‘Teen Vogue’ Has Already Pushed Abortion to Teens 63 Times in 2017

newsbusters.org/blogs/culture/katie-yoder/2017/02/23/teen-vogue-has-already-pushed-abortion-teens-63-times-2017

>Teen magazines targeting young women are no longer about make-up application, fashion tips or crushes. No, now they’ve found a more lucrative topic: abortion.

>Earlier this month, Teen Vogue rightfully came under fire after publishing “What to Get a Friend Post-Abortion.” Conservative media and teenagers alike challenged the story that recommended teens give presents to their friends after having an abortion – from signing up as an abortion clinic escort to gifting an “angry uterus” heating pad. But the story is just one of many. In 2017 alone, Teen Vogue has already promoted abortion to teens more than 60 times.


What do you think of this?
What are the morals they are pushing on young women?

Other urls found in this thread:

teenvogue.com/story/sexual-education-lies
teenvogue.com/story/unslut-slut-shaming-parents-talk-to-them
teenvogue.com/story/slut-shaming-bad-for-straight-guys
nationalreview.com/corner/444888/teen-vogue-abortion-gifts-women
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

teenvogue.com/story/sexual-education-lies

Another example:

>Virginity has historically been seen as a measure of purity for women; women who have sex, therefore, were seen as less wholesome. Sex is a big deal, but engaging in consensual sex when you're ready doesn't make you any less of a person.

>The idea was that it’s not enough to simply keep your own virginity — you should also demand it of anyone you choose to sleep with. Otherwise, you’re metaphorically sleeping with every single person sexually connected to your partner. Not only is this a severe case of slut-shaming, it fails to comprehend that a person's sexual history is a private thing, and absolutely not an indicator of their worth.

So what SHOULD you get a friend after her abortion?

Buckshot

Also, how to stop parents of educating their daughters

teenvogue.com/story/unslut-slut-shaming-parents-talk-to-them

>But sometimes, the issue isn’t just your safety — it’s a difference in values that might be made more extreme by the cultural or religious norms your parents are used to. Those norms often put special pressure on dads to police and control their daughters’ sexuality. Like most men, your dad was probably brought up to believe that there are two kinds of female people — “good girls” and “sluts” — and that it is a father’s job to make sure his daughter is one of the “good girls.”

>But the truth is, you’re probably not going to be able to change their mind with a single conversation. Instead, plan for the long game. As you grow up, pursue your career, have healthy relationships, and discover what makes you happy, you will be demonstrating to your parents that whatever they thought of as “proper” womanhood doesn’t necessarily make sense for you. Over the course of many years and many conversations, you can show them — through the awesome life you will be leading — that women should not be categorized according to their sexuality.

Ignore what your parents tell you about morals, you know better than to follow their advice.

Jews gonna Jew.

teenvogue.com/story/slut-shaming-bad-for-straight-guys

>At its core, slut shaming polices the sexual behavior, usually of girls and women, by setting rigid restrictions on how many partners we’re supposed to have and what we’re allowed to do with those partners. Who are those partners? In some cases, they’re guys! And since most straight guys enjoy sexual activity, labeling and bullying their potential female partners is pretty backward. Who wouldn’t prefer a world where sexual encounters could be carefree and confident, rather than hindered by one partner’s fear that the other could later use this encounter against her?

>Slut shaming also depends upon the outdated assumption that there are two different kinds of women: “good girls” and “sluts.”

And when you've done that and are still childless and alone despite giving it up to a new Chad every weekend for the past 15 years, continue to ignore the advice that has existed for millennia

nationalreview.com/corner/444888/teen-vogue-abortion-gifts-women

Some of its suggestions include an “angry uterus” heating pad, a “grl pwr” (girl power) cap, a sign-up to be an abortion-clinic escort, or a Ruth Bader Ginsburg coloring book.

if you have daughters and allow them to consume any media made after 1960 you deserve what you get.

The interesting thing is that the article doesn't even acknowledge that the parents may be right.

The assumption is that the parents are wrong and that you should convince them that being a slut is good.

who cares. Their damn lives, stop being so invasive in other people's lives.

Also, someone should have aborted you.

Yup, plain and simple.

So if media start saying you should die, and people should murder you, it won't matter because they are their own people.
Stop being stupid, if the media start avocating degeneracy, one need to stop it.

