesting opinion piece about men's behavior in the NYT last weekend, written by a rabbi, no less. It was written in response to the abuse experienced by an 8 year old girl in Israel at the hands of Jewish religious extremists.

The Talmud tells the religious man, in effect: If you have a problem, you deal with it. It is the male gaze — the way men look at women — that needs to be desexualized, not women in public. The power to make sure men don’t see women as objects of sexual gratification lies within men’s — and only men’s — control. Source

The whole article is amazing.

_{"OTP - Occupy The Patriarchy" ~ me}

adrena February 22, 2012 - 1:05pm

All the rules

requiring women to be as covered as possible says nothing about women but reflects pretty badly on men.
I can only conclude that the more serious men are about their religion, the more they find women disturbingly sexual. This leads me to question the 'normalcy' of their sexual mindset to begin with and wonder if all 'serious religious' leanings aren't simply a way to avoid or control their sexual issues.

It is worth remembering that the Founding Fathers were all traitors.

steeleweed February 26, 2012 - 8:55pm

Psychological rather than physical torture

Although the psychological can manifest in physical distress, which it no doubt will as a result of this procedure. The image of the fetus is one of the goals, prominent. They'd have made viewing mandatory if they thought they would still live in this state and get away with it.

Opposition to this is overwhelming in Virginia. The inmates may control the assylum now but there are two results of this politically8:

1) The Republicans will get wiped out in the next election - it's pretty even now but it won't be in the future.
2) There will be a movement to separate Northern Virginia from the rest of the state. That's been there a long time but this may be the spark that sets that off.

If the bill is signed, I would look a national boycott of Virginia as a destination for anything. That will be the coup de grace for this type of spectacularly vulgar behavior. The right wing Republicans deserve it. They will be replaced by democrats, who are so mild that they've allowed this to happen, even though they oppose it.

The Money Party RSS

Michael Collins February 22, 2012 - 3:15pm

Thank you, Michael

for highlighting this issue. It's much appreciated. Here's a related discussion.

_{"OTP - Occupy The Patriarchy" ~ me}

adrena February 22, 2012 - 11:01am

Welcome! It has to be in a very bright light

I wanted to contact you for a recommendation for an image, since you come up with such powerful imagery. But I relied on my own limited graphic skills and the 30 year old theme of "Virginia is for Lovers." What a crock that is.

I didn't see a link so fire it up. I'd be most interested.

The Money Party RSS

Michael Collins February 22, 2012 - 3:09pm

Kinda off-topic...

but riffing off the state motto you tweaked... Wasn't the 'Loving' interracial-marriage case a Virginia case? I'd be thingking VA isn't for Lovers, -or- Lovings.....

"It's no longer IOKIYAR....It's OK If You're A Republican, but IOKBYAR--It's OK BECAUSE You're a Republican." -- Me

justadood February 22, 2012 - 3:36pm

Loving vs. Virginia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

Raja February 23, 2012 - 12:37am

pictures

and story http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/photobooth/2012/02/mildred-loving-greeting-her-husband.html
also a HBO movie

Tina February 23, 2012 - 12:56am

But I married anyway...

Raja February 24, 2012 - 1:46am

You're a "bad" dood

"bad" as in "bad ass"...there will be huge payback for this in Virginia. The Governor just said he wouldn't sign the bill after extolling it. The Republicans are going to get creamed in the next state elections and McDonnell is finished with his base and has nowhere to go nationally (he wanted to be VP candidate, not likely;)

The Money Party RSS

Michael Collins February 23, 2012 - 1:22am

Your image is perfect

The link works fine for me. Actually, it's the same article that was posted by Cliff Schecter.

_{"OTP - Occupy The Patriarchy" ~ me}

adrena February 24, 2012 - 1:33pm

more useful sites on this issue for Virginia

trap-laws explained by the coalition for women's health
prochoiceva wordpress
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/217534.page

out of date for VA but gives you a good idea nationwide
ultrasound state requirements

_{The origin of the universe has not as yet been shown to be a conspiracy theory}

nymole February 22, 2012 - 5:56pm

Va. senator to kill amended bill on pre-abortion ultrasounds

By Michael Winter, USA TODAY
Updated 4m ago

After Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell said he opposed requiring women to undergo an invasive ultrasound before having an abortion, the state House today passed a revised measure that still mandates an ultrasound but makes the transvaginal procedure optional. Later, the bill's Senate sponsor said she plans to strike the amended bill.

