Feminism and pro-life

Moderators: Enigma, Sonic#

Locked
antfancier
member
member
Posts: 171
Joined: Thu Sep 3, 14:06 2015
Location: New England

Feminism and pro-life

Post by antfancier » Sat Jan 21, 21:24 2017

Yesterday I saw a promoted article on Facebook about 'pro-life feminists' feeling 'sidelined' by the Women's March. One woman quoted in the article said just because she doesn't believe in pro-choice doesn't mean she isn't supporting women in other ways and it was 'unfair' to take feminism away from her. Later, I saw another article on my phone news feed which basically pitched 'us women' as not being able to move beyond the cliquey stereotype and excluding others from our group 'just like in high school'.

Am I missing something here? Just because you are pro-choice, it doesn't mean that you choose abortion in every instance. But if you are pro-life then you are saying a women doesn't have the right to bodily autonomy. How can you reconcile that with feminism?

And why the hell are Facebook and my phone picking these articles to promote when there are plenty of other issues linked with the Women's March that they could be covering instead? It feels very much like attention is being placed on a minority view and a controversy created when there isn't one.

User avatar
rowan
member
member
Posts: 9575
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 11:01 2004
Location: US

Re: Feminism and pro-life

Post by rowan » Sat Jan 21, 22:40 2017

Anyone who is "pro life" is anti woman. Choice is important. You can choose to have that baby, that is a **choice**.

Anti women is not feminist by definition.
spacefem wrote:All your logical argue are belong to us!

lexiewalt

Posts: 60
Joined: Tue Dec 6, 6:24 2016

Re: Feminism and pro-life

Post by lexiewalt » Sun Jan 22, 14:55 2017

It's choice that is always important. If you announce yourself as pro-life, you've already given up the ability to choose.

User avatar
Nachos
member
member
Posts: 4712
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 6:42 2004
Location: Next Tuesday
Contact:

Re: Feminism and pro-life

Post by Nachos » Sun Jan 22, 15:15 2017

What pisses me off the most about these people is the way they then label anyone who is pro-choice as actually pro-abortion. Umm, no. Fuck off. I am not advocating that everyone have an abortion. That is why there is a "choice" in the label.
Ugh, I'm tired of my signature.

User avatar
DarkOne
member
member
Posts: 439
Joined: Mon Apr 6, 5:42 2015
Location: US

Re: Feminism and pro-life

Post by DarkOne » Wed Jan 25, 7:39 2017

Ok, this may very well be petty semantics on my part, but must pro-life = anti-choice?

Just wondering if that's not just falling in the same trap as those who equate pro-choice = pro-abortion...

How would you categorize a person who believes in respectfully dissuading others from procuring an abortion (including ceasing and desisting when told to fuck off) but acknowledge that ultimately the option to get an abortion should remain legally available? Similar to how we try to sway people to vote for whatever side we'd like to see win, but still believe in elections, free from coercion and undue influence? What I'm getting at is, I agree that anti-choice and feminism are mutually exclusive, but I could debate that pro-life can be feminist in the example I just gave. I just think "life" and "abortion" need to be be taken out of the labeling in this debate.

That being said, it is entire possible these women identifying as "pro-lifers" were really anti-choice, in which case, ya' know... :flamethrower:
"Winston Churchill once said 'The eyes are the windows of your face.' " -A man who's very scared of plants.

Taurwen
member
member
Posts: 200
Joined: Sat Jul 2, 9:33 2016

Re: Feminism and pro-life

Post by Taurwen » Wed Jan 25, 7:46 2017

I would categorize those people as pro-choice. They acknowledge that the final say is the woman's and don't want the procedure to be unavailable so they are pro-women-having-the-choice.

You can think there's a right and wrong choice without thinking the government should take the choice away.

User avatar
Nech
member
member
Posts: 460
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 13:50 2015
Location: Canada

Re: Feminism and pro-life

Post by Nech » Wed Jan 25, 7:51 2017

DarkOne wrote:Ok, this may very well be petty semantics on my part, but must pro-life = anti-choice?

Just wondering if that's not just falling in the same trap as those who equate pro-choice = pro-abortion...

How would you categorize a person who believes in respectfully dissuading others from procuring an abortion (including ceasing and desisting when told to fuck off) but acknowledge that ultimately the option to get an abortion should remain legally available? Similar to how we try to sway people to vote for whatever side we'd like to see win, but still believe in elections, free from coercion and undue influence? What I'm getting at is, I agree that anti-choice and feminism are mutually exclusive, but I could debate that pro-life can be feminist in the example I just gave. I just think "life" and "abortion" need to be be taken out of the labeling in this debate.

