What’s Current: Trump administration says life begins at conception

What’s Current is Feminist Current’s daily news round up.

  • The Trump administration’s strategic plan for the Health & Human Services will define life as beginning at conception.
  • The U.S. Women’s March’s upcoming national Women’s Convention will feature Bernie Sanders as headliner.
  • Indigenous anthology will publish author who pled guilty to a domestic violence related assault, despite objections by other authors whose work was planned for inclusion.
  • The City of San Francisco dedicates a memorial to the so-called “Comfort Women,” who were sexually enslaved by the Imperial Japanese Army during WWII.
  • Liberian women warn the country’s male presidential candidates to keep the peace that the women joined together to demand.
  • Police were called to deal with a “family disturbance” at Harvey Weinstein’s daughter’s home on Wednesday morning
Natasha Chart
Natasha Chart

Natasha Chart is an online organizer and feminist living in the United States. She does not recant her heresy.

Like this article? Tip Feminist Current!

Personal Info

Donation Total: $1

  • thebewilderness

    That makes a spontaneous abortion a crime, at the least manslaughter, just like it was in the burning times.

    • Cassandra

      Yup. They are going to control our lives via controlling our reproductive system or know the reason why.

  • Wren

    This discussion has been done and I will never agree with you. I also never said Clinton was a feminist hero. But to claim that life in the U.S. would have been just as hard under Clinton as Trump is to be woefully ignorant. Please don’t insult me again. Thank you.

    • rosearan

      No, this discussion is not ‘done’, just because you say it is. I’ll continue to speak out against claims that Hillary Clinton was cheated out of being the first female US president – on this and other forums. Please don’t fly off the handle at me again for expressing an informed opinion. Thank you.

      • Tobysgirl

        I totally support your position. I did not vote against Clinton, I voted FOR Stein, the lone candidate who spoke openly against U.S. militarism. And, no, I would not have voted for Sanders either, as his record on militarism is not a pretty one. And I am tired of Americans only being concerned with the comfort of their lives in the U.S. and not with the horrible havoc we wreak upon the rest of the world. You know what our bombing campaigns, which are endless, create? Areas that look like Puerto Rico and the wildfire devastation in California. Those were HUMAN BEINGS, often primarily women and children, killed by our viciousness.

      • Kathleen Lowrey
      • Kathleen Lowrey
      • Hekate Jayne

        The only time that women can get ahead or gain status in patriarchy is to mimic males. That is the ONLY way.

        Because any woman that does things her own way, puts women first, and just generally tries to be a decent human being will not get far. That is just reality.

        Hillary Clinton was running for a patriarchal position in a patriarchal government of a patriarchal country. And even though she got 3 million more votes, patriarchy still didn’t allow her to have what she actually won.

        I am not a fan of Clinton. For many and varied reasons, but mostly because democrats desert women at every turn.

        But the only reason that she got as far as she did was because she worked within the patriarchal system, and that takes a patriarchal mindset. She was no different then the male politicians that run the country.

        I don’t blame her for that, and I am not making a judgement on her character. But the fact is that males will allow a token woman into their clubhouse as a gesture, and only if she concedes to them, defers to them, does things like they do, will she be allowed to stay.

        Some of us choose to do that, and have some success because of it. Some of us choose not to, and accept the consequence of that. And I judge none of us for our choices. We always do the best that we can, I believe that.

        • Omzig Online

          I’m sure you’ve seen this, but I’m dusting it off and leaving it here for old times’ sake.


          • Hekate Jayne

            I have not seen that. I don’t watch Samantha bee, I just forget. I think that it is because I don’t have tv, lol.

            But that is a perfect synopsis, isn’t It? Of how much she had to change and adapt for the comfort of males, and at the beginning, the changes were demanded just because she is married to a patriarchal politician.

            The only politician that I have ever really admired and respected was Debbie Stabenow. She was wonderful. And I base that from watching her on c-span, back when I still had tv. But honestly, I don’t know how i would feel about how she is doing lately, since I have given up on all politicians.

            I feel like this Clinton issue is just so devisive when it really shouldn’t be. Whether we individually supported her or not, the fact is that she won, and the male government took it from her.

            The job of government in patriarchy is to uphold and enforce male systems and to insure male supremacy. I am not sure why having a woman win the presidency would be considered a feminist victory, when her job would be the same as all of the male presidents. She would be the head of the patriarchy. I see that as betrayal, not victory. Is that a victory for women? How is that?

            It would be used the same as Obama was used, when white people were all “racism is over!” And “See? Racial equality!” We already hear all of the time about how we are already equal, sexism is just in our dainty head, etc. That is not helping us or advancing women.