Tina February 22, 2012 - 7:17pm

The governor said he is pro-reelection:-)

eom

_{The origin of the universe has not as yet been shown to be a conspiracy theory}

nymole February 22, 2012 - 7:29pm

UPDATE: Virginia State Senate scuttles 'personhood' bill

_{Abortion rights supporter ejected after a Senate

committee vote on the "personhood" bill.}
Virginia Times-Dispatch -In a stunning turn of events, the Virginia Senate has voted 24-14 to scuttle a bill that would have given fertilized eggs the same legal rights as people.

Sen. Richard L. Saslaw, D-Fairfax, proposed that House Bill 1, which had passed the Senate Education and Health Committee earlier today on an 8-7 party line vote, be sent back to the committee and carried over to the 2013 legislative session for further discussion and deliberation.

Then Sen. Thomas K. Norment Jr., R-James City, the Republican leader of the Senate, rose to support the motion, saying that the issues raised by the bill are more complex and far-reaching than previously thought and merit further study.

The vote effectively kills the bill for the year.

Video here

_{The origin of the universe has not as yet been shown to be a conspiracy theory}

nymole February 23, 2012 - 10:18pm

Virginia women rock the house

Thanks nymole. Virginia women were not ejected when they screamed so loud that one of the male sponsors of this bill had to end his TV interview i the Capitol lobby. The silent protests became very angry and loud. I'm am very proud of these women for kicking ass and taking names.

What Stonewall was to the gay movement, this Virginia protest will be to what I hope becomes a new strain of public militancy against the idiotic, absurd, offensive acts of fat cats and their crazy pay masters.

It takes a collection of women to raze a capitol;)
The Money Party RSS

Michael Collins February 24, 2012 - 3:55am

I would love for a personhood bill

to pass SCOTUS muster. Hilarity would ensue. To start with, many pro-fetus couples would have their hopes dashed when state/national IVF clinics would be shut down once they are recognized as key players in fetal-holocaust machine. Hundreds of thousands of unwanted, extra embryos are "murdered" every year.

Ex-wife: My unborn, petri-dish embryo should be on the will. It has the same rights to his father's inheritance as our five year-old son!
Ex-husband: Your honor, this is insane!

Lesly February 28, 2012 - 10:54pm

She, the decision maker

The Hindu, February 14

In a significant decision, the Punjab and Haryana High Court last week ruled that the right to abort a pregnancy in a marriage rests with the wife and not husband.

“A woman is not a machine in which raw material is put and a finished product comes out. She should be mentally prepared to conceive, continue the same and give birth to a child. The unwanted pregnancy would naturally affect the mental health of the pregnant woman…” said the court.

Stressing that marital intimacy between a couple does not automatically translate to the woman's consent to child bearing, Justice Jitendra Chauhan said, “Mere consent to conjugal rights does not mean consent to give birth to a child for her husband.” Welcoming the judgement, Jagmati Sanwan, All India Democratic Women's Association national vice-president said, “If the family conditions are unsuitable, no woman would like to give birth to a child because after all, she is the one who takes care of the children for all practical purposes. We see around us that fathers often desert their families after a couple of deliveries. But children become a part and parcel of the mother's physical and emotional world. She invests much into their well being and she alone suffers. Hence, the rights of whether to give birth or not, should be with her.”

Savages!

Raja February 24, 2012 - 1:58am

The revised ultrasound bill is as restrictive as the old one

but it's no longer "rape".

_{The origin of the universe has not as yet been shown to be a conspiracy theory}

nymole February 28, 2012 - 5:57pm

Visual

_{"OTP - Occupy The Patriarchy" ~ me}

adrena February 28, 2012 - 11:46pm

Search

latest

User login

Navigation

Create new account

Team Agonist

Thoughtful

Global

Timely

Who's online

Online users:

Syndicate

Virginia is for Misogynists

Comment viewing options

Premium Advertising

Our Friends

Agonist Page on FaceBook

Agonist Facebook Activity