Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Can Pro-lifers be feminists?

742 replies

DevilsAdvocate123 · 27/02/2018 03:34

I am personally pro-choice, but in my 60 years, I have encountered pro-life feminists. Many of which asked that many other feminists try to "revoke their feminist cards", since they are pro-life.

I've asked them if it were sexist to be pro-life, and they explained these points to me:

-They entirely believe in the equality of men and women
-The reasoning behind the pro-life stance has nothing to do with sex
-If men could bear children, their opinion of abortion would be the exact same, as the reasoning behind the pro-life stance has nothing to do with sex
-They want to save babies of all genders, as the reasoning behind the pro-life stance has nothing to do with sex

I'm a fairly reasonable person. I've had discussions with liberals that think socialism is evil, I've had discussions with gays that believe a private business can do business with whomever it chooses, and I've talked with gun rights advocates that staunchly believe in background checks. I like to hear people out. I get things.

In this instance, I believe I understand where the pro-life feminists are coming from when they say they are still feminists.

Should the feminist community embrace these people into the community and work together, or should these people be shunned from the feminist community and not welcome?

OP posts:
Original poster
DevilsAdvocate123 · 27/02/2018 03:36

Edit, I meant to say this in my first paragraph:

Many of which have claimed that other feminists will try to "revoke their feminist cards", since they are pro-life.

OP posts:
TheButterflyOfTheStorms · 27/02/2018 03:42

No one needs to be embraced or shunned.

If you want to prevent high rates of abortion, on a population level, you have good women's rights, good education, free and accessible birth control, and free and accessible abortion on demand. If they are pro-life like that; fair play to them.

I don't think forced-birth advocates are either pro-life or pro-women.

TheButterflyOfTheStorms · 27/02/2018 03:45

They want to save babies of all genders Fetuses are male or female BTW. Two sexes.

Original poster
DevilsAdvocate123 · 27/02/2018 03:47

I agree. There are two sexes. Back to the discussion lol

OP posts:
TinyRick · 27/02/2018 03:48

No

CuntentWarning · 27/02/2018 04:00

personally i think anti-choice ideology is in opposition with female bodily autonomy. and look at countries like el salvador, where women can go to prison for miscarrying.
making abortion illegal doesn't really result in fewer abortions, it just drives them underground, making them dangerous.

TheButterflyOfTheStorms · 27/02/2018 04:16

But it does depend what they mean by pro-life. If they mean:

  1. They wouldn't personally want to have an abortion
  2. They give time, money and emotional support to women who would like to carry to term by are dealing with situations that prevent them
  3. They support free and accessible birth control.
  4. They support government action on rape, coercive control and domestic violence that limits women's autonomy...

And they are NOT pro forced-birth. I'm happy to still call them a feminist.

Scrumplestiltskin · 27/02/2018 04:18

No. Forcing women and girls to carry a fetus to term, and give birth to a child against their will, is absolutely anti-feminist.

thebewilderness · 27/02/2018 05:01

Women's autonomy is a basic tenet of Feminism, the political movement for the liberation of women.
We are all entitled to our own beliefs, but not our own facts. Forced birth is anti feminist. So how can they claim to be what they oppose? Same way male feminists do, I suppose.

Leilaniiii · 27/02/2018 05:33

I am a Feminist & Pro-Life. That is because I see an unborn baby as a baby, because it is. Changing the word to 'foetus' does not negate the fact that it is still a baby. I therefore believe that you should terminate its life in very few circumstances.

Leilaniiii · 27/02/2018 05:34

... however, I also feel that everything should be done to provide women with effective and free contraception and support if they do happen to find themselves pregnant.

MsJuniper · 27/02/2018 06:05

Pro-Life is a ridiculous term. I would always use the term "anti choice" - say it like it is.

I can also never understand how anyone can use the "if men could bear children" argument in any context. If men could bear children, they'd be the biologically oppressed class and the whole discussion is moot.

NauticalDisaster · 27/02/2018 06:23

Being anti-choice is not a feminist position. They may be feminist but their stance on abortion is not feminist.

Beachcomber · 27/02/2018 06:28

I hope they campaign for PIV not to be synonymous with "sex".

TheDowagerCuntess · 27/02/2018 06:28

There is nothing feminist about removing a woman's right to choose to have an abortion.

If your belief is that you think abortion is wrong, you wouldn't have one, but other women can if they choose to, then all good.

If your position is that abortion is wrong, and no women should be able to access one, then you're absolutely anti-feminist.

Making abortion illegal does not stop abortions. It hasn't since the dawn of time, and it won't ever stop abortion. Ever.

Women who categorically do not want to be pregnant will get rid of their baby.

So there is NO question that not allowing other women access to abortions is anti-feminist.

NameChange30 · 27/02/2018 06:31

I agree with MsJuniper and Nautical.

