You called it, Ann. The feminist commitment to reproductive justice absolutely means advocating for women in ALL cases where our agency and bodily autonomy in handling our pregnancies and births is denied. It has nothing to do with abortion being a moral good per se.

Oh. This is terrifying. The boyfriend definitely deserves to be punished in any and every conceivable way.

It's strange, because even though things like this are against pro-choicers beliefs, and against pro-lifers, I can bet with strong certainty that it will become "the pro-choicers' fault." Eugh.

I bet if Broadsheet posts something about this, the very first comment will be from one of the MRA's complaining about child-support payments. I'm so glad that Feministing is REALLY a forum where Feminists can discuss issues like these without having to deal with all the hate, vitrol, and distraction as found in the Salon comments section.

Regarding the actual post, its so funny that the "life" webpage that has this piece up has that picture of women waving their CHOICE posters. Now, many of us in the reproductive rights activist community might have some problems with how "choice" is articulated as part of the overall mission and how that seems to minimize the more comprehensive picture when it comes to Reproductive Rights and access to healthcare for women, but that CHOICE serves in that image as a reminder that FORCING ABORTION is not allowing a woman to choose. Its determining for the woman if, when, and how or not a woman continues a pregnancy, which is not pro-choice, its pro-authoritarianism, just like the "Pro-Lifers"/
Pro-Punishment League would like to shove down our throats.

I'm surprised you can buy those drugs online.

Yes, we're pro CHOICE because we want women to be forced to do things. Makes perfect sense. I don't want women to have control over their bodies when it comes to pregnancy, I want them all be forced to have abortions, because forcing people to do things is the key to choice.

How sad to post a pro-choice picture with that article. It doesn't make me angry, it just makes me incredibly sad that they would think any true person who supports choice would support a man drugging his girlfriend in order to control her body.

He sounds like an MRA posterboy to me.

Fine, but couldn't you have linked to a regular ol' news organization rather than a whacked-out anti-choice site that has the phrase "Forced Abortions" imposed underneath a picture of choice supporters?

About 40 seconds on Google got me this: http://www.dailypress.com/news/local/hampton/dp-news_inducedabortion_1017oct17,0,5605429.story

s.b., I think that was the point, to show exactly what whacked-out anti-choicers do with a story like this... conflate "choice" with "forced abortion" via a caption, misleading their flock into believing that pro-choicers favor forced abortion.

S.G.: I think the point of the link was not just the story itself, but the connection the site in question made between the pro-choice person in the unrelated picture and the story. There is no real connection, so why did they put that picture with that story? To suggest that the man's actions were in accord with a pro-choice position. But they're not.

Oh, ccall got their first.

While I'm glad this asshole is in jail, some of the rhetoric surrounding the case is appalling. Look at this:

After first arguing with her and punching her in the stomach, Riase changed his tactic: He began doting on his girlfriend, I-Sharri Best, telling her how excited he was about their baby. Then he bought a drug — destructive to the fetus — on the Internet, and slipped two crushed pills into a glass of Best's milk.

This asshole's behavior is a direct extension of his abuse of his girlfriend. He punched her in the stomach. He should be in jail for that, as well.

[Judge] Andrews said he was "baffled" as to how Riase — the son of a foot doctor, a member of the National Honor Society at a fine high school in Alabama, a past student at Hampton University, a man with a Christian upbringing, two good parents and no criminal record — could do such a thing.

What the hell? What does any of that have to do with male privilege and control over women's bodies? Given that this asshole beats his girlfriend, surely it's not a surprise at all. And Christian? Two good parents? I guess it's the kind of thing you'd expect an atheist raised by a single mom to do?

And worst of all, in my opinion:

Riase's attorney, Ronald Smith, pushed for leniency and asked for no time served behind bars. The fact that Best had previously had two abortions with Riase as the father, Smith said, may have desensitized Riase.

Because neither the attorney nor his client can see any difference between a woman seeking out a desired abortion and essentially being poisoned? The woman's desire makes the difference. It's like saying "I didn't think raping her would be that big a deal, because she'd had consensual sex with me a few times before."

