I'm not sure you can be pro life and a feminist. Feminism is about female autonomy and equality. And that is the opposite of letting the government dictate what happens to a female body.
You don't get to fucking say shit like this and then complain when some women feel some kind of way about calling themselves feminists.
I mean seriously.
You posted while I was typing, lol. I could have saved some time. Ditto.
I'm not sure you can be pro life and a feminist. Feminism is about female autonomy and equality. And that is the opposite of letting the government dictate what happens to a female body.
You don't get to fucking say shit like this and then complain when some women feel some kind of way about calling themselves feminists.
I mean seriously.
When did I fucking complain about women not calling themselves a feminist?
You don't get to fucking say shit like this and then complain when some women feel some kind of way about calling themselves feminists.
I mean seriously.
When did I fucking complain about women not calling themselves a feminist?
To the topic at large because we discuss it often, why feminism is a dirty word, why women don't want to align with the term, etc and then people act brand new and bewildered that women would behave that way and rush in to blather on about who can and cannot be a feminist.
This reaction you're having now is intellectually dishonest. Because it's not fucking Rush Limbaugh that's the current problem. It's your statements in this thread and others like it. Rush may have had a hand in the assiness that was the 80's and 90's but I'd be curious to know how many women and men in their 20's and 30's are listening to him right now.
It's really easy to blame him and not look at the variety of factors that might make people, especially young people shy away from identifying as feminists.
Just the three off the top of my head would be rape culture, the tone of some feminist discussions when determining exactly what one has to believe before they are allowed to call themselves a feminist in public, and the manner in which the feminist movement has historically alienated women of color and low income.
Two out of three of those issues are ones that women themselves can change but choose not to.
I've been on both sides of the fence on the abortion issue. While the pro-choice movement is clearly a pro-woman movement, I believe there is a schism on the other side of the movement between the truly pro-lifers and the anti-choicers. I don't doubt that many of the men fighting against abortion in various legislatures are anti-choice. However, the vast majority of pro-life women I know truly do believe that life begins at conception and therefore to terminate a pregnancy is the same as ending a life. And simply because only women can get pregnant does not make that viewpoint inherently anti-feminist.
I rejected the term for a very long time until about a year and a half ago, really, when I read--and fell intellectually in love with--Catharine MacKinnon. I then read Lean In and was drawn in to executive feminism. I've performed in a production of The Vagina Monologues. I've written about how sex offender registries are a tool of the patriarchy. I've seen MacKinnon speak and gotten her autograph. And I've recently signed up to volunteer to help trafficking victims. I preach the feminist gospel more than I preach my religion. I'm determined to get my S/O to identify as a feminist, despite coming from a relatively conservative background (and have made major strides in this quest). But I stay out of the abortion debate. Because I honestly get both sides. I'me frustrated that so many feminists feel there's no room to disagree on when life begins. Because I don't think my discomfort with abortion should mean I can't be a feminist.
When life begins or doesn't begin isn't really the issue with feminists. The issue is when does the government get to make a decision on what a woman can or can't do with her body?
When did I fucking complain about women not calling themselves a feminist?
To the topic at large because we discuss it often, why feminism is a dirty word, why women don't want to align with the term, etc and then people act brand new and bewildered that women would behave that way and rush in to blather on about who can and cannot be a feminist.
This reaction you're having now is intellectually dishonest. Because it's not fucking Rush Limbaugh that's the current problem. It's your statements in this thread and others like it. Rush may have had a hand in the assiness that was the 80's and 90's but I'd be curious to know how many women and men in their 20's and 30's are listening to him right now.
It's really easy to blame him and not look at the variety of factors that might make people, especially young people shy away from identifying as feminists.
Just the three off the top of my head would be rape culture, the tone of some feminist discussions when determining exactly what one has to believe before they are allowed to call themselves a feminist in public, and the manner in which the feminist movement has historically alienated women of color and low income.