I don’t think “the feminist community” is an actual thing that anyone can police membership of. If people who are anti-choice want to call themselves feminists, we can’t stop them, but we can disagree. Maybe they are feminist when it comes to other things. And by engaging in debate maybe we can persuade them on the abortion rights debate.

I mean, it’s crazy to call yourself a feminist if you basically want to force women to be incubators, so you have to expect people to challenge you. But I don’t think you should be “shunned”.

VikingVolva · 27/02/2018 06:45

Once you start limiting the range of 'acceptable' views, then it would mean you have to stop saying that every womanis really a femininst, eg if she has benefitted from and agrees with equal pay. You would also have to exclude women adherents of the principle world religions, and those who vote for parties which support limitations.

I'm not at all convinced that's the right approach. I can see how default TERFiness has led to a thought-pattern based on excluding/deriding those who do not agree with a particular approach/mindset. And how that's leading to people thinking 'don't agree, I'm out'

It's either an ecumenical movement or it isn't.

larrygrylls · 27/02/2018 06:46

This ‘choice’ and ‘life’ thing is ridiculous. They are both emotive words. What is wrong with pro and anti medically-assisted abortion?

It seems odd to me to think that a few undifferentiated cells have any rights. Equally it seems bizarre to me that a fully formed baby just before birth has no rights. The debate has accepted 24 weeks as that point where the foetus effectively gains the right to not be aborted. People can play clever games with words saying the foetus is not a person and thus cannot have rights. However the 24 week limit de facto grants the foetus the basic right to not be aborted.

Most women are pro the current time limit. A substantial minority want to reduce it. A tiny 1% want to extend it.

Is 1% of women telling 99% of women what to think feminist? You have to be very sure of your position to not listen to the 99% majority (some might say dangerously so).

Leilaniiii · 27/02/2018 06:48

But surely you can be pro-women's rights and pro-children's rights? Obviously there becomes a situation where one has to trump the other, but I believe that in most cases the life of the child is more important because it's their life.

NameChange30 · 27/02/2018 06:51

“The debate has accepted 24 weeks as that point where the foetus effectively gains the right to not be aborted. People can play clever games with words saying the foetus is not a person and thus cannot have rights. However the 24 week limit de facto grants the foetus the basic right to not be aborted.”

“The debate has accepted...”
That doesn’t really make sense, “the debate” can’t accept anything. 24 weeks is the law as it stands. Some people accept that and some people don’t.
And it’s not even true that a foetus has the right not to be aborted after 24 weeks. TFMR is still legal after that point.

BigDeskBob · 27/02/2018 06:57

I can't see how you can be both a feminist and anti termination of pregnancy. How is forced pregnancy beneficial to women?

larrygrylls · 27/02/2018 06:59

Emma,

This is a forum, not an academic paper. Yes tfmr is legal, as it ought to be.

The debate has been ongoing for many years and the current law, after much consideration, stands at 24 weeks. A substantial minority of women would like to reduce this limit (according to a 2017 comres poll, a 70% majority) would like to reduce this limit. Only 1% of women want to extend it.

Better?

BelindasRedPlasticHandcuffs · 27/02/2018 07:04

The reasoning behind the pro-life stance has nothing to do with sex

I suppose the reasoning is 'we want to save babies'. This fundamentally ignores the fact that to do that (using the assumption that the foetus is actually a baby for the purposes of this post) it requires members of one sex to suffer physically and mentally, and go through medical treatments and procedures which risk death or serious harm (and then be left with an unwanted child which then will be raised in an unloving home or in care but I don't see them offering up their homes).

Just because they don't think 'I believe women shouldn't have access to abortion, but theoretically men should' doesn't mean sex is irrelevant. Simply ignoring the fact that the result of pro-life teachings only impacts one sex in any real way doesn't mean it has nothing to do with sex.

If men could bear children, their opinion of abortion would be the exact same, as the reasoning behind the pro-life stance has nothing to do with sex

But they can't. So the 'what if' is entirely irrelevant supposition.

They want to save babies of all genders, as the reasoning behind the pro-life stance has nothing to do with sex

See above

Fundamentally, I'd struggle to reconcile the views of a pro-lifer with feminism as I know it. Yet again it's putting the wants of another group above the needs of women and to me that is entirely unfeminist.

YimminiYoudar · 27/02/2018 07:04

You can be pro-life and feminist if you hold strong views about the ethics of abortion whilst never doing anything - even so much as signing a petition or voting for an anti-choice political candidate - that restricts the access to abortion for a woman who disagrees with you.

You can't be a feminist if you think its ok for a woman to have her human rights to personal bodily autonomy suspended for 9 months against her will.

BertrandRussell · 27/02/2018 07:10

I don’t think you can. Bodily autonomy is such a fundamental thing- anyone who thinks women should not have it is not a feminist.