That being said, it is entire possible these women identifying as "pro-lifers" were really anti-choice, in which case, ya' know... :flamethrower:
For pro-lifers the choice is often to just not have sex. "Don't want a baby? Don't sex." I even had one person tell me if a women gets pregnant from being raped that's God's choice and she should except it. The basis of the pro-life debate is that abortions should not be allowed, which inherently leaves no choice.
Where there's smoke, there's fire. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. So just shut up, and bring some water.

User avatar
DarkOne
member
member
Posts: 439
Joined: Mon Apr 6, 5:42 2015
Location: US

Re: Feminism and pro-life

Post by DarkOne » Wed Jan 25, 8:33 2017

Nech wrote:For pro-lifers the choice is often to just not have sex. "Don't want a baby? Don't sex." I even had one person tell me if a women gets pregnant from being raped that's God's choice and she should except it. The basis of the pro-life debate is that abortions should not be allowed, which inherently leaves no choice.
Oh, I have ZERO doubt that most people who use the label pro-life really mean anti-choice. But I've met more than one person who's said they wouldn't procure an abortion, believe it is against their religion, have advocated adoption to relatives who were faced with the choice, but still believe it should be that woman's personal choice. If these people decided to call themselves "pro-life pro-choicers", I wouldn't object. And one of these friends does consider herself a feminist. I wouldn't object to that either.

I guess I really AM just complaining about semantics... Words and inconsistency sometimes bug me. I used to be rattled by people calling me "pro-abortion". But the truth is, I am. I AM pro-abortion. I'm pro-"abortion being legal and available and not stigmatized". Whether I would choose it or not is irrelevant, only that option is there. Ok I'll drop my rant about centering the arguments on the word "choice".
Last edited by DarkOne on Thu Jan 26, 8:13 2017, edited 1 time in total.
"Winston Churchill once said 'The eyes are the windows of your face.' " -A man who's very scared of plants.

User avatar
spacefem
member
member
Posts: 8074
Joined: Sat Aug 24, 1:37 2002
Location: Kansas
Contact:

Re: Feminism and pro-life

Post by spacefem » Thu Jan 26, 6:45 2017

It's tough. I used to say I was "both" because I would like to see birth control so widely available that the need for abortion becomes very rare. Then I realized that the pro-choice organizations like planned parenthood were doing exactly that, while the pro-life organizations were campaigning to make abortion illegal, labeling all kinds of things like IUDs as abortifacients, and driving around town with fetus photos enlarged to fit on trucks. So thank you for the examples Wichita Kansas, I picked a side. I don't care if it does make me pro-abortion anymore, as long as I'm opposite those assholes protesting the clinic that I now straight up donate to.
bork can eat steak with a spoon.

User avatar
melsbells
member
member
Posts: 760
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 6:45 2014
Location: Finland

Re: Feminism and pro-life

Post by melsbells » Sun Jan 29, 14:51 2017

I think a person can be a feminist and pro-life, but with so many caveats that it would be easier to say they were pro-choice and have less caveats.

theal

Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Feb 1, 8:30 2017

Re: Feminism and pro-life

Post by theal » Thu Feb 2, 8:30 2017

I think a person can definitely be a feminist and pro-life (feminism should embrace everyone except sexist men).

tomokun
member
member
Posts: 289
Joined: Fri Apr 5, 10:18 2013

Re: Feminism and pro-life

Post by tomokun » Thu Feb 2, 10:41 2017

Well, as has been pointed out quite often to me - feminism is not a monolith.

However, I do find it odd that feminists can hold contradictory positions on women's issues. That seems... counterproductive.

To be, is to be something, and to be something, is to be something specific. So, if a feminist is going to be Pro-Life, I would also suspect that they would want increased responsibility from the fathers of these children as well. If pro-life feminists are going to advocate that women don't have the right to choose, I would suspect that they would also argue that men ALSO don't have the right to choose.

Which strikes me as a very "big government" style of argument.

Am I missing anything there?

User avatar
Nae

Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Dec 2, 1:42 2014

Re: Feminism and pro-life

Post by Nae » Thu Feb 2, 16:35 2017

Feminism is about having choices to me... being pro choice makes sense.

User avatar
spacefem
member
member
Posts: 8074
Joined: Sat Aug 24, 1:37 2002
Location: Kansas
Contact:

Re: Feminism and pro-life

Post by spacefem » Fri Feb 3, 20:11 2017

melsbells wrote:I think a person can be a feminist and pro-life, but with so many caveats that it would be easier to say they were pro-choice and have less caveats.
this.

Okay here's how a feminist could be pro-life...

I think abortion should be legal during the first trimester, first trimester miscarriages are so common nature is clearly figuring out whether it's a good idea to make a human, it's a big deal, as if God wants it to only happen if circumstances are perfect, it's like He's pro-choice or something. The baby is unnoticable, you can't hear the heartbeat. It's called an embryo for the first 11 weeks because there's nothing particularly human about it.

