Did I miss the part where the data risks women's safety? I was particularly interested in that part of the headline, but I didn't see it detailed in the article.
Third paragraph:
> The report’s authors caution that cycle tracking app (CTA) data in the wrong hands could result in risks to job prospects, workplace monitoring, health insurance discrimination and cyberstalking – and limit access to abortion.
Did you miss it or are you disagreeing with these being a threat?
Or violence or even death. Certain cultures don't take to kindly to pregnancies outside marriage, or maybe the family disagree with the choice of partner. A cousin works for the app company, leaks the information about an unexpected pregnancy to a conservative father or uncle. Girls is shipped of to family back home and is tragically stabbed to death a few days after arriving.
Most people who collect data of this type of data lacks imagination if they don't think it can be misused.
More likely they believe that because they only collect the information they aren't culpable for what other people do with it.
Good point about family violence threats. That wasn't in the article, but makes sense.
The cyberstalking is the most applicable, but I dont see what the menstral data would provide vs not having the mentstral data. A name and address could present a potential threat, but knowing which days someone is bleeding one doesn't seem to be useful in attacking someone unless you believe it makes them a weaker target or something.
The others aren't about safety. The one about restricting abortion is a false attribution as the laws would be the thing actually restricting it, not the use of the app.
I'm not saying the problems shouldn't be addressed, but claiming safety is at risk is a bit of a stretch.
> knowing which days someone is bleeding one doesn't seem to be useful in attacking someone unless you believe it makes them a weaker target or something.
I have other things to say here but immediately this is a wildly gross and sexist way to phrase this.
> The others aren't about safety
> risks to job prospects, workplace monitoring, health insurance discrimination
A threat to livelihood and proper health care is a threat to safety, and the fact that you don't recognize that should hopefully trigger some amount of self-reflection.
Beyond that the fact that you can't make the really simple connection between knowing someone's menstrual cycle and knowing their pregnancy status means I deeply hope you take some time to self-reflect and maybe consider that you don't quite have the tools to engage in a nuance conversation about this and should instead take some time to listen to others
"A threat to livelihood and proper health care is a threat to safety, and the fact that you don't recognize that should hopefully trigger some amount of self-reflection."
A threat to livelihood is not a direct threat to safety. If we take this indirect route of logic, it can be applied to anything. Furthermore, how is it a threat to livelihood? Don't we have protected statuses for pregnant women in employment law?
"Beyond that the fact that you can't make the really simple connection between knowing someone's menstrual cycle and knowing their pregnancy status means I deeply hope you take some time to self-reflect and maybe consider that you don't quite have the tools to engage in a nuance conversation about this and should instead take some time to listen to others"
I'm asking legitimate questions, but I'm getting emotional responses instead of logical ones. You're making implications here about menstrual vs pregnancy status but not forming an actual response about them.
the most obvious is that abortions are illegal in the US and you can monitor that status through the app.
So in extreme cases if you are pregnant and the baby is going to kill you, you aren't allowed to abort it - get an illegal abortion - woops the app spied on me and now you are in prison.
Elective abortions are illegal in some states. Even the most restrictive states, like those with six week bans, include exemptions for things like ectopic pregnancy and preeclampsia.
Further, nationwide abortion rates are at an all-time high. The fall of Roe vs Wade has not moved the needle on that count.
While the letter of the law is one thing, the other aspect we have to consider is the intentional chilling effects these laws introduce. Doctors and providers are understandably more much hesitant to administer abortions, even in circumstances where it would be legal.
In highly restrictive states, the result is it's very difficult to get a doctor to stand by your abortion, even if you really need it. And, more concerning, some out-of-state doctors won't do it either, for fear of prosecution. States like Texas have demonstrated they intend to overstep and prosecute individuals getting abortions in other states.
For doctors, it's a game of risk-reward. They need to balance their own personal safety and employment, as well as their medical license and reputation. Many have decided it's not worth the risk.
More than just elective abortions, the ambiguity of the laws and serious threat to doctors are also preventing life-saving abortions
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/investigation-links-georgi...
I didn't really see laws as a threat to safety. While their enforcement can be, that train of thinking can be applied to anything. If you have a machine gun that isn't registered, is the app you took notes about it in a threat to your safety, or is it the law/enforcement? You can have people believe very strongly that abortion is a right or that owning an unregistered machine gun is a right. There may be implicit value based bias if we want to treat circumventing one scenario more favorably than circumventing another. At the heart of the issue, society/government is a threat to anyone who is breaking the law, which is implicitly how laws work.
> I didn't really see laws as a threat to safety.
I'm going to lay off of responding to you after this, I know I've made a couple of responses and quick succession, but these laws are a threat to safety in that they are preventing women from getting life-saving medical attention. Here is one example but there are many
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/investigation-links-georgi...