Voices of Feminism

happybrew · 10-06-2003, 05:44 PM

It has been argued that men are uniquely unqualified to speak about abortion. Very well. Let's see what the founders of American feminism had to say about the topic, including Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and Mary Wollstonecraft (author of "Vindication of the Rights of Women")

It can be found HERE.

happybrew

Hoosier Daddy · 10-07-2003, 06:33 AM

Probably shouldn't touch this with a 10' pole, but I've always thought that a man should have some input if it's his child. However, the final decision is by nature the woman's to make.

Silver Hilton · 10-07-2003, 06:35 AM

I think men have every right to enter the debate on abortion as a whole. On an individual case level, I believe that the man has no business in the question.

pdxkevin · 10-07-2003, 06:53 AM

oooohhhh this is a very touchy one. Since I believe that life begins at conception, my choice, in my life, is always the same. That aside and for sake of discusion:

To be a truly equal society both sexes should have equal say in their own way. I am not advocating that men should be able to dictate that an abotion happen or not happen. Rather, if one sex has the right to chose whether or not that person wants to be responsible after the pregnancy begins, than the other sex should also get the same right to choose whether to be responsible from that point on as well.

The pregnancy is 9 months. The legal obligation is 18 years.

The decision to keep the pregnancy is still completely up to the woman. Once he is notified of the pregnancy, shouldn't he have the same amount of time to decide if he personally wants to take on this responsibility for the next 18 years? This is only if you want both sexes to have equal rights under the law.

AuntyM · 10-07-2003, 07:36 AM

I can't believe I am getting into this topic. It's a bit too personal.

What a crock! Very few women are victims as portrayed by that link. We women have all the choices, including abortion. Men only have one choice. Sex or abstinence.

No pregnancy should happen WITHOUT the consent of both parties. Men who will be required to support an unwanted child should have some say or control. Abstinence will never work. Condoms? Woman lieing about using birth control?

I have a sister in law who "accidently" had her IUD fall out..... TWICE! Yes, she learned to remove them herself. The "father" has stuck around 20 years in a lousy marriage to raise 2 daughters he did not want. Sure, he loves the them, but should he have had to alter his entire life because a woman "tricked" him?

I have an "ex" daughter in law who also had one "accidently" fall out. She also admits to poking holes in every condom in every box.

Yeah, I now have 2 granddaughters as a result, with an ugly divorce, and the ex daughter in law only cares about support without visitation. She is now planning for a third man to father her fourth child.

She does not want to work and plans to live on the child support of those 4 children.

This type of behavior happens way more often than most of you know.

After my one and only child was born, my husband said he didn't want any more children. He got a vasectomy at the age of 21! Yes, I consented to the procedure. I firmly believe a man has a right to decide how many children he will father.

Abortion? I hate the idea that there is even a choice. As long as it's legal, men SHOULD have some say. If a woman gets pregnant and wants to abort, and the father objects and wants to raise the child, then so be it. It may be her body, but it is HIS child too. If she wants to keep the child and he doesn't, then what?

It is my hope that some day, easy and safe birth control will be available for BOTH sexes regardless of age and the need for abortions will be confined to those who have a medical reason or perhaps in the case of ****.

Where is the equality in this situation?

Women need to take responsibility for their actions and stop NEEDING abortions in the first place.

The "moral" thing to do is to make sure men have as much control over reproduction as women.

happybrew · 10-07-2003, 08:21 AM

AuntyM: my point was that the founders of American feminism were pro-life. They also pointed out, quite accurately I believe, that a man who abandons his responsibilities is as guilty, or more so, than the woman who has the abortion. If certain people don't want to hear from a man about whether abortion is right or wrong, perhaps they'll listen to what women say. And not just any women, but the same women who secured their right to vote and the reform of our legal system that at one time treated women as property.

happybrew

Reelentless · 10-07-2003, 08:25 AM

AuntyM- I feel like giving you a hug! :smile:

Cool Texan · 10-07-2003, 08:34 AM

Another abortion thread?!?