Two out of three of those issues are ones that women themselves can change but choose not to.Â
To the topic at large because we discuss it often, why feminism is a dirty word, why women don't want to align with the term, etc and then people act brand new and bewildered that women would behave that way and rush in to blather on about who can and cannot be a feminist.
This reaction you're having now is intellectually dishonest. Because it's not fucking Rush Limbaugh that's the current problem. It's your statements in this thread and others like it. Rush may have had a hand in the assiness that was the 80's and 90's but I'd be curious to know how many women and men in their 20's and 30's are listening to him right now.
It's really easy to blame him and not look at the variety of factors that might make people, especially young people shy away from identifying as feminists.
Just the three off the top of my head would be rape culture, the tone of some feminist discussions when determining exactly what one has to believe before they are allowed to call themselves a feminist in public, and the manner in which the feminist movement has historically alienated women of color and low income.
Two out of three of those issues are ones that women themselves can change but choose not to.
How does rape culture make people not want to identify as feminists?
It doesn't make people not want to identify as feminists. It makes feminism a dirty word. People who condone the attitudes that breed the mistreatment of women aren't overly fond of feminism. Because feminists ruin their fun with their PC attitudes and ridiculous insistence that men look at women as equals and not merely various objects of sexual gratification.
I preach the feminist gospel more than I preach my religion. I'm determined to get my S/O to identify as a feminist, despite coming from a relatively conservative background (and have made major strides in this quest). But I stay out of the abortion debate. Because I honestly get both sides. I'me frustrated that so many feminists feel there's no room to disagree on when life begins. Because I don't think my discomfort with abortion should mean I can't be a feminist.
But do you think the government should get to make those decisions? I think most mainstream feminists (like most of us on this board) can completely understand that there are two compelling arguments, especially for religious people, and wouldn't hesitate to call someone with this inner conflict a feminist. It's when personal belief=government restriction of bodily autonomy that feminists cannot abide.
I preach the feminist gospel more than I preach my religion. I'm determined to get my S/O to identify as a feminist, despite coming from a relatively conservative background (and have made major strides in this quest). But I stay out of the abortion debate. Because I honestly get both sides. I'me frustrated that so many feminists feel there's no room to disagree on when life begins. Because I don't think my discomfort with abortion should mean I can't be a feminist.
But do you think the government should get to make those decisions? I think most mainstream feminists (like most of us on this board) can completely understand that there are two compelling arguments, especially for religious people, and wouldn't hesitate to call someone with this inner conflict a feminist. It's when personal belief=government restriction of bodily autonomy that feminists cannot abide.
I agree with this, but I think abortion is dividing for some people and not for others. As a pro-choice woman, an abortion is just a woman's right to choose and nothing more - it doesn't reflect on a societal issue or problem except that a woman was working with a doctor about her own well being. For a woman who is pro-life, an abortion is a woman killing a living thing. I think that conjures up many more emotions and frames that one instance in someone's mind as an injustice. It's something to be stopped b/c living things are important and baby ones need protection from bad outcomes. I understand that and respect someone else to feel that, but I'm emotionally detached from it as a pro-choice woman. I don't care the another pro-life woman cares that someone else had an abortion and so it's hard to see common ground b/c I'm over it and a pro-life woman sees this an injustice.
I've been on both sides of the fence on the abortion issue. While the pro-choice movement is clearly a pro-woman movement, I believe there is a schism on the other side of the movement between the truly pro-lifers and the anti-choicers. I don't doubt that many of the men fighting against abortion in various legislatures are anti-choice. However, the vast majority of pro-life women I know truly do believe that life begins at conception and therefore to terminate a pregnancy is the same as ending a life. And simply because only women can get pregnant does not make that viewpoint inherently anti-feminist.
I rejected the term for a very long time until about a year and a half ago, really, when I read--and fell intellectually in love with--Catharine MacKinnon. I then read Lean In and was drawn in to executive feminism. I've performed in a production of The Vagina Monologues. I've written about how sex offender registries are a tool of the patriarchy. I've seen MacKinnon speak and gotten her autograph. And I've recently signed up to volunteer to help trafficking victims. I preach the feminist gospel more than I preach my religion. I'm determined to get my S/O to identify as a feminist, despite coming from a relatively conservative background (and have made major strides in this quest). But I stay out of the abortion debate. Because I honestly get both sides. I'me frustrated that so many feminists feel there's no room to disagree on when life begins. Because I don't think my discomfort with abortion should mean I can't be a feminist.
