Can you be both pro-life and a feminist?

[eveglass]

Yes, that's right! It's time for another round of "debate Julie"! In today's Gazette, there was a letter to the editor by Mary Ann Davis, who says that "you cannot be pro-life and call yourself a feminist." She's referencing this article, in which Janet Bagnall states, "Feminism is about equality, about a woman's right to make her own choices in life, including whether to continue a pregnancy. Without that right, women lose control over their lives."

I'm conflicted about this one. Personally, I'm pro-choice and totally against the idea of telling a woman that she must carry a pregnancy to term. However, if you truly believe that life begins at conception (as I think most pro-lifers do), and that abortions at any stage of a pregnancy are equivalent to murder, I imagine that you could still be pro-life and a feminist. I imagine that there are still ways of supporting women both before the pregnancies have started (comprehensive sex ed, free birth control pills and condoms, etc.) and after their pregnancies have ended (easy adoption services for women who would otherwise have aborted, affordable daycare and support networks for those who choose to keep the children, etc.).

So I'm not sure I agree that being pro-life necessarily excludes you from the feminist camp. Anyone want to take a side in the debate and tell me where I'm going wrong?

Comments

[terheyt.livejournal.com]

My reply to the "abortion is murder" argument is "self-defense".

A pregnancy has a severe and permanent effect on a woman's body, and can destroy her life. If we were talking about a man who kidnapped a woman and forced all these changes on her and her only way out would be to kill him, we'd have no problem calling it justified, and calling him an abuser. Now, for most pregnancies, the end result is worth the unpleasantness. But the only one that can assign the relative values and make the decision is the woman in the situation.

[eveglass.livejournal.com]

While it's true that, historically, pregnancy and childbirth were right up there among the leading causes of death for women (and I'm sure this is still true in certain areas of the world), I don't think that's really the case here in most of the developed world (Canada, U.S., Europe, Japan, etc.). At least in Canada, we're looking at less than 5 deaths per 100,000 births. (Referenced from here. (http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/rhs-ssg/matmort-eng.php))

I think most right-thinking people would agree that a woman has a total right to attack (and even kill) in self-defense anyone who wants to kill, rape, or mutilate her. But I'm not sure I agree that pregnancy is equivalent to that.

(That said, I am pro-choice. Just playing devil's advocate here.)

[joane.livejournal.com]

In reply, I'd say that even if our mortality rates are low, even a reasonably easy pregnancy and officially complication-free birth presents lasting physical changes to the mother.

My daughter's birth would be recorded as incident-free, but I ended up in physio and with severely limited mobility for months afterwards with a problem with my pelvic bones (pubic symphysis separation), I have what I assume is a permanent (at this stage) "numb patch" on one leg left over from the epidural (you never want to hear an anesthetist say "oops"...), and I've noticed dramatic changes in my monthly cycle and various drug tolerances that I can only attribute to effects of pregnancy. And that's not even going into the 21 hours of back labour that made me wish I were dead.

I was pro-choice before I got pregnant. After experiencing something that, by everyone's record-keeping would be considered an uneventful pregnancy and birth, I have become vehemently opposed to anybody who would ever dare suggest that any woman should go through this if she didn't, of her own accord, desperately want to.

[eveglass.livejournal.com]

Fair enough. As someone who's never had kids, there are clearly many aspects of this debate that I can't possibly know. (Likewise all the men who decide to chime in on the debate, but that's another matter.)

you never want to hear an anesthetist say "oops"...

Wow... definitely not.

[joane.livejournal.com]

Yup. Nicked something he shouldn't have nicked with the epidural needle, apparently. The first year it was absolutely numb/tingly like pins and needles on the surface, an area on my right thigh about the size of a domestic iron. It's no longer quite so bad, but I can feel a distinct difference between that and the surrounding skin in terms of sensitivity. (the ten months of severe PPD that followed pretty much sucked eggs too, but I can't rightly file that under 'physical problems of pregnancy')

There are reasons we still only have one child, and the largest among those is my abject terror at revisiting the process.

/anecdata