I don't like writing about facials. So I'll let Tracy at Broadsheet do it.
People magazine (and CNN) carry cringe-worthy quotes from Kourtney Kardashian and why she decided to have a baby: "I looked online, and I was sitting on bed hysterically crying, reading these stories of people who felt so guilty from having an abortion...I was reading these things of how many people are traumatized by it afterwards." Good to research your options, bad to fall for anti-choice claims of "post-abortion syndrome."
What is "natural beauty" anyway?
Danish conservatives are calling for an abortion ban.
Proposed legislation in the Bahamas would outlaw marital rape (it's still legal?!) and apparently - sigh - the bill is facing opposition.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: What We Missed.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://classic.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/15581
"My doctor told me there is nothing you will ever regret about having the baby"
I hate that assumption. There are people that regret having kids, believe it or not. The problem is that they tend to be silenced and labeled as "bad parents".
yes! I know plenty of people who would be so much better off had they not had a little accident. and plenty of marriages that never should have happened, but didn't because of a little "surprise."
Exactly. And there are plenty of people who love their children but regret the circumstances in which they had them. Parents are often glad they had children but wish they would have waited longer or had them with a different partner.
There are people that regret having kids, believe it or not. The problem is that they tend to be silenced and labeled as "bad parents".
I'm not sure it would be such a good idea for parents to be open about the fact that they regret bringing their children into existence. As you probably know, there are in fact parents who do make clear to their children that they were "mistakes." Can you imagine the kind of psychological scars that leaves?
That said, regardless of one's beliefs about abortion, I don't think anyone should ever be criticized - or even doubted - for choosing to carry a child to term, even if one believes she was misled (and that article does make pretty clear that Kardashian felt it was her own choice, not anyone else's.) A new human being has been brought into the world - and that's a fact to be celebrated, not shamed.
"I'm not sure it would be such a good idea for parents to be open about the fact that they regret bringing their children into existence. As you probably know, there are in fact parents who do make clear to their children that they were "mistakes." Can you imagine the kind of psychological scars that leaves?"
THANK YOU for saying this. My mother was wonderful. She was free and open with her affection for and pride in me. But once, when she was traumatized by my bad teenage behaviour, she said; "I wish I could trade you for another daughter". Despite all of the love that came from her before and after that statement, it hurt me and affected the way I see the world.
If something said rashly by a normally tender and enthusiastic parent damaged ME so much, I cannot imagine the anguish suffered by people who grow up knowing 24/7 their parents didn't want them.
Reproductive choice is vital - in fact I think removing choice is a human rights abuse. But I also think, since we live in a society where choice is available to us, that once someone chooses to become a parent, they should commit to it fully. If someone has a child that they end up not wanting, they should give it to someone who does. If they can't do that, they should suck it up and accept that they CHOSE parenthood.
(obviously this doesn't apply to societies where women don't have reproductive freedom)
Which is why a woman should make the decision on her own, independant of BF, husbands and asshole doctors. If she resents not having the information when she was pregnant to empower her to do what she wants with her own body that could breed these kinds of disasterous scenarios.
I don't know, I think it depends a lot on the situation. My mother is incredibly kind, we have an excellent relationship, and I have never for a second doubted that she loves me with all her heart. However, she has told me that she did not want children, that pregnancy and childbirth was one of the most traumatic experiences of her life, etc.
This does not bother me in the slightest; in fact, I think it's wonderful that she can be so honest with me. It also lets me know I have her support for whatever I do in my own life - she's not pushing me into being a mother the way some parents do, and I appreciate that.
"I'm not sure it would be such a good idea for parents to be open about the fact that they regret bringing their children into existence. As you probably know, there are in fact parents who do make clear to their children that they were "mistakes." Can you imagine the kind of psychological scars that leaves?"
I think that you can regret becoming a parent and be open about it without being an ass about it. Maybe it's not the best thing to tell your kids, but the thing is is that people who regret becoming parents can't tell ANYONE without being silenced.
"That said, regardless of one's beliefs about abortion, I don't think anyone should ever be criticized - or even doubted - for choosing to carry a child to term"
Yes, and no one should ever be criticized or doubted for abortion either. Each choice is just as valid as the other. It just pisses me off when people try to trick women into choosing the choice that THEY prefer by giving them misinformation.