When life begins or doesn't begin isn't really the issue with feminists. The issue is when does the government get to make a decision on what a woman can or can't do with her body?
Right. But most people are against taking the life of another without that person's express wishes (and many are against euthanasia too).
So, people who believe life begins at conception may not be so crazy about making it easier to terminate that life. They may very well, though, support measures that are respectful of pregnant patients in other respects if the issue wasn't so frequently framed as being all or nothing.
The other issue I have with blaming disdain for various aspects of feminism or the feminist label on Rush or Pat Robertson is that it presumes that the only reason any woman would take issue is because she is incapable of independent thought and merely parrots what those two fat, ignorant lumps tell them.
It's patently insulting to have been on this board as long as I have with other women who feel some kind of way about the feminist movement and listen to women who have heard us speak continue to say, yup, that must be the reason.
So yeah, I'm all het but the truth is, I'm feeling pretty shat on right now. I realize I shouldn't be taking this personally but hello, assholes, I'm sitting right here. Plenty of us are sitting right here and we've discussed quite often this exact subject and yet the first few replies are in the yeah, because they're stupid and let old men think for them vein.
So thanks for that. Now if you don't mind me, I'm gonna go debate Taylor ham.
Post by msmerymac on Sept 24, 2014 15:48:52 GMT -5
Saying that people who are pro-life- as in, actively campaigns for laws that restrict access to abortion services - aren't feminists shouldn't be THAT controversial. Feminism does have a definition. We've talked about this before: you can't, as a woman, make a choice and then claim it is a feminist action simply because you are a woman. It's a loose definition and can encompass many people and beliefs (and can also be narrowly tailored, unfortunately, please see anti-trans feminism for details). However, believing in and doing things that restrict the choices and rights of women, specifically, is kind of the opposite of feminism. I'm okay drawing a line like that.
And yes, I realize that Feminists for Life say they are protecting the rights of unborn women. Clearly, I disagree.
I preach the feminist gospel more than I preach my religion. I'm determined to get my S/O to identify as a feminist, despite coming from a relatively conservative background (and have made major strides in this quest). But I stay out of the abortion debate. Because I honestly get both sides. I'me frustrated that so many feminists feel there's no room to disagree on when life begins. Because I don't think my discomfort with abortion should mean I can't be a feminist.
But do you think the government should get to make those decisions? I think most mainstream feminists (like most of us on this board) can completely understand that there are two compelling arguments, especially for religious people, and wouldn't hesitate to call someone with this inner conflict a feminist. It's when personal belief=government restriction of bodily autonomy that feminists cannot abide.
I don't think of people who aren't actively in favor of legal restrictions on abortion as pro-life, or at least not part of the movement as the pro-life side sees it.
I understand seeing abortion as murder, and therefore wanting to campaign to end murder. I just can't reconcile that action with being pro-woman, as bodily autonomy is so important to feminism.
I can also see people being personally uncomfortable with abortion, especially from a religious perspective, and I suspect many people, even adamantly pro-choice people, might be.
The other issue I have with blaming disdain for various aspects of feminism or the feminist label on Rush or Pat Robertson is that it presumes that the only reason any woman would take issue is because she is incapable of independent thought and merely parrots what those two fat, ignorant lumps tell them.
It's patently insulting to have been on this board as long as I have with other women who feel some kind of way about the feminist movement and listen to women who have heard us speak continue to say, yup, that must be the reason.
So yeah, I'm all het but the truth is, I'm feeling pretty shat on right now. I realize I shouldn't be taking this personally but hello, assholes, I'm sitting right here. Plenty of us are sitting right here and we've discussed quite often this exact subject and yet the first few replies are in the yeah, because they're stupid and let old men think for them vein.
