Can Pro-lifers be feminists?

I don't understand why it's a mutually exclusive choice between the baby (non-feminist) or the mother (feminist).

If you believe both are of equal value, but would prefer both to live, why's it not feminist?
If someone sees the unborn baby as a person - which seems a reasonable view to hold (for some), then that person ends up trying to support two human beings - the mother and the baby. How can it be against feminism to err on the side of the baby rather than the mother? If it's a personal (feminist) right for the mother to choose to abort, surely it's a personal (feminist) right for someone not to approve?

Of course you can, BR. That's ridiculous. Lots of feminists hold lots of different views.

“I don't really think it's about that. I see an unborn child as a separate human, albeit one residing in another person. And for that reason the separate human should be afforded certain rights as a human, ie the right to life.”

That’s a perfectly reasonable position to hold. But you can’t hold it and be a feminist.

If you don't trust women you are not a feminist.

I don't really think it's about that. I see an unborn child as a separate human, albeit one residing in another person. And for that reason the separate human should be afforded certain rights as a human, ie the right to life.

If you don't trust women you are not a feminist.

I do trust women as a class. Within that group there are women I don't trust, but more pertinently, there are vulnerable women who need help and protection in order to get the outcome that they want.

That is it exactly. It is hard to talk about feminist class analysis these days because the "everything is subjective" individualism of post modernism has influenced us to see everything as individual people making individual choices.

I think most posters have broadly accepted the British abortion laws as reasonable, so perhaps energy is best spent in ensuring all women in the UK have access to legal, safe abortion rather than agonising over the entirely hypothetical situation of aborting to term for social reasons, which is not legal, won't become legal, and not really an issue when some women can't access abortion at all,

The science on foetal pain is still very much ongoing, but much like the debate on the right point for viability, science currently suggests 26-30 weeks before a foetus can register pain. Who knows what science might prove in the future.

Regardless, is 'pain' now the determining factor of when it's ok to terminate or not? I thought it was viability? or is it some other factor?

This debate only serves to illustrate the complexities of abortion for those contemplating one, for those who have to carry them out, and for those who have to try and legislate for them in law.

(proven incorrectly by science) clearly believe that a foetus feels pain or some such. What difference does it make if they "feel"that pain for one reason or another?
No, it's really not been proven. it also depends on gestation..
I spose people are willing to compromise on exceptions, or try to make a cut off point. It varies from person to person.

If I support abortion on demand up to a certain point but then only in cases where to continue the pregnancy would put the mother's life at risk or in cases with severe, life limiting conditions, am I a "forced birther"? "Pro-choice to 24 weeks then a forced birther"? "Feminist but then misogynist"?

"Because they think that the foetus is more important than the woman
And/or-
Because they think women should be punished for getting pregnant/having sex

If that were true the posters here you call "forced birthers" would oppose abortion in all circumstances. I think only one person has said that.

Can I just say that I don't understand the logic that you can terminate if you're an addict/rape victim/going to be a single mum/any other arbitrary line. I don't get it.
There is no difference between the foetus created by a single mum, heroin addict and a 35 year old career woman who's never wanted kids and a 14 year old girl who made a mistake out of ignorance.
you, speaking generally, (proven incorrectly by science) clearly believe that a foetus feels pain or some such. What difference does it make if they "feel"that pain for one reason or another? I've also never understood saying "limit abortions to only 3" or whatever. What's the difference between the 1st foetus and the 4th?
How can you say one is murder and one is not? I myself am pro choice but I would love to hear an explanation for this thinking. It makes no logical sense to me.

Because so called Pro Choicers are pro life - pro the woman's
Life and whatever she wants to do with it.

"Because they think that the foetus is more important than the woman.
And/or-
Because they think women should be punished for getting pregnant/having sex."

