In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Choice Words

Jill

In response to this article on TomPaine.com, Lynn Harris at Broadsheet asks if it isn’t time to change the term “pro-choice” to something a little more accurate:

“Choice” sounds to me like what you make between baked and mashed, when in reality these matters are life and death. “Choice” sounds — to the opposition, or the undecided — like a bunch of affluent women choosing among an array of options, including abortion on a whim (sic). When it comes to the rights we’re fighting for, after all, so many women have next to no choice at all.

This is partly why Quinlan and others say that “using the term ‘right’ — as in inalienable rights — is a frame that works much better, and can have appeal to libertarian side of both parties.” It’s also handy for linking abortion rights to civil rights, they say.

Fair enough, but we already call what we’re fighting for — at least part of it — “abortion rights.” And that still doesn’t cut it: a) We’re fighting for even more than abortion rights, and b) “abortion rights” is hardly an oomphy one-syllable word you can stick after “pro.” More to the point, it’s not an oomphy one-syllable word that can trump “life.” Damn them for taking — and failing to live up to — that one. Speaking of “them,” even “pro-family” sounds creepy at this point. So. Ideas? I’m open.

Well, I have a problem with saying that we’re fighting for “abortion rights,” because that’s only one prong in the reproductive rights (hi there, existing rights-based term!) movement. And with the anti-choicers going after women’s reproductive health in general through their opposition to birth control, their fight against the HPV vaccine, abstinence-only education, and their legislation to put warning labels on condoms, this obviously goes well beyond abortion.

So I think “reproductive rights” works quite well. Or “reproductive freedom.” But then, I didn’t have a problem with “pro-choice” in the first place. Thoughts?

26 thoughts on Choice Words

  2. How about a desperate grab to control one’s fate in a way that no men have to worry about, ever? Choice has never struck me as choice; it’s an option, but it’s an option for desperate women.

  3. Where, pray, in the definition of choice is the word affluent? I can’t find it in Merriam Webster’s definition. Or Webster’s. Oxford English, perhaps?

  4. My initial response was to say “pro-rights” or “pro-right,” because I think that could contend with the sanctimoniousness of “pro-life” but not come off as smarmily. And it could easily become an accepted term if it was used in the right public forum a few times (framing pro-life against pro-right, or pro-rights), but the word “right” is so fraught with political meaning that I’m afraid it would fail altogether.
    Pro-womb?
    Pro-woman?
    Pro-person?
    Pro-personal control?

  5. I like pro-rights; you can oppose choice by invoking divine plans (either directly or indirectly), but it’s hard to argue against rights in American political discourse for general consumption.

  6. I like “pro-rights” as well, though it’d fuel a lot of indignant screeds about how the “pro-rights” side doesn’t support the “rights” of fetuses.

  7. As I said over at Broadsheet, I liked someone’s suggestion for “pro-liberty,” although on reflection I might not like the libertarian association. With all the rhetoric and scripted retorts flinging round, I like the fact that I can relax on the words of men I respect who few in America, even among my opponents, would dare argue with: “give me liberty, or give me death.” It seems the right response to faux pro-lifers any day, not that I need an entire movement using that phrase to justify responding to a fetus fascist with that quote.

  8. Re: “Pro-Rights,” I can already predict the response: “But what about my other rights, like my right to own GUNS? Do you support those?”

    As for “Give me liberty or give me death,” well, the current leadership of the anti-choice right would gladly give you death.

  9. I still like the term ‘pro-choice’, and I think I always will. I think it implies a lot more than just reproductive rights- it’s a woman’s choice whether or not she wants to get married, whether or not she wants to raise a child, whether she wants to pursue a career or a cause or a family or all of the above. It’s also inclusive enough for men to get behind. There are other good suggestions here; but the things I really want to express are summed up in pro-choice:

    -that women are responsible enough to make the right choices for their own lives
    -that women have the absolute right to make a choice (right or wrong)
    -and that options should be open and available, because of life’s unpredictable elements

    Until I find something that conveys all that and more, I’m going to stick with pro-choice.

