Can Pro-lifers be feminists?

[DevilsAdvocate123]

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?

Missymoo100
Well you don't have autonomy now..
As I have said and yet to have an answer should adult women be able to consent to FGM? If you don't think so, then I could argue you don't believe in bodily autonomy.

Well actually i do, every woman just the other ways aint safe.

If thats the womans choice for HER body then why not, its her body. I wouldnt object to a woman getting implants, splitting their tounge or any other body mod.
FGM is bad when its done against ones will, like is the case in general. Im one who thinks that an adult male should be allowed to circumcise but a parent shouldnt choose for the child, that removes their bodily autonomy (barring medical need for it obviously)

The science about the ability of a foetus to feel pain is mixed. Most scientist currently believe at 24 weeks a foetus is not yet 'aware' or sentient. But of course, it's a particularly difficult thing to measure and scientists are still studying. There are some reflex actions at 24 weeks, but it's not clear if pain is felt.

The long and short of it seems to be that there's obviously a transition / growth from nothing to a human life, but where one ends and another starts is still in debate.

I don't think pro-life and feminism are mutually exclusive. I see pro-life as a defense of those who cannot defend themselves, but that's all based on the premise that a foetus is a life. IF you believe a foetus is a life, or that it is one after n weeks, then logically, you're caught between a rock and a hard place trying to defend a woman's right to choose but also defend the right to live. They aren't mutually exclusive desires though.
If you believe the foetus isn't a human being, then sure, it's a lot easier to resolve and the woman's right to choose is clear as day.

I think MissyMoo's point on autonomy is that it's a theoretical autonomy over your own body, but in reality we have laws that overrule your own personal choice to do as you wish with your own body.
You are not actually free (in UK law) to do absolutely anything you like to your own body. It's a technical point, but I think that's what she's arguing.

Feminism is not an identity. It is a political movement for the liberation of women. There is a body of work by women to support and explain this.
I keep saying this and people keep saying no, anyone who says they are a feminist is a feminist even though their policies are anti feminist and they have no clue what the tenets of feminism are.

If you wish to slice and dice your own morality you are entitled to do so. Others have a right to do the same.
The repeated claims that women have abortions for frivolous reasons clearly reveal you as an anti feminist no matter what you call yourself.
It reminds me of what we say when the when the women picketing the clinic show up for their appointment. The only moral abortion is my abortion.

Squeakums-
As I said, and other added...
FGM for consenting adults- I see you agree with this
But these....
Wilful grievous assault with consent
Illegal drugs
Prostitution
Do you think the law should be remove to allow bodily autonomy I'm these cases, if it's so important.
Then as jemima added
Porn
Page 3
Etc....
If you say autonomy is absolute you cannot place restriction on anyone, everything is allowable, even if they are harming themselves or indirectly others.

Suicide is no longer a crime in the UK, Brilliant.

Thank you for your example of reducto ad absurdum, missymoo, which is where these conversations always go.

I don't think so. It was said that to be a feminist you must believe in bodily autonomy- clearly in law there are cases where you don't have autonomy, and I don't believe you should either. The conclusion is that belief in bodily autonomy is not fundamental to feminism. If you believe in he type of feminsim that doesn't endorse porn, prostitution - then you absolutely don't believe in autonomy.

It is a political movement for the liberation of women.
There isn't a political movement on earth where all its members agree on the correct policies to achieve their goals, or on the morality of its members.

39 was an extreme figure but obviously anything above 28 weeks has the same issue.

In the 39 week situation I can't see it makes any difference to the woman whether the foetus/ baby lives, if it is accepted she has no responsibility to look after it. What right is she losing other than the right to end the life of a baby she does not want?

As to whether something is or is not a feminist act I was serious about saying that taking such an extreme position may well not a feminist act. It is fine debating this on MN but I think it would be detrimental to argue this position at say a select committee.