Nobody has to point at the specific individuals but an adult mind should know the realities that some do regret having kids, or the circumstances they had their kids from arent what they wanted. The doctor was wrong for saying what s/he did. My mom knows a woman that started crying once she found out that she was pregnant. She didnt want to be. Sadly to her abortion was taboo. A mix of misinformation on the net and moral chastizing by the religious right keep women from making a truly autonomous choice.
And I would NOT be with any guy that would try to 'make' me choose what to do with my own body.
Btw, Jessica, I think that's supposed to read "burqa ban", not "abortion ban".
I don't judge Kourtney Kardashian harshly because of her quotes. All the cringe-worthy quotes come from her speaking about the boyfriend and the doctor. The more constructive angle is to open up a dialogue about the people who can impede a woman's decision making process.
I was so uncomfortable reading that entire article. She was being pressured by her doctor, her boyfriend, and anti-choice propaganda. And she labelled herself as selfish for thinking of having an abortion. I think having an ex-boyfriend who would force you to give birth is a good reason not to have a kid with him. We'll see what happens.
When she said this:
"....and when I told Scott he was so excited. But I think if I had said I'm not going to keep it, I really think he would have pushed me into keeping it."
I was concerned.
http://whatswrittenonmybody.blogspot.com/2009/08/standing-up-to-fat-phobia-peta-style.html
Feminist vegetarians protest PeTA!
HELLS YES!!!!!!
Thanks for posting the bit on the Bahamas, Jessica. PZ's piece was, in my opinion, a great assessment of the position.
I really don't know how to feel about Danish politics. They've got issues with censorship and now they're looking to ban abortion? Kind of weird, given that I considered them a somewhat liberal country.
Read the article -- they're considering banning the burqa, not abortions (must've been a typo on Jessica's part).
I take offense with the media that salivates over soft news and gives a voice to celebrities who are clearly misinformed. In all fairness, there are many women out there who are misinformed on the topic, but there's something about distortions of the truth when married to the glitz and glamor of celebrity confession that absolutely enrages me. That some would formulate their own opinions based purely on the example of famous people is where the danger stems.
And as for this porn-centric culture that is as exploitative to all who partake in it, not just woman, I wish there was some way to reinsert the importance of love, devotion, and fidelity into sex without going as far as the right and insisting that all of these things only exist in the context of traditional marriage. For me, personally, the best sex I've ever had was with someone with whom I was in love. It was powerful, intense, and utterly sublime and that is what rarely gets out.
Am I the only one who feels somewhat wary about condemning consensual sex acts that many women choose to take part in (even I'm personally not a big fan of it)?
Read the article. The author doesn't "condemn" it, and acknowledges that many women do choose to take part in it for their own reasons.
I did read it. She acknowledges that, but maintains a "How could these girls being doing this?!?!?!" negative tone throughout.
"Someone will surely pen a book someday soon that details how women's pornification of their sex lives amounts to shameful self-exploitation. "
----Sounds a lot like condemning to me.
I think she was more talking about how young women are doing the things they see in porn because its just so cool now, but dont seem to realize that the acts they are mimicking are intentioned to humiliate women.
In re humiliation...
One of the things that makes sex enjoyable (for me at least) is an enthusiastic partner.
That also includes organisming during oral sex... and the women in porn much of the time do a good job of at least faking enthusiasm.
That does not necessarily mean a facial, but some at least a lack of repulsion at bodily fluids.
Flip the roles and a dude is performing cunnilingus... would you prefer some sorta enthusiasm or overt sounds of repulsion?
And that can happen without humiliation, just like analingus, spanking and dirty-talk.
But it's a problem to say "Facials are meant to humiliate women." Yes, that's what it's almost always about in mainstream porn. But it's unfair to suggest that that's what the act itself (as opposed to the context in which it is perfrmed) means. Within a respectful relationship, I can easily see how a facial could be about loving someone so much that you want them all over you.
""Someone will surely pen a book someday soon that details how women's pornification of their sex lives amounts to shameful self-exploitation. "
----Sounds a lot like condemning to me."
It does if you leave out the next line:
There's another way to look at it, though: Enthusiastically engaging in that defining act, the grand finale of most X-rated fare is one way to dramatically announce oneself as a member of our dominant sexual culture -- which is the world of porn.
In regards to post abortion depression I listen to... my mom.
She was a midwife for about two years (a short time considering she has been a nurse for about 30 years) and ball-parks the number of pregnancies she estimates she worked on about 100 pregnancies.
She saw women who had abortions with no emotional disturbance whatsoever. She also saw women who had had an abortion and were fine with it... until they actually had their first-born put in their arms.