After it becomes a fetus I think abortion should be legal if a fetal abnormality is detected because no court should force a family to carry a child to term only to have it face a hard, short life, I think that's really cruel, and if you're okay with that it's your choice but I cannot imagine a family going through that so I am not going to judge anything they have to do.

And while I'm at it let me bring up the fact that those 20-week abortion bans are exceptionally cruel because the midterm pregnancy scans that detect serious abnormalities happen right around that time, meaning that as soon as parents find out their fetus won't survive, they find out they're forced to continue the pregnancy because it's too late to terminate.

I think abortion should be legal in cases of rape if the fetus isn't to the viable 25 week stage, and we'd have to trust the woman to say she was raped because most rape cases take a very long time to prosecute from accusation to conviction, abortion would logistically have to be legal if a woman just says she's raped. We drag the names of rape victims through the mud so horribly they're afraid to bring forth charges, so we'd need to just let doctors trust women in this situation.

Obviously abortion has to be legal at any time if the health of the mother is at risk. We don't have time for a court of appeals on this, again, we'd have to trust the woman and her doctor to make that decision. When a woman finds out late in pregnancy that she's in danger, time is very short.

So basically I guess I don't think women should go full term then casually skip down to the abortion clinic to end the life of a 36 week fetus because they're bored.

But this already isn't happening (https://www.romper.com/p/how-many-late- ... dful-21462) because doctors are not monsters and pregnant women, by the time they get to be noticeably pregnant, want their babies. That's why all these late term abortion stories are coming out that are so hard to read

Pro-life feminists: do you realize that by saying you're pro-life, you're saying that these women who've had late-term abortions should be forced to carry their babies to term (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/don ... 44efa2bf58?)

Go ahead, tell me what you really think, how do you think these situations would play out in your pro-life world? Most of your allies calling themselves pro-life are not okay with any exceptions. Rape, fetal abnormality, early in pregnancy, health of the mother in danger... they are either in denial that these situations happen, or want every pregnant woman to face them with the slim hope that it just might be okay (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_ ... lappanavar).

There's my pro-choice rant for the year, I'm done now.
bork can eat steak with a spoon.

User avatar
melsbells
member
member
Posts: 760
Joined: Wed Jul 30, 6:45 2014
Location: Finland

Re: Feminism and pro-life

Post by melsbells » Sun Feb 5, 13:12 2017

I was thinking about it from a different angle. I can be pro-life when there's comprehensive sex-education, accessible/affordable birth control, universal health care, paid maternity paternity and family leave, accessible/affordable child care, and really the list goes on. There would have to be a system in place to support all lives. I used to say I was pro-life because I wanted those things. I thought it was supposed to mean that you cared about all life, but it turned out to require a lot more explanation than just saying I'm pro-choice.

Then after going through pregnancy, that pro-choice identification became more obvious. No one should have to go through that if they don't want to.

User avatar
DeepThink

Posts: 24
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 10:25 2015
Location: Deep South aka HELL

Re: Feminism and pro-life

Post by DeepThink » Fri Feb 10, 13:14 2017

I think of Marlise Munoz, the pregnant woman in Texas who suffered a stroke or pulmonary embolism and was put on life support against her wishes and her family's wishes. She had a DNR and the whole family had to sue the creepy bible thumping hospital for taking away her dignity as an actual human being and had been turned into nothing more than an incubator. Her husband's grieving comments made it that much worse. Her family was horrified and repeatedly pointed out they were being oppressed by religious beliefs.

When the public found out the brain dead woman's corpse was carrying a fetus with 'abnormalities' it just got worse for the hospital. The comments section in some articles was the real horror show. Women claiming that a corpse doesn't matter, even though she was actually alive once. I just don't get how people can become so brainwashed and heartless against an actual person. As a result I'm 100% for abortion and the fact that creepy people who have infiltrated the medical field with their religious nonsense can take away a person's wishes in death is just horrifying. Religious people make the worst doctors hands down and I'm saying that from personal experience. However, the "medical experts" at the John Peter Smith hospital in Fort Worth felt that they had to force their disgusting religious beliefs on a dead woman. How much more powerless can you get than by abusing a corpse?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/ ... s-hospital

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/08/us/p ... pport.html

When you violate the rights of someone who died just for a fetus (not a baby folks) then it's time for reform of a most dire kind. It's like the christians lately just want to go back to the "good old days" so they can abuse women again with the church's permission. Our society and civilization as a whole has moved forward by whittling away as such absurd beliefs and there is no reason for religion to be allowed to creep into the medical field whatsoever.

