I signed up for the Feminists for Life mailer “Pro-Woman Answers to Pro-Choice Questions” just yesterday and I already have my first answer in my email! However, it’s not to the question I asked, which is whether or not “Feminists” for Life wants to lower the abortion rate through the effective mean of helping women not get pregnant when they don’t want to be in the first place. I wanted to offer up my advice on how not to get pregnant, which is something I know a lot about, since I’ve never been pregnant. It’s really a two step process: 1) use contraception 2) correctly. However, they didn’t have a form for pro-choicers to submit questions and suggestions for this “dialogue”, so I was stuck offering my ideas to y’all, who already know about this magical formula to avoid pregnancy and therefore abortion.
Anyway, the first question is not about prevention, sadly.
Can you really be a feminist and pro-life?
Yes, let’s argue semantics instead of talk about the issue.
Yes. Feminists for Life of America continues the tradition of Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and other early American feminists who opposed abortion. Our efforts are shaped by the core feminist values of nondiscrimination, nonviolence and justice for all. Established in 1972, Feminists for Life is a nonsectarian, nonpartisan, grassroots organization that seeks real solutions to the challenges women face.
Non-partisan in the sense that Ann Althouse is non-partisan, which is to say that they are littered with Republican funders and supporters, from Patricia Heaton to Jane Roberts, who is married to Chief Justice John Roberts, a super-conservative Bush appointee. Jane Roberts provides pro bono legal counsel to FFL.
We insist on a world in which women have access to all nonviolent options.
This is where I started getting excited, because surely “all nonviolent options” is a category that includes contraception and sex education so you can avoid getting pregnant in the first place. But, shockingly, they seem to have forgotten to include it in the list.
Think about the consequences of such a world for the workplace, schools, and society. We encourage woman-centered and parenting-friendly policies including distance learning, which allows a new mom to be with her child while continuing her education and saving on child-care costs; affordable family housing near campus; campus and workplace child care; health care plans for students and employees that include maternity coverage; telecommuting and job sharing; a living wage; and child support when one parent is absent. We have to approach this holistically.
While a lot of that sounds really good, without including options for women who don’t want kids now, ever, or are done having kids, they aren’t really talking about “all” options, it seems to me. It’s almost like they’re opposed to contraception or something. But the things they do support seem okay to me, so I checked their news blog to see what kind of work they do in terms of lobbying for the things on the list, even as they ignore the possibility that there’s lots of women who have perfectly good reasons they don’t want kids that FFL won’t be budging.
It’s a mixed bag, to say the least. They support openly anti-woman legislation like the Teenage Endangerment and Grandmother Incarceration Act. On the other hand, they do support legislation aimed at helping lower income women get prenatal care, which would be even nicer if they cared about those women’s health when they weren’t pregnant. Weirdly, their biggest aim seems to be to get more and more college women to have babies and they’re pushing for legislation to encourage college women to have kids in college, which I really don’t get. The president hints around that they’re really seeking a way to get more white babies put up for adoption, though.
“This legislation will help pregnant students who feel they have no one to turn to, couples who would like to have children in school, women who feel adoption is the most empowering choice for them and women on the tenure track who want to balance work and family,” Foster said.
Between their college outreach and their lobbying efforts, I’d say that their main goal is, for various reasons, to get middle class women to start having children at much younger ages, preferably starting in college. Their strong support for things like increased family housing for students says to me that it’s about more than just getting more babies from white, middle class girls into the adoption supply for couples like John and Jane Roberts, but they also would like to return to a situation where girls get knocked up in college, marry their boyfriends, maybe drop out but possibly not. But the main thing is getting people married off very young and starting them on producing babies straight away.