I didn't mention suicide. You did.
The autonomy that is illegal is bodily harm as part of extreme sex (typically BDSM). Consent is not enough in UK law.

In the 39 week situation I can't see it makes any difference to the woman whether the foetus/ baby lives, if it is accepted she has no responsibility to look after it. What right is she losing other than the right to end the life of a baby she does not want?

She still has to undergo a birth which she may not consent to, and still has the possibility of a child walking the earth who may or may not come back to haunt her at some point in the future.
I'm not saying I agree with it, but logically, giving birth comes at a price, even if there's no responsibility of her part. An abortion also comes at a price of course, but that would be her choice to make.

If you're opposed to the idea of abortion/abortion past a certain date in the sense that you, personally, would not have one/have one past that date then that's fine and you may well be a feminist. If you've decided that you ought to have the right to determine whether other women are able to get an abortion and you devote endless hours to scolding them for doing so and attempting to instill in them a guilt that they don't feel by talking about crying fetuses in kidney trays, insisting that they must view every abortion as a tragedy, etc, then no, you're not a feminist. You may identify as one, in much the same way Danielle Muscato identifies as a woman, but you're both factually incorrect. It's possible to discuss where the legal limit should be set in terms of how many weeks and what's an achievable goal in that sense without all of the above attempts at emotional manipulation.

No uterus no opinion, mybrilliantmistake.

Wow, those advocating that a woman should be able to kill an unborn baby at 39 weeks because she would rather it didn't "walk the earth" are really helping me to move towards a more pro-life position. Really chilling stuff.

lass, an adopted person has the right to know who the birth parents are so that is one difference between abortion at 39 weeks and a live birth. In addition, I assume the physical process may well be different. Women giving birth aren't given the same painkillers as other people because they can harm the foetus whereas if the foetus isn't alive then I presume decent painkillers can be given or general rather than local anaesthetic could be used for CS. I'm not a medical expert tho, so may be talking bollocks!

She still has to undergo a birth which she may not consent to

She is going to have go through the motions of birthing in an abortion. Or are you suggesting the abortion would be a caeserean under general anaesthetic?

and still has the possibility of a child walking the earth who may or may not come back to haunt her at some point in the future

Well I suppose a pro-lifer would say so what? The child lived - the parent has no legal obligation to have anything to do with it.

It was said that to be a feminist you must believe in bodily autonomy- clearly in law there are cases where you don't have autonomy, and I don't believe you should either.
See where you switched from the Feminist tenet of bodily autonomy for women to law denying bodily auronomy? I did.

Do you think that there would be anyone who would actually seek an abortion at 39 weeks? For non-life threatening reasons? It's a theoretical answer to a theoretical question that was asked and an answer demanded.

an adopted person has the right to know who the birth parents are

So what? The parent has no legal obligation to have any contact with the child.

Wow, those advocating that a woman should be able to kill an unborn baby at 39 weeks because she would rather it didn't "walk the earth" are really helping me to move towards a more pro-life position. Really chilling stuff.
Whereas for me the people advocating that women should produce human resources or die trying creep me right the eff out.

Precisely, AssassinatedBeauty. From there we've once again arrived at the point where pro-lifers are insisting that hordes of women are chomping at the bit just waiting for the opportunity to abort what was clearly a wanted pregnancy or they'd have done something about it sooner a week before the expected delivery date because they don't want to lose out on the change to take advantage of their timeshare in Ibiza.

It takes a fairly staggering level of misogyny, internalized or otherwise, to believe that this is a thing that lots of women would do.

I can't believe anyone thinks it's fine to have abortion at full term.
Or even post viabilty frankly

She still has to undergo a birth which she may not consent to

She still has to undergo a birth anyway, so that’s irrelevant isn’t it?

No uterus no opinion, mybrilliantmistake.
That may be your belief but rest assured, doctors, judges and politicians of the male variety still have an opinion that counts and affects the lives of every woman.
You can't live in a vacuum where male opinion has no influence.