            There is absolutely no doubt that Clinton would have been a better president for all of us. But honestly, a doorknob would be a better president than Trump. That is how low that bar is set.

            I just don’t see how a woman winning a seat at the male table, actively participating in male systems, and helping males to enforce their supremacy is a feminist act or a victory for women. I just don’t get it.

      • thebewilderness

        When you do I suggest that you speak the truth instead of repeating the lies the Republican and Russian operatives promote. The truth is out there if you want to know it.

  • Wren

    I love The Onion.

  • lk

    “serving and protecting Americans at every stage of life, beginning at conception.”

    Since life begins at conception, I will be waiting for the Trump administration to begin going after fertility clinics as forcefully as they have gone after abortion clinics and planned parenthood. I will expect that they will make sure no tax dollars or insurance covers anything related to ivf since that treatment involves destroying fetuses…oops, I mean murdering people.

    I will also be waiting for people to begin protesting outside of places that provide ivf to let the workers and patients know that they are murderers.

    ..Something tells me I will be waiting a very looong time.

    • Blazing Fire

      Yes. If “life begins at conception”, any male who uses his wife/girlfriend (or victim) physically more than once a month would be committing child abuse/paedophilla (apart from rape, if the first “incident” was non-consensual) – because, who knows, perhaps the egg could have got fertilized, and a minor human would already be in there, so he has to wait for atleast a month to confirm that it is not the case before he can spew more of his adult-only emissions inside and inappropriately touch the embryo (I mean, the human – who is obviously under 18 years of age).
      But as you said, this will never ever be enforced… Women are expected to be barefoot, pregnant, chopping wood & baking bread AND still continue to serve as live rape-bots simultaneously (and pay for their medications & maternity from their own 70 cents per dollar, otherwise she is a “gold-digger”.. and of course, since “men shouldn’t have to pay for maternity”, insurance companies also won’t care)

  • catlogic

    So-called third wave feminism was never feminism anyway. It’s meninism, if anything.

  • Hekate Jayne

    It just seems like male reversal has become impossible to spot, it is so fucking insidious.

    Have you seen this?


    We cannot have anything without makes taking it over and just killing it. It is exasperating.

  • Hekate Jayne

    I feel like I have turned this corner, where I finally get it.

    I am done explaining and catering to males. They are eternally confused, they act like they just don’t understand.

    And I just don’t buy it anymore.

    I mean, it is straight up insanity to believe that they give a shit. They are never going to treat us as human, and they are still going to blame us for it.

    That is the problem that I am interested in addressing. I am not interested in making them comfortable. I am really not interested in getting them on our side.

    They are exactly where they want to be, which is with their boot on our neck, as always.

  • shy virago

    Very well said!

    Whenever I hear his voice, I remember ‘EXCUSE ME, I’M talking now!’.

  • shy virago


  • thebewilderness

    Perhaps he will once again mansplain to the women that their identity politics issues are a distraction from the important things Independents like him need to focus on in order to win.

  • Unree

    Wikileaks worked for Russian interferers who meddled to throw the election to their useful idiot. You do know that, don’t you? And if you want to say that Wikileaks just revealed stuff rather than composed its own prose, do you have any idea how Clinton’s e-mails compared to the known record about Trump and his family?

  • Hekate Jayne

    “This is not in essence a feminist issue and the US electoral system is not just about the patriarchy. It’s more about the US oligarchic electoral monopoly.”

    I understand what you are saying. My only disagreement is that, in my opinion, ALL systems are MALE .

    So the oligarchy, and all of its parts, are male created, male run, male directed, for the benefit of males. If this weren’t true, then the oligarchy would be mixed between males and women. But it is like all other systems, it is majority male.

  • Hekate Jayne

    I did absolutely used to love her. I haven’t read anything about her recently, so I don’t know about her now.

    I used to watch c-span, and I have 2 very vivid memories of it. One was senator Byrd when he had the floor speaking about dogfighting, and senator Stabenow when she had the floor about mortgages.

    Never forget either of those 2 times. They were both extraordinary.

  • Hekate Jayne

    I agree with you in that I have no interest in getting ahead in a patriarchal system, either. The implication is that to get ahead, that you have to take on the actions and thought processes of males. And I know that I don’t have to explain to you why I am not interested in doing that.

    But I don’t judge other women for doing it. I just don’t. At least I try not to.

    My self worth or how I see myself isn’t affected by how “successful” a patriarchal society sees me, and I am not interested in any of the benefits that come from doing the bidding of males. That is obviously something that some women want for themselves, though. I am sure that they think that their reasons for doing that are valid or important. Or maybe they just enjoy screwing over other women. But I tend to give them the benefit of a doubt, since it is impossible to know another woman’s whole story or motivations.