It has always seemed to me that feminism was about women deciding what they want to do and be. The hitch has been the abortion issue. The first (what we now call) feminists, who cut their advocacy teeth in Abolitionism that sought to expand membership in the moral community, were generally (what we now call) pro life. Thus Susan B. Anthony and Elizabeth Cady Stanton opposed abortion as a form of oppression of women and the “evil” of infanticide.
Contemporary feminists, of course, took the opposite course on this volatile issue. To them, the female reproductive function kept women locked in the ball and chain, and so to be truly liberated, abortion was–as one polemic put it–a sacrament. And that became the conventional wisdom. Pro life women could not be feminists and real feminists would never be pro life.
But Sarah Palin (among many others) didn’t care about the conventional wisdom. She recently laid claim to the feminist label for herself and other pro life female politicians–and the fur (please forgive me) began to fly.
I tend to believe that ideas and actions matter rather than the name tag stuck to one’s lapel or dress collar, and so I really haven’t paid close attention to the fight over the feminist label. But I thought (pro choice) pundit Kathleen Parker–who has certainly been no fan of Palin–made a very valid point in her Washington Post column about this controversy. From “A Feminism That Spans From Palin to Pelosi:”
The reason Palin so upsets the pro-choice brigade is because she seems so content with her lot and her brood. [Me: particularly for giving birth to Trig, who has Down syndrome.] One can find other reasons to think Palin shouldn’t be president, but being a pro-life woman shouldn’t be one of them...
Obviously, the forming human life is destroyed, and thus I also can make a human rights argument against abortion. I think we should. That other women, such as Palin, want to reframe the abortion debate in new feminist terms, arguing that abortion hurts women and is, therefore, anti-woman, doesn’t bother me a bit. And it shouldn’t bother older-school feminists.
Equality, after all, means that every woman has a voice.
Indeed. It seems pretty clear to me that this century is going to be dominated by women in the professions, business, and political leadership, as well as more traditional pursuits. I always thought that was what feminism sought to achieve. Trying to force all “feminists” into a political straight jacket about one of the most crucial moral issues of our times–and indeed, one that would definitely not fit the founding mothers of the movement like Anthony/Stanton–is actually the epitome of anti feminism.
June 23rd, 2010 | 10:58 pm
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Vince Humphreys, Wesley J. Smith. Wesley J. Smith said: Pro Life Women Are Feminists Too » Secondhand Smoke | A First Things Blog http://shar.es/mInA9 [...]
June 24th, 2010 | 7:18 am
If Palin runs for President, she should declare herself a “true” feminist, as opposed to all the selfish, anti-life women who have been masquerading as feminists all these years. If she does that, I believe the tide will turn against these phony feminists.
June 24th, 2010 | 9:51 am
Wes: “so to be truly liberated, abortion was–as one polemic put it–a sacrament.”
I think you’re semi-quoting Gloria Steinem, and if so, what she actually said was, “If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.”
If not, I’d be curious as to whom you were citing.
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
June 24th, 2010 at 10:28 am
That was the quote.
June 24th, 2010 | 10:18 am
Every group formed to be politically activist has been/will be infiltrated by communists/Marxists or whatever term is current. The goal is the same – establish the state as the “god” that determines right and wrong.
One barrier has been the Catholic church. Another has been the family. We know they’re out to destroy the church, but the destruction of the family – while more successful has not been so obvious since it’s couched in terms of benefits. (although that what they always do) If women don’t have children, they’re free to work. If they’re free to work, and at least limit their children to one or two, you have a need for childcare. Childcare (it takes a village) means that you have a means of early indoctrination. No longer are the parents the prime instiller of values, but society tells children and young people what is right and wrong. Parental values are “old fashioned” and can be dismissed. Families are “just” groups of people who want to live together. Marriage isn’t necessarily between a man and woman – but can be between any two people who _love_ each other – at least until they get “divorced” because they’re tired of each other…because no fault divorce makes divorce easy. Eventually, all children will be wards of the State, women will be given permission to have children – or forced to – if it benefits the State (although that hasn’t worked too well for Russia, has it!) because the State is the Prime Benefactor.
Abortion is just a means to an end. Women are just cannon fodder in a different war.
June 24th, 2010 | 11:50 am
Padraig: “I think you’re semi-quoting Gloria Steinem, and if so, what she actually said was, ‘If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament.’”
If we really respected the women who became pregnant, PREGNANCY would be the sacrament.
June 24th, 2010 | 1:03 pm
bmmg39, as far as I’m concerned, it is.
Nobody ever had to tell me to stand up to give a pregnant lady my seat on the bus.
June 24th, 2010 | 1:09 pm
Wes, if you were quoting Steinem, you’re misquoting her horribly. Steinem wasn’t saying that abortion IS a sacrament. She was saying that if the men who make the laws had to deal with being pregnant, abortion wouldn’t be illegal, and wouldn’t even carry a stigma.
The statement wasn’t even about abortion, really, more about how laws and ethics are determined within a male-dominated society.
June 25th, 2010 | 9:32 pm
The quote about abortion being a sacrament came from the female Episcopal bishop (I believe it may have been Ms. Jeffers – could be mistaken).
Mediocre feminists feel they need abortion to succeed and can’t stand seeing Sarah Palin do it without “stepping on her children’s bodies” as she climbed the ladder of success. Mediocre feminists can’t be mothers and handle the business world.
Abortion: the sacrifcial of our children on the altar of self-centeredness (and feminism).
June 26th, 2010 | 1:48 am
Feminists For Life, is an example of a courageous organization, that shows the lie that feminism and pro-life beliefs are incongruent, or mutually exclusive.
Being against abortion transcends political or ideological boundries. Evidence for this comes in the form of Feminists for Life, Atheists for Life, Libertarians for Life, Gays and Lesbians for Life, I could go on.
Most women do not believe that, in order to be considered equal to men they must have access to abortions. Statistically, it’s men who are more likely to favor abortion than women.
June 26th, 2010 | 4:26 pm
I don’t know how accurate this is but several sources attribute this quote to the female Episcopal priest Carter Hayward
““Abortion would be a sacrament if women were in charge. Abortion should be a sacrament even today. I suspect that for many women today, and for their spouses, lovers, families and communities, abortion is celebrated as such, an occasion of deep and serious and sacred meaning.” … speaking at the ninth annual meeting of the National Abortion Federation (NAF), June 9-12, 1985″
There is also a book titled: The Sacrament of Abortion by Ginette Paris & Joanna Mott.
Gloria Steinam in an interview said,”If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament. I didn’t make that up. An old Irish woman who was a taxi driver said that to me.”
So it seems pro-abortion people see abortion as a good thing, a sacrament. No big surprise really!
True feminists are pro-life.
Even as horrible as Margaret Sanger’s ideas were (and I not calling her a true feminist), she drew the line at abortion!
Wesley J. Smith Reply:
June 26th, 2010 at 7:31 pm
Sabine: I think (not sure) a new female EC bishop said something along those same lines. Not the head bishop. Could be wrong.
July 1st, 2010 | 7:09 pm
Forced childbearing is torture. There is nothing pro-feminist about supporting government policies that would lead to the torture of girls and women.
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact