Here's what I think: I believe you can be personally against the option of abortion for YOURSELF and still be a feminist... HOWEVER, if you not only deny abortion access for yourself but would also deny access for other women, then YOU ARE NOT A FEMINIST.
One of the biggest things that feminists have fought so hard for is reproductive choice and freedom. Women should be trusted to manage their own bodies, their own pregnancies, and their lives, whether they want to have children or not. By denying this basic right to other women because you think the "fetal life" is more important than any woman's life circumstances... then there's no way in hell you can call yourself a feminist. Feminism is all about the freedom to make CHOICES, protecting bodily autonomy, and protecting equality.
Speaking of choice, I am really nauseated by the Feminist for Life slogan: "Refuse to choose." goddamn, that is some Orwellian shit right there. YOU MUST REFUSE TO CHOOSE. CHOICE IS BAD. SURRENDER YOURSELF TO THE INEVITABLE. BIOLOGY IS DESTINY. YOU HAVE NO SAY IN WHAT GOES ON INSIDE OF YOUR BODY.
Won't someone please tell these fucks to shut up?
Actually, what's worse than their slogan is their campaign called "Women Deserve Better." Who the hell are you to tell me what I do or do not deserve?
This "Women Deserve Better Campaign" only functions effectively under the assumption that ALL women would just looove to have children (ie there would be no "unwanted" pregnancies) IF several conditions were fulfilled: more support for single mothers in the sense of more daycares, more financial support, tellin' off that darn boyfriend who's forcin' you to abort, and more access to adoption agencies, etc.
Okay, that sounds great, except...
AREN'T YOU FORGETTING SOMETHING?
Even if ALL of the above utopian conditions were fulfilled, it still remains a truth that NOT EVERY WOMAN WANTS TO GIVE BIRTH & HAVE CHILDREN.
Feminists for Life seem to think that if they just give you all the love & financial support you need, and help you get through work & school, then golly gee, of course you'll want to carry to term and raise that unwanted kid! ugh. It assumes that the only reasons for not wanting to carry to term are all EXTERNAL problems and if they are all eliminated, then there would be no need for abortion. Wrong. In actuality, there are many INTERNAL reasons not to give birth/have children. Not all women have abortions just because they are "victims" of external stimuli such as shamed parents, a forceful boyfriend, or economic instability.
For instance, although I've never been pregnant, my personal internal reasons to choose abortion would be: I never want to experience pregnancy, birth, or child-rearing/adoption, as I find all of those experiences to be extremely distasteful and incompatible with my psychological well-being and overall health.
One in three women have had an abortion. Obviously, that means a lot of women chose abortion on their own terms, and for a great deal of them, it was the first and best choice. Feminists for Life utterly FAILS to acknowledge that not every female has a MATERNAL instinct. And, that assumption in and of itself -- that every woman has a maternal instinct under the right circumstances -- is an extremely sexist/anti-feminist point of view.
Furthermore, their claim to "feminism" rests on the out-of-context writings of Susan B. Anthony. RH Reality Check has a lot to say about that.
If these idiots really cared about women, then they would call for more access to contraception (they are against contraception) and better sex education (they only care about ineffective abstinence education). But, noooo,
...they call for women to carry to term and parent after pregnancy has already occurred. Their recommendations glorify motherhood as a role for women and condemn women to the natural functioning of their bodies. This is reflected in their president Serrin Foster's assertion that Feminists for Life and pro-choice activists should work together in order to make the world more "woman-friendly": i.e. call for more day care etc. This action in and of itself is not negative, however, Foster fails to acknowledge that a pro-choice activist supports the full range of choices that women have when they are pregnant. Pro-choice activists will not work with Feminists for Life because they only support one choice: carrying a pregnancy to term (after which point the mother is strongly encouraged to parent).
In addition to that, here's a quote from Amanda Marcotte in the comments section on a blog from doublex.com. Its sums up my feelings perfectly, and she puts it a lot better than I could(!):
Their argument ... is that "true" freedom is freedom not how women themselves define it, nor is there the freedom to be different implied. You are "free" under this definition to fit into a very specific profile: a woman who is delighted to tolerate frequent childbirth as the price she pays for sexual activity, or who chooses to end her sex life when her child-bearing is over. You are not free to be a woman who says, "I've had two children, and that's enough." You aren't free to say, "I want to have a few more years of my youthful pleasures before I buckle down to child-rearing and marriage." You aren't free to say, "I don't want to have children, but I do like sex."
Under this definition of "freedom", you aren't free to have sexual partners you don't intend to marry, or to decide that you want to go back to school and get a degree now that your child is grown (because another is on the way!). Feminists for Life pretends that enough child care and welfare will somehow mean that having children will never be an unacceptable burden, but I suspect they know that really isn't ever possible. Their insistence otherwise demeans and degrades the importance of children, ironically, because they characterize children as minor inconveniences that can be shoved off in the corner, and handled with a minimum of official support. Which makes sense---the anti-choice movement's lack of care for children belies their main purpose, which is restricting women's freedom.
And in the end, why in the world would you want to be aligned with an organization that Sarah Palin represents and supports? You know, the abstinence-only-loving politically corrupt fundie who has actually said that she would oppose abortion even if her own daughter was raped. jesus fucking christ. Could you people get any more insane?
Further reading:
Who are the Feminists for Life to say What Women Deserve?
Palin on Abortion
Palin & FFL
Feminists for (Fetal) Life
Blog for Choice: Are Women Human?
Behind the protest
No comments:
Post a Comment