Look, I'm glad the guy's in jail, obviously, and I hope he rots there, but I am not thrilled with the way the judge and lawyers and newspaper article is talking about it.

I agree that this man should be punished... and what if this woman suffered other complications as a result of
this man's callous act?

What surprises me is that women who may choose this option of terminating a pregnancy may have trouble obtaining access to this option. Yet some guy was able to obtain these drugs online with no medical questions asked? Astonishing.

Um, if you have any desire to go through the next day without punching something really hard, please do not read the comments at the article s.b. posted. Disgusting.

Wasn't it Ann's point though to make note of how the anti-abortion crowd spun this? So using this link makes sense to me, FWIW.

Actually the "force abortion" vs. pro-choice issue isn't brought up enough, IMHO. Remember, some of us belong to religious traditions in which abortion is sometimes considered the only acceptable moral action. Nu? To say that we should ban (some) abortions because they are immoral opens the door to mandating some abortions because maintaining some pregnancies is immoral, does it not?

FYI, misoprostol (cytotec) is not necessarily an abortion drug. It's FDA approved use is to treat stomach ulcers, and it's extremely cheap (like $.25 per pill) That's probably why this guy was able to get it so easily. Abortion, really, is a side effect, which is why it is FDA pregnancy category X. However, due to the low cost and ease of use, it has been used quite successfully as an abortofactant and in labor induction.

appalling.

if it's true that she really has already had two abortions since she's been with this guy though, i have to wonder if they're not using any form of protection. this obviously in no way impacts what he did, i just wonder. these people don't sound like the brightest crayons in the box.

Ah, so pro- and anti-choicers finally stand on equal ground on some repro right issue. How interesting...

The problem with the anti-abortion crowd is they generally don't differentiate between actual forced abortion and "coerced" abortion. This case( a forced abortion) is an obvious crime. The woman was violated and had no choice. That is completely different from a man who vioices that he wants the woman to have an abortion because she has the power to say no. Punishing a man for doing this is implying women are too driven by emotions and can't make decisions for themselves.

Of course he should be charged - he abused his girl friend. He administered a drug to her without her consent. This isn't a question of disagreeing on a woman's right to choose. This is agreeing on a woman's right to bodily integrity.

The Brawn, what's interesting about it?

The picture that goes along with the article is accurate. America stands for choice. CHOICE. But I don't think anti-choicers know what choice means. To them, choice means abortion. They really need to invest in a dictionary.

Of course he should be charged and do prison time for causing a miscarriage without the woman’s permission or knowledge. By the same token, anyone forcing a woman to proceed with a pregnancy she does not want should also spend time in prison.

Twenty bucks the MRAs blame this abortion on the woman.

he kills an 11 week old fetus and faces 30 years. There you have it ladies, your body being violated to prevent a birth is more impoartant than your body being violated for men's twisted fantasy that may end up in a birth...

Sorry to be cynical, I really feel for this girl but wow shocking sentence, it makes me think that rape should carry the same punishment..

"Sorry to be cynical, I really feel for this girl but wow shocking sentence, it makes me think that rape should carry the same punishment.."

I agree.

Yeah, but he'll probably be out in three and a half. I'd like to see him and rapists rotting for 30.

don't you see? the sentence is so long because he killed a "baby", not because he drugged a woman...

blegh

"I'm surprised you can buy those drugs online."

You can buy anything online.

"According to the Daily Press newspaper, Hampton Circuit Court Judge William C. Andrews III sentenced Riase to 35 years in prison. Riase will serve five of the years and the other 30 are suspended. "
Am I understanding this correctly? He's only gonna be in jail for 5 years?

I thought two things about the article were quite positive, from a feminist perspective.

One: He wasn't charged with murder.

Two: He got convicted. I wouldn't have taken that for granted; keeping the 'MRAs' in mind. (Does that stand for marital rape apologists? Yeah, I thought so too; that other definition makes no sense.)