happybrew · 10-07-2003, 01:17 PM

Okay, not in every case. The situations you described are not the norm. I worked with one guy who had a one night stand ( [img]graemlins/dork.gif[/img] ), and the girl got pregnant. He was the ninth guy who had to take a blood test. So he gets to pay child support. I've also known women who had babies somehow thinking that would "cure" whatever ailed their relationship or to get the guy to marry her. Dumb. I see exactly what you're talking about. However, for those people who say that a man can't talk about abortion because he can't get pregnant, my point still stands. The founders of feminism in America were clearly pro-life. I think those who don't want to listen to pro-life men should at least listen to the women who worked for their right to vote and the right to not be treated as property. And if my pro-life conclusions match those of the early feminists, why can't I speak them because of my gender? It's the same conclusion. Under Islamic law the testimony of a woman is not equal to the testimony of a man, it takes two women to equal the testimony of a man in an Islamic court. Under the pro-abortion lobby, it's the same thing. The testimony of a man is not equal to that of a woman. So I posted a link to women they should respect. If they won't listen to me, maybe they'll listen to them.

happybrew

happybrew · 10-07-2003, 01:21 PM

Oh, and I wasn't talking about men who get tricked, but about those who, lacking an upright character, abandon their responsibilities. Clearly this is different from a woman tricking a guy into thinking she's using birth control.

happybrew

AuntyM · 10-07-2003, 01:58 PM

Happy,

This is kind of stupid. We more or less agree!

But you let women off the hook too easy I think.

I, as a woman, take full responsibility for my body and the children I may have. I think it is just as wrong to saddle a child on a man who doesn't want him/her as it is to get an abortion.

Children deserve to be born and they deserve two loving parents. If a woman gets pregnant and the man won't take responsibility, she had no business getting pregnant in the first place. Adoption is ALWAYS an option. This isn't the 50's or 60's anymore. Most unmarried woman are not social outcasts if they become pregnant.

With choice comes responsibility. In this day and age, we use abortion to shirk responsibility. It doesn't appear that we will morally improve in the near future, so I still hope that male birth control happens.

BrionLutz · 10-07-2003, 02:38 PM

Happybrew,

Quote:

The founders of feminism in America were clearly pro-life.

Some of the early leaders of equal rights for women did not think women should choose to have an abortion. Kind of like some of the founders being atheists.

You'll note that even among those quoted, their views are equivocal and don't provide quite the cover the anti-choice folks would like.

Brion

happybrew · 10-07-2003, 03:28 PM

Well Brion, let's see. Susan B. Anthony said " "Guilty? Yes. No matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed." Not very equivocal. Elizabeth Cady Stanton said " "When we consider that woman are treated as property, it is degrading to women that we should treat our children as property to be disposed of as we see fit." Not very equivocal. Emma Goldman said "The custom of procuring abortions has reached such appalling proportions in America as to be beyond belief...So great is the misery of the working classes that seventeen abortions are committed in every one hundred pregnancies." While recognizing the roots of some abortions in working class misery, she still calls it an "appalling" custom. Again, not equivocal. It's not called "regrettable" or "sad" but "appalling". Mattie Brinkerhoff stated that it was evidence of something very wrong in our society. Not very equivocal about the morality of abortion, although sympathetic to the circumstances surrounding it. Victoria Woodhull: "The rights of children as individuals begin while yet they remain the foetus." Very unequivocal. Sarah Norton: "Child murderers practice their profession without let or hindrance, and open infant butcheries unquestioned..." Quite unequivocal, although again she is sympathetic to the circumstances that drove women in that era to seek abortions, circumstances that do not exist for most women today. Mary Wollstonecraft: "Nature in every thing demands respect, and those who violate her laws seldom violate them with impunity." Again, unequivocal. In fact, she's the most unsympathetic to women cited on that web page, as she says that women are weak, and cast off normal maternal affection for "lasciviousness". Matilda Gage calls it a crime. Again, not equivocal, although she places the blame with men. The moral character of the act remains unchanged by this, however. Alice Paul: "Abortion is the ultimate exploitation of women." Quite unequivocal. Slavery is the exploitation of people. Abortion is the ultimate in the exploitation of women, and thus of the same moral character as slavery. Sorry Brion, but that's all of the women cited on that webpage, and not one of them is equivocal.