So thanks for that. Now if you don't mind me, I'm gonna go debate Taylor ham.
If you took this from my reply, it's not intended in there at all.
The movement has always been problematic for some. I think the WORD became culturally problematic around that time in large part due to backlash and denigration of the name of the movement without any real focus on the substance. There are plenty of women who don't identify as feminists because of the tenants of the movement itself. But I also think there are plenty of women (and men!) who believe in feminist principles but shy away from the word because it was made into a joke or a dirty word.
When life begins or doesn't begin isn't really the issue with feminists. The issue is when does the government get to make a decision on what a woman can or can't do with her body?
Right. But most people are against taking the life of another without that person's express wishes (and many are against euthanasia too).
So, people who believe life begins at conception may not be so crazy about making it easier to terminate that life. They may very well, though, support measures that are respectful of pregnant patients in other respects if the issue wasn't so frequently framed as being all or nothing.
That's fine. But if you are actively working to take away rights from women, the feminist movement shouldn't have to hold your hand. It's not what feminism stands for. And that's okay. You don't have to be a feminist.
I'm all kinds of confused because we've had this conversation before and I don't recall anyone saying the definition of prolife as it pertains to whether or not you can be a feminist was "works for a prolife organization."
That we're making that distinction now feels cagey.
I'm all kinds of confused because we've had this conversation before and I don't recall anyone saying the definition of prolife as it pertains to whether or not you can be a feminist was "works for a prolife organization."
That we're making that distinction now feels cagey.
We HAVE had this conversation before and I believe the consensus was that if you do not actively encourage the restriction of abortion through political means, you aren't pro-life. That's how we got AW to come around and stop readily identifying herself as pro-life. She doesn't believe abortion should be a decision women should move forward with, and would counsel against it, but she agreed that it also shouldn't be something that is banned by the government because it's a complicated issue.
Of course, I imagine both the pro-life and pro-choice side like to claim people in the middle who aren't outspoken either way, and may be okay with some restrictions (compromise) on abortion.
I'm all kinds of confused because we've had this conversation before and I don't recall anyone saying the definition of prolife as it pertains to whether or not you can be a feminist was "works for a prolife organization."
That we're making that distinction now feels cagey.
so you can believe it but never do anything about it, and then it's ok to call yourself a feminist. How wonderful! I'm going to rush off to FB and tell everyone I joined a new club!
I "liked" Habs's reaction to HeyJude BECAUSE I have a large group of friends who are Pro-Life Catholics who speak ill of feminists.
And it pisses me off because I don't get into the abortion debate on FB but I feel strongly that the definition of the word, "the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men," extends beyond abortion.
The "Feminist" label has identified so hard with the pro-choice platform that people no longer hear about:
1) equal educational opportunities and situations like that of Malala 2) rape culture here in the U.S. and rape epidemics in other countries around the world, general violence against women. 3) child brides 4) female sex slavery & human trafficking 5) equal pay for equal work 6) the glass ceiling 7) cultural shift in the division of domestic labor (why the FUCK am I the primary income earner, primary wage earner and fucking maid in my fucking house?)
heyjude, your comment sums up succinctly why there are people who hate to be labeled "Feminists." They may work tirelessly on all those issues but you and many leaders in the Feminist movement in the U.S. say the single most important issue is access to abortions and if you aren't in support of them you can't join the club.
And that pisses me off. I am not going to rally and picket and campaign about abortion rights. I am pro-choice in all my voting decisions but I have a religious faith that leaves me conflicted. But I want to work all day on all those other issues. So I'm not allowed to call myself a feminist?
And for fucks sake - I lead the charge on the advancement of women of color and educational opportunities in my organization, as well as equal treatment of gays (women and men). Why can't I be a feminist who says we need to do all those #'s 1-7 for white women and make an extra special effort to do all of them for all the other women who haven't been equally represented? Aren't I advocating for "women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men," even if I never say a damn thing about abortion? But I'm not allowed to call myself a Feminist (one who promotes Feminism)?