I can sort of see the ideal they’re picturing: Young, bright women that have only abstinence-only education under their belts head off to college where they, ignorant about how to use contraception properly, get pregnant. Convinced that they can be “pro-life” feminists, instead of aborting, they get married to their boyfriends instead. The wild young bachelor is tamed by this effort and is motivated to strive in school so he can get a good job right away to support his small but growing family. Meanwhile, the young wife continues to take classes but baby-raising is time-consuming and eventually they realize it would be better for the family if she dropped out of college and got a part-time job to support him while he finishes school. When he graduates, she slips into the role of the housewife full-time, cheering her husband on and supporting him every step of the way as he climbs the corporate ladder.
It’s not an unattractive fantasy from a guy’s point of view, which is why I tease the young Republican set at Townhall of writing angrily about how abortion allows sexy young college girls to slip out of the housewife trap. He gets a regular source of sex, a much more comfortable domestic existence than college bachelors usually enjoy, and his support system is even well-educated and can help him with his homework. It’s a darling picture, if you don’t care much for the hopes and dreams of the young woman in the scenario, which I guess FFL does not. Channeling young women away from their own dreams and into supporting roles for men is a lot of things but feminist ain’t one of them.
45 Responses to “I get “feminist” mail”
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>
Wow. Terrific post.
Can we sue “Feminists” for Life to have the “Feminist” tag removed from their name? I say this only half-jokingly.
At the risk of starting another “burkha picture from hell” incident, it strikes me that “Feminists for Life” makes about as much sense as “Jews for Jesus”…
“Jews for Jesus” would be more correctly called “Christians”, right?
“Feminists for Life” would be more correctly called - “Not-Feminists”?…
(I know there is a group that calls themselves “Jews for Jesus”. If I offended out of my ignorance, please help me understand why I’m wrong…)
It’s not an unattractive fantasy from a guy’s point of view,
I probably told the story of how the sperm donor’s eyes lit up when I told him I wanted to get pregnant, right? I think this was what went through his mind. He thought once I had his sperm magic inside me I would automangically become the wifey of his dreams.
When he found out that wasn’t going to happen, he felt betrayed.
Mike:
it’s complicated, but there is a difference between mainstream christians and people who describe themselves as jews who have come to the understanding that jesus was in fact their messiah. (Hint: one of the big things in early christianity was the question of what role jewish law should play for christians, with opinions ranging — at least — from “it’s all the same, except the messiah was here” to “none of the old stuff matters, only the new rules about loving god and loving your neighbor.)
But geez, the only people I remember getting pregnant in college and staying that way were either the semi-hippies who thought it was all fine and life was beautiful (and happened to be smart enough to take care of a kid and do a full course load) or the strictly-brought-up catholic girls who tried to act as if nothing was going on and then reappeared the next semester after having given the kid up for adoption. In either case, contraception failure was the first step — no one was planning to have a kid.
The FFL program for nominally encouraging young mothers in college makes much more sense to me in the context of outlawing contraception as well as abortion. Otherwise not nearly enough people would need the facilities they’re pushing to make the construction cost and schedule rearrangement worthwhile.
paul, thanks for the info.
I know the early Christian followers experienced a lot of instability as the details of dogma an belief were argued over. Many of those discussions led to fundamental splits, like the Eastern Orthodox Church vs. Catholic Church.
Those kinds of augments continue among Christian to this day. There are also several Jewish existing sects as well…
I was just trying to find an analogy that made sense in this context. All in all, the whole FFL thing seems like a front for some kind of anti-Feminist action in the future…
BTW
there is such a thing as Jews for Jesus, they are called messianic jews. I should know as my atheistic ass is dating one. Funny enough, they dosctrine is closer to what jesus said than any Christian church I know.
BAM! Right on the head, again.
I’ve got nothing more articulate to contribute.
I really wish the wingnuts would just cut the crap and come right out and say they want to keep women in their place. I get tired of having to always run every word spoken through a filter to determine (possibly) what they are hinting at…
How about “Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale is now our vision of the future. Come join us and celebrate the end of female individuality!!”
It would be so much easier for many people to reject their bogus rantings…
The president hints around that they’re really seeking a way to get more white babies put up for adoption, though.
I see. They’re eugenicists.
