The Perversion Of Feminism
By Cathryn Crawford (06/20/03)
Can feminism truly be pro-life? It’s a tough question, and one that not too many people are eager to discuss. A few weeks back I wrote an article about the pro-life movement, and in it I raised the point that not all prolifers are conservative Christian Republicans, as is so often the stereotype.
I stated that there were many different groups involved in the fight against abortion, including feminists. I was challenged by several different people, however, who simply could not fathom the mainstream feminist movement as having any factions that would classify themselves as pro-life. My question to them was – why not?
What is, in fact, the basic tenet of feminism? According to most feminist organizations, it is to protect women from all forms of bodily harm and to promote their equality with men. Yet so often, due to the outrageous and sometimes downright silly behavior of organizations such as NOW, feminism is boiled down to building up women while at the same time tearing down the institutions of family, children, and men. Motherhood is seen as a trial and a roadblock to financial success – thus the heavy emphasis placed on “reproductive rights”. Men are seen as the great Satan, as though the one thing holding back every woman is a man. After all, men “get” women pregnant, and children are, of course, the other major factor in the “inequality” of women. Children are messy, complicated, and involved – the exact things that feminists are so dead-set against.
This way of thinking, however, doesn’t make a great deal of sense. When looked at from the perspective of a true feminist, it should actually be a real insult to women to have their “reproductive rights” so cavalierly treated. In essence, by saying that children are an inconvenience that holds women back, mainstream feminists are saying that women cannot handle themselves as well as men. After all, no one would dare suggest that a man give up his right to have children so that he can get ahead financially or career-wise. Saying something to that effect would more than likely earn you a few odd looks and perhaps even an inquiry into your mental state of being. Yet NOW perpetrates this sort of idea on women all the time. They tell women that if their right to have an abortion is taken away, their whole world will practically come crashing down. They devote themselves to “reproductive rights” and don’t address the other issues that face women, such as affordable childcare and comprehensive healthcare. Real feminists ought to be offended by this sort of conduct being done in their name.
On the bright side, however, there are several excellent feminist groups that more fairly address the pro-life issue and its relation to women. Feminists for Life of America (FFL) is an excellent example. It describes itself as “a nonsectarian, nonpartisan, grassroots organization that seeks equality for all human beings and champions the needs of women.”
It goes even further in its mission statement, stating that it opposes all forms of violence against women, including abortion, infanticide, child abuse, domestic violence, assisted suicide, euthanasia and capital punishment, and the exploitation of women and children. Notice that they include abortion as violence against women; that’s very different from what you would normally hear out of the mouths of so-called “feminists”, and very intriguing.
It is also interesting to note that FFL points out something that NOW and the like have hidden and covered up very conveniently for years – the fact that the very first feminists, including Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony were pro-life. Susan B. Anthony often referred to abortion as “child murder” and “infanticide” and once said, “Sweeter even than to have had the joy of caring for children of my own has it been to me to help bring about a better state of things for mothers generally, so that their unborn little ones could not be willed away from them." That certainly doesn’t sound like the typical “battle-axe” stereotype of the modern day feminist. She sounds, God forbid, almost feminine. What a concept!
FFL also strongly supports the notion that fathers should have rights to their children and that fathers are extremely important to the upbringing of a child. FFL calls for both maternal and paternal leave, something that you’ll never hear NOW discussing, On the contrary, as a matter of fact, the NOW website has an entire section devoted to “closely watching” the father’s rights movement and “family issues” including marriage and custody issues. Its paranoid schizophrenic type view is almost laughable - “…many judges have a double standard for mothers and fathers, such as giving fathers credit for doing even a minimal amount of parenting or homemaking tasks while criticizing mothers if they dare to take any time at all for themselves or work outside the home.” – That statement is so vague as to be silly and is just a taste of the many scare tactics that NOW and its counterparts use to frighten women.
Pro-abortionist women have hijacked the name of feminism for their own gain. What used to be a legitimate and worthy cause has now become something completely different. True feminists, women who believe in equal rights for all, not just themselves, need to take back the standing of feminism and have it again be something respectable and good. FFL is going a long way to correct some of the wrongs done in feminism’s name, and for that they deserve our respect and support. As Serrin Foster, president of FFL, states, “Abortion is a reflection that we have not met the needs of women. Women deserve better than abortion.”
I can’t put it any better than that.
(Printer friendly version) Email: Cathryn Crawford