There were the mothers who had already had children and then needed to end the pregnancy midterm. They self-identified as mothers, and so when they had to end their pregnancies they felt like they no longer deserved the children they had.
While I don't know how many women fall into each of the categories, I do believe post-abortion depression is real for a subsection of women, and denying that fact can be pro-abortion and not pro-woman.
Kardashian:
"For me, all the reasons why I wouldn't keep the baby were so selfish: It wasn't like I was raped, it's not like I'm 16. I'm 30 years old, I make my own money, I support myself, I can afford to have a baby. And I am with someone who I love, and have been with for a long time."
She seems to talk a lot about NOT wanting to have an abortion, about what her boyfriend wants and what her doctor said and there's that whole thing about God, but I find it interesting that she never says "I decided not to have an abortion because I want to have a baby."
I think it's a good idea to NOT have an abortion because you want to have a baby, but I'm not sure it's such a good idea to have a baby because you don't want to have an abortion. There is a distinction, there.
Or maybe she's just a drama queen. I mean, if she's supposedly a reality tv star, she is used to hamming it up for the media. Maybe she just wanted to create some drama to get herself bigger ratings or more interviews.
What she says in the article sounds kind of immature for someone 30.
I got three impressions from the article......
1) She can't make her own decisions.
2) She really wanted to make her own decision and didn't want to face the fact that what she really wanted...was what everyone around her wanted too.
3) She's driven by guilt.
I think it's a good idea to NOT have an abortion because you want to have a baby, but I'm not sure it's such a good idea to have a baby because you don't want to have an abortion.
If you don't want to have an abortion you still have several other options, even though some of them are not certain....
-Adoption
-Pawning the little one off on its grandparents
-Giving it to the father
Given the indecision you mention and the finality of abortion... I gots to say bringing the child to term is the way to go if there is that kinda doubt.
And she is right, her reasons for not wanting a child are selfish, and she acknowledges that. I think it is human nature to be selfish and a better part of human nature to overcome your selfishness so I cannot slight her for that.
I disagree. If you don't want to have a baby, then don't have one. "Just because you're pregnant" isn't a good enough reason. Having a child is an incredibly huge responsibility that lasts a lifetime and yet it is treated as though it's the same amount of effort as getting a manicure.
Does me not wanting to have a dog make me selfish? If I don't want the responsibility, why does that automatically classify me as selfish?
And here is where the conversation gets messy...
Generally speeaking, you have to have sex with someone before you have sex. But that is not so before you get a puppy.
Alot of people have some notion of dermatological (duty based) ethics, even if they don't know it.
If you make your bed, lie in it... do the crime do the time are some examples.
So... you fucking someone is different than swinging by the pound to look at puppies.
There has been some recent chatter about what someone number is, and what it means.
I don't have sex with someone if:
1) I don't feel like having a child, and
2)I don't want to have a child with that specific person.
Given all that, my number is kinda low.
By doing so I abridge my desires because having a child and abandoning the mother just for the sake of an orgasm would be selfish.
So, if you don't want the responsibility, avoid the behavior that leads to the responsibility.
Otherwise you are selfish. You only care about your pleasure, your hedonistic desires, and you don't care about the moral ramifications of your actions...
Because that is easier.
1. Producing babies is not the only purpose of sex. It is also pleasurable, which is either by evolution or by design. Not all sex results in pregnancy which also results in a live baby.
2. Selfishness is not necessarily an undesirable quality.
3. Disallowing cells from growing in one's uterus is only a moral question if one has defined those cells as a human life.
1. The only 'purpose' of sex is having a baby, just as the only 'purpose' of food is to sustain life. Just because humans created/discovered all sorts of para-sexual activity because it feels good does not change the fact the only biological reason for gonads and the attendant equipment is reproduction.
Just because all sex does not result in a living baby means one should forget that the only way to have a living baby is for sex to be involved somewhere in the process (or a hell of a lot of science to mimic the sexual reproductive process).
2.Way to hedge your comment with a 'unnecessarily.'
3.That is damn near psychopathic way of looking at the world. Morality based on defining what you encounter in the world to your best convenience is in the basement of any moral hierarchy (Kohlberg, Gilligan, etc).
The battle over definitions is a transparent act of minimizing any culpability and very act of definition becomes the 'moral act' you want to avoid.
Steven, it is not psychopathic to try to correctly define things and then to act on those definitions.