THAT is why Feminism has become controversial. Because as women there is an "in club" and and out group based on "choice" and because while all those other issues (and more) are also in need of advocacy, abortion gets all the attention as of late so the women who work for all those other things are not allowed to be part of the Feminist movement.
And plus also, I've tried to defend the feminist movement and say that all the abortion attention lately is in reaction to the anti-choicers trying to take away what Roe V. Wade made accessible, whereas if they left it alone other things would have a chance for advocacy by feminists. But based on your comment, I doubt that truth, and you added support for their position that it is bad to be a feminist.
PPS - Hey Jude I'm not trying to be an asshole with my vehement tone. I have some stress about this from recent FB battles. And in general I'm in a sour ass mood today.
It's surprising to me that my comment about feminism not having to embrace the anti-choice movement is getting some backlash when in fact the controversial opinion is the one that says feminism should make room for anti-choicers.
(BTW, I wasn't the only one to express this but I was the first (in this thread but not ever and certainly not the first in the history of this board); So I will try to tackle it.)
The right to an abortion is the law. Women have the right to choose. This is a legal fact. But we all know that the abortion dialogue does not end there. The way the right to choose was set up left a pretty good balance between protecting the rights of the woman and the rights of a viable fetus. But this is not good enough. Many anti abortion groups have made it their sole mission to take away this right from women. To ban abortion completely. They have done this in any number of overt and covert ways. They operate in state houses throughout the country. They file law suits. They push initiatives. They have a myriad of tools at their disposal to chip away at the right.
Where does feminism fit into all of this? Abortion is not the sole priority of feminism. But an ability to control one's body is a pretty major tenant of feminism. If the right to an abortion disappeared tomorrow we would absolutely see a return to a dark period for women. Since abortion law is not static and since the above groups aim erode it, the fight to defend a woman's right to choose must continue. Just as feminist thought played a big role in giving women the right to choose yesterday, feminist thought must play a big role in defending the right today.
And why should feminism be held to a different standard than other civil rights groups? Would we expect the LGBTQ rights groups to allow space for anti marriage equality advocates even if those advocates are okay with say things like anti discrimination housing and employment laws for LBGTQ individuals? No.
Being personally, morally, and ethically opposed to abortion is okay. And there is room in the feminist movement for this. But taking your beliefs and trying to pass laws to take away a fundamental right from a woman is not. And there is no room in feminism for this.
It's surprising to me that my comment about feminism not having to embrace the anti-choice movement is getting some backlash when in fact the controversial opinion is the one that says feminism should make room for anti-choicers.
(BTW, I wasn't the only one to express this but I was the first (in this thread but not ever and certainly not the first in the history of this board); So I will try to tackle it.)
The right to an abortion is the law. Women have the right to choose. This is a legal fact. But we all know that the abortion dialogue does not end there. The way the right to choose was set up left a pretty good balance between protecting the rights of the woman and the rights of a viable fetus. But this is not good enough. Many anti abortion groups have made it their sole mission to take away this right from women. To ban abortion completely. They have done this in any number of overt and covert ways. They operate in state houses throughout the country. They file law suits. They push initiatives. They have a myriad of tools at their disposal to chip away at the right.
Where does feminism fit into all of this? Abortion is not the sole priority of feminism. But an ability to control one's body is a pretty major tenant of feminism. If the right to an abortion disappeared tomorrow we would absolutely see a return to a dark period for women. Since abortion law is not static and since the above groups aim erode it, the fight to defend a woman's right to choose must continue. Just as feminist thought played a big role in giving women the right to choose yesterday, feminist thought must play a big role in defending the right today.
And why should feminism be held to a different standard than other civil rights groups? Would we expect the LGBTQ rights groups to allow space for anti marriage equality advocates even if those advocates are okay with say things like anti discrimination housing and employment laws for LBGTQ individuals? No.
Being personally, morally, and ethically opposed to abortion is okay. And there is room in the feminist movement for this. But taking your beliefs and trying to pass laws to take away a fundamental right from a woman is not. And there is no room in feminism for this.
