>>40198850yes. It is voluntary because the woman consents to getting pregnant in exchange of money. If you object by saying "but money is coercive" or "they only do it bevause poverty!" I have no choice but to call you a retard. Is it slavery to hire a plumber to fix your pipes? The plumber doesn't do it out of the kindess of his heart, he does it because he gets money. If poverty is coercive then the conclusion is that you are actually enslaving the plumber by paying him. Isn't this retarded? Luckily this retarded conclusion can be avoided simply by acknowledging that decisions do not cease to be voluntary simply because unfortunate circumstances make them compelling. Intentional coercion under the threat of violence is the only stance in which decisions can be said to not be voluntary.
This kind of "no it isn't REALLY voluntary and free because so and so and so" is really common amongst tyrants that want to take people's freedom away, precisely because it allows a paternalistic "I know better" entity to make decisions on behalf the sad little poor people. Negative Liberty is the only real liberty, positive liberty an oxymoron in that it allows tyranny in the name of freedom. It is no surprise that TERFs clinge so hard to positive liberty ("ummm, Chud, sex workers don't actually consent even though they literally do because poor people are literally incapable of making decisions and don't have autonomy!") as it is instrumental in justifying the state backed tyranny which they seek to implement in the name of liberation.