  10. While I’m not going to engage directly in the question of a replacement of the label “pro-choice” – (I tend to think that in conversation the most honest and accurate way to talk about it is in terms of “supporters of abortion rights” versus “opponents of abortion rights”, for reasons not worth getting into now) – I do think this discussion speaks to the idea that we want to connect reproductive rights (like the right to an abortion) to family and healthy motherhood, generally.

    Just as “pro-choice” gives us “who decides?”, I think, in reverse, that we’re looking for the label that gives us “when I’m ready.” “Pro-family” might give us that, but I’m skeptical. “Reproductive rights” is good because it brings up issues of health care, family planning, and other resources for the woman, and, if she chooses, if she is ready, for the expectant child.

    And of course, “when I’m ready” speaks to Jill’s comments about how women who have abortions and women who have babies, become mothers – are the same women.

  11. I like pro-choice. I think what is worthwhile is distinguishing between different kinds of choices. One has choices in an ice cream parlor; one also has choices when a mugger pulls a gun and says “Your money or your life”. But the former is a more pleasant choice scenario.

    We need to do a better job of educating people to disabuse them of the notion that “choice” implies whim or impulse; choices are often exercised in desperation, or in reverence, or with misgivings, or with a resolute certainty born of deep reflection.

  12. Just what is wrong with abortion on a whim? Why should women have to suffer to get one? men can abdicate their responsibilities on a whim, why not women?

  13. I don’t thinkthe opposite of whim is suffer, frumious, I think the antonym is “to act after reflection.” And I’m confident that the vast majority of women who do choose to abort do so after considerable reflection. That’s the point pro-choicers ought to be making. In the battle for hearts and minds, defending “whim” is pointless — it will alienate the fence-sitters (of which there are many) and it doesn’t actually describe most women’s experience. It’s the pro-lifers who sometimes tend to think of abortion as something done on impulse without consideration; pro-choicers who care about women’s lives and have walked through them as they undergo abortion ought to know better.

  14. “Whim” implies that it hasn’t been given any real thought. I can’t imagine there are a significant number of women, if any, who truly abort on a whim.

    If there are? Yes, I have a problem with that. I think abortion is a complex issue and generally a sad choice. I would never, never, ever never ever ever ever want to take away a woman’s right to choose even if I disagreed with her motivation, but I would find it sad if a woman aborted and then thought months later that she might have wanted to have a child then, after all. Or thought months later that maybe pregnancy wouldn’t be so bad. Or hadn’t slept more than two hours a night for months because she agonized over her abortion and felt like a monster and that it was the wrong thing for her. Even if we didn’t have all the religious and political issues surrounding abortion in the US, I would still believe it to be a complex thing.

    But I agree with Hugo that this is largely a distraction from the real issue, because choosing or even considering abortion is not a carefree dance through the meadows as it is and to pretend otherwise is to make things even more complex than they later are.

  17. Men can abdicate their responsibilities on a whim, why not women?

    No, they cannot.

    But on topic, I think Jill’s “reproductive rights” is a good flag to fly, for several reasons.

    The modern pro-life/pro-choice debate is about far more than merely abortion–it touches on birth control, contraception, hell, even vacines for cervical cancer. So many of those issues are far more clear-cut than abortion, in my mind. Best to tie your ideology to those as well, rather than only the most contentious issue among them.

    IMO, part of the problem with so many of the suggestions here are that they’re much higher-order than the issue that’s actually being debated. “Pro-autonomy,” “pro-rights,” or “pro-liberty.” Sure, you are probably pro-all-those-things, but that’s not the debate. It may be part of the big picture, but that’s not what we’re talking about. “Reproductive rights” is just specific enough.

    If you’re willing to go as far as “pro-liberty,” you might as well just call yourselves “Good,” and the anti-abortion side “Evil.”

    Hey, waitaminute…

  18. How about “reproductive freedom”? It’s certainly the opposite of the ‘control’ the pro-forced childbirth forces want.

    reproductive freedom ride
    reproductive freedom forces/fighters
    reproductive freedom rights
    reproductive freedom rainbow

  19. I prefer “reproductive rights” to “pro-choice”; the term “pro-choice” seems to infer “to give, or not to give birth” as being the only question. Reproductive rights, on the other hand, encompasses a wide range of issues: access to safe, effective birth control, choosing between being a parent or childfree, protection from forced sterilization, access to reproductive health care, protection from pregnancy-related job loss (or education loss, as was once common from pregnant teens), legal breastfeeding, etc.

