OK, so it's not really morning anymore, but I started writing this earlier today, so cut me some slack.
I've wanted to make an abortion post for a while now, but haven't quite found the energy. Arguing about this subject, especially, can take quite a bit out of you, but there are two items in the news I've wanted to address lately.
CNN recently reported a dramatic drop in support for abortion rights, but I'm not terribly concerned about it. Why? First of all, I want to know: how many people participated in this poll? And what was the demographic makeup of the respondents? Also, where did they get this sample? Furthermore, I would like to know exactly how they worded these questions because the wording of a question can make a big difference in the answer you get.
I would also like to point out that people who simply identify as "pro-life" aren't necessarily likely to support all-out criminalization of abortion. I've encountered plenty of people who will say something along the lines of, "Well, I'm pro-life for myself, but I don't think it should be illegal." The number of people who actually support banning abortion under all circumstances is still pretty low. If I remember correctly, it's about 23 percent.
In my opinion, that "pro-life for myself, but it should still be legal" viewpoint is A-OK. It may not be consistent with the "pro-life" ethic, but I don't concern myself too much with that. I don't care what opinions people hold or what decisions they make for themselves. What's important to me is that abortion remain legal, under most circumstances, because the alternative is kind of scary.
And speaking of the alternative, MSNBC recently reported that almost half the abortions performed worldwide are unsafe, and furthermore, that most of those unsafe abortions are occurring in countries with the least access to contraceptives and abortion services.
File this under "Why I'm pro-choice."
14.10.09
A quick one today
Jill Stanek is bleating more nonsense about birth control again. Color me shocked.
The source she cites, the DailyFail, is dubious at best, so take it with a grain, no, scratch that, a bucket of salt. The article she discusses essentially says a recent study shows the birth control pill may have an effect on the type of man a woman finds attractive. The article then goes on to assert the popularity of stars like Johnny Depp, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Will Smith, is likely proof of this.
From the source:
Lesson learned, ladies: If you take the pill, not only will you be able to have as much sex as you want while simultaneously preventing unintended pregnancies, you'll also fall for nicer guys.
The source she cites, the DailyFail, is dubious at best, so take it with a grain, no, scratch that, a bucket of salt. The article she discusses essentially says a recent study shows the birth control pill may have an effect on the type of man a woman finds attractive. The article then goes on to assert the popularity of stars like Johnny Depp, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Will Smith, is likely proof of this.
From the source:
On days when women are not fertile, their tastes swing towards more feminine, boyish faces and more caring personalities, researchers have shown.
However, if women are taking the Pill they no longer have fertile days.
That means they no longer experience the hormonal changes that make them more attracted to masculine men and those with dissimilar genetic make-up.
Stanek characterizes men with caring personalities as "wimps" and "quiche eaters." Call me crazy, but I don't want some big, hulking Neanderthal to throw me over his shoulder and bring me back to his cave for a dinner of woolly mammoth steak. I'm a 21st century woman. I want a guy with a caring personality. I want a guy who has a good sense of humor and can hold an intelligent conversation. Why is it a bad thing to be attracted to men with caring personalities? Wouldn't those men be better fathers in the long run anyway? Also, what does quiche have to do with this? I didn't know food was supposed to be masculine or feminine.Lesson learned, ladies: If you take the pill, not only will you be able to have as much sex as you want while simultaneously preventing unintended pregnancies, you'll also fall for nicer guys.
8.10.09
Have sex, get pregnant, get expelled
This had me seeing red. Essentially, a private Christian school in Arkansas is being sued by a student's mother because they expelled the girl for getting pregnant.
This is what the student's mother is alleging in the lawsuit:
Upon hearing rumors that the student was pregnant, the principal summoned her to his office and badgered her to 'fess up. When she wouldn't tell the principal, he called in a teacher, and when the student confided in the teacher, the teacher then turned around and told the principal. The student was expelled and then taken to a so-called "Crisis Pregnancy Center"* where the center's staff interviewed the girl, administered a pregnancy test, and then disseminated the information to school employees.
All without calling her parents.
This entire scenario is flat-out wrong, but before I get into why, let's look at some of the points that might count in the school's favor.
I've been going back and forth with a conservative friend about this story for a few days now. He contends that it is a Christian school, that the student knew the rules when she enrolled, and that she broke them anyway. He further argues, "What's the point of having rules if you aren't going to enforce them?" and worries that failure to enforce this policy will encourage more teen pregnancies in the school system.