It is just not true that the only purpose of sex in humans is reproduction. Sure, that's the only purpose for gonads and ovaries, but it's not the only evolved use of sex. In bonobos, sex is used as a social mechanism and sex, and the pleasure derived from it, have many different uses in human society, some of them similar to those observed in bonobo society.
It also seems to be prudent that the human species has found many ways to divorce sex from being solely reproductive, otherwise every human family might look like the Duggars, and we would be in even more severe competition of resources.
And defining something as it is convenient sounds a lot like anti-choice propaganda. I decide to define ANY human that doesn't have a functioning brain as a non-person, and a non-person does not require as much moral consideration as a person. Some people have different moral definitions, but mine is at the very least consistent to all situations, and not just those of "convenience." Until we find the stone tablets of eternal morality, whose to say which definitions are "correct" and which are incorrect?
The only 'purpose' of sex is having a baby, just as the only 'purpose' of food is to sustain life. Just because humans created/discovered all sorts of para-sexual activity because it feels good does not change the fact the only biological reason for gonads and the attendant equipment is reproduction.
How heterocentric of you.
Also consider that while abortion may be a relatively new medical intervention, the desire to control timing and number of children is part of our long human history. Spacing out children and having the number of children that your physical, emotional and social resources will allow is something that is as ingrained in the psyche as much as the desire to have sex.
"is for sex to be involved somewhere in the process "
Cuz lesbians and gay men dont have kids.
You are right... they don't without PIV or science to replicate PIV... now you are on board with sexual reproduction.
Men and women dont always use PIV sex to have kids they can use IVF or a finger and sperm. Now youre caught up with youre own words and why they dont make sense.
Why would two gay men using a surrogate replicate PIV sex? Second this is hugely heterocentric. Sperm in vagina, doesnt need a penis in vagina to make it happen. Youre claiming superiority of one over the other. This also proves you wrong that sex is all about reproduction. Sperm and eggs dont need hetero sex to reproduce. Just each other. YOU dont seem to understand reproduction. No penis need be involved, just sperm and egg. You very pro PIV. Do you run an organization or something? PIV, PIV, PIV!!!
Wow. If your definition of living is doing only those things which we're biologically programmed to do, I don't envy your existence. On the other hand, your earlier posts suggest you engage in sex for pleasure ... so which of these claims is BS? Or is it only men who are "allowed" sex for pleasure?
"If you make your bed, lie in it... do the crime do the time are some examples."
Seriously, on a feminist blog? You know thats lame and its going to be torn apart easily.
I'll start:
Babies arent punishment. Sex isnt evil, ect.
I know that no matter how good my argument, the dogma will be crushing. That is why I don't write long winded post... they would not be appreciated anyway.
But you is right, babies should not be treated as a punishment. But also if you aint ready to have one, you should not be doing the acts which natural conclusion is to lead to a baby.
Otherwise it is just hedonism and selfishness.
So people, specifically women people, shouldn't have sex unless they want a baby. This (il)logic always makes me laugh, because it makes absolutely no sense. You know why? Because this belief, if it was practiced at all, hasn't been practiced in many generations. On both sides of my family, I had a total of 10 great aunts and uncles. That's because they practiced family planning. Or maybe you think my four grandparents only had sex a total of 10 times in their entire lives. You'd be pretty naive if you truly believed that your parents only had sex to make you and any siblings you may have. Nobody wants to think about this stuff, but our parents fuck for fun. So did (do) our grandparents, and our great grandparents. Most people my age (almost 25) don't have dozens of great aunts and uncles, because even their parents from 100 years ago used birth control. They didn't "have as many children as the lord would allow." The vast majority of women didn't want to have a child every year from menarche to menopause, and that certainly hasn't changed.
Well STEVEN, when you get your own uterus you can choose to do what you want with it. Grow sea monkeys in it for all I care. But you are expressing a misogynistic attitude to womens choice when you will never be pregnant. Unless you support a womans right to choose, and support her choosing it then YOU shouldnt be having sex. Failure to do this makes you controlling misogynist and one of many in the misogynistic army of slut shamers and those whom try and shame those women who have abortions. Most of these activists will never be pregnant because they are men. You need to learn to keep your BS off my body.
Thank YOU!!!
And Steven, how about this:
No matter how careful a fertile woman is when she has sex with a fertile man, there is a chance that she will become pregnant. A fertile woman should not have sex with a fertile man unless she is willing to have a baby OR terminate the pregnancy in a way she sees as appropriate.
"I don't have sex with someone if:
1) I don't feel like having a child, and
2)I don't want to have a child with that specific person."