As soon as a medical professional starts forcing their beliefs on a person at their most vulnerable time in their life then they've violated the Hippocratic Oath and should be stripped of their medical license period. If the ignorant people would actually stop the number of unwanted and unintended pregnancies from increasing (i.e., Texas) then they must educate people instead of lie to them. The kind of crap I was told in high school was bad enough. So bad that out of 11 students six got pregnant and five dropped out. One very pissed off set of parents had one daughter not only get an abortion but they left the city and school district with some choice words. Encouraging girls to have sex is horrible, but if people are kept poor and ignorant they are easier to control. Churches know this. Ironically religions never do that and yet the brainwashed and indoctrinated believe it's the only "choice" there is.

There's also the case of the Savita Halappanavar in Ireland who was sentenced to die by idiotic religious beliefs that have infested the medical fields in Ireland. I don't want some idiot telling me that the United States is a "Catholic country" as an excuse to kill me through an absurd belief system. For anyone doubting just how bad it can get, keep in mind that hospitals today in the U.S. can keep information from women if it goes against their "religious rights" to oppress others through archaic beliefs. Can we really call our country a first world country when doctors lie to women about fetal abnormalities?

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-ireland-20321741

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/ ... indu-woman

Religion elevates men while burying women six feet below them. Pro-Life to me means anti-human as it falsely claims to actually care about a fetus that may become a baby only to die from neglect or abuse later. Not one of those people has told me what the plan is to deal with all of the unwanted and unplanned results of their religious fervor. It has never made any kind of sense to claim that an actual human being carrying a fetus somehow just doesn't matter at all. It makes my skin crawl when christians start attacking women with Dark Ages legislation and trying to claim that a fertilized egg is in any way human. Sure the DNA matches but it's an egg. There's a canyon of difference between a fertilized egg and an actual person being imprisoned in their own body and being forced to carry an egg full term even if it will kill them. That makes no sense to me at all.

In case you haven't guessed it I don't throw away 10% of my income to pedophile clubs. I absolutely can't stand religion.

The cancer of religion is already working hard to deny women reproductive options in hospitals.

http://www.scpr.org/blogs/health/2016/0 ... or-pregna/

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/19190916/ns/h ... ient-care/

Either women have a choice or don't and it seems our rights are being eroded every day.

I remember reading a horrible article in a well-known magazine called TIME, where parents who have children with Down Syndrome wanted to demand that people be forced to have children with Down Syndrome, even if they found out early enough to terminate the pregnancy. Why? Because they were tired of programs that subsidize them with their children's care being cut and eliminated. They were so selfish to wish birth defects on other couples. They also wanted to deny pregnant women access to the test that would tell a woman if the fetus had that abnormality. When I asked christians if they would ever abort a fetus if they found it was going to grow up to be homosexual - they suddenly supported an abortion. I see no point in forcing beliefs on others because there's no way I could sleep at night denying an actual human being rights.

Yep, that's the end of my rant on this subject.

User avatar
Sonic#
member
member
Posts: 5162
Joined: Sat Nov 7, 9:37 2009
Location: Georgia, US

Re: Feminism and pro-life

Post by Sonic# » Fri Feb 10, 13:46 2017

I agree with most of this, especially the idea that the stakes for women's health are real and substantial enough that a ban on abortion will force doctors to make worse decisions. I also agree with Spacefem's idea that even if we're thinking pragmatically any feminist who's pro-life should seek to reduce the kinds of maltreatment that phrases like "collateral damage" don't do justice for. And I think if the goal is reducing abortions while improving quality of life, one needs at minimum to recognize what access to contraceptives and sex education do to reduce the rate of unwanted pregnancies, and conversely to recognize that a total ban doesn't necessarily reduce the abortion rate.
In case you haven't guessed it I don't throw away 10% of my income to pedophile clubs. I absolutely can't stand religion.
We could equally well have a thread titled "Religion and pro-choice," since I think comments like this dismiss current religion-based pro-choice efforts. There are so many religions, and religion itself is such a broad category, that painting all religions as opposed to women concedes too much ground, and fails to acknowledge the ways in which religion can also provide the foundation for feminist and/or pro-choice efforts. While I agree with you if I understand your comments to refer to explicitly anti-choice conservative Christian groups, I don't think it's fair to call them all "pedophile clubs." Three quick examples:

Pro-choice groups within established religions. I'm mostly familiar with pro-choice Catholic and Protestant Christians, but certainly these must exist among other religions. Catholics for Choice is one group. A broader religious coalition is the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice.

Some denominations are explicitly pro-choice. The (official site) Unitarian Universalist Association recognizes the right to free-choice and takes steps like its OWL program to educate people on sex and consent. So has the (official site) United Church of Christ. Other denominations have been attacked for having pro-choice leadership. The Presbyterian Church in the US and the Evangelical Lutheran Church are among denominations that don't condemn abortion.

Then there are church memberships, which may differ from their leaders on issues. This can get complex: in Methodist circles, I know several pro-choice pastors who are placed in churches with many more conservative members. And certainly in many congregations opinion may range widely, with people who believe in pro-choice policies doing their best to coexist with members who disagree.

Locked