Well, If It’s ‘Good For Women’, Who Cares About Anything Else?

Jessica Valenti on abortion (please, stifle those yawns!):

There are certain polite terms that even the most well intentioned, prudent pro-choice people use when they talk about abortion. The most difficult decision. Tragic. Safe, legal and rare. But as state after state makes abortion effectively illegal in the United States – and as the anti-choice movement prepares for a US supreme court fight to end the right entirely – it’s time for the pro-choice movement to lose the protective talking points and stop dancing around the bigger truth: Abortion is good for women.

Not quite so good for unborn babies, but hey, who cares about that, eh?

In Katha Pollitt’s new book, Pro: Reclaiming Abortion Rights, she argues that, as much as abortion is a private medical decision, it’s also a necessary public good. “We should accept that it’s good for everyone if women only have the children they want and can raise well,” she writes.

Oh, if only we had a reliable method of preventing women from having children, eh, Jessica?

The pro-choice movement needs to put the opposition on its heels, and make what some in the “pro-forced birth” movement say what they’re really thinking: that it’s more important for women be mothers than go to college; that the ability to support existing children, to have a job that pays well or to pursue a career path we love are inconsequential realities compared to embracing our “natural” role as perpetually pregnant; that a woman’s ability to incubate a fetus trumps any other contribution to society that she could possibly make.

And none of that load of old emotive codswallop seems to take account of the fact that, in 2014, no woman need be risking pregnancy.

11 comments for “Well, If It’s ‘Good For Women’, Who Cares About Anything Else?

  1. Ed P
    October 20, 2014 at 11:04 am

    In a sane world anti-abortionists would be promoting birth control. But they all tend to be anti birth control religious nutters – perhaps they’re all bipolar?

    • October 21, 2014 at 10:29 am

      Do WE ‘all’ seem to be religious nutters, EdP? Or is this just a generalised bigotry on your behalf? I am against abortion on demand. There are times when abortion is a necessary though tragic need. Dismissing pro-life people in your terms tells more about you than about me or the others against abortion on demand.

      • Ed P
        October 21, 2014 at 11:00 am

        I make a general comment and get the ad hominem treatment!

        Well, OK:
        I said “tend to be” and you changed it to “seem to be” – see what you did there?
        I am not in favour of abortion on demand and agree there are times when it’s a tragic necessity.
        The point I was trying to make, obviously unsuccessfully to you, was about the logical disconnect between being anti abortion and also anti birth control.
        Does “Pro life” necessarily mean “Every sperm is sacred”? Or can you accept birth control is preferable to unwanted pregnancies?

        • October 21, 2014 at 11:19 am

          Seems to me you’re both big boys here and can handle yourselves.

        • October 21, 2014 at 11:23 am

          OOOOW, excuse me. I take back the ‘seem’ and re-insert the ‘tend’ and hope that makes you happy. But the point still stands. But what is this logical disconnect? Why would we be promoting birth control when it is so universal? Does birth control need to be promoted by anti-abortionists? Is birth control not already on the syllabus for 5 year olds in school, along with buggery, transgenderism and finger painting in faeces?

          • Ed P
            October 21, 2014 at 1:40 pm

            I don’t know what five year olds are taught these days – my children are all grown up. But if the little ones are being taught about birth control, it’s not effective when they’re older: there are still too many unwanted pregnancies.
            Using abortion as an alternative to taking precautions is what I loathe (as, I suspect, do you), but that’s the nadir our godless throwaway society has reached. So logically, yes, promoting birth control may be seen as an interlinked action for anti-abortionists.
            (I think we are disagreeing from the same side of the argument.)

  2. mikebravo
    October 20, 2014 at 4:09 pm

    You would think that all those smart, college goers, well paid wimmin and career lovers would know how to avoid getting themselves pregnant in the first place and not have to resort to abortion.
    Bit like I know how to avoid stuffing my car into a tree whilst pissed out of my mind.
    Even more education needed for todays career woman?

    • October 26, 2014 at 4:57 am

      You would think so, wouldn’t you?

  3. October 21, 2014 at 4:09 am

    Margaret Sanger must be rubbing her hands with glee down there in hell.

  4. Furor Teutonicus
    October 21, 2014 at 9:05 am

    AA (please, stifle those yawns!): AA

    I did try…. HONESTLY.

    Fucke ’em, they want to use a meat mixer to get rid of a bastard, let them.

    Who CARES?

    DD “We should accept that it’s good for everyone if women only have the children they want and can raise well,” she writes.DD

    Aye, then stop fucking shagging when you reach your limit.

    Bit like beer. You don’t want to end the night in the cell with the wee low “bed”, then stop fucking drinking at the right time.

    Or do they REALLY not know the cause and effect in all this?

  5. Budvar
    October 23, 2014 at 1:03 am

    Abortion on demand, a womans right to sacrifice their children on the altar of convenience..

Comments are closed.