Sunday Douchebaggery Interlude

Take a gander at this shit:

"The billboard depicts an Alamogordo businessman, [Greg] Fultz, 35, holding what appears to the outline of a baby in his arms as he is looking down at it. Next to the picture, in large print, is the statement, 'This Would Have Been A Picture Of My 2-month Old Baby If The Mother Had Decided To Not KILL Our Child!'"

Last week the woman targeted by this billboard brought suit against Mister Douchebag, on the grounds that he's violating her privacy and causing emotional distress. The judge ruled in her favor, ordering the billboard to be removed and granting the plaintiff an order of protection. Thank goodness.

Further gross details and aspects:

A) As Greg "Douchebag" Fultz admits in the rest of his letter, he is "not sure" that his ex actually had an abortion! He doesn't have proof so is guessing. The plaintiff says she miscarried.

B) Of course, whether or not she had an abortion remains HER business alone, anyhow! We don't need to explore her medical history to determine whether she did or did not "deserve" this.

C) Aside from the violation of privacy, to me this also sounded like a violation of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances (FACE) Act, which prohibits intimidation to prevent people from receiving or providing reproductive health services. Unfortunately, it's not that straightforward; it turns out the language of the law forbids the use of "force, threat of force or physical obstruction" -- so, although I'd argue that this could constitute intimidation with a chilling effect on care-seeking ("If I have an abortion my manipulative douche of an ex may put up a billboard about me, like what happened to that woman in New Mexico"), a judge might not agree. But I still wonder about all the things that happen when women have good reason to fear stigma and public excoriation; one woman who survived the dangerous care at Kermit Gosnell's illegal practice (but not without lasting injury) said that she initially headed to Planned Parenthood but turned around when she saw the protesters.

D) Bonus grossness! Mr. Douchebag is 35; the plaintiff is 20. Twenty. Twenty years old! Jesus Christ, that adds a whole OTHER layer of slimy sleazy selfishness to this guy's actions. As though they didn't already sound enough like intimidation and punishment for not doing what he wanted, on top of that he's nearly twice her age and she's still at practically the beginning of her life, and HE's the one who feels robbed? Because he didn't have the right to decide how the rest of her young life was going to go?

Indeed he does feel robbed. In statements to newspapers and to the New Mexico legislature, he says:

"Women have all the power when it comes to pregnancy. The men get no say when a woman wants to go and have an abortion without the say of the father. I believe that is wrong because men are 50 percent of the result of the pregnancy."

and

"I'd like to get a bill created in honor of my baby (Baby Fultz) for all fathers. My idea is to get a bill introduced that gives biological fathers equal rights as to the welfare and decisions being made of the unborn child with exceptions to those of rape and incest and other means of illegal fatherhood."

Of course, the fact that a spermatozoon and an ovum contribute equal numbers of chromosomes doesn't really mean that "men are 50 percent of the result of the pregnancy." That's not how it works; I've never seen a male partner carrying and feeding a fetus for 4.5 months. Simpleton's math aside, I do honestly want to know, exactly what would he consider "equal rights" to a decision about abortion? If one partner (or ex-partner) decides in favor of ending the pregnancy and the other doesn't, what should happen? How do you make that a 50/50 decision?

EDIT: Further information highlights just how much this abortion-billboard stunt is part and parcel of Mr. Douchebag's manipulative, abusive strategy. The billboard reads "Created for N.A.N.I. (National Association of Needed Information"; turns out Nani is his target's first name. He abused his then-wife and has harassed and stalked her and other exes; he created a website named after his ex where he publicized her contact information; he published gross comments and "jokes" about extreme violence toward women and toward his ex in particular; he may or may not have been lying about always wanting a child, as there are allegedly court documents concerning his child-support deadbeatery. Can't say I'm shocked, as divulging private and socially-stigmatized information is a common weapon in the abuser's arsenal; but I sure as hell remain grossed out.