Punish? What is your evidence that people want to punish women by denying abortion to term? It doesn't make sense. Some don't want to legislate for later term abortion but are ok with early abortion- is the motive there to punish?
The foetus isn't MORE important, but I would argue is a live human being - and I don't think we have the right to kill human beings. That's why it's Pro-life.

"Just not Pro Life because it is inaccurate.... "
in what way? How about-anti- killing.
I'd say pro-life fits the intention better than forced birth!

"What do you actually think they seek to gain by forcing women to give birth?"

Because they think that the foetus is more important than the woman.
And/or-
Because they think women should be punished for getting pregnant/having sex.

The term "forced birthed" is well just illogical- for reasons stated already- one being that beyond a certain gestation, birth is inevitable.
Forced birther really is a manipulative term.
It's not about people being anti woman, more to do with protecting another life.
Russell-
Why do you think anyone is pro- forced birth?

• because they like the idea of forcing women to give birth? Do you actually think this is the reasoning? What do you actually think they seek to gain by forcing women to give birth?

So what would you call someone who wants to prevent a woman having an abortion that she wants and needs? Happy to use another term. Just not Pro Life because it is inaccurate.

It's like the trans activists just calling people TERF- is not progressive, they're closing down the debate because they think the belief is not open to question or reason. They dont want their belief challenged. It's BELIEF- it's nothing more.

Why do you object so much to "forced birthed"? It's a simple statement of fact. Pro Life is completely inaccurate. Is there another term you would like to be used to describe people who would deny a woman an abortion?

Upstart crow-
That kind of line there is part of the dogma. just calling someone a forced birther is a way to close down the discussion- there's no reason to that statement and no explanation of what exactly you mean. How can there be any sensible dialect?
I seem to get the impression that some think a small minority of woman, opposed to most other women- have ownership of feminism, and well no, that's not true.

Boy*--- not

Forced birthing is incompatible with feminism.

I think being a forced- birther, anti-choice is a bit like being labelled a heretic by those that treat feminism as a religion.

I think Larry touched on something with the goat example and religion-
As others have said the abortion to term argument seems to be faith based.
No matter what evidence that there is to show the foetus is a baby- which it most certainly is by a certain point - it won't make a difference to the view points of some because they view feminism as a religion-
1.Thou shall support abortion to term
2.All women's choices are good ones and they will always make the right decisions
Etc
No matter what evidence there is some will argue against it- because it's like religion- a set of principles to be kept, a feminist dogma.
Some have said- I don't like it but thats how it has to be;
.... well why? Because of "women's choice?" Because you defend women's choice no matter what? Well that's dogma rather than reason.
In fact someone said this to me as an example- a feminist boy supporting abortion- it's like saying your religious but not believing in god.
Feminism shouldn't be a belief system. I'd rather think that feminism was a vehicle for good, rather than a misplaced faith- that is so unbending it won't submit to reason and women are excluded.
What about women doing their part, all those helping other women such as d v supporters, refuge workers etc, if they are pro-life they can't be part of the feminist club?
I think they- (the people actually fighting a cause) - could be more feminist, than people who just spout feminist doctrine regardless of thought or reason. I don't think it's particularly constructive to be so obstinate on an issue.

Unfortunately, the law can't just offer carte blanche legislation. Women with mental health issues MAY need to have decisions made on their behalf, plus there's still that issue of the female abuser who got herself pregnant via a minor, and the biggest issue of all still remains - at what point in time does the 'lifestyle' decision to abort expire? I think virtually everybody agrees that in life threatening situations, the mother can elect to abort. A good proportion of people agree that abortion for serious defects is permissible (providing it takes place at the earliest diagnosis). The biggest bone of contention seems to revolve around the theoretical option to abort late term simply because the mother chooses to. Currently this is not possible in the UK, but it seems some would like it to be. Some are arguing it's every woman's right to abort for whatever reason she chooses and at any time she chooses, whilst others are arguing for the rights of the child in the womb. I can't see how arguing for the rights of the child in the womb is anti-feminist.