No. You, as a man, shouldnt be having sex unless you respect whatever choice shes going to make. Sounds like you shouldnt be having sex at all steven.
and just out of curiosity: why would you demonstrate this kind of attitude and flawed logic on a FEMINIST forum? Disrespecting a womans reproductive choice, as a man, is not thinking clear.
Because I don't buy into the ideas that my ideas a flawed.
So I showed two of my criterion, but I did not lay out my criterion for my criterion... I should not have to write a book to explain my ponits....
\
And take some time to look at at criterion number 2. Just because my sentiments can be distilled into two sentences does not mean they are simple.
I have seen enough babies without caring parents to have faith in my standards. I will never leave a child to be unloved or unsupported and I will never have to feel like a child I helped create will need to be aborted because of my inability to support it or get along with the mother.
I will never leave a child to be unloved or unsupported and I will never have to feel like a child I helped create will need to be aborted because of my inability to support it or get along with the mother.
Then follow your own rules (don't have sex with women who would choose abortion, don't have sex until you're ready to have a baby), and leave the rest of us alone.
Those are all alternatives to parenthood, not pregnancy.
"-Pawning the little one off on its grandparents"
Why have a kid when you would only end up doing that. Its barbaric and dishonorable. Thats no alternative to parenting, its anti-parenting and harmful to the kid. Not to mention the grandparents whom are old and may have debilitating health problems. And if this situation were to ever happen then WHY would the woman have it?
But seriously steven, I think you should get a little soap box and shout that (above) out. It'll only work for the pro-choice RESPONSIBLE parenting side.
"Adoption
-Pawning the little one off on its grandparents
-Giving it to the father"
Lurvely. But these are all 'choices' that could be disasterous to the welfare of another human being (the baby) and they all suggest that she didnt want it. If abortion wasnt enveloped in so much irrational shame then why would she do it if she doesnt want it? These are all the 'choices' of an undecisive, and guilt radden person. Not an empowered and informed woman.
"-Giving it to the father"
Why would a woman have a baby just to give it away? That would also be stupid if the bio father isnt a fit parent. All your solutions would only exist if she sadly thought that abortion was something bad. Its not. So you shoudl quit spreading the BS, especially as youre a man and will never have to deal with the issue.
"Given the indecision you mention and the finality of abortion... I gots to say bringing the child to term is the way to go if there is that kinda doubt."
"finality of abortion"
Last I checked, birth is pretty final and in comparison it also affects another human being. So you cant really deduce what youve deducted up there.
"she never says "I decided not to have an abortion because I want to have a baby." "
Interesting, isn't it? In typical empty-headed celebrity fashion, it sounds like "What the heck? Why not? Might be fun! If it isn't fun, I'll just leave it with a nanny!"
"While I don't know how many women fall into each of the categories, I do believe post-abortion depression is real for a subsection of women, and denying that fact can be pro-abortion and not pro-woman."
You clearly left out post-partum depression for mothers of wanted babes!
And..."pro-abortion"? Really?
Certainly different women feel differently after an abortion and after a birth. Please don't forget, though, that even going through a menstrual cycle for some women can be very painful and can contribute to severe depression.
I would be willing to bet that even in cases of post-abortion depression that much of the emotion is hormone-based.
A lot of women are looked at as less-than as moms if they mention depression (but you have a baby! how can you be sad!?) or for NOT feeling guilt after an abortion.
I think the point you made was a little unfair.
Well its not supporting by any legit psychological institution nor is it what most women report they feel. Only a minority of women regret it and what is often cited as the source is shame and religion. And most women who have abortions are mothers themselves. I'm sure your mothers experiences were from a different era when women were institutionalized differently and more oppressively.
I wonder if she ever mentioned whether or not she was using birth control. Because if she wasn't, it's a little hard to believe she was shocked to be pregnant. If she's 30, then she should have a clue.
I think I saw (of course i can't remember now) that she kept forgetting to take her birth control pill, and didn't think it was that big a deal until she found out she was pregnant.
Suddenly, it all makes sense. I hope she doesn't forget to feed the kid.
Staff will take care of that for her.
But not having a dog isn't the same as aborting a fetus.
We feminists like to forget that a fetus is still potential life because we're focusing on the woman, not the fetus. And while the foster care system is mostly very horrible, it isn't impossible to find a family for a newborn infant. It's perfectly fine to have a baby and then give it up because you don't want an abortion but don't want to raise a child. It's not what I would do, but that doesn't make it wrong.