  20. When ever we change a label to rights are liberties the whole dynamic is changed. Pro-choice has always been a bad label to use, reproductive rights brings it down to the individual, which is where our rights begin.

  21. Choice has never struck me as choice; it’s an option, but it’s an option for desperate women.

    I’m surprised that this statement went unchallenged. I know two women who had abortions who were definitely not desperate. They were both educated, successful, and financially independant (they earned more than their mates). Do you really think every abortion is an act of desperation?

    I tend to think that in conversation the most honest and accurate way to talk about it is in terms of “supporters of abortion rights” versus “opponents of abortion rights”

    Me too. I proudly proclaim to be pro-abortion, but I see how that doesn’t make a good bumper sticker.

    So I think “reproductive rights” works quite well. Or “reproductive freedom.”

    I’ve always liked “reproductive freedom” too, but I think you’ll find some unwanted company using that term.

  22. Pro-responsibility.

    Wouldnt THAT cause an uproar.

    It would, at that. Problem is, while the pro-life side understands concepts like “choice” and “autonomy” as supporting abortion, I doubt that many of them accept that there’s anything responsible about terminating a pregnancy. I mean, we’re talking about people who barely acknowledge that contraception use is being responsible.

    We know that not spending nine months creating a baby that one doesn’t want and/or can’t take care of is being responsible. They, however, will start screaming about how “you’re responsible for supporting that bayyybeee inside you!!!!” and “you’re responsible for abstaining from sex to avoid pregnancy.” At least with “choice,” the other side can’t use the same word to make the opposite argument.

    It’s a good idea, but I think it’s in danger of getting claimed by the pro-lifers, sort of the way we can lay claim to “pro-life” whenever there’s any abortion ban with no mother’s-life exemptions.

  23. I think that the reason “pro-choice” has prevailed for so long is because it is somewhat value neutral. Some other terms seem to affirm abortion as a positive action (“reproductive freedom” for example), and there are many people who are uncomfortable with outlawing abortion (and would oppose the sweeping statewide bans) but think that abortion is morally wrong, or at least a moral gray area.

  24. How about anti-torture? Because forced pregnancy followed by forced childbirth is a completely grotesque form of physical abuse, and I don’t think people think about that aspect of it enough. And anyone arguing with that framing could be seen as minimising the Holy Sacrifice of Suffering that all mothers(=all women) are supposed to make in right wing world.
    Or pro-health.

  25. I’ve posted my thoughts at Broadsheet as well. I think this is an importance discussion. Choice is over. It does not represent us accurately, and it is not broad enough. I offer Pro-Reproductive Rights or Pro-Reproductive Health. I prefer the former, because it is more workable. The latter idea should be interjected verbally in all debate. We are fighting for the right to reproductive health of the american woman, period. This eliminates the “desperate woman” standpoint also. A woman may not be desperate, but she may in fact be married, but mentally, emotionally and/or physically unwilling and unable to bear yet another child.

    And to answer some worried straggler posts here and there….I’m sure the other side can always find SOME woman somewhere who doesn’t have a valid reason to abort, in their mind. But the rights of the majority should not be taken away because of a fraction of women exercising that right. In addition, whose to say what mind a woman is in? Whose to say if she is emotionally mature/ready/able to bear a child? So it circles around back to our benefit. It is spin proof.

  26. With the intersection of stem cell research, infertility alternatives, cloning, reproductive blurring, euthanasia, suicide and capital punishment – it is the perfect time to include both genders, all people, all parties and get to the point – this is about physical autonomy. Now when I speak on reproductive freedom and responsibility, I only talk about every human’s fundamental right to physical autonomy. You own your body and you decide what to do with it. The decision is NOT a democratic process. It is only yours – true and appropriate dictatorship.

    Zoe Nicholson

    http://www.onlinewithzoe.typepad.com

Comments are currently closed.