Amanda:
And have a Plan B. Sex happens, Amanda. Sometimes your original plan doesn’t work.
I wouldn’t demonize a group I share some goals with, they could be useful in some situations. But…
Amanda, why not email them and see if we can’t extend their love for breeding young women down to the high school level. Maybe they could lend their support for daycare centers and nursing rooms in high schools.
It’s never to young to set the flower of young American womanhood on the path of blessed motherhood. If you wait until they are in college, those liberal professors will put crazy ideas in their heads and they won’t let us knock them up at all.
And have a Plan B. Sex happens, Amanda. Sometimes your original plan doesn’t work.
Isn’t taking “Plan B” iusing contraceptives correctly?
Mike:
I think maybe a better analogy would have been something like Blacks for the Klan…
…or Log Cabin Republican.
How about “Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale is now our vision of the future. Come join us and celebrate the end of female individuality!!�
Hmm - would “celebrating the end of female individuality” involve relations with more than one of the gender at the same time?
Um, not that I would be so crass as to have that particular sordid male fantasy, of course. Even about female coed redheads.
it’s complicated, but there is a difference between mainstream christians and people who describe themselves as jews who have come to the understanding that jesus was in fact their messiah.
Which is to say, yes, they’re Christians. But you don’t persuade other Jews to give up their foolish ways and follow the Lord as easily if you use the C-word.
FFL and their lot see a woman’s natural, happy lot in life as a wife and mommy. Sex is a commodity that men take from women; so it’s obvious that contraception and abortion are bad, as their only function is to allow men to use women sexually.
Amanda,
I think you initial premise is a bit naive–I believe that you are correct in the major ways to not become pregnant–as you say “It’s really a two step process: 1) use contraception 2) correctly.”
Unfortunately, I did both, and still became pregnant. And no matter that I was in grad school with no money, no support, and no idea how to take care of myself, much less a little one, I still did not want a baby. ANd even given the option of some sort of support, I did not want a baby at that time. Abortion needs to be available to all whenever they need it, for whatever reason, I don’t need to tell this audience about the consequesnces of an unwanted baby–the first step is education and makeing sure that women know their bodies and their choices, but it is equally important to know that accidents happen to intelligent people trying their best, as well as the sixteen year old who was told she could get pregnant by “being too close in a swimming pool”.
I adore your blog–you enlighten me everyday.
Kirsten
First, I just want to say I wasn’t trying to hijack this thread. I just got a flash that I had a good analogy to FFL. (maybe not…)
Lady Amanda, please forgive me…
I have heard several discussions of the “Jews for Jesus” phenomenon. One that was particularly interesting was a discussion on Bill Handel’s morning radio show some years ago (KFI AM in Los Angeles). I actually find the topic interesting, but I haven’t done in depth study… (In general, organized religion sickens me…)
(I am basically an Atheist, but I’m not strongly convinced that it’s possible to say with absolute certainty that “there is no God�… Agnostic might be the best term…)
Oh, and Phoenician? - Naughty, naughty…
:)
often, if you thing that you did everything correctly–ie, used norplant like I did, you did not think that you needed Plan B–it never crossed my mind….so, whereas it can be a major help, it will not solve all cases of unintended pregancies. Abortion is necesaary and although the descision is not like choosing between vanilla and chocolate ice cream, it is not one I ever doubter–bofre, during,or after.
Kirsten
Oh I’m not saying contraception doesn’t fail, but something like half of the women who have abortions weren’t using any. So if you’re serious about empowering women and helping them avoid abortion, you’d make sure they were using contraception.
Sex happens, epi? I know, that’s why you use contraception. It doesn’t just happen. I think it should. No sad “it happens” here. It should happen; people would do better fucking than hating.
you said it girlfriend–I just get nervous when everthing starts concentrating on education the women (which I firmly believe is necessary), I just fear that the other side will use it as a scapegoat by saying that if all eduacation is available to all women, then abotion should not be…and that makes my skin crawl. It is why I never bought into the abortion should be rare line, abortion should be what it is, there for those that need it. Nobody likes it, nobody thinks it is a day in the park, but I don’t even believe it is a necessary evil, it is just necessary–and those who hav had them should not be ashamed–or made to feel ashamed.