1. food processor
2. 1600w vacuum cleaner
3. 10-pack coat hangars

So, if the media is promoting degeneracy to society, you should not disagree?

A free helicopter ride

Well, what would you do instead?

I dont understand how you cucking pro lifers can gleefully champion abstinence only education and screech at the existence of condoms and then get ass ravaged when abortions become necessary and popular.

20 bucks the writers are pedos

Good. Teens make shit single mums.

Good. This world needs a lot less people in it, stop discouraging people from getting abortions. Most people who have children are retards themselves, we don't need any more.

What is the cause of abortion?
And why do they want to make it so abortions are less stigmatized?

>a person's sexual history is a private thing

Until you find out she gave you the clap :(

control what she consumes? believe it or not if you simply dont let kids rot their brains with tv and just read to them (thus giving them a reason enjoy reading) they wont end up mindless liberals. tv is 10 times worse for girls than boys.

Kekked

What is wrong with people who get pregnant and then decide to not have children? Should we just force women who are pregnant and likely not ready to be mothers have those kids? That doesn't seem very productive. Abortions are going to happen, either with a coathanger or with a doctor, there should be no stigma involved.

I'm a huge fan of abortions, this world is already collapsing under the weight of 7.5 billion people, you should be aware of this Brazil bro, your country is hacking down the Amazon rainforest for your steadily growing population. Such a shame that we sort of need the Amazon, as it is one of the worlds largest carbon sinks. I forget this is /pol though so people don't care about the environment, and they won't until it is already too late.

>What is wrong with people who get pregnant and then decide to not have children?

That they are promiscuous, immoral and are going to kill their own children.

>What is the cause of abortion?
Spontaneous? It happens. Non-spontaneous: accidental pregnancy; rape cases; parents don't want it; babies are expensive and can't afford it; too young; circumstances make it so the parents can't take care of the child; etc. There are many reasons why someone would want an abortion. Removing the stigma would benefit everyone.

Why would you force someone to carry and give birth to an unwanted child?

> accidental pregnancy; rape cases; parents don't want it; babies are expensive and can't afford it; too young; circumstances make it so the parents can't take care of the child

Rape aside, in the other cases, if people didn't want to have kids, why are they having sex in the first place?

>Removing the stigma would benefit everyone.

They want to remove the stigma to promote promiscuity.

>Why would you force someone to carry and give birth to an unwanted child?

Because otherwise, you would be killing someone.

I wonder if this is the solution. Eventually, the kid will be surrounded by others who were not raised well.

I think teaching Ethics is the best way to go.

This keeps the population of useless welfare recipients down.
>inb4 adoption
There aren't enough decent families willing to adopt what we have now. Most couples want to make their own.
>inb4 personal responsibility
Teens make horrible parents. You are dooming the baby to neglect and poverty. Have the girl volunteer somewhere with needy kids after the abortion of you want to punish her.

...you do realize abortion means not having children?

Saying that parents that get abortions are promiscuous for killing the unborn doesn't really have any kind of logic when the whole point of abortions is to murder the fetus, lol

>...you do realize abortion means not having children?
Abortion means killing the children.

>Saying that parents that get abortions are promiscuous for killing the unborn doesn't really have any kind of logic when the whole point of abortions is to murder the fetus, lol

They are promiscuous because they had sex purely for hedonistic reasons.

A ride to church

>why are they having sex in the first place?
Thanks for the kek, but most people don't have sex because they want to procreate, they want to enjoy themselves.
Removing the sigma from abortion wouldn't necessarily lead to promiscuity, pushing it that way is degenerate.

>killing someone.
In the first weeks of pregnancy, a bunch of cells isn't "someone", they're cells. I don't know if you want to go on the subject "at what point in development does life begin".

Sexual history is private.

Going 'hey I have an STD we need to take steps to prevent it being transmitted' is just something that a decent person does.

Girls that read Teen Vogue to begin with are demonstrably retarded and require to be court ordered into having their tubes tied.

Teen Vogue also should be imposed to include razor blades as well as be sold in black plastics, along the "adult" degenerate magazines.

rope

>Thanks for the kek, but most people don't have sex because they want to procreate, they want to enjoy themselves.

And that's promiscuity. That's having poor morals.

