Jayshree Singh
1 min readApr 29, 2023

--

It is true if there had been abortion ban, the power play of misogyny would come in picture through their own progeny.
But it is also true if there had been abortion ban the counter to misogyny is as difficult as putting one's foot in one's mouth, because love, lust and sex are predominating prerogatives and perspectives of one gender, and other gender too has the same to contribute in primordial instincts, yet one's role and sacrifice is not considered contributory, rather more a liability on the former's life-long span; while for the latter the same act is a vicarious one - as refusal in any context for anything is to be deprived and disablement, besides facing blame game later in life - why not there had been abortion ban? Why there had been abortion? Who is doer of abortion? Who actually got into the abortive procedure? Who faced actual vicarious liabilty of abortion? Who was in No Fault Zone in abortive procedure? Who should be penalised? Who should be actually liable for the abortion - misogyny or feminism?? Who will actually benefit from abortion ban and why?? Who gets beyond the compliance of abortion or beyond the cognizance of abortion ban?????
The article is very much discursive, insightful and initiates agencies of abortive procedure and logics of abortion ban and effects of abortions and role of misogyny on a specific gender.

--

--

Jayshree Singh

https://medium.com/@1967jayshreesingh A prolific creative writer as a researcher and critic so credited with Publications more