Oh, and Phoenician? - Naughty, naughty…
I was hoping for at least a bigger bite than that.
Anyhow, I’m just in the process of shifting places. I can’t help wondering if it’s a good idea for someone with an Elizabeth Hurley fixation to move next to a school…
Phoenician - “I can’t help wondering if it’s a good idea for someone with an Elizabeth Hurley fixation to move next to a school…”
Depends on the school. If they’re of legal age, go for it. Just don’t pull a “Foley”…
:)
Oh, they’re of legal age. Alas, I have slipped into Dirty Old Man age.
I beg to differ, pro bono being Latin for “for the good.”I know 2 women who became pregnant while ON THE PILL and taking it correctly.
even the pill is only 98% EFFECTIVE.
JUST SAYIN
Kathy McCarty, unless you timed their pill taking every day, you do not know if they took it correctly. Perfect use (which gives 99% protection against pregnancy per year) means taking one pill a day, every day, _at the same time_, not vomiting and not using interfering medications. (Anything else is typical use, which gives around 92% protection per year.) Even so, 99% protection per year means that you probably will know a woman or two who got pregnant on the pill, since very many women use the pill and they do it for a very long time.
Weirdly, their biggest aim seems to be to get more and more college women to have babies and they’re pushing for legislation to encourage college women to have kids in college, which I really don’t get.
My guess is it’s part “white baby mill” wishful thinking, as alluded to elsewhere here, and part because it can serve the dually useful function of turning a career women into a baby slave and get her out of college before “liberal indoctrination” takes hold.
They can couch it however they want, but over and over all I hear from groups like this is that they think white folks are being outbred. So their misogyny really takes second place to their racism.
(Even used perfectly, contraceptives have failure rates. If you think about it, 99% sucks — that would mean that out of every million women using the pill, 10,000 would need a backup plan. While we’re on anecdotes, one friend got pregnant not only on the pill but also while fitted with an IUD.)
When my roommate was getting fitted for a diaphragm, her gynocologist lectured her sternly on it proper use.
Gyno: Do you know the major cause of diaphragm failure?
Roomie: Umm, no?
Gyno: Not taking it with you when you’re just going out for a dozen eggs and a quart of milk.
I’m torn here. Additional facilities for student parents would be enormously useful for folks who return to college for graduate school in their late twenties or beyond.
On the flip side, though, you just know that isn’t what they have in mind.
Conclusion: Kathy knows 100 women.
Still think John Roberts is an Opus dei stealth.
And Jane’s a perfect ‘Stepford’.
Or maybe it’s ‘Onus dei’ as in
God as a ‘piece of work’?
No offense , God…I actually kinda like you.
Not that you give a shit.
re Jews for Jesus: While they may not be “Christians” they also aren’t Jews, since one of the few tenets of Judaism; to the point that, like some form of belief that Jesus was the Messiah is one of the few things which belongs to all Christian denomiations, even those the rest don’t want to accept; see Jim Jones, is that the Messiah hasn’t come.
So declaring that the Messiah has come, makes one; at best, a splinter group of semi-Jews.
Given that Jews for Jesus (I’ve, oddly enough, had to deal with them at several colleges I’ve attended/been affiliated with), as an organisation, are active proseltysers, aiming to convert the rest of Judaism so the Glorious End of Days (rtm) can come to pass; I lump them in with the rest of the wacky Christian set. They have a different sales-pitch, but they are end-timers. Not so offensive as most, but then not being Jewish, I didn’t get preached to much.
They were confused that I, a Catholic (no matter how lapsed) belonged to Hillel, and wasn’t trying to convert people, but once I told them I wasn’t Jewish, and was, nominally, Christian, they left me alone.
Which I found more telling than anything else. They were on a mission, and that mission wasn’t to convert the world to the right stripe of Christianity, but to “save” Jews from the error of their ways.