>Removing the sigma from abortion wouldn't necessarily lead to promiscuity, pushing it that way is degenerate.

Of course it would. They want to separate the act of sex from procreation even more.
The message they want to send is that "sex is for pleasure, having kids is an unfortunate consequence, but with abortion and condoms there is no problem, so have as much sex as you want"

>In the first weeks of pregnancy, a bunch of cells isn't "someone", they're cells. I don't know if you want to go on the subject "at what point in development does life begin".

Yes, they are someone, a human being in a different stage of life.

I wasn't trying to argue that abortions are a reasonable option to condoms or pills, I just meant to imply that the people that are dumb enough to have unprotected sex and get an abortion in order to get rid of the child shouldn't be parents in the first place

You're a heap of useless cells,too, user

abortion is murder. Theres no two ways about it. Just call it what it is, baby-murder. Now, I am 100 percent against the woman having any choice whatsoever, but if a man decides the baby isn't worthy he should tie it in a sack and throw it in the river like any sane person, not just scramble the fetus up like my morning eggs.

Not necessarily. You can enjoy having sex with your partner but both don't want to have a child at the moment. And that is one single partner. I'm not saying "go fuck everyone and enjoy it". You think you should only have sex to reproduce? How boring.

>The message they want to send is that "sex is for pleasure, having kids is an unfortunate consequence, but with abortion and condoms there is no problem, so have as much sex as you want"
They should be pushing protection means and planned pregnancy instead.

>a human being in a different stage of life.
Okay, however in that stage they aren't a person yet. Don't get me wrong, I think kids are wonderful things, but you should be forced to push one out as a result of an accident or other reasons.

I can agree with your statement as it can be true for all of us, you included.

>Not necessarily. You can enjoy having sex with your partner but both don't want to have a child at the moment. And that is one single partner. I'm not saying "go fuck everyone and enjoy it".

It is about how you relate to pleasure.
This is something that the Ancient philosophers knew that we have forgotten. If you look even Epicurus was a virgin.
We treat bodily pleasure as a good, maybe even as the only good. But it isn't. There are plenty of Hollywood celebrities that have as much pleasure as they can and that are a trainwreck. Look at Charlie Sheen or Lindsay Lohan.

When you are having sex solely for pleasure, you are selling your chastity for pleasure. You start to need sexual pleasure more. And when you view sexual pleasure as a good, you are setting yourself up for failure.

And that's why we end up with this kind of problem.

>You think you should only have sex to reproduce? How boring.

Yes. Do you think a fun life can only be achieved by bodily pleasure?

>They should be pushing protection means and planned pregnancy instead.

They should teach people the Classics.

>Okay, however in that stage they aren't a person yet. Don't get me wrong, I think kids are wonderful things, but you should be forced to push one out as a result of an accident or other reasons.

They are a human being.

Btw,

Why do you think the Traditional Morals existed? It is not only because of problems such as bastards or diseases. They exist because people are better off and happier when they follow them.

But then, in the 20th century, people forgot about this and abandoned them.

> they want to enjoy themselves.
For generations we have been warned not to do this, unless ruin we want ruin to fall upon us.
Pretty much every religion, every civilization, every group of humans who ascended to a higher cultural tier than sticks and mudhuts and stones knows this, and each time they fell, it was because their descendents forgot this very simple fact.

And now you're telling me we should allow people to play around with sex, an act that creates life, "because it feels good". Next you'll be telling me that use of cocaine by 6 year olds should also be accepted, right?

Pointless, mindless hedonism never leads anyone anywhere but to personal, financial and moral perdition.

And this is not even talking about the fact that you encourage murder for the sake a whore's (and her enabler) pleasure.
I can agree with abortion due to rape, incest or serious genetic defect. It is sad, unfortunate, but a worthwhile sacrifice.

Numa nota mais portuguesa, para de ser um degenerado da merda.

Why are you limiting everything to sexual or bodily pleasure? Sex isn't all there is and it's not even the biggest concern.

>And now you're telling me we should allow people to play around with sex, an act that creates life, "because it feels good".
Yes. Use protection.
>Next you'll be telling me that use of cocaine by 6 year olds should also be accepted, right?
No. That's unrelated.

Because we are talking about sexual morals, not something else.

All part of the programme goy. Pic related