Except, we do. In fact, the old school gay rights activists of the 80s were (are?) against gay marriage for reasons I understood when I learned of them but doubt I could adequately represent here. Because you can be pro gay rights generally without agreeing with every single issue. Similarly, there are pro-porn and anti-porn feminists. Now perhaps you can say MacKinnon isn't sex positive, but it'd be odd to say she's not a feminist.
It's surprising to me that my comment about feminism not having to embrace the anti-choice movement is getting some backlash when in fact the controversial opinion is the one that says feminism should make room for anti-choicers.
(BTW, I wasn't the only one to express this but I was the first (in this thread but not ever and certainly not the first in the history of this board); So I will try to tackle it.)
The right to an abortion is the law. Women have the right to choose. This is a legal fact. But we all know that the abortion dialogue does not end there. The way the right to choose was set up left a pretty good balance between protecting the rights of the woman and the rights of a viable fetus. But this is not good enough. Many anti abortion groups have made it their sole mission to take away this right from women. To ban abortion completely. They have done this in any number of overt and covert ways. They operate in state houses throughout the country. They file law suits. They push initiatives. They have a myriad of tools at their disposal to chip away at the right.
Where does feminism fit into all of this? Abortion is not the sole priority of feminism. But an ability to control one's body is a pretty major tenant of feminism. If the right to an abortion disappeared tomorrow we would absolutely see a return to a dark period for women. Since abortion law is not static and since the above groups aim erode it, the fight to defend a woman's right to choose must continue. Just as feminist thought played a big role in giving women the right to choose yesterday, feminist thought must play a big role in defending the right today.
And why should feminism be held to a different standard than other civil rights groups? Would we expect the LGBTQ rights groups to allow space for anti marriage equality advocates even if those advocates are okay with say things like anti discrimination housing and employment laws for LBGTQ individuals? No.
Being personally, morally, and ethically opposed to abortion is okay. And there is room in the feminist movement for this. But taking your beliefs and trying to pass laws to take away a fundamental right from a woman is not. And there is no room in feminism for this.
Except, we do. In fact, the old school gay rights activists of the 80s were (are?) against gay marriage for reasons I understood when I learned of them but doubt I could adequately represent here. Because you can be pro gay rights generally without agreeing with every single issue. Similarly, there are pro-porn and anti-porn feminists. Now perhaps you can say MacKinnon isn't sex positive, but it'd be odd to say she's not a feminist.
No. Find me a gay rights group today that welcomes people who want to define marriage as solely between a man and a woman. You and I both know that the legal gay rights movement and attitudes surrounding it have changed dramatically since the 80s.
The "Feminist" label has identified so hard with the pro-choice platform that people no longer hear about:
1) equal educational opportunities and situations like that of Malala 2) rape culture here in the U.S. and rape epidemics in other countries around the world, general violence against women. 3) child brides 4) female sex slavery & human trafficking 5) equal pay for equal work 6) the glass ceiling 7) cultural shift in the division of domestic labor (why the FUCK am I the primary income earner, primary wage earner and fucking maid in my fucking house?)
I disagree. We constantly hear about all of this stuff. I mean, we talk about one of these topics on the daily here on this board, which means these stories are somewhere in the news. DAILY.
Abortion might appear to take a front seat simply because it's the most under siege in a concrete way. New laws are being passed every month to erode this right that we already have. It's a lot easier to write news about anti-Roe legislation--concrete stuff--than to do another piece on sex trafficking. That doesn't mean we don't still have those conversations.
Post by 5thofjuly on Sept 24, 2014 19:48:41 GMT -5
I actually think I'm ok with pro-life feminists. Like some of you have noted, there are many, many issues to concern ourselves with and if we disagree on a few (majors) issues, I think I'm ok with that.
I think about people who are Catholic, for example, who are pro-choice or pro gay marriage. Those are pretty big nos in Catholicism, but that doesn't get them ejected from the fold because they still believe in many of the other major tenants and work together on the goals they do share...either that or I'm getting soft in my old age.