Some fun stuff with obstetrics.

Okay so I crunched some numbers re: that panel with Touka’s due date and Yoriko’s notice, and here’s some fun stuff I figured out:

(Credits to @juuuzo and their post for the pic above and for illuminating some things for me!)

x Firstly, I don’t think it takes a genius to glean from this panel that the Touken baby is due 12/28 (which apparently is Ishida’s birthday… making the Ishida the One Eyed Prince?? dundundunnnnn)

x For the Obstetrics nerds: It’s hard to see based on just this panel if Touka really did use Naegele’s rule to figure it out, but if the due date really is 12/28, a couple of the numbers highlighted above (and a few that I squinted at) correspond to the formula. But it’s really hard to tell because Touka’s writing is shit lmao.

x But using some reverse engineering (not really, I just like that term; I used the Qx calculate app), if the due date is 12/28, Touka’s last menstrual period was 3/23.

x This is Yoriko’s execution notice:

x The penalty was placed 4/15, and Kaneki received the notice approximately 4/17, which would be the current date of the story right now. (How did I figure that out? See this post.)

x By simple math, we can estimate Kaneki Jr’s current gestational age as 3 weeks and 4 days. Taking things further, the end of the first trimester will be on 6/15.

x I have the urge to discuss the stage of embryonic development Kaneki Jr is currently in, but 1) ghoul biology might be different, and 2) really? do we really want to get into that? lmao.

x Interestingly, I looked back in the calendars, and comparing Touka’s calendar, the story seems to be taking place in 2016.

Martin Gilens, “Affluence and Influence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America,” 2012, pgs. 185-186:

In my dataset of proposed policy changes, religious/moral issues constituted less than 2 percent of all proposed changes during the Johnson, Reagan, and G.H.W. Bush administrations, increasing to 6 percent under Clinton and 9 percent under G.W. Bush. This appears to reflect not just a change in the behavior of survey organizations, but the paucity of attention to these issues at the federal level prior to the 1990s (despite the strong association of President Reagan with the Moral Majority and other elements of the religious Right). As an independent indicator of federal policy makers’ attention to moral/religious issues, consider the number of abortion votes in the House of Representatives each year. During Reagan’s terms in office, for example, abortion votes in the House occurred less than twice a year. This increased to about four votes per year under G.H.W. Bush and eleven per year in the first years of Clinton’s presidency.

You don’t have to love abortion. You can dislike it. Maybe it even makes you sad. The way you view abortion is up to you. If you don’t like abortion, you can advocate for proper sex education, access to birth control and other things that have been shown to lower unplanned pregnancies. You don’t have to like abortion.

But what you can’t do is disrespect somebody for having an abortion. You can’t take away that choice from women because you don’t like it. Your emotions are not somebody else’s responsibility. Your emotions aren’t more important than anyone else’s bodily autonomy. You don’t have to like abortion, but you have to respect other people’s rights and that includes the right to safe, accessible, abortion.

Margaret Atwood says it’s “a form of slavery to force women to have children they can’t afford”

  • Margaret Atwood has an eerie prediction about the outcome of abortionrestrictions, one that bears an uncanny resemblance to the dystopian future depicted in her hyper-relevant novel, The Handmaid’s Tale.Speaking at New York City’s Book Con on Saturday, Atwood argued that when states obligate women into childbearing, they institute “a form of slavery,” Insider reported. 
  • State-mandated reproduction has two outcomes, she said: That women die, and that orphanages fill up.Atwood referred specifically to Texas, where Gov. Greg Abbott is poised to sign Senate Bill 8
  • The legislation not only requires abortion providers to bury or cremate fetal remains, but also bans the most common second trimester abortion procedure — dilation and evacuation — as well as dilation and extraction, the typical procedure for late-term abortions. 
  • Dilation and extraction abortions are, generally speaking, only performed when the mother’s life or health is in danger. Read more. (6/4/2017 5:30 PM)
Missouri Women Could Soon Be Disqualified From Jobs Based On Reproductive Decisions
Legislators aim to undo an ordinance that prevents discrimination in jobs and housing.

Lawmakers in the Missouri Senate spent more than 10 hours in a closed-door special session last week to push through Senate Bill 5, a wide-reaching anti-abortion measure that—among other things—would roll back anti-discrimination protections for women in one of that state’s major cities.

The legislation would undo a relatively recent St. Louis ordinance that prohibits potential employers and landlords from discriminating against women based on their reproductive health history. In other words, if they’ve had an abortion. Or have used birth control. Or if they are pregnant.

When the ordinance first passed last February, supporters hailed it as necessary protection for women living in a deep-red state that is considered to be “hostile” to abortion rights. Unsurprisingly, it also drew sharp criticism from several local religious groups and leaders who lamented its passage as a “terrible moment” for the city of St. Louis. In May, the St. Louis Archdiocese and several other organizations filed suit against the city of St. Louis, seeking to overturn the ordinance

Now, just months later, anti-abortion legislators in the state appear poised to topple the ordinance. The bill—which also includes other anti-abortion measures that would affect women statewide—passed the Senate late last Wednesday and is now being heard in the House Children and Families Committee. The Kansas City Star reports that it could be passed without changes and sent to the governor directly, or undergo revisions that would require the House and Senate to negotiate the differences in a special conference.

NARAL Pro-Choice Missouri—the reproductive rights advocacy group, which fought for the anti-discrimination ordinance to be passed last winter—quickly announced it was launching an online and radio ad campaign criticizing Republican Gov. Eric Greitens who called the special session. (”Do you think your boss should be able to fire you for using birth control? Governor Greitens thinks so,” one ad claims.)

A spokesperson for the group told HuffPost that before the ordinance passed last winter, NARAL had not heard of any specific cases in which women were discriminated against because of their reproductive history. But the group had not been tracking the data closely before then either.

“Under the current political administration, we are seeing more threats against women for using birth control or having an abortion. We wanted to be proactive and protect them,” Kirstin Palovick, an organizing and policy associate with
NARAL Pro-Choice Missouri, told HuffPost in an e-mail. “Since the passage of this bill, we have had at least one person make a discrimination complaint based on their reproductive health care. We know the problem is happening, and we are beginning to hear more stories about it.”

Let’s be crystal clear: The Senate Republican healthcare repeal bill is a savage, immoral attack on women and the health and well-being of hundreds of millions of Americans. Take action by calling your Senator: 1-866-665-4470


If you care about reproductive rights, pay attention to what is happening in Iowa

  • Planned Parenthood of the Heartland is poised to shutter four of its Iowa centers, dropping the state’s number of clinics from 12 to eight effective June 30 and disrupting care for some 15,000 patients.
  • The closures come thanks to legislation Gov. Terry Branstad signed into law in May, with which Iowa declined roughly $3 million annual in federal Medicaid money for its family planning program. 
  • The state decided to forgo these dollars on the grounds it did not want to funnel taxpayer money into abortion services, which might make sense if that money went toward abortion — but it almost never does.
  •  Instead, it pays for the types of treatment a person might seek at a gynecologist or a urologist, for people who might not be able to afford those visits otherwise.
  • The move is another version of the “defund Planned Parenthood” strategy that’s become so common in Donald Trump’s America.
  • But however often we may see that headline, however routine it becomes, it’s eminently worth our attention. What’s happening in Iowa has already happened in Texas, to disastrous effect. 
  • And if congressional Republicans get their way in repealing the Affordable Care Act, we can expect those same disastrous effects to bleed out across the country. Read more (6/21/17)