Having been raised in a pro-choice household by parents who quietly taught me the feminist adage that "feminism is the radical notion that women are people," and knowing far too many people in my life who were victims of rape, incest, abuse, or who occasionally got stuck in bad situations where there was the threat of physical violence from parents or boyfriends, prop. 85 seemed a no-brainer to me. And yet, a lot of people who would normally consider themselves to be pro-choice, or at least find themselves uneasy with the consequences of the criminalization of abortion, were taken in a year ago with the arguments of prop 73 (of which prop. 85 this election cycle is basically the same bad penny). The rhetoric of "concern for one's kids" was well played, then and now, by the hard-core right-wingers who financed both trojan horse propositions. But ultimately, the driving ideology behind this proposition is not concern for the vulnerable, but rather cynically uses that rhetoric as cover for their real agenda, which is legally enforcing the dominion of parents over children. And while that might sound fine to parents who aren't abusive, the reality in far too many households is that that abusive parents' dominion can often put young women in serious harm.
This recent ad from the No on 85 people brings it home in the clearest way that I have seen:
Politics matters. To a teenage girl in a tough situation, afraid to tell her parents about an unintended pregnancy, either because the pregnancy is due to incest, or because she fears physical abuse, or could be thrown out of the house for her "sin" of pregnancy or her decision to abort, this bill could make a tremendous difference in her life.
Think outside your bubble, and vote No on prop. 85. Don't make things worse for kids in bad situations.
4 comments:
Thanks, Bud.... well written
My mom's best friend was kicked out of her house in HS because she got pregnant. Obviously, at that time, abortion wasn't an option. My mom's family took her in and she gave the baby up for adoption. But growing up, hitting high school and hearing that story, I wondered what would have happened to her if she hadn't had my mom, and my mom's family to turn to.
Our children are not our property any more than our animals are. We are but privelidged caretakeres of another life.
What's so interesting to me about Prop. 85 and other arms of the anti-choice movement is their appeal to the same "save the children" rhetoric we've heard (from the right and the left) scores of times over the course of the 20th century-- from environmentalists to those who want to police objectionable content in the media, and from international human rights advocates to supporters of domestic social welfare programs.
While I think this obsession with the protection of children is historically specific (early industrial societies' lack of child labor laws probably suggest its absence), today's will to protect children-- born and unborn-- seems virtually unassailable. How can we on the left of this issue compete? Who, after all, are more vulnerable and precious than children?
All of this seems to get back to the larger question of how to be successful (as the Right has) in framing the issues. If someone out there figures out how to do this in a sophisticated yet soundbite-friendly way, I sure hope they will tell us.
a good point, leah. one thing that i have also noticed about that line of argument is that it inevitably is used to put laws in place to put the same restrictions on adults.
in one sense, it might be worthwhile just to call that subtext out explicitly into the open, and by doing so perhaps stripping it of some of its power as an unspoken appeal to a social order that viewed both women, minorities and commoners as children and not sovereign citizens.
but the framing in prop. 85's case is skillfully done in that regard, by choosing teenaged daughters as a symbolic representation of pro-choicers. it coopts mothers in a wway that, say, making the same argument for husbands' right to be informed and have veto power over abortion would be less politically feasible b/c of the way it would rightfully outrage adult women. who, unlike the minors targetted by prop. 85, can vote.
good to see you stopping by, leah. you've got some great pictures over there on your blog.
Post a Comment