This was supposed to be in response to jeana's comment about puppies, but I forgot to hit reply.
Women who don't want to carry a pregnancy to term are not selfish. There are probably just as many reasons for abortion as there are women who have them, and it is NOT your place to judge these women.
But the point remains that caring a child to term is different than getting a dog.
Yes, and? That makes it even more important to consider abortion if you weren't planning on having a baby. It is obviously much worse to do a sup-par and unenthusiastic job as a parent than as a dog owner.
I didn't mean that a dog and a baby are the same thing, and I think you know that. But the one thing they have in common is there is a lot of work that both take (much, much more for a baby) and you shouldn't just take it on because you are made to feel guilty if you don't or you are forced into it. You should do it if you WANT to do it. And if you don't want that responsibility, then don't take it on. That doesn't make you selfish. It makes you smart.
It is irresponsible to have a baby you can't properly care for or don't want.
I'm not comparing having an abortion with not wanting a dog. I was trying to point out that me not wanting to take on a lot of responsibility (let alone go through a pregnancy and birth against my will) does not make me selfish anymore than not wanting to care for an animal.
If you don't want an abortion or a baby, then adoption was made for you. Go for it. But if you don't want a baby, abortion is also ok.
I actually think it's much worse to produce a kid you don't want and can't properly care for when there are so many kids who need homes. I never understand the logic of making more and being guilted into it.
Jeana:
"I actually think it's much worse to produce a kid you don't want and can't properly care for when there are so many kids who need homes. I never understand the logic of making more and being guilted into it."
Agreed.
Also, it's a stretch but I think one could once more draw the dog parallel. It's irresponsible to not have your animal fixed (unless you intend to responsibly breed it and raise the offspring, accepting the consequences if you cannot find homes for all the young) when there are so many poor creatures in shelters already without homes.
And agreed with the commenter who said brought around the point to the effect of "not having an abortion because you want a baby... probably a good idea, having a baby because you don't want an abortion... not so sure"
I think you might want to qualify that first statement. Plenty of feminists don't forget that there's a potential life involved - that it's not as simple as popping a zit. Honest.
One the Natural Beauty article:
Wow, interesting read on how natural is defined. I mean, if makeup is considered unnatural (I would say it is) then what about skin care products? Face creams and cleansers and the like, which can be beneficial to your skin?
*goes off to ponder*
I wrote about Tracy's article on porn here:
http://clarissasbox.blogspot.com/2009/08/sex-is-scary-at-least-to-some.html
I know of three women who have had abortions. The main regret all three of these women had was that they got pregnant in the first place and they vowed to themselves to become more aware of the various birth control methods. None of the three regretted the abortions. It was a hard decision at the time for them but they do not appear to be suffering from "post-abortion" syndrome. I still keep in touch with two of them and I have asked them about this as it is always such a hot topic. Both of them are still very pro-choice.
I am also a nurse and have done student work at an abortion clinic, as well as my regular job in mental health nursing. The clinic I was at only did abortions up to 13 weeks, but many of the women there were mothers with 1-4 children already. I'd say an easy 30-50% of them. They were not waiting until "mid-term," these were women who wanted to provide well for the children they already had and that entailed not having more children. They did not regret their abortions, they were frustrated at getting pregnant but did not, as I am reading your post, feel they did not deserve their current children for having an abortion. I think the categories of "no emotional disturbance" "no emotional disturbance until they have a kid - after that messed up" and "messed up because they already had children" reinforces the whole idea that if only women interested in abortion experienced motherhood they would never choose abortion. As you noted, you don't know how many fit into what categories, which is why I question that category system - if 98% fell in category A, and one of each into the next two, does it really say anything valuable about reactions from abortion? It is not true in the surveying of women who choose abortion from places like the Guttmacher institute and it was not true in my personal experience.
Further, I want to touch on the fact that in mental health, I have yet to treat for depression a woman who is suffering from this "post-abortion depression syndrome." Which strikes me as surprising, considering how many women in my community and in general have abortions. And I'm not talking about their formal diagnosis, I mean that I have yet to treat anyone wherein abortion has the slightest barring on their mental status. Intrapartum or postpartum depression? Several cases. Other sources of depression, organic, post-traumatic stress from rape or abuse, death of a family member or a living child, illness affecting them or their family members? Yes. Not abortion. My direct observation tells me it is much more a cultural invention that is not that common in reality, vastly paling in the comparison to people telling women they will totally regret it, than an actual mental health phenomenon that is being ignored by feminists.
WORD.