You say that not all of the early feminists were pro-life, just as not all of the founders of our country were theists, that some were atheists. You cannot deny, however, that the bulk of our founding fathers did believe in God, with Thomas Paine a notable exception, and the writers of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution expressed their belief in God in those documents, giving our country's foundation a definite theistic character. In the same way, the bulk of the early feminists were pro-life, and saw in abortion the exploitation of women, giving early feminism a definite pro-life character, even if some may not have been pro-life. It's exceedingly ironic that modern feminists embrace a practice that the early feminists considered exploitative towards women, and a symptom of their character as second class citizens. It is, in fact, the outcome of certain women in the 1900's who, having overcome domination and exploitation, decided that they wanted their own brand of domination and exploitation. Most notable among these is Margarite Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, who sought through the use of contraception, sterilization, and abortion to get rid of groups of people she deemed "undesireable", and who greatly admired Adolf Hitler, being one of his greatest supporters in the United States prior to our entry into the war in Europe. This fact is conveniently forgotten. It's the force at work in the Balkans and in Africa, where, being freed from oppression, different groups decide it's a perfect opportunity to become the oppressors instead. Planned Parenthood has denied the roots of feminism, and represents women who, being freed from oppression, have decided to become oppressors. But like all groups of oppressors, they see it merely as the way things ought to be, the natural order of things, rather than what it really is. Ask the Serbs and they'll tell you they had to get those Kosovars because they were a threat to them. Ask a Planned Parenthood abortionist or activist, and they'll tell you they've got to get that baby because it's somehow a threat to the woman, either to her "health" or lifestyle, her relationship, or her career. It's the same thing. Have you ever read Hegel? I had to read him in my social and political philosophy class taught by a Marxist in college, and at the time I thought Hegel was off his rocker, but I now think he had it right when he wrote that the oppressed desires to become the oppressor, in a repeating dialectic of oppression and liberation. In this case, however, unlike ethnic groups in the Balkans or Africa, the cycle stops with the woman oppressing the child because the unborn baby cannot oppress the woman.

happybrew

happybrew · 10-07-2003, 03:36 PM

Aunty M: I let women off easy to be charitable. Some of them should be let off the hook, but certainly not all of them. There are some women who are never given an option. Look at China, where women are forced to have abortions against their will. Certainly not the case here, but there are often children, by definition the victims of sexual abuse brought to abortion clinics by parents and not given any choice. Go to childpredators.com to see how Planned Parenthood facilitates this.

happybrew

BrionLutz · 10-07-2003, 06:57 PM

Happybrew,

Quote:

Emma Goldman said "The custom of procuring abortions has reached such appalling proportions in America as to be beyond belief...So great is the misery of the working classes that seventeen abortions are committed in every one hundred pregnancies." While recognizing the roots of some abortions in working class misery, she still calls it an "appalling" custom. Again, not equivocal.

Really? You'll note that she does not say women should not have the choice of abortion yet that is what you claim. This is true of several examples.

The anti-choice viewpoint requires a bit of hypocrisy in labeling folks as "pro-abortion". No one is "pro-abortion", they note that only the mother who is being asked to bear a child can make the decision.

While many of these 19th century women did not approve of abortion (but then who does?), they did not oppose women having the right to decide as the examples demonstrate.