As a staunchly pro-choice feminist, I'll admit to having wrung my hands about the matter of teen pregnancy. I've often asked myself, Where is the line between supporting the young women who want to have their babies and carry on with life, and blatantly encouraging this behavior? I can't help but wonder if such hand-wringing is totally unfounded and paranoid, though. And even if I have the slightest inkling that measures meant to help teen moms finish school (day care centers in public high schools, for example) might unwittingly encourage more teen pregnancies, I have to imagine that whatever scant encouragement that offers is greatly outweighed by the benefits of helping teenage moms finish up high school. Isn't it more important to worry about the young women whose chances at education are already diminished than to worry whether helping those girls sets a bad example for others?
So the hand-wringing is unnecessary, I admit it. Now back to the matter at hand... Let me say this: The policy of expelling pregnant students because having them around encourages "sexual immorality" is outdated, sexist, and just plain stupid.
It's outdated because it relies on the old-fashioned notion that punishing teens for getting pregnant will actually discourage them from having sex. It's that same line of thinking that says we shouldn't have a vaccine that could prevent cervical cancer because women and girls should be punished for having pre-marital sex with a disease.
It's sexist because this policy disproportionately affects the girls and young women involved. Male students are seldom ever punished for their sexual indiscretions, and again, that invokes antiquated ideas about female sexuality and what the consequences for that should be. (Which, in my mind, raises the question, "Why does sexuality have to have consequences?")
And finally, it's stupid because it brazenly discourages teen moms from completing their high school educations. Although the situation of teen mothers has improved dramatically over the last few decades, the fact still remains that only about a third of teen mothers receive their high school diploma, and teen moms are even less likely to go onto higher education. (Only about 1.5% of teen moms earn a college degree by age 30.) Furthermore, about 80 percent of teen moms wind up on welfare. And this doesn't bode well for their babies, either. The sons of teen moms are approximately 13% more likely to end up in jail, and their daughters are 22% more likely to end up teen mothers themselves.**
You know what can greatly improve a teen mom's prospects for a long, healthy, successful life? An education!! That's a no-brainer! And as a slight aside, it's real education about sex, sexuality, STIs, and contraceptives, that will be the real solution to the problem of teen pregnancy. Education, not keeping them in the dark with this abstinence-only nonsense.
I have to add another point, too, about the sheer hypocrisy of Christian schools whose policy is to expel pregnant students. I did a little bit of digging and found the school in question is affiliated with Trinity Baptist Church in Texarkana, Ark. I searched their website, but the closest thing I could find to a statement on abortion was this: "Children, from the moment of conception, are a blessing and heritage from the Lord." They could theoretically be pro-choice, but I don't think it's likely that a school with such a conservative policy on teen sex would simultaneously hold a liberal point of view on abortion.
Having said that, I wonder if those school officials, if they identify themselves as pro-life, recognize that this policy quite likely has the effect of encouraging pregnant students to seek abortions or to hide their pregnancies for as long as they can, thereby delaying very necessary prenatal care. Why exhort young women to "choose life" when you aren't going to support them in that choice??
I am pro-choice, and while I would not encourage the choice to have a child at such a young age, I think these young women should be supported nonetheless. They've made their choice, so don't throw them out on their asses.
*For those of you not in the know, Crisis Pregnancy Centers are essentially fake or quasi- medical clinics often run by pro-life organizations with the intent of discouraging abortions. While some CPCs are upfront about their bias, others may masquerade under the more generic moniker of "women's clinic." Often, CPCs will brand themselves as "abortion alternatives" and after luring in confused young women with a free pregnancy test, will foist misleading, anti-choice propaganda on them. Having said that, I'm willing to give a few of them the benefit of the doubt, but that's another discussion for another day.
**Numbers taken from the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy.
This is what the student's mother is alleging in the lawsuit:
Upon hearing rumors that the student was pregnant, the principal summoned her to his office and badgered her to 'fess up. When she wouldn't tell the principal, he called in a teacher, and when the student confided in the teacher, the teacher then turned around and told the principal. The student was expelled and then taken to a so-called "Crisis Pregnancy Center"* where the center's staff interviewed the girl, administered a pregnancy test, and then disseminated the information to school employees.
All without calling her parents.
This entire scenario is flat-out wrong, but before I get into why, let's look at some of the points that might count in the school's favor.
I've been going back and forth with a conservative friend about this story for a few days now. He contends that it is a Christian school, that the student knew the rules when she enrolled, and that she broke them anyway. He further argues, "What's the point of having rules if you aren't going to enforce them?" and worries that failure to enforce this policy will encourage more teen pregnancies in the school system.
