By JOSÉ FABIO RODRIGUES MACIEL*
By preventing coexistence with difference and those who are different, the social bubble works as a catalyst for unique and authoritarian thinking
Social bubbles… There are some simple ones, with just one layer. Others resemble onions and are more difficult to break. They can be good, offering protection at certain moments in life, or harmful (almost always), when they limit thoughts and, due to their opacity, do not allow them to see beyond their limits, resulting in a lack of empathy with different experiences and the non-construction of otherness, limiting the ability to see the other as an individual, also endowed with their respective histories, experiences and subjectivity.
By preventing coexistence with difference and those who are different, the bubble works as a catalyst for unique and authoritarian thinking.
When disregarding other people's experiences, the tendency is to want to impose what we believe to be right in discussions, without paying attention to the debate and exchange of ideas and arguments. This is what I witnessed several times, at a time when a medieval project was advancing in the National Congress, with the aim of further reinforcing State interference over a woman's body, by equating abortion carried out after 22 weeks of gestation with the crime of homicide. .
One of the arguments used in defense of Bill 1904/24 was more or less this: “at 22 weeks the fetus' heart is already beating, the kidney is already functioning, the pregnancy cannot be terminated. Keep it for a few more weeks and then place it in the incubator. There is a huge queue wanting to adopt.” After this argument, an upper middle class girl angrily expressed all her prejudice towards the poorest: “they get pregnant at the funk dance and then use abortion as a contraceptive…”. And her conviction was such that she would not admit to hearing any divergent position, labeling everyone as murderers, etc.
At no point did he appreciate the situation from a public health perspective, that is, not for a second did he think about the misfortunes experienced by thousands of children raped every year in Brazil, the vast majority victims of those who should be their protectors.
It ignored the difficulty for these children to report their abusers and that many of them do not even know what a pregnancy is, often discovered at school or by third parties at an advanced stage. At no point did he defend speed in the judicial and medical sphere of legal abortion, the delay of which often makes it practically impossible to achieve the right that exists today.
He was also unable, from his vision of comfort and accusation, to have empathy with the victims of rape, when defending yet another act of violence which is the maintenance and growth of the result of rape in his own body, growing day in and day out in his womb. and magnifying the horror of the moment of the criminal act, into a clear act of permanent torture.
When analyzing the arguments presented by the girl mentioned here, one can see the fragility and superficiality of the justifications that support her opinions, probably shaped by a limited vision of the world outside the bubble in which she lives, which makes her defend points of view based on their restricted access to other socioeconomic and cultural realities.
As a result, he fails to understand the harm that the legislative change he defends could cause for part of society, starting with allowing the State to interfere in their bodies, followed by the criminalization of women who are victims of violence and also of health professionals.
After all, changing the Penal Code to equate abortion performed on children victims of rape with homicide, even if it is from the twenty-second week of pregnancy, will be State terrorism practiced by the Brazilian legislative branch, going against the real role expected from both State and the right, which is to support those who have been victims of violence, and not to re-victimize raped women and children by criminalizing an issue that is, above all, public health.
To make real progress on this topic, there is an urgent need for state action to reduce social bubbles, providing more inclusive education and promoting diversity of experiences and thoughts through intercultural dialogue, with ample encouragement for critical thinking and overcoming views. who just want to make their dogmas prevail, including religious ones.
We must consider all hypotheses in question and combat violence by punishing criminals and welcoming victims, not the other way around. Unfortunately, we are not heading in that direction, quite the opposite, given the number of parliamentarians who signed the Bill mentioned here and the popular representation they have.
*José Fabio Rodrigues Maciel He is a PhD candidate in Comparative Studies of Portuguese Language Literatures at USP. Author, among other books, of Handbook of the History of Law (Saraiva Jur). [https://amzn.to/3xuifY2]
the earth is round there is thanks to our readers and supporters.
Help us keep this idea going.
CONTRIBUTE