Brion

[ 10-07-2003, 07:57 PM: Message edited by: BrionLutz ]

happybrew · 10-07-2003, 07:27 PM

Brion, what she called "appalling" and "beyond belief" at 17% is now at least twice that rate, making it even more "appalling" and "beyond belief". You're in denial dude! You're trying to argue that because in this particular quote she didn't specifically say that women shouldn't have a choice, she must be affirming it! It's a non-sequiter. You're trying to argue that she favored women making "appalling" choices that are "beyond belief", that they had that right. You just don't get what they were about, do you? Abortion was viewed as the exploitation of women, and that's why it was "appalling" and "beyond belief". Yet you would have us believe that they thought women should have the choice of being exploited. It's like arguing that Harriet Tubman thought black people have the choice of being a slave or not because she only took escaped slaves North, thereby recognizing the choice of those who did not escape to remain in slavery. Show me an equal number of prominent feminists from that time period arguing for a woman's right to abortion if you want to prove your point. Right now you're just denying the evidence that's right in front of your face.

happybrew

[ 10-07-2003, 08:29 PM: Message edited by: happybrew ]

AuntyM · 10-07-2003, 11:34 PM

Quote:

that a man who abandons his responsibilities is as guilty, or more so, than the woman who has the abortion

Do we really want to go there? The man hasn't got the birth control choices that the woman does. If he is tricked, why would he be considered AS or MORE guilty?

I don't think so. As long as the woman has the advantage of having all the choices, she should bear the majority of the blame and responsibility. It's not as if women don't know HOW to prevent unwanted pregnancies.

BrionLutz · 10-07-2003, 11:35 PM

Happybrew,

Quote:

Brion, what she called "appalling" and "beyond belief" at 17% is now at least twice that rate, making it even more "appalling" and "beyond belief".

Last I looked at Gallup, it was 81% of Americans approve of women's right to choose vs. 19%. Not sure where your 17% comes from.

Quote:

You're trying to argue that because in this particular quote she didn't specifically say that women shouldn't have a choice, she must be affirming it!

Bingo! Consider that this is the best quote the anti-choice group could come up with to try and make their point. The fact that many of these "best examples" don't deny a woman's right to choose loses the point for them.

Their "best case" is weak.

Brion

Stratocaster · 10-07-2003, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Last I looked at Gallup, it was 81% of Americans approve of women's right to choose vs. 19%. Not sure where your 17% comes from.

Thats total bunk. Its consistently 50/50 in all the polls ive seen Gallup, Zogby, etc. Its only higher when asked if they agree with abortion when the mothers lifes at risk. Why cant you use facts instead of major exaggerations to prove you point of view? Hmmm. Im not advocating any side here, either. Its just that i like facts is all, well as factual as a poll can be.

2LEYS · 10-08-2003, 12:59 AM

Quote:

Thats total bunk. Its consistently 50/50 in all the polls ive seen Gallup, Zogby, etc. Its only higher when asked if they agree with abortion when the mothers lifes at risk.

I thought 81% was pretty high also. I never really knew before but figured it was about 50/50

happybrew · 10-08-2003, 06:41 AM

Uh, Brion, did you read the web page? The 17% was not people who approved of abortion, but the abortion rate. 17% of babies were aborted according to the quote. It had nothing to do with how many people approved or disapproved. Now you can try to make the argument all day long that because there was no statement regarding a woman's right to choose that somehow they must have favored it, however that argument will continue all day long to be a non-sequiter, and one which flies in the face of the evidence presented.

happybrew

BrionLutz · 10-08-2003, 10:50 AM

Fisherdan,

Quote:

Its consistently 50/50 in all the polls ive seen Gallup, Zogby, etc.

Not exactly. 51% are in the middle but another 28% are on the fully legal end and 19% on the fully illegal end.

Quote:

According to a year 2000 Gallup Poll:

Most American adults (51%) currently believe that abortions should be legal under some circumstances.
28% believe that abortions should be legal under all circumstances.
19% believe that they should be always illegal -- apparently even to save the life of the woman.

BrionLutz · 10-08-2003, 11:26 PM

Happybrew,

Quote:

The 17% was not people who approved of abortion, but the abortion rate.

Ah...I'm not sure there were really any stats available on this in the early 1900's. With no birth control available until the the late 1900's I suppose it could be that percentage.

Certainly birth control and sex education have done more to reduce abortion than the punitive measures adovcated by the minority.

Brion