As a staunchly pro-choice feminist, I'll admit to having wrung my hands about the matter of teen pregnancy. I've often asked myself, Where is the line between supporting the young women who want to have their babies and carry on with life, and blatantly encouraging this behavior? I can't help but wonder if such hand-wringing is totally unfounded and paranoid, though. And even if I have the slightest inkling that measures meant to help teen moms finish school (day care centers in public high schools, for example) might unwittingly encourage more teen pregnancies, I have to imagine that whatever scant encouragement that offers is greatly outweighed by the benefits of helping teenage moms finish up high school. Isn't it more important to worry about the young women whose chances at education are already diminished than to worry whether helping those girls sets a bad example for others?
So the hand-wringing is unnecessary, I admit it. Now back to the matter at hand... Let me say this: The policy of expelling pregnant students because having them around encourages "sexual immorality" is outdated, sexist, and just plain stupid.
It's outdated because it relies on the old-fashioned notion that punishing teens for getting pregnant will actually discourage them from having sex. It's that same line of thinking that says we shouldn't have a vaccine that could prevent cervical cancer because women and girls should be punished for having pre-marital sex with a disease.
It's sexist because this policy disproportionately affects the girls and young women involved. Male students are seldom ever punished for their sexual indiscretions, and again, that invokes antiquated ideas about female sexuality and what the consequences for that should be. (Which, in my mind, raises the question, "Why does sexuality have to have consequences?")
And finally, it's stupid because it brazenly discourages teen moms from completing their high school educations. Although the situation of teen mothers has improved dramatically over the last few decades, the fact still remains that only about a third of teen mothers receive their high school diploma, and teen moms are even less likely to go onto higher education. (Only about 1.5% of teen moms earn a college degree by age 30.) Furthermore, about 80 percent of teen moms wind up on welfare. And this doesn't bode well for their babies, either. The sons of teen moms are approximately 13% more likely to end up in jail, and their daughters are 22% more likely to end up teen mothers themselves.**
You know what can greatly improve a teen mom's prospects for a long, healthy, successful life? An education!! That's a no-brainer! And as a slight aside, it's real education about sex, sexuality, STIs, and contraceptives, that will be the real solution to the problem of teen pregnancy. Education, not keeping them in the dark with this abstinence-only nonsense.
I have to add another point, too, about the sheer hypocrisy of Christian schools whose policy is to expel pregnant students. I did a little bit of digging and found the school in question is affiliated with Trinity Baptist Church in Texarkana, Ark. I searched their website, but the closest thing I could find to a statement on abortion was this: "Children, from the moment of conception, are a blessing and heritage from the Lord." They could theoretically be pro-choice, but I don't think it's likely that a school with such a conservative policy on teen sex would simultaneously hold a liberal point of view on abortion.
Having said that, I wonder if those school officials, if they identify themselves as pro-life, recognize that this policy quite likely has the effect of encouraging pregnant students to seek abortions or to hide their pregnancies for as long as they can, thereby delaying very necessary prenatal care. Why exhort young women to "choose life" when you aren't going to support them in that choice??
I am pro-choice, and while I would not encourage the choice to have a child at such a young age, I think these young women should be supported nonetheless. They've made their choice, so don't throw them out on their asses.
*For those of you not in the know, Crisis Pregnancy Centers are essentially fake or quasi- medical clinics often run by pro-life organizations with the intent of discouraging abortions. While some CPCs are upfront about their bias, others may masquerade under the more generic moniker of "women's clinic." Often, CPCs will brand themselves as "abortion alternatives" and after luring in confused young women with a free pregnancy test, will foist misleading, anti-choice propaganda on them. Having said that, I'm willing to give a few of them the benefit of the doubt, but that's another discussion for another day.
**Numbers taken from the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy.
7.10.09
Good on Illinois!
While I'm sure many of my pro-life friends would disagree, I'm inclined to think this was a very good decision. I certainly can't blame the Illinois DMV for wanting to keep abortion politics off of license plates. Besides, if you feel that strongly about the issue, then you're free to cover your car in bumper stickers.*
*I think bumper stickers are obnoxious, by the way. All bumper stickers - not just the ones I happen to disagree with. When I see a car's ass end covered in bumper stickers, I feel the urge to pull up closer to the car and read them all. And they're usually not worth reading. Additionally, I like to keep politics off my vehicle of choice.
*I think bumper stickers are obnoxious, by the way. All bumper stickers - not just the ones I happen to disagree with. When I see a car's ass end covered in bumper stickers, I feel the urge to pull up closer to the car and read them all. And they're usually not worth reading. Additionally, I like to keep politics off my vehicle of choice.
Well, this is certainly interesting...
What have I been saying all along, fellas? It pays to date smart women, apparently!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)