Maybe they’re trying to reverse the trend you pointed out here.
Is it possible they’re trying to do to feminism what the right-wing fanatics did to the Republicans? Infiltration in sheep’s guise, then metastasizing once they’re entrenched?
Actually, no, Chris. Many doctors forget to tell women that certain antibiotics (Amoxicillin, Doxycycline) make the Pill ineffective, as do certain other drugs (Topamax, St. John’s Wort). You can be taking the Pill completely correctly and still find yourself pregnant because of this.
I do not think there is anything wrong with their positions except for the glaring contraception omission.
The position that women should have the final say on the moral, legal and medical status of something growing in their own bodies is not always accompanied by the kind of personal beliefs that you might expect. I know some people with consitent personal pro-life ethics that, unlike FFL, do not make calls for legal restrictions. There are more nuanced positions that do not involve hating teh Sex or thinking women are less than. Holding those positions should not force you to turn in your Feminist card.
Triffid about 10 posts upthread has the idea. These FFL are likely part of the Buchananesque panic over “the browning of America”. There has always been a segment of white America that has decried the low childbearing rate of the middle- and upper-class white woman of reasonable or high intelligence - and the supposedly higher rate of the racial minorities and lower-class uneducated whites. It is not surprising that eugenics has made a resurgence in a stagnant economy and in the fading of living memory of the Holocaust.
I would also like to comment on the “use contraception, don’t get pregnant” bit. One comment on Plan B seems to assume that it’s very effective, it’s not. Or at least it wasn’t when I took it (1997) when it was 87.5% effective. I got pregnant after the condom broke and after using the morning-after pill. And, in the group of 5 of us going through the pre-abortion counselling etc. together, 4 had used emergency contraception. We’re not all irresponsible.
The rest of the Jewish population does not accept “Jews for Jesus” or Messianic “Jews” as Jewish. If the none of the leaders and few of the lay people of the religion accept your sect as part of the larger group, how can you claim that you are part of it? I see this as the perfect analogy for “Feminists” for Life. There are not all that many things that all Jews accept. (There is good reason for the saying “two Jews, three opinions.”) Belief in Jesus as messiah is the one of the few things that qualifies as apostasy and will make other Jews consider you no longer Jewish. Your ethnicity is still Eastern European Jewish or Middle Eastern Jewish or Mediterranean Jewish, but your religion no longer is Jewish unless you renounce any belief that a messiah has already come.
Re: Jews for Jesus:
This used to be a blog critical of the group. Then JFJ sued Google and got the domain handed to them. They’re litigious bastards and more or less fundamentalists to boot.
For what it’s worth, a lot of people also think well of the Salvation Army, another consistently creepy cheap-labor cult.
I am a pro-life feminist. I believe that I should be honored and accepted for my uniquely feminine qualities, not by wether or not I can do the same things as a man. I am proud of my bodies ability to bear children. I am proud of the fact that I left my job after attaining my bachelors degree to stay home with my child and (get this), I enjoy it!!!! I love my nurturing side and the desire to mother. I want people to accept this as legitimate and WORTHWHILE!!! A modern feminist (which actually is the original form of feminism) doesnt not seek validation by comparing herself with men. She seeks it through acceptance of what makes her a WOMAN! I am thankful for what feminism has done for me and how it has allowed me to go to school, vote, and be considered human. But I dont agree with the archaic turn it took with Roe v Wade. Were I raped, molested, or found to have a pregnancy with “defective” child, I would say the same (by the way, the only type of pregnancy known to threaten the life of a mother is ectopic which is extremely rare). Please dont be narrow minded and attempt to silence those who oppose you because of fear or hatred. Why is my view as a woman invalid? Why do you attempt to silence those like me?
Also, I can see that most people here will attempt to mince my words and argue semantics. Please just look at my stance!
I also wanted to say I came from a welfare home and that my stance has nothing to do with religion or political affiliation as I am sure this will be questioned.